The URL can be used to link to this page

PP 1992-490 (2)' CITY OF LA 4 UIM PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, DEPARTMENT 78 -105 CALLE ESTADO LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 RESIDENTIAL and PLOT Case No. :, — *10 Date Received, 8 —o2 I--om COMMERCIAL FEE :235 PLAN APPLICATI( IiAS ViUN 1_1- 835.00io In order to process your application in a timely manner, please complete and sign this form. The information which is required to be shown on the plans and submitted with the application is stated on the back of this form. Failure to provide the required information is justification for rejection of the application. THIS APPLICATION MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A NON- REFUNDABLE FILING FEE OF $ AND _ COPIES OF THE COMPLETE AND ACCURATE PLOT PLAN, LANDSCAPE PLAN AND ELEVATIONS. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Name of Applicant r;� 1 r aya. Phone Mailing Address A' �p� ^��Q� � )QkC7 �,' (��zo' Street City Zip oodde�� Legal Owner Address1 Proposed Use r The net and gross square footage for each proposed use and building. — • - a 9,t_ _ _. _ . _ The square footage allocated for sidewalks /walkways, parking, landscaping, #nS bu�i lading. Location.of Property (Address if known) , Oak �.. Assessor's Parcel Number p cQ.�� . C 1 1 �1 Legal Description of Property (give exact legal description as recorded in the office of the County Recorder) -- (may be attached) Signature of Applicant (J&oDate ZI Signature of Owner Date sr—. A list of the names and addresses of all owners of real property located within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property to be considered, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll and any update issued by the City Assessor. The list must be certified by a title company, architect, engineer, or surveyor. 9.182; €.s0 Applications. Resider, al and commercial plot plan applications shall be submitted to the planning and development department and provide the following in- formation and exhibits: A. Complete application form; B. One copy of the preliminary,_ title _report„ or deed of trust to"the' subject;rtproperty_; _ 0.- C:.'`Setsof the site development plans (number as re- quired by the planning and development department) , each set to incorporate the following: O1. Dimensioned floor plan(s) relating to all build- ing layout aspects, showing applicable sales /display, office area, bedrooms, kitchens, hallways, bath /restrooms, etc., for the particular use under review, O 2. Four -point elevations of any and all buildings proposed on the site, delineating any outstanding architec- tural feature(s), relationships to any existing structures and /or other adjacent properties, and listing proposed building materials, finishes, colors, etc., O 3. A detailed site plan delineating all siting aspects of the development (i.e., setbacks, topography, fencing locaitons, locations provided for ground - mounted mechanical and heating /air conditioning systems, parking, accessways, adjacent streets, utilities, drainage, and any proposed signage. ONote: In some instances, a preliminary grading plan . may be required if it is determined to be necessary due to topographic considerations and other related site factors. O4. A complete site landscaping plan, showing a listing of quantities, species, location and plant sizes to be incorporated into the final landscaping of the project. The final approved landscape plan must be stamped "approved" by the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner's office O prior to the issuance of a building permit. D. Two sets of all plans reduced,t.o eight and one -half max._ _„�- ... _.,.,.,.: - r �- - �.. _ - .�.L,.�. inches by eleven inches, and submitted on acetate or other similar format suitable for presentation. OE. One eight -inch by thirteen. -inch color, material and finish sample�'boa'rd" for the Jbuild,ing's exterior areas, r in- 'n dYH g,' 66t ` fibt`t!`i mi te'd"to,roof covering, facia boards, tile inlays, stucco finish, wood or other plant -on mater- ials, etc. Colors and materials shall be keyed on at least O one set of architectural elevations. F. One colored elevation of all sides of the build- ings, oriented to public view, in accordance with the mater- ials sample board submitted. A colored swatch (band of color on the drawings) may be substituted for a complete colored drawing. G. If the application requires a public hearing: A list of the names and addresses of all owners of real property located within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property to be considered, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll and any update issued by the City Assessor. The list must be certified by a title company, architect, engineer, or surveyor. Case Number Fok q7- — .241 Date Received _A_;., _92. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Please complete Parts I & II of this form and provide ALL of the addit- ional materials requested in Part III. Failure to do so may delay the review and process of your project. If you are unable to provide the information, or you need assistance, please feel free to contact the Environmental Quality Section of the Planning Department at (619- 564 - 2246). PART I. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. What is the total acreage involved? 2 LD S 2. Is there a previous application filed for a same site? Q. If "Yes ", provide a Case Number. Also provide the Environmental Assessment Number, if known, and the Environmental Impact Report Number, if applicable. Case No. (Parcel Map, Zone Change, Etc.) EA No. (if known) EIR No. (if applicable) PART II. EXISTING CONDITIONS g5i$ A � i7 TOTAL `S '92' `3i3.9gio 1. Project site area G .a ( ize of property in square feet and acreage) 2. Existing use of the project site VA-(,WT 3. Existing use on adjacent properties: (Example: North, Shopping Center; South, Single Family Dwellings; East, Vacant, etc.) A W SST' 4CP&fe cb fA N rr 61AA- ; 56t1 -ry V ACGAn j 4. Site topography (describe): (If any portion of the site exceeds 5% slope, attach a topographic display of the proposal site; if less than 5% slope, please provide elevations at corners of site) 5. Grading (Estimate number of cubic yards of dirt being moved): FORM.005 /CS VU -1- Ri :1 6. Are there any natural or man -made drainage channel areas through or adjacent to the property? Yes No (If "Yes " - submit a display - of such drainage channel area ) Describe the disposition of these channels /areas should the proposal be implemented. W 1 h5e- e l.V- 7 Are there any known `a� chaeological finds near or on the proposed site? Yes No I� 8. Describe any cultural or scenic aspects of the project site. i� ge . 9. Describe existing site vegetation and their proposed disposition should the proposal be approved. %w e) 9! W.a'%rer- ra,Me-;eve5. (If any significant plant materials, e.g., mature trees, exist on the site, please prepare a site plan that illustrates their number, type, size and location.) 10. Describe accessibility of proposal site to the following utilities; gas, water and electricity. (If proposal site does not have immediate access, further describe necessary extension of services and provide a graphic display, 8 1/2 x 11" that indicates their present location in reference to the subject site). 11. Additional comments you may wish to supply regarding your project. (Attach an additional sheet if necessary.) 44: PART III. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS The following items must be submitted with this form: 1. At least three (3) panoramic photographs (color prints) of the Z project site, or an aerial photo of the site. 2. A clear photocopy (Xerox or similar copy) of the appropriate portion of the US Geological Survey quadrangle map, delineating the boundaries of the project site. Also note, the title of the map. I certify that I have investigated the and the answers are true and correct to a e & Title;-of Per on C mpleting orm G�aVC 1 rnRM nnc;lrq -I- questions in Parts I, II, & III the be of my knowledge ign re of Applicant i - PROPERTY PROFILE - RIVERL .E COPYRIGHT (C) 1992 OA JUICK INFORMATION NETWO0 PHONE (714) 27S-0771 PREPARED F0R : E.F.P. ED BY : MICHELE/D[BORA REQUESTED BY : CONTINENTAL LAWYERS TITLE CO $ � $ PARCEL NUMBER : 617-080-021 � $ OWNER 13T : EFP INC � � 2ND : NONE � � SITE ADDRESS $ $ MAIL ADDRESS : 48630 MONROE 3T � $ : INDIO, CA 92201 � $ PHONE NUMBER : PAGE-GRID: � $ OWNERSHIP OESC: CORPORATION � $ LEGAL DESCRIPTION; 21,33 ACRES M/L IN POR ME 1/4 OF SEC 29 TSS R7E � $ $ ------------------------ � $ PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS � $ ------------------------ � $ USE DESC : VACANT COMMERCIAL PROPERTY � $ LOT SIZE 21.33 ACRES SQUARE FEET $ YEAR BUILT : 00 BEDROOMS $ SECURED PRCL ; BATHROOMS $ # UNITS GARAGES ; N � $ PO0L ; N � $ 1 * --------------------- � $ SALE/LOAN INFORMATION � * --------------------- � $ LAST SALE DATE: 02/91 � $ AMOUNT: $1,880,000 F/P-UNK C0ST/SQ FT; � $ DOCUMENT NUM ; 65252 � $ LENDER ; $ $ LOAN 1ST TO LOAN TYPE: � � ADOT'L TDS: � $ PREV SALE DATE: UNAVAIL � $ AMOUNT: UNAVAZL � $ -------------------------- � $ . ASSESSMENT/TAX INFORMATION $ $ -------------------------- � $ ASSESSED TOTAL: $4°413,400 (91) TAX AMOUNT $50,278.60 � $ LAND: $4,413,400 TAX STATUS CURRENT � $ IMPROVEMENT: YEAR DELINQ $ t IMPROVEMENT : 0 � TAX RATE AREA ; 020011 � $ EXEMPTION ; NONE $ $$$$$$$$$*$$*$$*$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$*$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$*$$$$$$$$$$ THE ACCURACY OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS °�° DEEMED RELIABLE BUT IS NOT GUARANTEED °^° PROPERTY PROFILE - RIVERS�-,E COPYRIGHT (C) 1992 DA'..,vUICK INFORMATION NETWORK PHONE (714) 275-0771 PREPARED FOR : E.F.P. ED BY : MICHELE/DE8ORA REQUESTED BY : CONTINENTAL LAWYERS TITLE CO $$$$$$$$*$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$:$$$$:$$$$$$$$$$$$$*$:$$$$:$$$$$$$$$$:$$$$$*�$$$$$$$$,$$$$$:I�'t **� THE ACCURACY OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS ^*° °^* DEEMED RELIABLE BUT IS NOT GUARANTEED ^^° $ � $ PARCEL NUMBER : 617-080-021 � $ OWNER 1ST ; EFP INC � $ 2ND : NONE � $ SITE ADDRESS $ MAIL ADDRESS : 48630 MONROE 3T � � : INDIO, CA 92201 � � PHONE NUMBER : PAGE-GRID: � $ OWNERSHIP DESC; CORPORATION � � LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 21,33 ACRES M/L IN POR HE 1/4 OF SEC 29 T5S/R7E � $ ------------------------- � $ PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS � $ _--_--___-_-___-_-______ � $ USE DESC : VACANT COMMERCIAL PROPERTY � $ LOT SIZE : 21.33 ACRES SQUARE FEET $ YEAR BUILT 00 BEDROOMS ¢ SECURED PRCL : BATHROOMS $ # UNITS GARAGES N � POOL ¢--------------------- � � SALE/LOAN INFORMATION � �--------------------- � $ � * LAST SALE DATE: 02/91 � $ AMOUNT: $1,880,000 F/P-UNK COST/S0 FT: � � DOCUMENT NUM ; 65252 � � LENDER $ LOAN 1ST TD : LOAN TYPE; � � AODT'L TDS: � $ � $ PREV SALE DATE; UNAVAIL � $ AMOUNT; UN8VAIL � $ � $ ASSESSMENT/TAX ZNFOR118TIOH � $ $ � $ ASSESSED TOTAL: $4,413,400 (91) TAX AMOUNT $ LAND: *4,413,400 TAX STATUS CURRENT � $ IMPROVEMENT: YEAR DELINQ Y IMPROVEMENT ; 0 TAX RATE AREA 020011 � `$ $ EXEMPTION : NONE � $ � $$$$$$$$$$$$*$$$*$*$$$$$$$$$$$$$*$$$$$$$$$$$$$$*$$$$$*$$$$$$$$$$44�$$$$$$$*$$$$$IlI **� THE ACCURACY OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS ^*° °^* DEEMED RELIABLE BUT IS NOT GUARANTEED ^^° CITY OF I1 QUI I d� of ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent: 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: / A"irb e CA 2=ol 3. Date of Checklist: 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: Lrt`-f Oi— L.& JiNTtQ S. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Lt ffeks"i II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - (Explanation of all "Yes" and "Maybe" answers is required on attached sheets.) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No, a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? _ d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any increases in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach, sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, in- cluding but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic Plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or result in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? S. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a.. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of any use of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any renewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk oY an explosion or the release of hazardous sub- stances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, istd ron, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation /Circulation. Will the proposal refit in: -'- a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? Yes Maybe No °- 10 — V ' 1 L' �f l� i - (5) Yes Maybe No c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation .systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and /or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, L' bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govern- mental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? C. Schools? _ d. Parks or other recreational' facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities,.including roads ?� _ f. Other governmental services? 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? L/ 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? _ f. Solid waste and disposal? _ _ 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? _ 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recrea- tional opportunities? 20. Archeolo ical /Historical. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological / or historical site, structure, object or building? i V 21. Mandatory Finding of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially re- duce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plan or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? (5) u b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, en- vironmental.goals? (A short -term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long -term impacts will endure well into the future.) c. Does the project have impacts which are indi- vidually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION IV. DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation; Yes Maybe No 1l_ v I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. T:1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date: �Z- /signature Grz EC :�a �ryELC CITY OF LA QUINTA INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY CASE NO. SP92 -022 & PP92 -490 (EA92 -241) Jefferson Square GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has proposed a commercial development which is to include the ultimate development of +260,000 square feet of shopping space on a portion of a 23 acres site located generally on the northwest corner of Jefferson Street and Highway 111. The property is zoned CPS (Scenic Highway Commercial). The site is vacant at this time and bounded on the north by the Whitewater Storm Channel. ------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS EXPLANATION OF "YES" AND "MAYBE" QUESTIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 1. EARTH /SEISMIC: The soil on this property has been classified as Myoma Fine Sand. This type of soil has rapid permeability and it can be used for crop production, homesite or other urban development. Significant paving on the site will occur, to allow for the construction of the building structures and the parking lots. The surface soil consists of blowsand which will require compaction or removal prior to construction. Minor changes in topography and ground surface relief features may occur with grading and the construction of the, proposed improvements. Since the site is presently flat, no major problems are anticipated. No unique geologic or physical features exist on the site. The general elevation of the site is approximately 60 feet above sea level. The site is in a Zone 4 Seismic /Geologic Hazard area as noted by the City's MEA (1992) . A Zone 4 is an area with moderate shaking qualities but less severe than a Zone 12 (highest level). It is categorized as: "effect on people: felt by most people indoors. Some can estimate duration of shaking. But many may not recognize shaking of building as caused by an earthquake, the shaking is like that caused by the passing of' light trucks (Riverside County Manual)." Earthquake damage should not be a major problem at the site. The project is not located within a designated Alquist - Priolo Special Studies zone. The project is located to the south of the Whitewater Storm Channel which flows through the Valley from Palm Springs to the Salton Sea. The proposed project will not cause the deposition or erosion of beach sands, or in the siltation, deposition or erosion which could modify the Whitewater River. Any drainage into the channel will require approval by the Coachella Valley Water District. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. Grading of the site shall occur pursuant to the approval of the future grading plan as specified by the City's Engineering Department. All work shall be conducted in a manner so that it does not disturb other abutting properties unless off -site agreements have been made and /or approved. The grading quantities have not been submitted. It is assumed that most of the earth moving at the site (contouring) will occur on the premises and limited importation will occur. All building structures shall be designed pursuant to the Uniform Building Code based on the code which is in affect at the time of plan check consideration. The plans shall be prepared 'by a licensed architect or structural engineer. 2. Prior to site grading any existing miscellaneous material on the site shall be removed (e.g. bushes, trees, etc.). All structures shall be supported by recompacted soil mats. 3. The facility will be required to employ shut -off valves and other safety features which will reduce the likelihood of fire in the event of a major earthquake. ------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. AIR: The project site is located within the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB) and is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). With the proposed construction, there may be air pollutant sources which may deteriorate ambient air quality. These sources are stationary and mobile sources. Stationary source considerations include emission from on -site construction activities and natural gas combustion. Mobile source consideration include exhaust emissions resulting from short term construction activities and long term generation associated with the project. It could be anticipated that with the construction of the proposed project there will be an increase in the overall mobile emission releases because of personal vehicle usage by employees or customers. The levels will be consistent with other projects in the area and no abnormalities are expected by the implementation or development of this project. It is assumed that vehicle trip generation figures would be lower for this type of project if public transportation was utilized more and people did not rely on their private automobiles to get from place to place. The development of a commercial development should not create any objectionable odors except for in the close proximity to the refuse collection areas. However, the collection areas will not be abutting any residential areas, therefore, this should not pose a problem if servicing of the containers is done on a regular basis. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). Adequate watering techniques shall be employed to partially mitigate the impact of the construction generated dust. All requirements of the Coachella Valley's PM10 Ordinance should be followed. 2). Areas graded but not immediately constructed shall be planted with a temporary ground cover to reduce the amount of open space subject to wind erosion. 3). Grading and. construction shall comply with all applicable City Ordinances and the requirements of the Air Quality Management Plan. 4). Public transportation should be encouraged. 5). Trash servicing should be done as needed to ensure that objectionable odors do not become a problem at this site. 3. WATER: With the proposed construction it can be expected that there will be a change in the absorption rate (due to impervious surfaces), drainage patterns and amount and rate of surface water run -off. The project proponent will provide an on or off -site retention /detention basins for the collection of storm water and nuisance,water run -off. At this point, the applicant will contain some run -off along the frontage of the site, however, a majority of the future run -off will be diverted in the Whitewater Storm Channel to the north of the site. This area is not subject to liquefaction (similar to the problems of the Downtown area). Liquefaction is the term which is used when the ground water table is very close to the surface, and during an earthquake the ground has a tendency to vibrate building structures from their respective foundations thus causing failure and other adverse side - effects. The project will not result in changes in currents or the course /direction of the Whitewater River. Groundwater resources in the Coachella Valley are divided into upper and lower valley aquifers. The lower valley aquifer extends south and west from the City of La Quinta and contains the project site. The proposed improvements will be located on unpaved areas. The foundation depths for the proposed structures are not anticipated to cause a change in the direction or flow of groundwater in the area. On August 20, 1992, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted a general storm water NPDES permit for contruction activities. All construction activities that disturb five or more acres of land are required to file for this permit. This project is 21 acres, therefore, a permit is required from the CRWQCB prior to on -site construction. The property is designated Zone X on the Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. Zone X are those areas subject to 500 year flood events and 100 year floods with average depths less than 1 foot. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1) The project shall comply with all applicable City requirements regarding storm water and nuisance water. The developer shall complete a hydrology study, prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer, which identifies the increased water run -off quantities which will be generated at the site by analyzing the assumed quantities in an undeveloped state and factoring this against the development proposal. Based on this study the project engineer shall design the necessary on or off -site drainage basins (retention /detention) which will maintain storm water run -off from the property and allow gradual dissipation of the water into the ground. If an off -site system is proposed for the Whitewater River, the Coachella Valley Water District shall approve the design program. 2) The proposed development will have to comply with NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) stormwater discharge requirements which are implemented by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Region 7 - Contact Mr. Vincent Christian, WRC Engineer at 776 -8933 for any questions). 4. PLANT LIFE: Desert vegetation presently covers a majority of the site, and no building structures located on the property. The proposed project will remove the native vegetation. Since the native plants have no significant value to the area, no significant impacts are anticipated. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. 5. ANIMAL LIFE: The subject site is located in an area defined as a Fringed -Toed Lizard Habitat area (a Federally protected species) and it has been determined that a mitigation fee shall be paid to the City of La Quinta if the site is.developed. The City is required to contribute the money to the Valley's Nature Conservancy, and the Conservancy is required to use the money at their Thousand Palms preserve (1300 acres) to protect and maintain this endangered species. All the valley cities contribute to this preserve through contractual arrangements which were made in the early 1980's. Although all properties in the City do not pay toward this fund at such time as they are developed, this project is required to contribute funds towards the continued preservation of this federally protected species since the property is designated as property that might have (or currently is) supported refuge for the lizard in the past. MITIGATION MEASURES: The applicant /developer shall contribute, at the time a building permit is issued, money in the amount of $600.00 per acre which shall be used by the Nature Conservancy to mitigate the development of this parcel to an urban use. 6. NOISE: Because of the proposed construction and subsequent operation of the commercial center, it can be expected that there will be some increase in the existing noise levels on the site. Most of the noise generated will be from motorized traffic coming to the site since the use of the property will be for indoor commercial activities (offices, restaurant, etc.). It is anticipated that no internal noise will be projected externally outside of the building mass. However, a noise study will examine both projected noise and external noise of project onto abutting properties. During project construction, heavy machinery will be capable of generating periodic peak noise levels ranging from 70 to 95 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the source. Once the project is operational, noise impacts are anticipated to be within an acceptable ranges as required by the General Plan. MITIGATION MEASURES: As required by the General Plan, this project shall prepare a noise analysis to minimize noise impacts on surrounding land uses. The City's General Plan Guidelines for indoor and outdoor noise shall be met (Ch. 8, Environmental Hazards). The study shall examine all proposed commercial uses, and if necessary, require special acoustical walls to mitigate sound transmission to the surrounding properties. During construction of the project, the developer and his contractors shall observe the City's Ordinances regarding construction work hours and any other requirements required by the City's Building Department. 7. LIGHT AND GLARE: It is anticipated that the building(s) and /or parking lot /landscaping will include lighting. However, at this time we do not have the pertinent information in order to examine whether or not glare will be a problem at the site. This type of material will be submitted to staff during the plan check process. Approval of the material is required by the City's Design Review Board, Planning, and Building Departments prior to construction permit issuance. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). All lighting will have to comply with the City's "Dark Sky Ordinance ". Additionally, light sources shall be shielded to eliminate light glare and off -site spillage onto abutting vacant or developed properties. Exterior pole light fixtures should be low level fixtures in order to maintain both human scale to the project and reduce glare from the fixtures on to abutting City thoroughfares. 2). A lighting plan shall be submitted for the on -site parking lot. The plan shall include a photometric study of the lighting which analyzes the necessary footcandle light intensity, identifies the height of the light poles, spaces of the poles, type of lighting fixtures, and any other pertinent information necessary to assure compliance with the City's Off- street Parking Ordinance and the Dark Sky Ordinance. Light poles less than 30 feet in height shall be encouraged. 8. LAND USE(S): The General Plan and Zoning Code have designated the property as fit for commercial development. The plan is consistent with this intent, and the Planning Commission and City Council will review the development plan in the next few months. MITIGATION MEASURES: None is required because the project, if approved, will be conditioned to meet the City's requirements for on and off -site improvements commensurate with the level of development. ------------------------------------------------------------------- 9. NATURAL RESOURCES: No major adverse impacts are anticipated with by the construction of this project. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. However, the applicant shall meet all necessary requirements of the local serving agencies as outlined in the attached agency comments or as mandated during construction plan implementation. This shall include compliance with Title 20 and 24 of the California Administrative Code relating to conserving energy resources which is handled by the Building Department during plan check review. 10. RISK OF UPSET: No adverse impact is anticipated due to explosion or release of hazardous substances. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. However, all construction activities whether or not they are permanent or temporary shall meet all necessary safety standards of the Federal, State and local government requirements. 11. POPULATION: It is not anticipated that the proposed project will have an adverse or significant impact on population distribution, density or growth rate in the area. However, the development of the site will increase the need for the City to provide housing opportunities for its residents to support this commercial venture. At this time, the City has approximately 45 percent of its land designated for residential needs. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. 12. HOUSING: With the proposed project there may be an incremental demand for additional housing for employees of the development. However, due to the size of the commercial center any demand would be insignificant because the City presently has an overabundance of land either vacant at this time, but slated for residential development, or developed at this time with housing units. Single family housing is the primary type of housing at this time, however, multiple family housing projects will be forthcoming in the City's high density areas in the future. Approximately half of the City is designated for residential development and /or growth. MITIGATION MEASURES: None are proposed. 13. TRANSPORTATION /CIRCULATION: The site is located at the northwest corner of Highway 111 (a State roadway) and Jefferson Street. The number of vehicles which use Highway 111 and Jefferson Street are 23,000 and 7,000 respectively. The present level of service on each streets is B on Highway 111 and B on Jefferson which means they are presently operating a good level. without traffic delays. With the proposed project it can be anticipated that there will be a generation of additional vehicular traffic movement in the immediate area. The project will generate approximately 10,400 v /td based on 40 trips per 1,000 sq. ft. of building area or 2,080 additional trips per year (5 year development scenario). The project is fronting on two existing partially developed major arterial thoroughfares of the City which are planned to have divided median islands to discourage cross traffic vehicular movements. The Engineering Department (and Caltrans') has expressed a need to mitigate traffic problems in this area through various means, which can include: additional traffic lanes, right -turn medians, center island medians, and other options which might assist traffic through this area in a faster pace thus reducing delays for either north /south or east /west travel. The applicant's plan will meet these design related requirements provided the conditions of approval are met. The site is served by the Sunline Transit bus system and no impacts to the Sunline serves are anticipated by the development of the project. Routes 35 and 19 service the area along Highway 111. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). Compliance with all applicable City requirements regarding street improvements of adjacent street(s). 2). The project shall provide adequate on -site parking to accommodate the proposed use of the property. 3). A bus stop and shelter shall be installed along the frontage of the site along Highway 111 in a location approved by Sunline Transit, Caltrans and the City Engineering Department. The bus lane shall be separate of any off -site deceleration lane pursuant to the request of Sunline in their letter of October 6, 1992. 4) . Permit for any work on Highway 111 shall require permission by Caltrans since the roadway is a State Highway. The right -of -way width for Highway 111 shall be 172' (86' 1/2 width) as outlined in the existing General Plan (FEIR- 1992). The requirements of Caltrans shall be met (see the attached letter). 5). Traffic improvements to the site can consist of additional travel lanes on both arterial streets, street island medians, traffic signal modifications, transit facilities, curb, gutter and sidewalk, or other improvements which are commensurate with the proposed project and, as condition, will improve transportation in this area and assure the level of service at this intersection will acceptable. The improvements shall be consistent with the adopted General Plan (1992). 6). If a City Transportation Demand Model (TDM) Ordinance is passed by the City in the near future, the applicant shall meet all parameters of the Ordinance as it relates to the commercial uses on the property. ------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -- 14. PUBLIC SERVICES: The project may create a need for additional fire protection, police protection, solid waste collection, and maintenance of public roads in the area. However, it is anticipated that any increases in this area will be incremental (e.g. phased construction), and further, should only have negligible impacts on existing personnel or services. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). Prior to the issuance of a building permit the applicant will be, required to pay an infrastructure fee of $6,000.00 per acre. This fee will help mitigate impacts as noted above. 2). The project shall comply with all requirements of the Fire Department and Riverside County Sheriff's Department prior to building permit issuance. 3). The School District mitigation fees shall be paid prior to permit issuance pursuant to the adoption of AB2986 in 1986 (Desert Sands). 4). The project developer shall make provisions with waste Management of the Desert to have the project serviced to ensure waste products are disposed of without creating health hazards to the community. Necessary facilities shall be built to dispose of product waste. Recycling facilities shall also be provided to assist in the City's need to reduce recyclable waste (AB939). 15. ENERGY: The city is served by the Imperial Irrigation District for electric power service. IID maintains and operates five 92KV substation facilities which serve the City and is in the process of acquiring an additional 92 KV substation site which will be located on the west side of Adams Street, north of the Whitewater Channel. The site has existing overhead utility lines running along the perimeter of the site. The Southern Cal. Gas Co. provides natural gas to the City. The Gas Co. currently has an existing gas line along both project frontage streets, and their sizes area six inches on Highway 111 and a four inch line along Jefferson Street (60 psi). The proposed development is anticipated to result in increases in the demand on existing sources of nonrenewable energy but both providers have not stated that they cannot support this project based on current City demand. . MITIGATION MEASURES: The proposed development is anticipated to result in increases in demand on existing sources of energy and may require the development of new sources of energy to serve the site. The requirements of each respective serving agency shall be met in order for the project to be developed in the future. 16. UTILITIES: The proposed project will require extension of serves to the proposed building pads. However, the local services are adjacent to the immediate site. Staff has received the necessary agency comments on the project, and we did not receive any letters which stated that this project could not be served by any of the existing service providers. No significant impacts are anticipated in the area of utilities which include natural gas, communication systems, water, sewer, and solid waste nor storm drainage. MITIGATION MEASURES: All necessary infrastructure improvements which are mandated by the City or any other public agency shall be met as part of the development of this site. This can include new off -site improvements as well as on -site construction. No major impacts. are anticipated at this time. 17. HUMAN HEALTH: There are no potential health hazards presently on the site. The proposed project will not expose employees, patrons or visitors to potential health hazards. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. 18. AESTHETICS: The site is presently vacant, the construction of buildings will disrupt the site and change the existing views of this area because the applicant is proposing both single and multiple story buildings. The multiple story portion of the site is toward the north side of the site, whereas the other portions of the facility are single story. The City presently has a policy which discourages multi -level building along major thoroughfares within 150 feet of the future property line. The applicant has stated he will meet the City's requirements for building heights and landscaping setback provisions. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). The height of the building shall not exceed the requirements of the City's Zoning Code or existing General Plan. The buildings along Highway 111 and Jefferson Street shall be low level facilities pursuant to the policies of the existing General Plan which encourages single story facilities within 150 feet of the new property line. 2). The City's Image Corridor policies of the General Plan shall be met. This includes the development of a perimeter landscape buffer (50' along Highway 111 and 20' along Jefferson Street), and inclusion of a Gateway landscape program at the intersection of Jefferson and Highway 111. 3). The development of the on and off -site landscaping program should take into consideration the agrarian image of the City of La Quinta. The developer should consider vertical type plant material (Palm trees, etc.) and the use of accent type trees (Citrus, etc.) which will create view "windows" into the project but accentuate the mountains, to the southwest of the proposed buildings. Native landscaping should be pursued and accent lighting on the landscaping should be encouraged. Parking lot lighting should be discouraged wherever possible without sacrificing pedestrian security. Uplighting (accent lights) shall be used on the palm trees for visual appeal. 19. RECREATION: No significant adverse impacts are anticipated in this area since no homes are to be built on the property. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. ------------------------------------------------------------------- 20. ARCHEOLOGICAL /HISTORICAL: Due to the historical nature of the City, there may be an adverse impact created by the construction of the project. Presently, the site is vacant and staff is unaware of any recorded archeological (historical) sites on the property at this time. The applicant is in the process of contacting the Univ. of Riverside to investigate whether any recorded sites are known at this time. Further information will be available prior to the future public hearing dates. MITIGATION MEASURES: An archaeological survey of the site by qualified archaeologists will need to be completed prior to activities which would disturb the site (i.e. site grading). Compliance with the results of the archaeological survey will be required, and if necessary, on -site archaeologist will remain on- site during the grading of the property for development. ------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS: It is not anticipated that there will be any adverse impacts by the project in the areas of plant and animal life, long term environmental goals, cumulative impacts, or impacts on human beings based on the mitigation measures outlined above, and any other conditions of approval deemed necessary by the Planning Commission and City Council as part of the review of this case. Attached: Agency Comments Ref: FEIR City of La Quinta (1992) Canyon Mall Draft EIR (1992) Prepared by: Greg Trousdell (11 -1 -92) �f Notice of Determination Appendix N To: Orrice of Planning and Reseamb 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento. CA 95814 County C1ert County of Riverside P. 0. Box 431 Riverside, CA 92502 From `:(Nb& Agency) CITY OF LA QUIM P. 0. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 492253 �1 Subject: Filing of Notice of Determination In compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Jefferson Square (Plot Plan 92 -490 & Specific Plan 92 -022) Project Title N/A Greg Trousdell 619 -564 -2246 Ext 234 State Clearinghouse Number Lead Agency Area Codei7elephonaxkioion (it submitted to Cleuinehouse) Contact Person Northwest corner of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street Project Location (include county) Project Description: Request to develop an "off price" shopping center on a.portion of a 23 acre site in a CPS Commercial at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street. The Specific Plan was prepared in conjunction with the development request. M is to advise ft ft City of La Quinta has approved the above dex abed project on A4mq )Reap ,Ik Aar► and has made the following dewminadons regarding the above described pmje= (Dift) I. The project ()wM MwM not] have a significant eQeet,on the environment. 2. ) An Environmental impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 13 A Negative Declarabon unit prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. M dgadon measures Owe1e )were not] made a condition of the approval of the project 4. A statement of Overriding Consideradons ()was G was om) adopted for this project 3. Findings Owere )were not] made pursuant to the provisiom of CEQA. T1tis is to certify that the final EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval is available to the General PuNk at C 1 of La Quints 78 -105 Calle Estado, La Quinta CA 92253 e V-0 C6- - Date received for filing at OPR: Associate Planner rule Rrvimd Ocroba 1989 ,,,.:,. I .. :� 1 1!►. ,,,.:,. I .. :� w PROPONENT:. 4 EA No. 92 -241 CASE No. SP 92- 022/PP92 -490 NEGATIVE DECLARATION DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: SECTION /TOWNSHIP /RANGE: ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: THRESHOLD DETERMINATION: MITIGATION MEASURES: LEAD AGENCY: DATE OF ISSUE: Greg S. Trousdell, Assoc. Planner Environmental Review Officer EFP Corp., Mr. Ed Carnes (V.P.) 251,550 sq. ft. "off- price" Commercial Shopping Center NW Jefferson Street and Highway 111 N1 /2 Sec. 29, T5S R7E Al WA FIT-91 Ul _ W Rol The Lead Agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant ad- verse impact upon the environ- ment. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required. This decision was made after review by the Lead Agency of a completed Environmental Checklist and other information on file with the Lead Agency. This information is available to the public on request. ( XXX were) ( were not) made a condition of approval of the project. CITY OF LA QUINTA February 2, 1993 RESOLUTION 93 -8 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CONCURRING WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 92 -241 AND APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490. CASE NO. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 APPLICANT: EFP CORP (ED CARNES) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 24th day of November, 1992, hold a duly- noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of E.F.P Corp. to develop a 251,550 square foot commercial shopping center on a portion of a 23 acre site bounded by the Whitewater Storm Channel on the north, Highway 111 on the south, and Jefferson Street on the east. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 26th day of January, 1993, reconsider their review of the project based on the City Council's action of December 15, 1992. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 15th day of December, 1992, and February 2, 1993, hold a duly- noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of E.F.P Corp. and recommendation of the Planning Commission to develop a 251,550 square foot commercial shopping center on a portion of a 23 acre site bounded by the Whitewater Storm Channel on the north, Highway 111 on the south, and Jefferson Street on the east, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 29, T5S, R7E, SBBM (APN 617 - 080 -017, 021) WHEREAS, said Specific Plan and Plot Plan request has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended) by Resolution 83 -68, in that the Planning Director has conducted an initial study and has determined that, although the project could have an adverse impact on the environment, the mitigation measures incorporated into the Conditions of Approval will mitigate those project impacts to levels of insignificance; and, WHEREAS, mitigation of various physical impacts have been identified and incorporated into the approval conditions for Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490, thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; and, CS /RESOCC.047 - 1 - o WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to justify the approval of said Specific Plan and Plot Plan: 1. The proposed Specific Plan and Plot Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. 2. The Specific Plan and Plot Plan are compatible with the existing and anticipated area development. 3. The project will be provided with adequate utilities and public services to ensure public health and safety. 4. That the project will not impact the abutting streets as they will be fully improved along the frontage of the site as required by the adopted General Plan (Circulation Element). 5. That the conditions imposed are deemed necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community. 6. That the use(s) is consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 7. That the project is consistent with State Law Section 65450 (et. al.). SPECIFIC PLAN GOALS /OBJECTIVES 1. To create a shopping area to serve the City of La Quinta and adjoining cities. 2. To create a unique urban design environment that is appealing to the citizens of La Quinta. 3. To create a harmonious relationship with the adjacent residential neighborhoods (north and east) by buffering the project with streets, setbacks, landscaping, walls, and other architectural features. 4. To create a pedestrian- oriented environment. S. To provide a balanced transportation system to conserve and reduce air pollution. 6. To provide an adequate supply of on -site parking and landscaping. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: CS /RESOCC.047 - 2 - 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment No. 92 -241, indicating that the proposed Specific Plan and Plot Plan will not result in any significant environmental impacts as mitigated by the recommended Conditions of Approval; 3. That the City Council does hereby approve the above - described Specific Plan and Plot Plan request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 2nd day of February, 1993, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JOHN PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: SAUNDRA L. JUHOLA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: DAWN HONEYWELL, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California CS /RESOCC.047 - 3 - CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 93 -8 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FINAL SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 & PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (REVISED) FEBRUARY 2, 1993. * Modified by Planning Commission on' November 24, 1992 ** Added by Planning Commission on November 24, 1992 + Revised by Design Review Board on 1/13/93 ++ Added by Design Review . Board on ' 1 / 13/93 + + + Modified by Planning Commission' 1/26/93 )C Me��a ►off e ,-� �b� ��,k a - 2 —R3 GENERAL: 1. Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the City of La Quinta Municipal Code, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 2. This approval shall expire and become void within one year unless extended pursuant to the City's Municipal Code. 3. Phasing plans, including phasing of public improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer and the Planning and Development Department prior building permit issuance. 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval,: the applicant shall obtain permits and /or clearances from the following public agencies: - City Fire Marshal - Public Works Department - Planning and Development Department - Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department - Desert Sands Unified School District - Coachella Valley Water District - Imperial Irrigation District - California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) - Caltrans District II Applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approvals and signatures on the plans. CONAPRVL.071 1 .- Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building Division at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 6. Construction shall comply with all local and State building code requirements as determined by the Building and Safety Director. FEES AND DEPOSITS 7. In order to mitigate impacts on public schools, applicant shall comply with the following: Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall provide the Planning and Development Department with written clearance from the DSUSD stating that their impact fees have been paid. J( 8. The California Fish and Game Environmental filing fees shall be paid. The fee is $1,300.00 plus $50.00 for the Riverside County document processing. The fee shall be paid within 24 hours after approval by. the City Council. 9. Applicant shall pay all fees and deposits required by the City for processing, plan checking, and construction inspection. The fee and deposit amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the City. 10. Prior to issuance of any land disturbance permit, the applicant shall pay the required mitigation fees for the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Program, as adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 11. Applicant shall construct, or enter into an agreement to construct, the on- and off -site grading, streets, utilities, landscaping, on -site common area improvements, and any other improvements required by these conditions before approval of the final map. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. CONAPRVL.071 2 r Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 If improvements are phased, off -site improvements and property -wide improvements such as perimeter walls and landscaping, common drainage basins or mains, and perimeter landscaping shall be constructed or secured prior to issuance of a building permit. 12. The applicant shall develop phases in the order of the approved phasing plan so that improvements required of each phase are complete prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy within any subsequent phases. The City Engineer may consider proposals by the applicant to stage the installation of off -site and property -wide improvements normally secured with the first phase (i.e., off -site improvements, perimeter walls and perimeter landscaping) with the orderly development of all phases within the plot plan. 13. Applicant shall dedicate public street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans if any, and as required by Caltrans and the City Engineer. Right of way geometry for cul -de -sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs for State Route 111 improvements shall conform with Caltrans requirements or as approved by the City Engineer. Right of way geometry for cul -de -sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs for all other improvements shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Dedications shall include: A. Jefferson Street - 60 -foot half width, plus additional to accommodate any right turn refuges and dual left turn lanes and an exclusive right turn lane at SR 111, plus additional as required by the intersection alignment study required herein. B. State Route 111 - 86 -foot half width, exclusive bus turnout, additional width as necessary to accommodate exclusive left and right turn lanes and alignment changes resulting from the intersection alignment study required below. C. Right -of -way or easements as required to provide access for emergency service equipment. D. Mutual access easement to adjacent property to the west over the most westerly access drive. E. Parcels and easements as required by CVWD. CONAPRVL.071 3 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 14. Applicant shall create, and offer to dedicate, common area setback lots, of minimum width as noted, adjacent to the following street rights of way: A. Highway 111 50 feet wide; and B. Jefferson Street - 20 feet wide. 15. Applicant shall dedicate blanket easements over the setback lots for the purpose of sidewalks and /or bikepaths. 16. The applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to abutting public streets. Access to those streets shall be restricted to street intersections and approved emergency access locations. 17. Applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, common areas, and centralized mail delivery units. PROJECT DESIGN: 18. Development of the project site shall comply with Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92- 490 and the following conditions, which conditions shall take precedence in the event of any conflict with the plans and exhibits. 19. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be submitted to the Planning & Development Department for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on the tract from perimeter arterial streets, and recommend alternative mitigation techniques. Recommendations of the study shall be incorporated into the project design. The study shall consider use of building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (terming, walls, and landscaping, etc.), and other techniques. *20. A six - foot -high masonry wall or chain link fence (living fence) shall be provided along the north side of the project. The exact location, design, and materials shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning and Development Department in conjunction with the noise study and approved by the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission. Landscaping shall be provided on both sides of the future wall or fence. 21. The requirements of the City's Off -Street Parking Ordinance shall be met for each development phase of the project. 22. This approval does not authorize the construction of the pad sites. These buildings' specific locations, design, height,_ and size shall be subject to separate plot plan review and approval by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. CONAPRVL.071 4 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 23. All lighting facilities shall comply with Chapter 9.210 (Outdoor Light Control) and be designed to minimize light and glare impacts to surrounding property. All lighting to be installed shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning and Development Department. Applicant shall submit plans for street lighting along roads, if any, for review and approval by the Planning and Development Department. BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN 24. The development shall be governed by the following: A. All ground - mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from view by methods approved by the Planning and Development Department. B. No two -story buildings shall be allowed within 150 -feet of Jefferson Street or Highway 111. C. All roofing material within the project shall be clay or concrete barrel tile. The color of the roof tiles shall consist of desert hues and be approved by the Staff. D. A building addressing plan shall be submitted to Building and Safety and to the Fire Department for review during plan check. The minimum building address size lettering shall be eight inches. E. Screening of the parking lot surface shall be provided from all adjacent streets through use of berming, landscaping. and /or short decorative walls. The minimum vertical height shall be 42 inches. F. Handicap access, facilities and parking shall be provided per Federal, State, and local requirements. G. No overhead or similar door shall open to the north or towards any residentially zoned property unless adequate screened from noise and visibility to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Director. H. Variety in setbacks and siting shall occur in development of the future pad sites, but in no case shall the building setback line be less than the minimum building setback requirement. I. No outside cart or other storage shall be permitted unless completely screened in CONAPRVL.071 5 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 a City approved area, excluding cart return areas within parking lot area. J. Parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of building permits. +K. Plot plan or conditional use permit applications, as deemed necessary by C -P -S Zone requirements, shall be processed for each pad site. The architectural features of the pad sites shall be consistent with the design theme of the main structure.. L. The Planning Commission shall conduct annual reviews of this specific plan until the project is completed. During each annual review by the Commission, the developer /applicant shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the specific plan. The applicant/developer of this project hereby agrees to furnish such evidence of compliance as the City, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, mayi require. Evidence of good faith compliance may include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, good faith compliance with the requirements of the specific plan. Upon conclusion of the annual review, the Commission may extend the approval period for 12 months at a time. M. The final landscape plan shall utilize trees and palms along Highway 111 and Jefferson Street and the entry drives into the project. Palms should not be used as shade trees for the parking lot areas unless they are massed because the applicant will not be able to meet the City's landscape shading requirements which call for 50% of the parking shall be shaded. Canopy shade trees may be used in the parking lot. N. Accent tree uplighting shall be used along both major streets and along the main entry drives. +O. A master sign program shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to any on -site building construction. The program should include uniform materials and colors for each tenant space. +P. A trellised or tiled roofed pedestrian arcade shall be built along the front of the shopping center to shield the customers and store owners from the intense summer sun. The location ;and design of the arcade shall be approved by Staff during plan check. The maroon canvas awnings may be used under the trellis or roofed arcade as an accent treatment to the overall design of the shopping complex. The awning color shall be a softer color. CONAPRVL.071 6 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 + + +Q. The neon tubing which is mounted to the top of the building complex should be used sparingly throughout the shopping center because the neon will distract from the architectural elements of the center plus it could be a distraction to Highway 111 traffic. The neon tubing may be used on buildings C, F, and G on the sides of the building which face the shopping complexes primary parking lot (south side). The neon tubing shall be mounted in a recessed stucco channel and the location and /or color shall be approved by the Staff prior to construction plan check. The neon tubing should create a "soft" light accent on the building but should not create glare. R. A special landscape design shall be submitted for the intersection of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street because it is a "gateway" intersection. The applicant should prepare a formal landscape plan which uses citrus trees, decorative hardscape, desert landscape, uplighting, and public art as a focal point for this primary intersection. The landscape area should be approximately 50 feet by 100 feet (5,000 square feet). The plan shall be approved by the Design Review Board and by the Arts in Public Places Committee. S. All roof mounted mechanical equipment should be screened by the building wall parapet (e.g., 32 -inch parapet). T. The minimum dimension for a parking lot planter should be seven feet wide. +U. The final concept building plans shall be reviewed by the Staff during plan check. + +V. A trellised pedestrian cover between Buildings A & B is not necessary unless the applicant desires the facility for his patrons. If desired, the height of the structure shall be approved by the City Fire Marshall during plan check. The design and its location shall be approved by the Planning Department. + +W. The building parapet heights throughout the project shall be continual around each respective building mass to assure architectural continuity for the project. + +X. The design features of the south elevation should be reflective in the north elevations, where appropriate. GRADING 25. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department an interim landscape program for the entire site, which shall be for the purpose of wind erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blowsand and dust control measures during the grading and site development. CONAPRVL.071 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 These shall include but not be limited to: A. The use of irrigation during all construction activities; B. Planting of cover crop or vegetation upon previously graded but undeveloped portions of the site; and C. Provision of wind breaks or'wind rows, fencing, and /or landscaping to reduce'the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The land owner shall comply with requirements of the Director of Public Works and Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent the emission of dust and blowsand. 26. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a condition so as to prevent a dust and blowsand nuisance and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures as approved by the Planning and Development and Public Works Departments. 27. Applicant shall comply with provisions of the Master Plan of Drainage, including payment of fees required therewith, and the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. 28. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490 which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a building permit. Prior to final building inspection approval, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigating measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490. The Planning and Development Director may require inspections or other monitoring to assure such compliance. 29. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. The plan must meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report. The soils engineer and /or the engineering geologist shall certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. CONAPRVL.071 8 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 DRAINAGE 30. The project shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow into the Whitewater River Channel. Pipes shall be sized to prevent ponding in parking areas from exceeding six inches during a one hundred year storm event. The project shall be graded to receive storm flow from adjoining property at locations that have historically received flow. 31. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of any public street contiguous to the site. 32. In design of retention facilities, the percolation rate shall be considered to be zero unless Applicant provides site - specific data that indicates otherwise. A trickling sand filter and leachfield shall be installed to percolate nuisance water in conformance with requirements of the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of drainage area. 33. The design of the project shall not cause any change in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the project. 34. Applicant shall construct storm water facilities along the north side of Highway 111 as required by the City Engineer. UTILITIES 35. All existing and proposed utilities adjacent to or on the proposed site or shall be installed in underground facilities. Electric power lines over 12,500 volts are not subject to this requirement. 36. Underground utilities in areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned shall be installed prior to construction of the surface improvements. Applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. 37. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District including dedication of parcels, lining of the Whitewater River Channel and other requirements of their letter of October 2, 1992. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 38. The City is contemplating adoption of a Major Thoroughfare Improvements Ordinance. The Ordinance is intended to distribute the cost of major thoroughfare construction evenly and fairly on undeveloped land at the time the land is subdivided or developed for beneficial use. CONAPRVL.071 9 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 If the Ordinance is adopted at least 60 days prior to the issuance of a building permit, this project shall be subject to the provisions of the ordinance. If the Ordinance is not adopted the'Applicant shall construct street improvements within and contiguous to the project as listed below. . 39. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. Improvements to State Route 111 shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of Caltrans and the City Engineer. Other improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the La Quinta Municipal Code, adopted Standard Drawings and as approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall perform an alignment study of S.R. 111 and Jefferson Street to determine the design of the Jefferson /S.R. 111 intersection. The study shall extend 500 - feet in all directions beyond the boundaries of the applicant's site. If total required improvements to S. R. 111 exceed $300,000, the applicant shall perform a Project Study Report if and as required by Caltrans. Pavement design shall consider soil strength, anticipated traffic loading and design life. The minimum pavement section shall be 3" AC /4" Class 2 base for on -site work and 41/2"/6" for arterial and collector streets. 40. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and centralized mail delivery units approved in design land location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. Enhancements to existing improvements may be required to integrate the proposed improvements with existing conditions. This includes street width transitions extending beyond tract boundaries. 41. The following street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1. Jefferson Street - Three travel lanes on west side (39' curb to curb) plus required turn lanes. Install 8 -foot sidewalk. CONAPRVL.071 10 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 2. S.R. 111 - Install three travel lanes and shoulder on north side (estimated 46' curb to curb), median island, required turn lanes, exclusive bus turnout with pedestrian walkway to site, and 8 -foot sidewalk. B. ON -SITE STREETS 1. As required by the City Engineer. Shall include at least one 24' access road each to Jefferson Street and S.R. 111. + + +C. TRAFFIC SIGNALS 1. S.R. 111 at West Entry Drive - Full traffic signal. If the signal is warranted when this development occurs (as determined by the City Engineer), the applicant shall design and construct the signal at the applicant's expense. If the signal is deferred .until warranted at a later date, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for 25% of the cost to design and construct the signal. 2. S.R. 111 at Jefferson - Traffic signal modifications as determined by the alignment study and as approved by the City Engineer. If the modifications are warranted when this development occurs (as determined by the City Engineer), the applicant shall design and construct the modifications at the applicant's expense. If the modifications are deferred until warranted at a later date, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for 25% of the cost to design and construct the modifications. 42. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted as follows: A. S.R. 111 - Unrestricted at most westerly access drive. Right -in /right -out at drive approximately midway between the west property line and Jefferson Street. B. Jefferson Street - Unrestricted at intersection with Vista Grande. Right -in only at drive between this intersection and S.R. 111. C. Applicant shall provide signage and traffic control devices along entry drives as required by the City Engineer. CONAPRVL.071 11 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 LANDSCAPING 43. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the setback lots along Jefferson Street and State Route 111. Design of these setbacks shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board and approved by the Planning Commission. The applicant is encouraged to minimize steep slope designs. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 5 -feet of street curb. 44. Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall prepare a water conservation plan which shall include consideration of: A. Methods to minimize the consumption of water, including water saving features incorporated into the design !of the structures, the use of drought tolerant and low - water usage landscaping materials, and programs to increase the effectiveness of landscape, as recommended by Coachella Valley Water District and the State Department of Water Resources. B. Methods for maximizing groundwater recharge, including the construction of groundwater recharge facilities. C. Methods for minimizing the amount of water used for on -site irrigation, including the use of reclaimed water from sewage treatment facilities. The water energy plan shall be subject to review and acceptance by CVWD prior to final approval by the City Engineer. 45. Applicant/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan which is in compliance with Ordinance 220, pertaining to water efficient landscaping, and which shall be designated to feature drought tolerant plant species, and the latest water conserving irrigation technology. The plan(s) shall be subject to initial review by the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission, with subsequent final review and acceptance by Coachella Valley Water District prior to landscape construction. Evidence of CVWD acceptance shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 46. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planning materials shall be encouraged. Provision shall also be made for planting materials which provide forage and nesting areas for nearby wildlife. 47. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, common retention basins and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of, and be signed by, the Planning Director, the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. CONAPRVL.071 12 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Common basins shall be designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor - mounted equipment. 48. Applicant shall insure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above- ground utility structures. 49. Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to the Coachella Valley Water District for review and approval with respect to the District's Water Management Program. PUBLIC SERVICES 50. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City Fire Marshal, who may approve alternate means of compliance where deemed appropriate and equivalent to these standards: A. The access road proposed along the northern boundary of the project shall be completed during Phase I to provide through circulation. B. All future building expansions shall be subject to a site plan review /approval prior to issuance of building permits. C. A minimum unobstructed width of 24 feet shall be maintained for all access roads, with certain areas designated as fire lanes. D. The water mains shall be capable of providing a fire flow of 5000 gpm and an actual fire flow available from any two adjacent hydrants shall be 2500 gpm for two hours duration at 20 psi. E. A combination of on -site and off -site Super hydrants (6" X 4" X 2 -1/2" X 2 -1/2 ") shall be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. F. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the Coachella Valley Water District prior to any combustible building material being placed on the site. G. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review /approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location spacing, and the system shall be designed to meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall CONAPRVL.071 13 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 be designed to meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed /approved by the local water company and a registered civil engineer with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department. H. Buildings shall be constructed so that the fire flow required for any individual building or unseparated area does not exceed 3500 gpm. I. Final conditions and requirements with regards to type of construction, area separations, or built -in fire protection systems will be addressed when the building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. 51. Applicant/developer shall work with Waste Management of the Desert to implement provisions of AB 939 and AB 1462. The applicant/developer is required to work with Waste Management in setting up the following programs for this project: A. Developer shall prepare a plan to provide enlarged trash enclosures for inclusion of separate facilities for storage of recyclables such as glass, plastics, newsprint and steel & aluminum cans. B. All on -site recycling bins shall be by . approved masonry walls or other architectural features. 52. Applicant /developer shall provide for transit amenities as may be necessary. These amenities shall include, at a minimum, a bus turnout location and passenger waiting shelter along Highway .111, the precise location of which shall be determined by Sunline Transit. QUALITY ASSURANCE 53. The City is contemplating adoption of a quality- assurance program for privately- funded construction. If the program is adopted prior to the issuance of permits for construction of the improvements required of this map, applicant shall fully comply with the quality - assurance program. If the quality- assurance program has not been adopted, applicant shall employ or retain a California registered civil engineer, geotechnical engineer or land surveyor, as appropriate, to exercise sufficient supervision and quality control during construction of the tract grading and improvements to certify compliance with the plans, specifications, applicable codes, and ordinances. CONAPRVL.071 14 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 927490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 The engineer shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. Upon completion of the improvements, a statement on the "as built" plans as follows: "The construction of all improvements on these plans was properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision for compliance with the plans and specifications. The work shown hereon was constructed as approved except as otherwise noted. Noted exceptions have been approved by the City Engineer. " B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, a separate document bearing the engineer's or surveyor's seal and signature, that lists actual building pad elevations. The document shall, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, 'and shall clearly identify the difference, if any. The data shall be organized by phase and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at different times. 54. Applicant shall provide the City a set of "as built" reproducible drawings of all grading and improvements except water and sewer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "As- Built" or "As- Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer certifying to the as -built condition. MAINTENANCE 55. Adequate provision shall be made for continuous maintenance of all landscaping and related features. 56. Applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas of the project such as the landscaped setback lots and retention basins. Applicant shall maintain all off -site improvements until final acceptance of the improvements by the City. . MISCELLANEOUS 57. Grading, drainage, street, lighting,: landscaping & irrigation, park, gate, and perimeter wall plans are not approved for construction until they have been signed by the City Engineer. 58. Appropriate approvals shall be secured prior to establishing any construction or sales facilities, and /or signs on the subject property. CONAPRVL.071 15 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 59. The City shall retain a qualified archaeologist, with the Developer to pay costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. At a minimum, the plan shall: (1) identify the means for digging test pits; and (2) provide for further testing if the preliminary results show significant material are present. The final plan shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for final review and approval.. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Developer shall have retained a qualified cultural resources management firm and completed the testing and data recovery as noted in the plan. The management firm shall monitor the grading activity as required by the plan or testing results. A list of the qualified archaeological monitor(s), cultural resources management firm employees, and any assistant(s) /representative(s), shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department. The list shall provide the current address and phone number for each monitor. The designated 'monitors may be changed from time to time, but no such change shall be effective unless served by registered or certified mail on the Planning and Development Department. The designated monitors or their authorized representatives shall have the authority to temporarily diver, redirect, or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation, or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until appropriate mitigation measures are completed. Upon completion of the data recovery, the Developer shall cause three copies of the final report containing the data analyses to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 60. All on -site billboards shall be removed prior to the issuance of a building permit. 61. The on -site parking spaces fronting Highway 111 will be allowed to be within 25 feet of the new property line provided visual screening is constructed. 62. A parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department prior to any developer of the freestanding pad buildings in the future. The study shall be presented to the Planning Commission for their review and approval. In each study, building size adjustments shall be' made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. CONAPRVL.071 16 e r• � � F Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022-& Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2, 1993 * *63. Angled parking stalls shall be used for the northerly one -half of the parking lot to the south of the shopping center complex. CONAPRVL.071 17 RESOLUTION 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE _CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CONCURRENCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 92 -241 AND APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490. CASE NO. SPECIFIC PLAN 92-022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 APPLICANT: EFP CORP (ED CARNES) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 24th day of November, 1992, hold a duly- noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of E.F.P Corp. to develop a 267,275 square foot commercial shopping center on a portion of a 23 acre-site bounded by the Whitewater Storm Channel on the north, Highway 111 on the south, and Jefferson Street on the east. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 15th day of December, 1992, hold a duly- noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of E.F.P Corp. and recommendation of the Planning Commission to develop a 267,275 square foot commercial shopping center on a portion of a 23 acre site bounded by the Whitewater Storm Channel on the north, Highway 111 on the south, and Jefferson Street on the east, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 29, T5S, R7E, SBBM (APN 617- 080 -017, 021) WHEREAS, said Specific Plan and Plot Plan request has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended) by Resolution 83 -68, in that the Planning Director has conducted an initial study and has determined that, although the project could have an adverse impact on the environment, the mitigation measures incorporated into the Conditions of - Approval will mitigate those project impacts to• levels of insignificance; and, WHEREAS, mitigation of various physical impacts have been identified and, incorporated into the approval conditions for Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490, thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; 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 City Council did find the following facts and reasons to justify the approval of said Specific`Plan and Plot Plan: 1. The proposed Specific Plan and Plot Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. CS /RESOCC.047 - 1 - 049 2. The Specific Plan and Plot Plan are compatible with the existing and anticipated area development. 3. The project will be provided with adequate utilities and public services to ensure public health and safety. 4. That the project will not impact the abutting street:: as they will be fully improved along the frontage of the site as required by the adopted General Plan (Circa: ation Element). 5. That the conditions imposed are deemed necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community. 6. 'That the use(s) is consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 7. That the project is consistent with State Law Section 65450 (et. al.). SPECIFIC PLAN GOALS /OBJECTIVES 1. To create a shopping area to serve the City of La Quinta . and adjoining cities. 2. To create a unique urban design environment that is appealing to the citizens of La Quinta. 3. To create a harmonious relationship with the adjacent residential neighborhoods (north and east) by buffering the project with streets, setbacks, landscaping, walls, and other architectural features. 4. To create a pedestrian- oriented environment. 5. To provide a balanced transportation system to conserve and reduce air pollution. 6. To provide an adequate supply of on -site parking and landscaping. NOW, THEREFORE,•BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment No. 92 -241, indicating that the proposed Specific Plan and Plot Plan will not result in any significant environmental impacts as mitigated by the recommended Conditions of Approval; CS /RESOCC.047 - 2 - 3. That the City Council does hereby approve the above - described Specific Plan and Plot Plan request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 15th day of December, 1992, by the following-vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JOHN PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: SAUNDRA L. JUHOLA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: DAWN HONEYWELL, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 051 CS /RESOCC.047 - 3 - CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 92 -045 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - ADOPTED SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 & PLOT PLAN 92 -490 NOVEMBER 24, 1992 * Modified by Planning Commission on November 24, 1992 ** Added by Planning Commission on November 24, 1992 GENERA.: 1. Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the City of La Quinta Municipal Code, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 2. This approval shall expire and become void within one year unless extended pursuant to the City's Municipal Code. 3. Phasing plans, including phasing of public improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer and. the Planning and Development Department prior building permit issuance. 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and /or clearances from the following public agencies: City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Planning and Development Department Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department Desert Sands Unified School District Coachella Valley Water District Imperial Irrigation District - California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) Caltrans District II Applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approvals and signatures on the plans. Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building Division at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. CONAPRVL.066 Fl r 0 5,-- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE. CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONCURRENCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 92 -241 AND APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490. CASE NO. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 APPLICANT: JEFFERSON SQUARE WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 24th day of November, 1992, hold a duly- noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of E.F.P Corp. to develop a 260,000 square foot commercial shopping center on a portion of a 23 acre site. The site is bounded by the Whitewater Storm Channel on the north, Highway. 111 on the south, and Jefferson Street on the east, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 29,.T5S, R7E, SBBM (APN 617 - 080 -017, 021) WHEREAS, said Specific Plan and Plot Plan request has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended) by Resolution 83 -68, in that the Planning Director has conducted an initial study and has determined that, although the project could have an adverse impact on the environment, the mitigation measures incorporated into the Conditions of Approval will mitigate those project impacts to levels of insignificance; and, WHEREAS,. mitigation of various physical impacts have been identified and incorporated into the approval conditions for Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490, thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; 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 find the following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said Specific Plan and Plot Plan: 1. The proposed Specific Plan and Plot Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. 2. The Specific Plan and Plot Plan are compatible with the existing and anticipated area development. CS /RESOPC.042 - 1 - 3. The project will be provided with adequate utilities and public services to ensure public health and safety. 4. That the project will not impact the abutting streets as they will be fully improved along the frontage of the site as required by the adopted General Plan (Circulation Element). 5. That the conditions imposed are deemed necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community. 6. That the use(s) is consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 7. That the project is consistent with State Law Section 65450 (et. al.). SPECIFIC PLAN GOALS /OBJECTIVES 1. To create a shopping area to serve the City of La Quinta and adjoining cities. 2. To create a unique urban design environment that is appealing to the citizens of La Quinta. 3. To create a harmonious relationship with the adjacent residential.neighborhoods (north and east) by buffering the project with streets, setbacks, landscaping, walls, and other architectural features. 4. To create a pedestrian- oriented environment. 5. To provide a balanced transportation system to conserve and reduce air pollution. 6. To provide an adequate supply of on -site parking and landscaping. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment No. 92 -241, indicating that the proposed Specific Plan and Plot Plan will not result in any significant environmental impacts as mitigated by the recommended Conditions of Approval; 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above - described Specific Plan and Plot Plan request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. CS /RESOPC.042 - 2 - PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 24th day of November, 1992, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: KATIE BARROWS, Chairwoman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California CS /RESOPC.042 - 3 - COUNCIL MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 2, 1993 (CONTINUED FROM DECEMBER 15, 1992) ITEM TITLE: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 - A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR FUTURE SHOPPING CENTER, AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 - A REQUEST TO DEVELOP A 251,550 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL CENTER LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. APPLICANT: EFP CORP (ED CARNES) BACKGROUND: AGENDA CATEGORY: PUBLIC HEARING: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: The applicant has proposed the development of an "off- price" shopping center (approximately 251,550 square feet) on 21.7 acres of a 23 acre site in the CPS Zone (commercial) at the northwest corner of Jefferson Street & Highway 111. The site is presently vacant and a portion of the site is in the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (no development is proposed in the channel). The Planning Commission recommended approval of the project at their November 24, 1992 meeting with a 4 -0 -1 vote. The Planning Commission reconsidered their November 24, 1992 action at the request of the City Council on January 26, 1993. The revised Conditions of Approval are attached. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None APPROVED BY: RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution 93- , approving Specific Plan 192 -022, and Plot Plan 92 -490, subject to conditions and confirmation of the environmental determination. Submitted by: CC #2 /2.F2 /CS "Approved for submission to City Council: TOM GENOVESE, CITY MANAGER �� -� t�'� � � � f' � �" '',, �:y r �. . , r, s 1982- 1992 • "®A• It L;11 Val at, Lwau� TO: DATE: PROJECT: APPLICANT: ARCHITECT: reirly a/ ya 2"lonla MEMORANDUM HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 2, 1993 PLOT PLAN 92 -490, JEFFERSON SQUARE E. F. P. CORPORATION (ED CARNES, VICE PRESIDENT) MHA; MICHAEL HURST REQUEST: 1. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022: A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A FUTURE SHOPPING CENTER PROPOSED FOR THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. 2. PLOT PLAN 92 -490: REQUEST TO DEVELOP A ±251,550 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER ON A PORTION OF A +23 ACRE SITE. THE CENTER WILL INCLUDE ON -SITE PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. EXISTING ZONING: C -P -S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL) AND W -1 (WATER COURSE) BACKGROUND: The project was tentatively recommended for approval by the Design Review Board on November 18, 1992, and approved by the Planning Commission on November 24, 1992, subject to the final plans being reviewed by both groups prior to construction plan check. 'The City Council reviewed the proposal at their meeting of December 15, 1992, as a public hearing. The City Council felt that the project architect and developer should reach a consensus on the final design of the shopping center prior to acquiring final approval of the project. MEMOGT.041 1 �j The City Council voted to continue the case and requested that the project be re- examined by the Design Review Board on January 6th and by the Planning Commission on January 12th, if possible. The City Council concerns or questions on the case were: 1. Could the roof line on Building "B" be redesigned so that it is similar in design to the rest of the shopping center? 2. Could the architect refine or upgrade the pedestrian arcade along the south side of building, mainly Buildings "C" and "F "? 3. Was the exposed neon tubing necessary? 4. Would a more traditional Spanish design theme be more appropriate for this location? The City Council discussed other elements of the project. However, their directive to .the Planning Commission was that they would like the Commission and the architect to refine the project architecture so that everybody involved knows exactly how the design of the shopping center will look, if approved. A copy of the December 15, 1992, Staff report is attached. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ACTION: The Design Review Board reviewed the revised plans on January 6, 1993 and January 13, 1993. The project architect has modified the architectural plans of the project in the following ways: 1. Upgraded the covered pedestrian arcade to include another design theme along portions of the south elevation (tile with double arch); 2. Varied the roof pitch throughout the project (4:12 & 3:12). 3. Changed the roof parapet design to include a rounded design and a tile roofed design (fake two story design) to accentuate the original design scenario; 4. Revised the access driveway on Jefferson Street so that the main entry is south of Building "G "; 5. Angled parking has been added to the overall parking lot design theme; and, 6. Changed the design of Building "B" to include some of the design features noted above plus modified the entryway design on both sides of the building (north and east). 7. An enlarged pedestrian arcade plan was prepared as well as a roof plan. 8. The colorboard was updated. MEMOGT.041 2 As mentioned, the Design Review Board spent additional time with the Architect and his client to examine the finite features of the project. The major topics which were discussed were; 1. Neon Lighting - The Board requested that if neon lighting is to be used, they would prefer that the light tubes be recessed behind stucco channels so that the light source cannot be seen from within the parking lot. The Board stated that the final solution would be designed so that the light created is "soft" and does not create glare. Neon should only be used on the south side of the buildings and along Jefferson Street. 2. Building_ Colors - The Board initially was not comfortable with the foam -green accent color along the pedestrian arcade. However, after some discussion, they instructed staff to evaluate whether or not the colors blend well with one another. 3. Canopy Awning - The Board would like the color of the maroon awning material to be lightened so that it is not so dark. 4. Trellis Building Connection - The Board did not feel that Building "B" and Pad Building "A" needed to be connected by a covered pedestrian walkway. They felt the architectural character of pad Building "A" should stand alone as an independent facility. The Board stated they would evaluate the architectural character of the pad site once a separate application was received. 5. Buildin „g, Parapet Design - The parapet design was discussed and the Board felt that since there are various heights to the building complex it would be appropriate to have each building masses at particular height have its parapet be continual around all four sides of the building. This design would insure that the connections between each level of the building had uniformity and could stand alone as independent features. 6. North Side Building Elevation - The members expressed a desire to make sure that the north side of the structure (facing the wash) had many of the architectural characteristics as the south side with the exception of the neon lighting. 7. Glass Skylite Design - There was some discussion on whether the glass skylite was necessary, and whether another design would be more practical. The Board agreed that it was up to the developer to design the structure and pay for the cooling of the building, but it might be more cost effective to examine a prefabricated design instead of a field assembled custom design. The Board was not opposed to the overall design. 8. Sign Program - The Sign Program should be submitted so that the members can get an idea of how the tenants will be identified. The Board stated that it would have been nice to see the program during the overall discussion of the center. In conclusion, the Design Review Board voted 4 -3 to accept the attached revised plan date stamped January 11, 1993, provided the above cited items are evaluated. A modified version of the original Planning Commission Conditions of Approval are attached based on the Design Review Boards action of January 13, 1993. MEMOGT.041 3 l PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: The Planning Commission reconsidered their review of the case on January 26, 1993, and their recommendation was to re- approve the case provided some of the original conditions were modified. The revised conditions are attached. CONCLUSION: That the City Council should approve the attached plans pursuant to the Planning Commission action of January 26, 1993. A copy of the recommended revised Conditions of Approval are attached. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution 93- , approving Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490, subject to conditions and confirmation of the Environmental Determination. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. December 15, 1992 report 3. New plans date stamped January 20, 1993 4. Revised Conditions of Approval MEMOGT.041 4 i • 111 .'r ^1.1 „ Fred Waring Drive L j Ah Miles Avenue Westward Ho Drive OWE 4V Hi wa 111 �[1( •; ��.° �� „ Avenue ' 48th j,V.9 c •� c . 44 ,f Iaa �• �:� .p 41 _. Avenue 50th a -_`� is •`: / �. �a[Ca�r, rL a � ,+' '`.;I •_'I.� •Lai �• I I• I. EXISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONS NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES ® 4 LANES ® 3 LANE E3' 2 LANES IMMSECTiON CONTROL XSIGNALIZED Ic STOP SIGN (4 VW) ® FUTURE STOP SIGN a 10! t0\ WT I= am mm X= .® 1= � ES E-P-1 0 0 a 010 v. V! 314 , 1NI 604C 604C c L NA aFHE %b 3 �o ' IDAC MAC TO: FROM: DATE: PROJECT: MEMORANDUM HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DECEMBER 15, 1992 SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) APPLICANT: E.F.P. CORP. (ED CARNES, PROJECT MANAGER) ARCHITECT: MHA ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING; MICHAEL HURST REQUEST: 1. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 - A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A FUTURE SHOPPING CENTER PROPOSED FOR THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. 2. PLOT PLAN 92 -490 - REQUEST TO DEVELOP A +267,275 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER ON A PORTION OF A +23 ACRES SITE. THE CENTER WILL INCLUDE ON- SITE.PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. EXISTING C -P -S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL) & W -1 (WATER COURSE) ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: AN ENVIRONMEN' BEEN PREPARED ASSESSMENT IT NOT HAVE A ENVIRONMENT. ENVIRONMENTAL PAL ASSESSMENT (EA 92 -241) HAS FOR THE ABOVE PROJECT. BASED UPON THIS HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT WILL SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE AFFECT ON THE THEREFORE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF IMPACT HAS BEEN PREPARED. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: NORTH - WHITE WATER STORM CHANNEL, W -1, BEYOND CHANNEL IS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, R -1 & GOLF COURSE, R -5 SOUTH - VACANT & 111 TRAILER PARK, R -T & CPS (PORTION OF PROPERTY IS IN CITY OF INDIO) EAST - CIRCLE K MARKET /GAS STATION & INDIAN SPRINGS APARTMENT (INDIO) AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, R -1 (LA.QUINTA), WEST - VACANT, CPS -1- i BACKGROUND: The subject plot plan was submitted concurrently with Specific Plan 92 -022. Plot Plan 92- 490 proposes an approximately 267,275 square foot shopping center on a portion of a 23 acre site generally north of Highway 111, south of the White Water Wash, and west of Jefferson Street. The property south of the White Water Wash is zoned C -P -S and the property in the wash is zoned W -1. STATISTICAL DATA: Land Approximately 21.3 acres (developable) Building Area Approximately 267,275 square feet Parking Provided Approximately 1000 spaces Parking Ratio 1/267 square feet DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The project site is approximately 23 acres but 1.7 acres are in the existing flood control channel. The channel to the north of this site is not lined at this time. The property is presently vacant and the site is void of any significant vegetation. The property is made up of two contiguous parcels which are owned by the applicant's company. The parcel has approximately 1,450 feet of frontage on Highway 111 and approximately 860 feet on Jefferson Street. SITE DESIGN: The applicant has proposed an L- shaped shopping center with a majority of the site facing Highway 11.1, a major arterial. Future pad site building sites have been proposed along Highway 111 and Jefferson Street (Pads A, G, H, I, J & K). Various access driveways have been proposed which provide two -way traffic into the site. The applicant proposed two access driveways on Highway 111 and two driveways on Jefferson Street. Guest parking is interspersed on the south side of the building and intertwined with the on -site landscaping. The parking lot design proposes groups of 20 to 40 parking spaces per parking area (double- sided). ARCHITECTURE: The architect has proposed a primarily single story contemporary Spanish shopping center with portions that are two story. Various architectural elements have been used which include stain -glass accent windows, exposed neon tubing, stucco walls, and other textures. A tile roof has been included on the building to create diversity for the main entrance (Buildings D & E) and along portions of the pedrstrian arcade. Desert hues will be used on the building. The exposed rose and blue neon tubing will accentuate the upper area of the building parapet. MFMnnT.028 /CS -2- In order to lend variety to the building architecture, the store -front areas have included a stair -step window pattern which is accented by a speckled rose colored tile (Megara or Delphi Rose). A pedestrian arcade (covered or latticed) has been developed along the south side of the shopping center. SPECIFIC PLAN DOCUMENTS REQUIRED: A specific plan was required because of the CPS Zoning Code standards which requires that all properties greater than 15 acres have a specific plan document approved prior to any project approval for the site. The applicant has chosen to process both the specific plan and plot plan together since the owner has a particular type of development proposed at this time. The developer has stated to staff that he is interested in building a shopping center primarily for discount or off -price retailers. The center would be similar to the Cabazon Shopping Center near Banning off Interstate 10. STAFF COMMENTS A. IMAGE CORRIDOR: The General Plan designates the frontage streets along the exterior portion of the site as "primary image corridor" thoroughfares, and the signalized intersection is a "gateway" image intersection. A copy of the adopted material is attached. The primary function of the program is to provide boulevard streets with raised, landscaped medians and heavily landscaped areas within and contiguous to the street rights -of -way. The General Plan states that "primary image corridors shall include landscape themes which are reminiscent of La Quinta's agricultural past and desert environment ". Overall, the applicant's request is generally consistent with the intent of the General Plan. We would recommend that the applicant enhance the intersection of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street to include an area for a public art piece surrounded by citrus trees. The citrus trees are required in order to preserve the city's agricultural past. A geometric type design might be appropriate for Jefferson Street and Highway 111. B. EXPOSED NEON: The architect has proposed exposed neon light tubes for the outside of the main building along the top of the building parapet. Two separate blue and rose colored light bars are proposed. The light tubes are used along the south side of the main building complex to accent a majority of the building complex. mrmnr,T . 0 2 R /CS -3-' Staff generally is not opposed to the use of exposed neon tubing bands on the outside of the building, provided they do not detract from the overall character of the shopping complex. It might be beneficial to have the tubes recessed into the building envelope and restrict the use of the light system to one color and /or one neon tube. We also would like the use of neon to be used sparingly along the Highway 111 frontage. C. LANDSCAPING: The concept landscape plan has been submitted. The plan includes a variety of plant material which is used on a regular basis in this area (e.g. palms, Mesquite, Acacia, and other type of desert material). The primary architectural element is the palm tree throughout the parking lot area. Whereas, the street frontages use a combination of groundcover, lawn and trees /palms to accent this important intersection. The City's Off- Street Parking Ordinance discusses project landscaping especially within the parking lot areas. The code states: "Shade trees shall be placed so as to shade a portion of the total parking area with tree.canopies within 15 years per the following Table. Professional landscaping judgement shall be used to evaluate the plan as to its 15 -year growth and coverage." % of Total Parking Parking Area Spaces Required to be Shaded 5 - 24 spaces 25 - 49 spaces 50 + spaces 30% minimum 40% minimum 50% minimum Tree coverage shall be determined by the approximate crown diameter of each tree at 15 years of age. The Applicant's use of palm trees in the customer parking lot would not allow the applicant to meet the 50% minimum shade coverage requirements of the City. It might be appropriate to use the palm trees along the entry driveways into the site plus along the main east /west drive aisles. In this way, the palms are a focal point for the project but shade trees are used to shade the vehicle parking areas. Staff is not opposed to the use of palm trees along each respective street frontage. The landscape requirements are required to be met during plan check considerations. D. SITE PLAN MODIFICATIONS: On October 23, 1992, staff met with the applicant to discuss the submittal and to review the public agency comments of the other agencies of the valley (see the Specific Plan Booklet for the original drawings). Based on this meeting the applicant revised the initial site plan in the following fashion: Mrmnr_T . n i R /rs -4- 1. Eliminated two driveway access points onto Highway 111 per Caltran's request; 2. Provided a bus shelter location on Highway 111 which is not a part of a deceleration lane per Sunline Transit Authority's request; 3. Modified the access driveways on Jefferson Street to account for the existing raised medians per the requests of the City's Engineering Department; 4.- Modified the site plan to accommodate the City's General Plan street widths based on the newly adopted General Plan for Hwy 111; 5. Revised the landscaping areas along each street frontage; 6. Revised the on -site parking design to include angled parking areas along the south side of the shopping complex to assist vehicle maneuverability; 7. Revised the building layout and reduced to project square footage to accommodate the above changes; and, 8. Added a covered pedestrian arcade along the south side of the building for shade protection to the client and store owners. The new revision is date stamped November 10, 1992. The plan has a. 50 -foot setback along Highway 111 and varies the setback along Highway 111 for on -site parking areas. E. HIGHWAY 111 CORRIDOR TREATMENT: The recent adoption of the Updated General Plan by the City Council on October 6, 1992, requires the Applicant to dedicate and improve 86 feet (1/2 street) of property along Highway 111. The new requirement is 26 -feet larger than the City's past requirement of 60 feet. The larger width requirement was requested by Caltrans. The 26 feet is to be reserved for future highway widening in the advent that additional travel lanes are needed in the next 20 to 30 years. The new property line location is therefore 86 feet. The City,'s Off - Street Parking Code and General Plan require a 50 foot landscape buffer on Highway 111. However, the setback can be varied, if certain design standards can be written into the proposed specific plan. In the past, the city did not try to make allowances for reductions to the 50 feet requirement, but with the new requirement to increase the property dedication from 60.feet (half- width) to 86 feet (half- width) it might be appropriate to examine setback variations along Highway 111. The applicant has proposed an optional design for the front yard setback along Highway 111 of 25 feet for customer parking. Staff is not opposed to the.customer parking encroaching in the 50 -foot setback provided the cars are screened from view by appropriate methods. However, a 50 -foot setback should be retained for the buildings. MRMOGT.028 /CS -5- F. PARKING LOT DESIGN: The parking lot circulation pattern has been redesigned due to the confusion around the south side of the building because of the intersecting driveways which meet the aisle way periodically. The new plan insures that sight visibility problems will not occur, and angled parking lanes will be added along the south side of the building complex to assist on -site parking needs as requested by the Planning Commission. G. DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO HIGHWAY 111: The project is located along a State Highway. Caltrans officials have reviewed the proposal and they have requested that the City limit the number of driveways along Highway 111 to one or two.. Their preference would be to have the main driveway 1/4 mile to the west of Jefferson Street just in case a traffic signal is installed in the future based on traffic warrants. A secondary (right in /right out) driveway should be located between the main driveway and the intersection of Jefferson Street and Highway 111. In the past, the City has accommodated the wishes of the State when they have made comments on a proposed project. Staff supports the design concept of the Caltrans staff because it will assist traffic flow along this major arterial street over the next 30 years. The city's General Plan predicts that approximately 75,000 vehicle trips per day will traverse Highway 111 once the city has been fully developed. The revised submittal meets the requirements of Caltrans. The other requirement of Caltrans is that the city require a 172 foot right -of -way along Highway 111 and that additional right -of -ways might be required at the intersection of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street. The letter from Caltrans states 24 feet might be necessary to assure that dual left -hand turn pockets can be built, and an exclusive right -hand turn land can also be installed to increase traffic flow patterns along the Highway 111 corridor. The City's Engineering Department will evaluate this last request with Caltrans during plan check. H. DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO JEFFERSON STREET: Engineering Department has evaluated the access plan of the applicant and its relationship to the properties to the east. The conclusion reached by the City is that this area will be heavily used in the future and any driveway into the site should be designed to reduce the traffic impacts on Jefferson Street. The Engineering Department is requiring the northern driveway to align with Vista Grande (to the east) in order to permit full- turning movements into and out of the project. A second driveway.will be permitted to the south of this driveway but the driveway shall be a right -turn in only driveway. The current plan, dated November 23, 1992, meets the requirements of the Engineering Department. MFMnr.T. n2R /CS 5 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD EVALUATION: The Design Review Board reviewed the initial submittal on November 4, 1992. At the meeting the members requested that the Applicant and his architect revise the architectural character of the shopping complex to include elements and materials consistent with a more traditional or early Spanish heritage. However, this recommendation did not preclude the architect from examining other contemporary styles as long as the proposed architecture had design elements that reflect the desert area. On November 10, 1992, the architect for the project submitted his revision to the project. Minor adjustments have been made to the site plan and the architect has revised the exterior elevations of the shopping center. A tile roof has been added to various portions of the building complex pursuant to the general discussions of November 4, 1992, and other exterior modifications have been made to soften the project architecture (e.g.. elimination of the concave notches at the building ends, a revision to the parapet design, a reduction in the number of leaded glass windows, and a revision to the design of the covered pedestrian arcade),. A special meeting was held by the Design Review Board on November 18, 1982, to discuss the third revision to the project (November 10, 1992 submittal). The Board felt it was an improvement to the plan they first saw on November 4, 1992, but they felt it hard to give their final stamp of approval since not all sides of the buildings were submitted for review. The Board, as a group, voted to recommend the project provided the architect and his client submit their final conceptual elevation drawings to them for approval prior to the plans being submitted to the Building Department for plan check. They said they were interested to review all building elevations, location of the pedestrian arcade, the design and color of the neon tubing, roof tile color (light color or hue), final landscaping/ lighting, signs, and any. other items which are an integral part of the overall exterior appearance of the .project. The final vote was six members for the project with one member abstaining. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: The Planning Commission reviewed the project at their November 24, 1992 meeting. The Commission asked various questions of the applicant and architect concerning the proposed development. The Commission expressed an interest in the developers tenant mix, how the neon lighting would work, if the proposed movie theater should be in another location, whether the overhead utilities would be removed, should Buildings D &.E be enclosed buildings, whether or not a trellis would be built along the south side of the shopping complex, and other general questions. The project manager, Mr. Ed Carnes, stated that he is marketing the center to be an off -price center, but that the quality would be better than Cabazon and the users would be an upper -end brand name (e.g. Adolpho, Nike, etc.). Mr. Carnes submitted a new site plan (dated November 23, 1992) at the meeting which was similar to the plan that was reviewed by the Design Review Board except that the movie theater building had been removed from Building F to become Pad G, and the amount of project square footage had been increased to approximately 267,275 square feet from 260,000 square feet. Mr. Carnes stated that it is his intention to create a shopping center that La Quinta residents would be proud of. He felt his architect had prepared drawings which were architecturally pleasing on both the north and south sides of the project. Mr. Carnes. said he has used the neon in another project in Texas and he was trying to use a non -glare (soft) neon element for this center too. He said he would work with the Design Review Board to develop a color and /or hue which was acceptable to the city. Mr. Hurst, the project architect, stated that Buildings D & E would be fully enclosed, but skylights would be used in conjunction with the thermo -pane glass. The architect further stated that a trellis or tiled roof arcade would be built on the south side of the shopping center. In terms of the overhead utility lines, Mr. Carnes stated that he would meet the requirements in the attached Conditions. The public hearing was opened, and several members of the public spoke. The members were from the Indian Springs Country Club and wanted to know how their homes would be effected by the development of the shopping center. The Planning Commission responded that they felt the shopping center would buffer the road noise from Highway 111 and the city will also require a noise study for the project to determine if it will comply with the City's General Plan. The Planning Commission noted that the city will either require a masonry wall or living fence (chain link with landscaping) along the Coachella Valley storm channel to enhance the rear area of the shopping center. If security lights are installed, the city will require that the lights be hooded and they are required to meet the City's Dark Sky Ordinance , provisions. Mr. Carnes stated the site will have 24 -hour security and he will also have an office on the premises. The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the case to the City Council with minor amendments to the draft Conditions of Approval. The final vote was 4 -0 -1. CONCLUSION: The request of the developer is consistent with the zoning and design standards of the City provided certain conditions of approval are met. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the City Council adopt Resolution 92- , approving Specific Plan 92 -022, and Plot Plan 92 -490, subject to conditions and confirmation of the environmental determination. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. Environmental Assessment 3. Agency comments 4. Excerpts from the General Plan 5. Jefferson Street access plan 6. Revised plans date stamped November 10 & 23, 1992 7. Planning Commission Minutes 8. Draft Conditions of Approval n�R /r. g -8 L O1• Q 6 60 I �� Of 1 S O • ®• O 64 I CV Stormwater Channel -0 O - -0 if Jefferson Square Property r HighwaX 111 I Vacant • O � G <a0� Vas tia O /N.Ir �- - wao Indian Q �' SDrI ng5...« ,"_ � c A r.I o/w H $. I tc Circle K Center I Z. 3OAc . - ---T7P7r77'r 24 f VK 92- Zy/ r-• CM of u aVMI f o dS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent:�p �pRQ 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: �8 ' 30 /t%NYt e- r A 922c/ 3. Date of Checklist: /I- 1 Is. 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: Grc' -f 0r L.G. nJ%&arA S. Name of Proposal, if applicable: s.J I1. ENVIRONl ENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "Yes" and "Maybe" answers is required on attached sheets.) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Yes �e No a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? _k_ c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? V e. Any increases in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of-beach, sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- failure, hazards? / slides, ground or similar 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? 1/' c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or -any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Hater. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b., Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, in- cluding but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? _ ✓� f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? _ Yes Ka bye No h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? Vi b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? -dam V✓ c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or result in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? S. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: , a.. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthie organisms, insects or microfauna)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? lee, c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? _ �✓ d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? ✓ _ 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. Light and Clare. Will the proposal produce new light or Par;? S. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? �►'�� 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of any use of any natural / resources? b. Substantial depletion of any renewable natural resource? 10. of !Vet. Does the proposal involve a risk _Risk_ o an explosion or the release of hazardous sub- stances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11. Will the proposal alter the location, _Population. stdi rtution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Trans ortatIWO rculat ion. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? ✓ 1. . i b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or 1 Yes Maybe No c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? _ _L d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and /or goods? . ! �C e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govern- mental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? _ _ d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? _ f 15. Ener . Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power ,or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water.? d. Sewer or septic tanks? Afoo, e. Storm water drainage'. — f. Solid waste and disposal? _ 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? _ b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? _ L✓ 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public. or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? _ 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact Up-on the quality or quantity of existing recrea- tional opportunities? _ Jl 20. Archeolo icil /Historical. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? — �C 21. Mandatory Finding of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially re- duce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self, sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plan or animal community. reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? _ _� Yes Ma be No b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, en- vironmental goals? (A short -term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long -term impacts will endure well into the future.) ✓� c. Does the project have impacts which are indi- vidually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or core separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) _ g/ d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? _ J.::• III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION IV. DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: _ I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A KEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIROWENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date: Signature 415 C, %I CsI)Ce_c. CITY OF LA QUINTA INITIAL.ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY CASE NO. SP92 -022 & PP92 -490 (EA92 -241) Jefferson Square GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has proposed a commercial development which is to include the ultimate development of +267,000 square feet of shopping space on a portion of a 23 acres site located generally on the northwest corner of Jefferson Street and Highway 111. The property is zoned CPS (Scenic Highway Commercial). The site is vacant at this time and bounded on the north by the Whitewater Storm Channel. ------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS EXPLANATION OF "YES" AND "MAYBE" QUESTIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 1. EARTH /SEISMIC: The soil-on this property has been classified as Myoma Fine Sand. This type of soil has rapid permeability and it can be used for crop production, homesite or other urban development. Significant paving on the site will occur, to allow for the construction of the building structures and the parking lots. The surface soil consists of blowsand which will require compaction or removal prior to construction. Minor changes in topography and ground surface relief features may occur with grading and the construction of the proposed improvements. Since the site is presently flat, no major problems are anticipated. No unique geologic or physical features exist on the site. The general elevation of the site is approximately 60 feet above sea level. The site is in a Zone 4 Seismic_ /Geologic Hazard area as noted by the City's MEA (1992). A Zone 4 is an area with moderate shaking qualities but less severe than a Zone 12 (highest level). It is categorized as: "effect on people: felt by most people indoors. Some can estimate duration of shaking. But many may not recognize shaking of building as caused by an earthquake, the shaking is like that caused by the passing of light trucks (Riverside County Manual)." Earthquake damage should not be a major problem at the site. The project is not located within a designated Alquist - Priolo Special Studies zone. The project is located to the south of the Whitewater Storm Channel which flows through the Valley from,Palm Springs to the Salton Sea. The proposed project will not cause the deposition or erosion of beach sands, or in the siltation, deposition or erosion which could modify the Whitewater River. Any drainage into the channel will require approval by the Coachella Valley Water District. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. Grading of the site shall occur pursuant to the approval of the future grading plan as specified by the City's Engineering Department. All work shall be conducted in a manner so that it does not disturb other abutting properties unless off -site agreements have been made and /or approved. The grading quantities have not been submitted. It is assumed that most of the earth moving at the site (contouring) will occur on the premises and limited importation will occur. All building structures shall be designed pursuant to the Uniform Building Code based on the code which is in affect at the time of plan check consideration. The plans shall be prepared by a licensed architect or structural engineer. 2. Prior to site grading any existing miscellaneous material on the site shall be removed (e.g. bushes, trees, etc.). All structures shall be supported by recompacted soil mats. 3. The facility will be required to employ shut -off valves and other safety features which will reduce the likelihood of fire in the event of a major earthquake. 2. AIR: The project site is located within the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB) and is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). I With the proposed construction, there may be air pollutant sources which may deteriorate ambient air quality. These sources are stationary and mobile sources. Stationary source considerations include emission from on -site construction activities and natural gas combustion. Mobile source consideration include exhaust emissions resulting from short term construction activities and long term generation associated with the project. It could be anticipated that with the construction of the proposed project there will be an increase in the overall mobile emission releases because of personal vehicle usage by employees or customers. The levels will be consistent with other projects in the area and no abnormalities are expected by the implementation or development of this project. It is assumed that vehicle trip generation figures would be lower for this type of project if public transportation was utilized more and people did not rely on their private automobiles to get from place to place. The development of a commercial development should not create any objectionable odors except for in the close proximity to the refuse collection areas. However, the collection areas will not be abutting any residential areas, therefore, this should not pose a problem if servicing of the containers is done on a regular basis. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). -Adequate watering techniques shall be employed to partially mitigate the impact of the construction generated dust. All 0 requirements of the Coachella Valley's PM10 Ordinance should be followed. 2). Areas graded but not immediately constructed shall be planted with a temporary ground cover to reduce the amount of open space subject to wind erosion. 3). Grading and construction shall comply with all applicable City Ordinances and the requirements of the Air Quality Management Plan. 4). Public transportation should be encouraged. 5). Trash servicing should be done as needed to ensure that objectionable odors do not become a problem at this site. 3. WATER: With the proposed construction it can be expected that there will be a change in the absorption rate (due to impervious surfaces), drainage patterns and amount and rate of surface water run -off. The project proponent will provide an on or off -site retention /detention basins for the collection of storm water and nuisance water run -off. At this point, the applicant will contain some run -off along the frontage of the site, however, a majority of the future run -off will be diverted in the Whitewater Storm Channel to the north of the site. This area is not subject to liquefaction (similar to the problems of the Downtown area). Liquefaction is the term which is used when the ground water table is very close to the surface, and during an earthquake the ground has a tendency to vibrate building structures from their respective foundations thus causing failure and other adverse side - effects. The project will not result in changes in currents or the course /direction of the Whitewater River. Groundwater resources in the Coachella Valley are divided into upper and lower valley aquifers. The lower valley aquifer extends south and west from the City of La Quinta and contains the project site., The proposed improvements will be located on unpaved areas. The foundation depths for the proposed structures are not anticipated to cause a change in the direction or flow of groundwater in the area. On August 20, 1992, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted a general storm water NPDES permit for contruction activities. All construction activities that disturb five or more acres of land are required to file for this permit. This project is 21 acres, therefore, a permit is required from the CRWQCB prior to on -site construction. The property is designated Zone X on the Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. Zone X are those areas subject to 500 year flood events and 100 year floods with average depths less than 1 foot. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1) The project shall comply with all applicable City requirements regarding storm water and nuisance water. The developer shall complete a hydrology study, prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer, which identifies the increased water run -off quantities which will be generated at the site by analyzing the assumed quantities in an undeveloped state and factoring this against the development proposal. Based on this study the project engineer shall design the necessary on or off -site drainage basins (retention /detention) which will maintain storm water run -off from the property and allow gradual dissipation of the water into the ground. If an off -site system is proposed for the Whitewater River, the Coachella Valley Water District shall approve the design program. 2) The proposed development will have to comply with NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) stormwater discharge requirements. which are implemented by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Region 7 - Contact Mr. Vincent Christian, WRC Engineer at 776- 8933.for any questions). ------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- 4.. PLANT LIFE: Desert vegetation presently covers a majority of the site, and no building structures located on the property. The proposed project will remove the native vegetation. Since the native plants have no significant value to the area, no significant impacts are anticipated. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. 5. ANIMAL LIFE: The subject site is located in an area defined as a Fringed -Toed Lizard Habitat area (a Federally protected species) and it has been determined that a mitigation fee shall be paid to the City of La Quinta if the site is developed. The City is required -to contribute the money to the Valley's Nature Conservancy, and the Conservancy, is required to use the money at their Thousand Palms preserve (1300 acres) to protect and maintain this endangered species. All the valley cities contribute to this preserve through contractual arrangements which were made in the early 19801s. Although all properties in the City do not pay toward this fund at such time as they are developed, this project is required to contribute funds towards the continued preservation of this federally protected species since the property is designated as property that might have (or currently is) supported refuge for the lizard in the past. MITIGATION MEASURES: The applicant /developer shall contribute, at the time a building permit is issued, money in the amount of $600.00 per acre which shall be used by the Nature Conservancy to mitigate the development of this parcel to an urban use. 6. NOISE: Because of the proposed construction and subsequent operation of the commercial center, it can be expected that there will be some increase in the existing noise levels on the site. Most of the noise generated will be from motorized traffic coming to the site since the use of the property will be for indoor commercial activities (offices, restaurant, etc.). It is anticipated that no internal noise will be projected externally outside of the building mass. However, a noise study will examine both projected noise and external noise of project onto abutting properties. During project construction, heavy machinery will be capable of generating periodic peak noise levels ranging from 70 to 95 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the source. Once the project is operational, noise impacts are anticipated to be within an acceptable ranges as required by the General Plan. MITIGATION MEASURES: As required by the General Plan, this project shall prepare a noise analysis to minimize noise impacts on surrounding land uses. The City's General Plan Guidelines for indoor and outdoor noise shall be met (Ch. 8, Environmental Hazards). The study shall examine all proposed commercial uses, and if necessary, require special acoustical walls to mitigate sound transmission to the surrounding properties. During construction of the project, the developer and his contractors shall observe the City's Ordinances regarding construction work hours and any other requirements required by the City's Building Department. 7. LIGHT AND GLARE.: It is anticipated that the building(s) and /or parking lot /landscaping will include lighting. However, at this time we do not have the pertinent information in order to examine whether or not glare will be a problem at the site. This type of material will be submitted to staff during the plan check process. Approval of the material is required by the City's Design Review Board, Planning, and Building Departments prior to construction permit - issuance. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). All lighting will have to comply with the City's "Dark Sky Ordinance". Additionally, light sources shall be shielded to eliminate light glare and off -site spillage onto abutting vacant or developed properties. Exterior pole light fixtures should be low level fixtures in order to maintain both human scale to the project and reduce glare from the fixtures on to abutting City thoroughfares. 2). A lighting plan shall be submitted for the on -site parking lot. The plan shall include a photometric study of the lighting which analyzes the necessary footcandle light intensity, identifies the height of the. light poles, spaces of the poles, type of lighting fixtures, and any other pertinent information necessary to assure compliance with the City's Off- street Parking Ordinance and the Dark Sky Ordinance. Light poles less than 30 feet in height shall be encouraged. 8. LAND USE(S): The General Plan and zoning Code have designated the property as fit for commercial development. The plan is consistent with this intent, and the Planning Commission and City Council will review the development plan in the next few months. MITIGATION MEASURES: None is required because. the project, if approved, will be conditioned to meet the City's requirements for on and off -site improvements commensurate with the level of development. ------------------------------------------------------------------- 9. NATURAL RESOURCES: No major adverse impacts are anticipated with by the construction of this project. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. However, the applicant shall meet all necessary requirements of the local serving agencies as outlined in the attached agency comments or as mandated during construction plan implementation. This shall include compliance with Title 20 and 24 of the California Administrative Code relating to conserving energy resources which is handled by the Building Department during plan check review. 10. RISK OF UPSET: No adverse impact is anticipated due to explosion or release of hazardous substances. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. However, all construction activities whether or not they are permanent or temporary shall meet all necessary safety standards of the Federal, State and local government requirements. 11. POPULATION: It is not anticipated that the proposed project will have an adverse or significant impact on population distribution, density or growth rate in the area. However, the development of the site will increase the need for the City to provide housing opportunities for its residents to support this commercial venture. At this time, the City has approximately 45 percent of its land designated for residential needs. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required- 12. HOUSING: With the proposed project there may be an incremental demand for additional housing for employees of the development. However, due to the size of the commercial center any demand would be insignificant because the City presently has an overabundance of land either vacant at this time, but slated for residential development, or developed at this time with housing units. Single family housing is the primary type of housing at this time, however, multiple family housing projects will be forthcoming in the City's high density areas in the future. Approximately half of the City is designated for residential development and /or growth. MITIGATION MEASURES: None are proposed. 13. TRANSPORTATION /CIRCULATION: The site is located at the northwest corner of Highway 111 (a State roadway) and Jefferson Street. The number of vehicles which use Highway 111 and Jefferson Street are 23,000 and 7,000 respectively. The present level of service on each streets is B on Highway 111 and B on Jefferson which means they are presently operating a good level without traffic delays. With the proposed project it can be anticipated that there will be a generation of additional vehicular traffic movement in the immediate area. The project will generate approximately 10,680 v /td based on 40 trips per 1,000 sq. ft. of building area or 2,136 additional trips per year (5 year development scenario). The project is fronting on two existing partially developed major arterial. thoroughfares of the City which are planned to have divided median islands to discourage cross traffic vehicular movements. The Engineering Department (and Caltrans) has expressed a need to mitigate traffic problems in this area through various means, which can include: additional traffic lanes, right -turn medians, center island medians, and other options which might assist traffic through this area in a faster pace thus reducing delays for either north /south or east /west travel. The applicant's plan will meet these design related requirements provided the conditions of approval are met. The site is served by the Sunline Transit bus system and no impacts to the Sunline serves are anticipated by the development of the project. Routes 35 and 19 service the area along Highway 111. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). Compliance with all applicable City requirements regarding street improvements of adjacent street(s). 2). The project. shall provide adequate on -site parking to accommodate the proposed use of the property. 3). A bus stop and shelter shall be installed along the frontage of the site along Highway 111 in a location approved by Sunline Transit, Caltrans and the City Engineering Department. The bus lane shall be separate of any off -site deceleration lane pursuant to the request of Sunline in their letter of October 6, 1992. 4) . Permit for any work on Highway 111 shall require permission by Caltrans since the roadway is a State Highway. The right -of -way width for Highway 111 shall be 172, (861.1/2 width) as outlined in the existing General Plan (FEIR- 1992). The requirements of Caltrans shall be met (see the attached letter). 5). Traffic improvements to the site can consist of additional travel lanes on both arterial streets, street island medians, traffic signal modifications, transit facilities, curb, gutter and sidewalk, or other improvements which are commensurate with the proposed project and, as condition, will improve transportation in this area and assure the level of service at this intersection will acceptable. The improvements shall be consistent with the adopted General Plan (1992). 6). If a City Transportation Demand Model (TDM) Ordinance is passed by the City in the near future, the applicant shall meet all parameters of the Ordinance as it relates to the commercial uses on the property. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES: The project may create a need for additional fire protection, police protection, solid waste collection, and maintenance of public roads in the area. However, it is anticipated that any increases in this area will be incremental (e.g. phased construction), and further, should only have negligible impacts on existing personnel or services. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). Prior to the issuance of a building- permit the applicant will be required to pay an infrastructure fee of $6,000.00 per acre. This fee will help mitigate impacts as noted above. 2). The project shall comply with all requirements of the Fire Department and Riverside County Sheriff's Department prior to building permit.issuance. 3). The School District mitigation fees shall be paid prior to permit issuance pursuant to the adoption of AB2986 in 1986 (Desert Sands). 4). The project developer shall make provisions with Waste Management of the Desert to have the project serviced to ensure waste products are disposed of without creating health hazards to the community. Necessary facilities shall be built to dispose-of product waste. Recycling facilities shall also be provided to assist in the City's need to reduce recyclable waste (AB939). 15. ENERGY: The city is served by the Imperial Irrigation District for electric power service. IID maintains and operates five 92KV substation facilities which serve the City and is in the process of acquiring an additional 92 KV substation site which will be located on the west. side of Adams Street, north of the Whitewater Channel. The site has existing overhead utility lines running along the perimeter of the site. The Southern Cal. Gas Co. provides natural gas to the City. The Gas Co. currently has an existing gas line along both project frontage streets, and their sizes area six inches on Highway 111 and a four inch line along Jefferson Street (60 psi). The proposed development is anticipated to result in increases in the demand on existing sources of nonrenewable energy but both providers have not stated that they cannot support this project based on current City demand. MITIGATION MEASURES: The proposed development is anticipated to result in increases in demand on existing sources of energy and may require the development of new sources of energy to serve the site.. The requirements of each respective serving agency shall be met in order for the project to be developed in the future. 16. UTILITIES: The proposed project will require extension of serves to the proposed building pads. However, the local services are adjacent to the immediate site. Staff has received the necessary agency comments on the project, and we did not receive any letters which stated that this project could not be served by any of the existing service providers. No significant impacts are anticipated in the area of utilities which include natural gas, communication systems, water, sewer, and solid waste nor storm drainage. MITIGATION MEASURES: All necessary infrastructure improvements which are mandated by the City or any other public agency shall be met as part of the development of this site. This can include new off -site improvements as well as on -site construction. No major impacts are anticipated at this time. 17. HUMAN HEALTH: There are no potential health hazards presently on the site. The proposed project will not expose employees, patrons or visitors to potential health hazards. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. 18. AESTHETICS: The site is presently vacant, the construction of buildings will disrupt the site and change the existing views of this area because the applicant is proposing both single and multiple story buildings. The multiple story portion of the site is toward the north side of the site, whereas the other portions of the facility are single story. The City presently has a policy which discourages multi -level building along major thoroughfares within 150 feet of the future property line. The applicant has stated he will meet the City's requirements for building heights and landscaping setback provisions. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). The height of the building shall not exceed the requirements of the City's Zoning Code or existing General Plan. The buildings along Highway 111 and Jefferson Street shall be low level facilities pursuant to the policies of the existing General Plan which encourages single story facilities within 150 feet of the new property line. 2). The City's Image Corridor policies of the General Plan shall be met. This includes the development of a perimeter landscape buffer (50' along Highway 111 and 20' along Jefferson'Street), and inclusion of a Gateway landscape program at the intersection of Jefferson and Highway 111. 3). The development of the on and off -site landscaping program should take into consideration the agrarian image of the City of La Quinta. The developer should consider vertical type plant material (Palm trees, etc.) and the use of accent type trees (Citrus,. etc.) which will create view "windows" into the project but accentuate the mountains to the southwest of the proposed buildings. Native landscaping should be pursued and accent lighting on the landscaping should be encouraged. Parking lot lighting should be discouraged wherever possible without sacrificing pedestrian security. Uplighting (accent lights) shall be used on the palm trees for visual appeal. 19. RECREATION: No significant adverse impacts are anticipated in this area since no homes are to be built on the property. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. ----------------------------------------------=--------------- - - - - -- 20. ARCHEOLOGICAL /HISTORICAL: Due to the historical nature of the City, there may be an adverse impact created by the construction of the project. Presently, the site is vacant and staff is unaware of any recorded archeological (historical) sites on the property at this time. The applicant is in the process of contacting the Univ. of Riverside to investigate whether any recorded sites are known at this time. Further information will be available prior to the future public hearing dates. MITIGATION MEASURES: An archaeological survey of the site by qualified archaeologists will need to be completed prior to activities which would disturb the site (i.e. site grading). Compliance with the results of the archaeological survey will be required, and if necessary, on -site archaeologist will remain on- site during the grading of the property for development. ------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS: It is not anticipated that there will be any adverse impacts by the project in the areas of plant and animal life, long term environmental goals, cumulative impacts, or impacts on human beings based on the mitigation measures outlined above, and any other conditions of approval deemed necessary by the Planning Commission and City Council as part of the review of this case. Attached: Agency Comments Ref: FEIR City of La Quinta (1992) Canyon Mall Draft EIR (1992) Prepared by: Greg Trousdell (11 -1 -92) STATE Of CAIFOIHA • BUSINESS. TR►..,r.ATATION AND HOIASM AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 11, P.O. Box 05406. S N OIEa0.921MS" (619) 688 -2503 October 15, 1992 Mr. Greg Trousdell City of La Quinta 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490 Dear Mr. Trousdell: PETE WISON.O0MM 0 C T 19 I;IIY"' F L ci"l 'r.�" 11- RIV•111 PM 33.1 We have reviewed Jefferson Square Specific Plan which proposes to construct a 280,000 square foot commercial shopping center on 23 acres located on the northwest comer of State Route 111 (SR -111) and Jefferson Street. Please refer to the enclosed letter submitted to our Planning department by the Caltrans engineer responsible for this portion of SR -111. It states the issues which we wish the City to address as part of our review of this proposed project. We also wish to add these additional comments: • This development should be phased and coordinated with proposed improvements to SR -111.. This will avoid and minimize traffic congestion. • Caltrans supports the concept of 'Fair Share Contributions' on the part of developers. Therefore, it is our recommendation that developers contribute their fair share towards transportation improvements for the Jefferson Street and SR -111 intersection. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any questions, Please contact Famaz Badiei at (619) 688 -2503. Sincerely, JESUS M. GARCIA District ,Director BILL DILLON, Chief Planning Studies Branch Enclosure oa CWest AKosup PHardin FYazdan/MDobbin FBadfet T/P File dr u, Transportation and Ho"nR ARonw Memorandum To +WILLIAM DILLON, Chief Date October 13, 1992 Planning Studies Branch 96 NO,11 -RIV -111 Specific Plan 92 -022 Attn: Farnaz Badier From , DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION District 11 /Project Studies Subject. SPECIFIC ,PLAN - CITY OF LA QUINTA - STATE ROUTE 111 (SR 111)/ JEFFERSON STREET We have reviewed the Jefferson Square Specific Plan which proposes to construct a 280,000 square foot commercial shopping center on 23 acres located on the northwest corner of SR 111 and Jefferson Street and have the following comments. On March 14, 1991, a Project Study Report /Project Report (PSR /PR) for improvements on SR 111, between Washington Street and Adams Street in the City of La Quinta, was approved by the District. A conceptual plan for upgrading the existing four -lane highway to a six -lane conventional highway through this area was included in that report. We have also had very preliminary discussions with the City of La Quinta concerning a second project which would extend this widening east to Dune Palms Road near the City of La Quinta limits. Improvements proposed as part of this project should be coordinated, with the development of the proposed State Highway improvements and improvements to the existing local street system in order to minimize potential congestion and safety concerns. Since the Specific Plan does not address impacts to SR 111 which would be generated by the proposed development, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a detailed traffic study would be required to determine impacts and the appropriate mitigation. If it is determined that the mitigation for this project exceeds $300,000, a Project Study Report (PSR) would be required. In addition, land use decisions should not be made at this time which would limit alternatives or the scope of the PSR. The EIR for the development should include a section that incorporates a detailed Traffic Impact Analysis based on Year 2015 traffic. The Traffic Analysis should include the expected cumulative traffic impacts to SR 111. Any traffic impacts to SR 111 generated by the Jefferson Square development need to be addressed in the environmental document. Adequate noise mitigation should also be among the impacts addressed in the EIR. The mitigation should be based on 2015 traffic and the ultimate configuration of the highway. William Dillon October 13, 1992 Page 2 Since signals could be installed at any median break or unsignal'ized intersection once signal warrants are met, spacing of median breaks or unsignalized intersections should not be less than one quarter mile. Access to SR 111 should be limited to one access point per parcel in newly developing areas. Attempts should be made to limit access between intersections to one point (right turns only), midway between the adjacent intersections. In cases where there are multiple ownerships with potential for additional access points between intersections, we recommend that the local agencies use their land use authority to combine access points, where practical, as those parcels are developed. SR 111 is currently classified as a six -lane conventional highway in this area. Dedication of right of way may be necessary in order to meet the current Transportation Concept Report. A minimum right of way width of 172 feet would be required to accommodate the six -lane highway. The typical section for the six -lane highway assumes a raised median and does not include additional right of way which may be required for structures, additional grading, intersection channelization and drainage facilities. In the area of major intersections up to an additional 24 feet may be required to accommodate dual left -turn lanes and /or exclusive right -turn lanes. In areas of limited grading and existing development, the right of way width can be reduced to 150 feet.. It should be noted that existing development adjacent to SR 111 may require the non - symmetrical widening of existing SR 111 in some areas to minimize the cost right of way acquisitions. It is recommended that right of way be reserved or dedicated for this future expansion. Close coordination with Caltrans is encouraged. If we can be of any additional help or if you have any questions regarding our comments, please contact Dan Martin.at 688 -3211. a A-1v ALLAN KOSUP Project Manager Project Studies ARK: sr bcc;: KHBarnes /SFPfiles ARKosup/ WMartin Callfornla Eastern Archaeological Informatlon Inventory Center r Mr. Mike Hurst Indian Palms Country Club 48630 Monroe Street Indio, CA 92201 Dear Mr. Hurst: Eastern Information Center Depanmenl of Anthropology INYO Universay of California UoNO Riverside. CA 92521 FaVErWOE (714) 787.5745 N�V j 0 i�g2 . June 15, 1992 RS i 1435 We received your request on October 20, 1992 for a cultural resources records search for the property designated Indian Palms Country Club, located in Section 29, T.5S, U E, SSSM, near the city of la Quinta in Riverside County. We have reviewed our site records, maps, and manuscripts against the location map you provided. Other available heritage resource listings, including the National Register and the State Historic Resources Inventory, have been checked. Our records indicate that a cultural resources survey has not been. conducted on the subject property. There are no sites recorded within the project boundaries, however, our records indicate that 34 archaeological sites have been recorded within a one -mile radius of the project area. In addition to the California Archaeological Inventory, the following were reviewed: A. The National Register of Historic Places, Vol. I and II, and subsequent Federal Register listings: None of the properties or sites are listed. National Register Determinations of Eligibility (listed through November 1991): There is a site adjacent to property which is being in the process of being determined for eligibility. B. California Historic landmarks, 1990, California Department of Parks and Recreation: None. C. California Inventory of Historic Resources: None. D. The Historic Resources Inventory, conducted in the late 1970s and early 1980s by the Riverside County Parks Department: None. Mr. Hurst October 21, 1992 Page 2 E. An historic road appears on USGS Palm Desert 15'(1959) and Grant Land Office Plat Map (1855/56) that is located near the subject property. A copy of the map is included for your information. Based on existing information, there is a probability of cultural resources being present; therefore, further archaeological study is recommended. The property should be systematically surveyed by a qualified archaeologist to identify all cultural remains and provide further recommendations for their study and treatment prior to any grading or construction. Enclosed is a list of archaeological consultants. When an archaeologist has been selected to perform the above - recommended work, please provide him /her with a copy of this letter, the search may then be completed to the level required by an archaeologist, either by this office or by your archaeological consultant's study and research of our files. If this finalization of the search is completed within three months of the initial search, we will not charge the consultant the minimum- per - project fee. This statement does not constitute a negative declaration of impact. This statement reports only known archaeological materials on or in the vicinity of the property in question. The presence of archaeological resources on the property cannot be ruled out until a systematic survey is conducted. Sincerely, Rachel S. Greeley Information Officer enclosure eiv C uNrr RlV6RS1�JF... ..� GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF RIVERSIDE COUNTY EIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN WINTO AVENUE • PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 9230 (714) 657 -3183 October 1, 1992 To City of La Ouinta ,• Planning Division Attn: Ore Trousdell ;: v Greg � OCT OZ X91 � Re: Plot Plan 92 -490 pp 1.•• _... 1t)• .,..Fi With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced plot plan, the Fire Department requires that the following fire /life safety measures be provided in accordance with the La Quinta Municipal Code, Uniform Fire code and other recognized fire protection standards: ACCESS 1. The access road proposed along the northern boundary of the project shall be completed during Phase I to provide through circulation. 2. All future building expansions shall be subject to a site plan review /approval prior to issuance of building permits. 3. A minimum unobstructed width of 24 feet shall be maintained for all access roads, with certain areas designated as fire lanes. WATER . 1. The water mains shall be capable of. providing a fire flow of 5000 gpm and an actual fire flow available from any two adjacent hydrants shall be 2500 gpm for 2 hours duration at 20 psi. 2. A combination of on -site and off -site Super hydrants (6" x 4" x 2 -1/2" x 2 -1/2 ") shall be located not less than 25' or, more than 165' from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. -1- PLANNING DIVISION O M10 OFM 0 TwEcuA oFna 79.773 Country Club Drive, Suite F. Indn� CA 92201 41002 Coney Cerra Drive, Suite I25, Tonmull, G 91390 (619) 3428886 • FAX (619) 7152072 0 RIVERSIDE OFFICE (714) 694-5070 • FAX (714) 694.5076 ........ " . „!.._:L I`. a Val To: Planning Division October it 1992 Re: PP 92 -490 Page 2 3. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the Coachella Valley Water District prior to any combustible material being placed on the site. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant /developer shall furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review /approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location spacing, and the system shall be designed to meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed /approved by the local water company and a registered civil engineer with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department. GENERAL 1. Buildings shall be constructed so that the fire flow required for any individual building or unseparated area does not exceed 3500 gpm• 2. Final conditions and requirements with regards to type of construction, area separations, or built -in fire protection systems will be addressed when the building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning b Engineering staff at (619) 863 -8886. jmp Sincerely, RAY REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner By l v+y Tom Hutchison Fire Safety Specialist 9 GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF To: City of La Guinta Planning Division Attn: Greg Trousdell Res Specific Plan 92 -022 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN 1ACINTO AVENUE * PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 923710 (714) 657 -3183 ,_."2 Oct obp�, 1P92 1 v F OCT 0 2 199'1 j i With respect to the review /approval of the above referenced document, the Fire Department has the following comments: The "Fire -In" (initial attack) fire stations are located within 3 to 4 miles, and have a response time of five to six minutes. The response times of emergency vehicles could be delayed during peak travel hours at intersections receiving a Level of Service of "E" or "F ". This project will contribute to the need for additional equipment, personnel, and /or facilities. Impacts associated with capitol improvements such as land, buildings, and equipment can be mitigated with appropriate budget action, and /or developer participation in a fire protection mitigation program or assessment district. The proposed project will have a cumulative adverse impact on the Department's ability to provide an acceptable level of service. These impacts are due to the increased number of emergency or public service calls generated by additional buildings and human population. The continuing costs necessary for an increased service level could be mitigated by an increase in the Fire Department's, operating budget. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning Engineering Staff at (619) 863 -8886. 0 Quo OFFICE 79.733 Country Club Drive; Suite F. burkh CA 91201 (619) 312-8M 9 FAX (619) 775.1072 Sincerely, RAY REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner By Ow• y��' Tom Hutchison Fire Safety Specialist PUNNING DIVISION 13 TE)AECvtw OFF1cE 11002 Quay Cenft Drive, Suite 225, Temecuik CA 92390 ❑ RIVERSIDE OFFICE (711) 694-5070 • FAX (711) 694-5076 SunLine Transit Agency MEMBER AGENCIES Cathedral City Coachella Desert Hot Springs Indian Wells Indio La Ouinta Palm Desert Palm Springs Rancho Mirage Riverside County Mr. Greg Trousdell, City of La Quinta P. 0. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 0 C T 0 8 1992 Associate Planner October 6, 1992 RE: Specific Plan 92 -022 b Plot Plan 92 -490 Dear Greg: Thank you for allowing. SunLine Transit Agency to review the plans for the Jefferson Square Commercial Center to be located on Hwy 111 and Jefferson. SunLine Transit Agency does currently operate Line 19 on 15 minute peak hour service past this site. This project will have a definite impact on our need to provide transit services to the site. Therefore, we are requesting the city's assistance in obtaining transit mitigation measures for this property. We note that the developer has placed a bus turnout on the south east corner of the property. This bus turnout is located in a deceleration lane for the first driveway into the property. SunLine Transit Agency has experimented with placing bus turnouts in deceleration lanes and finds that this is not the preferable solution. What generally happens in this case is that, as the bus stops, drivers turn in behind the bus, not realizing that the bus will be stopping, or they cut very close to the bus when the bus is trying to pull back out and many conflicts occur. There- fore, we would prefer to see a bus turnout that was separate from the deceleration lane. The location they have it in is an excellent one. We do note that there are four driveways off of Hwy 111 into the site. We believe that with a little bit of creativity, this could be reduced to three and the eastern most driveway could be eliminated. We also note that the current plans include a passenger waiting shelter. Both the turnout and the passenger waiting shelter will be needed. We have an additional concern in that a pedestrian path way does need to be provided from the bus stop into the main stores. 32.505 Harry Oliver Trail . Thousand Palms, CA 92276 • (619) 343.3456 • FAX (619) 343.3845 Mr. Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner City of La Quinta October 6, 1992 Page 2 SunLine Transit Agency will be more than happy to work with the city and the developer to design a mutually acceptably stop. Please let me know how I can assist you further. Yours very truly, SU INE TRANSIT AGENCY .-Awn. De ra Astin Director of Planning DA/ n cc: File s �IATEI� ESTABLISHED IN 1916 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY ��8TRIC� COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058 - COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 - TELEPHONE (619) 3982651 DIRECTORS OFFICERS TELLISCODEKAIS. PRESIDENT THOMAS E LEVY. GENERAL MANAGER CHIEF ENGINEER RAYMOND R RUMMONDS. VICE PRESIDENT SERNARDINE SLP70h SECRETARY JDHNW McFADDEN OWENMcCOOKAMSTANIGENEPA:MANAG" DOROTHY M. DE LAY October 2, 1992 REDWINEANDSHERRILL ATTORNEYS THEODORE J. FISH File: 0163.1 Planning Commission City of La Quinta 0C1 7 13'1 Post Office Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92253 , Gentlemen: Subject: Specific Plan 92 -022, Portion of the Northeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Meridian This area is protected from stormwater flows by the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel and may be considered safe from stormwater flows except in rare instances. This area is designated Zone X on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. There may be erosion of the banks of the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel during periods of unusual rainfall and discharge. The developer shall construct concrete slope protection on the bank of the stormwater channel to prevent erosion. Plans for concrete slope protection shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Water District for review. A portion of this area is adjacent to the right- of-way of the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel. We request that the developer be required to install suitable facilities to prohibit access to this right -of -way. The developer shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Coachella Valley Water District prior to any construction within the right -of -way of the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel. This includes, but is not limited to', surface improvements, drainage inlets, landscaping, and roadways. The district will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area in accordance with the current regulations of this district. These regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the subdivider and said fees and charges are subject to change. TRUE CONSERVATION 1I0,F WATER WISELY Planning Commission -2- October 2, 1992 The district will need additional facilities to provide for the orderly expansion of its domestic water system. These facilities may include wells, reservoirs and booster pumping stations. The developer will be required to provide land on which some of these facilities will be located. These sites shall be shown on the tract map as lots to be deeded to the district for such purpose. This area shall be annexed to Improvement District No. SS of Coachella Valley Water District for sanitation service.. Plans for grading, landscaping, and irrigation systems shall be submitted to Coachella Valley Water District for review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management. The area is within Improvement District No. 1 of the Coachella Valley Water District for irrigation water service.. Water from the Coachella Canal is available to the area. The developer shall use this water for landscape irrigation. If you have any questions please call Bob Meleg, stormwater engineer, extension 264. Yours very truly, Tom Levy General Manager -Chief Engineer RF:kf /ed4 cc: Don Park Riverside County Department of Public Health 79 -733 Country Club Drive, Suite D Bermuda Dunes, California 92201 I. RIVERSIDE COUNTY COLS BYRD, SHERIFF City of La Quinta Planning Department 78105 Calle Estado La Quinta CA 92253 Atten: Greg Trousdell Associate Planner Dear Mr. Trousdell. Sheriff 82 -695 DR. CARREON BLVD. 6 INDIO. CA 92201 •(619) 342 -8990 October 14, 1992 "J OCT 151992 CITY Of LA. &UINTA PLANNING OE ARTMENt RE. Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 The Sheriff's Department would like to comment on a number of significant problems the plans show. The complex will have a significant impact on police services for the City of La Quinta. Traffic congestion, patrol requests and calls for service will impact the Department at least 25 %. This service will require an additional need for police manpower for La Quints. There are some deficiencies on the design of the complex. These deficiencies are: Lighting must not exceed City of La Quinta's requirements to ensure customer safety as within La Quinta's standards. Angled parking is recommended for better field of vision while backing in to traffic. Theater drop -off should be moved away from entrance to shopping center so as not to block incoming traffic. Exits on to Highway 111 should be right hand turn only. Need more handicapped parking near main building D & E. Wider aisles for shipment drop -off out front of pads J,K,H,l or loading docks to the rear of stores. This will allow safe passing of stopped vlehicle& Page 2 E19- Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 October 14, 1992 Main entrance traffic signal - Is there going to be one? Buildings should have large numerical addresses; must be consistent with east /west addressing. No suite numbers Addresses must be at least eight inches tall on contrasting backgrounds. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the project from a law enforcement point of view. Sincerely, COIS BYRD, SHERIFF Ronald F. Dye, Capt in Indio Station Commander cr m , 9 d � Z 2 7 4 d � � RM A I�J N w N Policy 3 -4.1.2 Primary image corridors shall be defined as streets in the roadway network which are the major urban design statements of the City. Primary image corridors shall consist of boulevard streets with raised, landscaped medians and heavily landscaped areas within and contiguous to the street rights -of -way. Primary image corridors shall include landscape themes which are reminiscent of La Ouinta's agricultural past and desert environment Primary image corridors may include vertical landscape elements such as palm trees complemented with a shade - producing understory of canopy trees, such as indigenous, drought tolerant desert species. More water intensive understory canopy trees, such as various citrus species, shoud be used spanngy in nodes at key locations as highlights and reminders of past agricultural activities. Ground plane landscape materials should evoke a lush image through the use of drought tolerant, low maintenance plant species. Turf should be used in a manner consistent with citrus trees--Sparingly and in high visibility locations. Primary image corridors shag include street traffic signals, street lighting systems, street furniture, bus shelters, street name signs, and noise berms/barriers which are designed in a coor- dinated and consistent theme unique to La Quints At key intersections, primary image corridors shall include treatments which may include special roadway paving, hardscape/sczeen wall arrangements and displays of public art: Policy 3 -4.1.3 Primary image corridors shall include the following roadways: • Washington Street • Jefferson Street • Highway 111 • Fred Waring Drive • We Tampico * eserecwer Drive (from Calle Tampico to Washington Streeq Policy 3 -4.1.4 Secondary image corridors shag be defined as streets in the roadway network which are the secondary urban design statements of the City. Secondary image corri- dors shag consist of streets with raised, landscaped medians and landscaped areas within and contiguous to the street right -of -way. Secondary image corridors shall be consistent with primary image corridors relative to similar landscape materials, street traffic signals, street lighting systems, street furniture, bus shelters and street name signs. However, secondary BRW, bhu~ tw- �ovuoairt Excerpt From the General Plan street image corridors shall emphasize the use of lower profile indigenous canopy trees, accentuated with the use of citrus trees in various nodes. The use of taller, vertical landscape elements shag be de- emphasized and shag occur in nodes, primariy at street intersections. Policy 3 -4.1.5 Secondary image corridors shall include the following roadways: • Miles Avenue e Dune Palms Road (south of the Coachella Vagey Stommater Channeq 9 Adams Street (south of the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channeo • Avenue 48 • Avenue 50 • Avenue 52 • Eisenhower Drive (south of Calla Tampico to Avenida Bermudas) Policy 3 -4.1.6 Agrarian image corridors shall be defined as streets in the roadway network which are designed to evoke a rural ambiance and to provide a strong linkage to the City's agricultural past These corridors are to be located h dose proximity to areas designated 'Rural Residential' on the Land Use Policy D.agram in the Land Use Element Agrarian image corridors shag incorporate equestnan Grails and shag include design themes representative of rural areas, such as shaded country lanes which utilize lower profile indigenous canopy trees accentuated with various citrus species. The use of taller, vertical landscape elemems. such as palm trees, shag be de- emphasized. Where possible, the use of vertical curbs on the outside lane of the roadway shall be minimized. Street traffic signals, street bghtirg systems, street furniture, bus shelters and street name signs shad be similar to primary and secondary image corridors, but if possible, shag incorporate more of a rural character. Policy 3 -4.1.7 A,Vw an linage corridors shag include the fogoy4v roadways: e Madson Street • Avenue 54 (from Jefferson Street to Monroe Streeq Policy 3 -4.1.8 Prin•,ary gateway treatments shag be defned es st^set- scape treatments at key intersections leading into the City and into the Village area Primary gateway treatments may include special paving, street furniture, Chapter 3 - Circulation Oement 3 -21 City of La Quints General Plan hardscape/screen wad arrangements, displays d public art, monument s+gnage, landscaping and street lighting. Primary. gateways are intended as' dramatic design statements indicating the entrance to the City and the Village area Primly gateway treatments shall occur at the following street intersections: • Fred Waring Drive and Washington Street • Washington Street and Highway 111 • Jefferson Street and Highway 111 • Cal/e Tampico and Washington Street • Eisenhower Drive and Cade Tampico Policy 3 -4.1.9 Secondary gateway treatments shall be derined as streetscape treatments which are similar to primary gateway treatments except that an emphasis is placed on a less dramatic entry statement. For example, secondary gateway treatments may not include special paving, street furniture or hardscape/screen wall arrangements. The secondary gateway treatment may rey more on the use of landscaping, street lighting and monument signage as the major elements of design. 3- 4.1.10 Along primary, secondary and agrarian image corridors the City shad establish appropriate building height limits to ensure a low density character and appearance. Pollcy 3- 4.1.11 Landscaped setbacks are necessary to ensure a high quality and attrac trve appearance on major streets. Setbacks for walls, buildings and parking areas may vary, if property designed, but shad generally be as bllows: • Highway 111 - 50 feet • Other Major Arterials - 20 feet • Primary Arterials - 20 feet • Secondary Arterials - 10 feet • Collector Streets - 10 feet Landscaping within these setback areas shad be consistent with the appropriate image corridor designation, if applicable. Policy 3- 4.1.12 Special right- of -vay yridth and design treatments will be identified for streets within the Village Area, recognizing established set -backs of adjacent developments and the maturity of existing landscaping Ex( it from the General Plan materials. The following streets will be permitted to remain at a maximum fifty (50) foot right -of -way width. a) Calla b) Barcelona C) Amigo Policy 3- 4.1.13 Wall openings to allow views into projects from image corridors are 'desirable and should be required where appropriate as one means of minimizing nega" visual impacts of continuow wads. This can also be accomplished by varying setbacks. Policy 3- 4.1.14 The City may require adequate parkways, vistas into walled communities, and other features as appropriate. Policy 3- 4.1.15 More desirable, the use of existing natural vegetation including estrus trees, date palm groves, eucayptus windrows, and oleander hedges should be considered for retention in image corridor landscape designs. Policy 3- 4.1.16 Special design treatments for major elements of the Gtys street system sha0 be considered in all approvals for related development Policy 3- 4.1.17 The Citys streetscape quality shall be improved by tundergrou nding of utilities wherever possible. Policy 3- 4.1.18 Prevention of visual blight shad be enhanced by the administration of a comprehensive sign ordinance. Public Transit Policies Background - The provision of public transit is an integral part of La Quinta's multi -modal circulation system. increased use of public transit in the future will provide benefits such as reduced congestion and improved air quafhty. For transit to be successful, it should be property planned so that it is convenient and accessible to users and operates in a timely fashion. The following policies are intended to provide guidance in establishing an expanded transit system to serve the needs of the City and region. BRW, Ina Chapter 3 - Circulation Element City of La Quinta 3 -22 General Plan all r t a It l , f / 11 r 71 � H F Irv-0 qr 15aC L° O 000, 00 � •r . I � J t� . � r� �••Ir n I .• `- IMINIIIIIIIIIIN l: Tr �++O.�T '__ N 0 R T H CASE Na Jefferson Square Proposed Access Plan for Jefferson Street SCALE - 1" = ±100' (approx.) moCLIDE S U P on Planning Commission Minutes November 24, 1992 PC11 -24 ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: mmissioners Ellson M Adolph, & Chai ows. NOES: None. ENT: Commissione osher. ABSTAINING: N e. fpecific Plan 92-022 and Plot Plan 2 -4 ; a request of E.F.P. Corporation (Ed arnes) to establish development standards for a future shopping center and a ±260,000 sq. ft. commercial shopping center on a portion of a ±23 acre site. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the Staff report, and noted the changes. in the size of the project from 260,000 square feet to 265,000 square feet and a modification in the two way entrance on Jefferson Street. A copy of the file can be viewed in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Commissioner Adolph asked if the developer was asking for architectural approval. Staff explained that they were asking for a conceptual approval and that the Design Review Board would review the final architectural drawings. Commissioner Adolph stated he would. like to see final architectural drawings. Commissioner Barrows stated that Condition #22 could be changed to require the project to come back before the Planning Commission. 3. Commissioner Ellson asked Staff to clarify when sections were two story. Staff stated the applicant would describe the project. Commissioner Ellson further inquired if the theater traffic would have to cross the traffic area. She suggested that the theater be switched with Building #B. 4. There being no further questions of Staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the public hearing. Mr. Michael Hurst, architect for the project, gave a detailed report of the project. 5. Commissioner Adolph asked if the overhead power poles would be put underground. Mr. Hurst stated he would comply with the Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Adolph stated his concern that Building "I" would be to close to the corner. Mr. Hurst explained that the building would be recessed back. 6. Commissioner Ellson inquired if the flood control channel would be covered in concrete. She was concerned about the aesthetics. Mr. Hurst stated he had a proposal to present to the Water District. 4 Planning Commission Minutes November 24, 1992 7. Chairwoman Barrows asked for clarification on the use of the neon lighting. Mr. Hurst stated it was to be used as an accent to buildings "C OF7, and r ". It would be hooded so only the lighting would be seen. Discussion followed regarding the lighting. 8. Commissioner Ellson asked about the window shading and if angle parking would be provided. Staff stated that angle parking would be required north of the center street. 9. Mr. Bud Melkesian, neighbor to the north, stated his concern about the view of the north elevation, as well as the noise, traffic, lighting, buffers, and graffiti on the walls. Commissioner Marrs stated that the Commission had discussed most of these issues in study session and felt they would be addressed in the Conditions of Approval. 10. Mr. Wally Reynolds, property owner to the east, stated that the Indian Springs golf community to the north was concerned about the amount of noise, traffic, lighting, buffering, and graffiti on the walls. Commissioner Marrs stated that the issue of graffiti was addressed by the Commission in their study session and stated that in the Conditions of Approval #20 the noise issue would be addressed. 11. Mr. Ed Carns, Project Manager. for the project, stated that the project would maintain its own security force and would be patrolling the project for any problems including graffiti. 12. Ms. Pam Serabian, property owner to the north, asked if the City had any plans in the near future for a bridge over Jefferson Street at the channel. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated that the City had no plans for the immediate future for a bridge on Jefferson Street. 13. Commissioner Marrs inquired if the north entrance to. the project would line up with Vista Grande. Staff replied it would. 14. Commissioner Ellson asked Staff if the utilities would be undergrounded and if the parking would be angled. Staff stated the utilities would be undergrounded and angle parking would be provided. 15. There being no further public comment, Chairwoman Barrows closed the public hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion. PC11 -24 5 Planning Commission Minutes November 24, 1992 16. Following discussion regarding the location of the theater and parking, Commissioner Adolph moved and Commissioner Ellson seconded a motion to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 92-045 recommending to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490 subject to the amended conditions and confirmation of the Environmental Determination. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Ellson, Marrs, Adolph, & Chairwoman Barrows. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Mosher. ABSTAINING: None. E. Plot Plan 91 -456 AU&nt 1; a request of the Koenig Co for approval of an ame to allow the reduction of the size of t ect from 116,600 square f 5,650 square feet on 9.25 acres redu 11.8 acres. 1. Pri Planner Stan Sawa presented the inf aWbn contained in the eport, a copy of which is on file in ning and Development partment. There being no questions of Staff, oman Barrows opened the public hearing. Mr. John Koenig, t, stated his concurrence with the Staff's recommendations b ed his concern about being able to meet the 50% parking lot He further went on to explain the art project proposed fo roject. 3. Commission 107 1ph asked if the trellis proposed on the Tampico side would be ed. Mr. Koenig stated there would be a screened wall on the so de so the parking lot would be sheltered from the str Di n followed regarding the west wall. 4. mmissioner Adolph stated his concern that the deliv would not be able to make the turn to exit onto Washingto Mr. Koenig stated the project would be designed to be sure uld. Discussion followed regarding shop #2 north elevation ential trash problems. 0 5. There being no further public discu airwoman Barrows closed the public hearing. PC11 -24 6 RESOLUTION 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CONCURRING WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 92 -241 AND APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490. CASE NO. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 APPLICANT: EFP CORP (ED CARNES) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 24th day of November, 1992, hold a duly- noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of E.F.P Corp. to develop a 251,550 square foot commercial shopping center on a portion of a 23 acre site bounded by the Whitewater Storm Channel on the north, Highway 111 on the south, and Jefferson Street on the east. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 26th day of January, 1993, reconsider their review of the project based on the City Council's action of December 15, 1992. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 15th day of December, 1992, and February 2, 1993, hold a duly- noticed Public Hearings to consider the request of E.F.P Corp. and recommendation of the Planning Commission to develop a 251,550 square foot commercial shopping center on a portion of a 23 acre site bounded by the Whitewater Storm Channel on the north, Highway 111 on the south, and Jefferson Street, on the east, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 29, T5S, R7E, SBBM (APN 617- 080 -017, 021) WHEREAS, said Specific Plan and Plot Plan request has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended) by Resolution 83 -68, in that the Planning Director has conducted an initial study and has determined that, although the project could have an adverse impact on the environment, the mitigation measures incorporated into the Conditions of Approval will mitigate those project impacts to levels of insignificance; and, WHEREAS, mitigation of various physical impacts have been identified and incorporated into the approval conditions for Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490, thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; and, CS /RESOCC.047 - 1 - WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to justify the approval of said Specific Plan and Plot Plan: 1. The proposed Specific Plan and Plot Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. 2. The Specific Plan and Plot Plan are compatible with the existing and anticipated area development. 3. The project will be provided with adequate utilities and public services to ensure public health and safety. 4. That the project will not impact the abutting streets as they will be fully improved along the frontage of the site as required by the adopted General Plan (Circulation Element). 5. That the conditions imposed are deemed necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community. 6. That the use(s) is consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 7. That the project is consistent with State Law Section 65450 (et. al.). SPECIFIC PLAN GOALS /OBJECTIVES 1. To create a shopping area to serve the City of La Quinta and adjoining cities. 2. To create a unique urban design environment that is appealing to the citizens of La Quinta. 3. To create a harmonious relationship with the adjacent residential neighborhoods (north and east) by buffering the project with streets, setbacks, landscaping, walls, and other architectural features. 4. To create a pedestrian- oriented environment. 5. To provide a balanced transportation system to conserve and reduce air pollution. 6. To provide an adequate supply of on -site parking and landscaping. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: CS /RESOCC.047 - 2 - 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment No. 92 -241, indicating that the proposed Specific Plan and Plot Plan will not result in any significant environmental impacts as mitigated by the recommended Conditions of Approval; 3. That the City Council does hereby approve the above- described Specific Plan and Plot Plan request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 2nd day of February, 1993, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JOHN PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: SAUNDRA L. JUHOLA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: DAWN HONEYWELL, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California CS /RESOCC.047 - 3 - CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 93- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 92-022 & PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (REVISED) FEBRUARY 2, 1993 * Modified by Planning Commission on November 24, 1992 ** Added by Planning Commission on November 24, 1992 + Revised by Design Review Board on 1/13/93 + + Added by Design Review Board on 1/ 13/93 + ++ Modified by Planning Commission 1/26/93 GENERAL: 1. Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the City of La Quinta Municipal Code, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 2. This approval shall expire and become void within one year unless extended pursuant to the City's Municipal Code. 3. Phasing plans, including phasing of public improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer and the Planning and Development Department prior building permit issuance. 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building .permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and /or clearances from the following public agencies: - City Fire Marshal - Public Works Department - Planning and Development Department - Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department - Desert Sands Unified School District - Coachella Valley Water District - Imperial Irrigation District - California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) - Caltrans District II Applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approvals and signatures on the plans. CONAPRVL.071 1 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building Division at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 6. Construction shall comply with all local and State building code requirements as determined by the Building and Safety Director. FEES AND DEPOSITS 7. In order to mitigate impacts on public schools, applicant shall comply with the following: Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall provide the Planning and Development Department with written clearance from the DSUSD stating that their impact fees have been paid. 8. The California Fish and Game Environmental filing fees shall be paid. The fee is $1,250.00 plus $25.00 for the Riverside County document processing. The fee shall be paid within 24 hours after approval by the City Council. 9. Applicant shall pay all fees and deposits required by the City for processing, plan checking, and construction inspection. The fee and deposit amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the City. 10. Prior to issuance of any land disturbance permit, the applicant shall pay the required mitigation fees for the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Program, as adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 11. Applicant shall construct, or enter into an agreement to construct, the on- and off -site grading, streets, utilities, landscaping, on -site common area improvements, and any other improvements required by these conditions before approval of the final, map. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. CONAPRVL.071 2 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 If improvements are phased, off -site improvements and property -wide improvements such as perimeter walls and landscaping, common drainage basins or mains, and perimeter landscaping shall be constructed or secured prior to issuance of a building permit. 12. The applicant shall develop phases in the order of the approved phasing plan so that improvements required of each phase are complete prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy within any subsequent phases. The City Engineer may consider proposals by the applicant to stage the installation of off -site and property -wide improvements normally secured with the first phase (i.e., off -site improvements, perimeter walls and perimeter landscaping) with the orderly development of all phases within the plot plan. 13. Applicant shall dedicate public street right of way and utility easements in.conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans if any, and as required by Caltrans and the City Engineer. Right of way geometry for cul-de -sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs for State Route 111 improvements shall conform with Caltrans requirements or as approved by the City Engineer. Right of way geometry for cul -de -sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs for all other improvements shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, ##801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Dedications shall include: A. Jefferson Street - 60 -foot half width, plus additional to accommodate any right turn refuges and dual left turn lanes and an exclusive right turn lane at SR 111, plus additional as required by the intersection alignment study required herein. B. State Route 111 - 86 -foot half width, exclusive bus turnout, additional width as necessary to accommodate exclusive left and right turn lanes and alignment changes resulting from the intersection alignment study required below. C. Right -of -way or easements as required. to provide access for emergency service equipment. D. Mutual access easement to adjacent property to the west over the most westerly access drive. E. Parcels and easements as required by CVWD. CONAPRVL.071 3 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 14. Applicant shall create, and offer to dedicate, common area setback lots, of minimum width as noted, adjacent to the following street rights of way: A. Highway 111 - 50 feet wide; and B. Jefferson Street - 20 feet wide. 15. Applicant shall dedicate blanket `easements over the setback lots for the purpose of sidewalks and /or bikepaths. 16. The applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to abutting public streets. Access to those streets shall be restricted to street intersections and approved emergency access locations. 17. Applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, common areas, and centralized mail delivery units. PROJECT DESIGN: 18. Development of the project site shall comply with Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92- 490 and the following conditions, which conditions shall take precedence in the event of any conflict with the plans and exhibits. 19. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be submitted to the Planning & Development Department for review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on the tract from perimeter arterial streets, and recommend alternative mitigation techniques. Recommendations of the study shall be incorporated into the project design. The study shall consider use of building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (terming, walls, and landscaping, etc.), and other techniques. *20. A six-foot -high masonry wall or chain link fence (living fence) shall be provided along the north side of the project. The exact location, design, and materials shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning and Development Department in conjunction with the noise study and approved by the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission. Landscaping shall be provided on both sides of the future wall or fence. 21. The requirements of the City's Off -Street Parking Ordinance shall be met for each development phase of the project. 22. This approval does not authorize the construction of the pad sites. These buildings' specific locations, design, height, and size shall be subject to separate plot plan review and approval by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. CONAPRVL.071 4 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 23. All lighting facilities shall comply with Chapter 9.210 (Outdoor Light Control) and be designed to minimize light and glare impacts to surrounding property. All lighting to be installed shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning and Development Department. Applicant shall submit plans for street lighting along roads, if any, for review and approval by the Planning and Development Department. BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN 24. The development shall be governed by the following: A. All ground - mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from view by methods approved by the Planning and Development Department. B. No two -story buildings shall be allowed within 150 -feet of Jefferson Street or Highway 111. C. All roofing material within the project shall be clay or concrete barrel tile. The color of the roof tiles shall consist of desert hues and be approved by the Staff. D. A building addressing plan shall be submitted to Building and Safety and to the Fire Department for review during plan check. The minimum building address size lettering shall be eight inches. E. Screening of the parking lot surface shall be provided from all adjacent streets through use of berming, landscaping and /or short decorative walls. The minimum vertical height shall be 42 inches. F. Handicap access, facilities and parking shall be provided per Federal, State, and local requirements. G. No overhead or similar door shall open to the north or towards any residentially zoned property unless adequate screened from noise and visibility to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Director. H. Variety in setbacks and siting shall occur in development of the future pad sites, but in no case shall the building setback line be less than the minimum building setback requirement. I. No outside cart or other storage shall be permitted unless completely screened in CONAPRVL.071 5 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 a City approved area, excluding cart return areas within parking lot area. J. Parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of building permits. +K. Plot plan or conditional use permit applications, as deemed necessary by C -P -S Zone requirements, shall be processed for each pad site. The architectural features of the pad sites shall be consistent with the design theme of the main structure. L. The Planning Commission shall conduct annual reviews of this specific plan until the project is completed. During each annual review by the Commission, the developer /applicant shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the specific plan. The applicant/developer of this project hereby agrees to furnish such evidence of compliance as the City, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require. Evidence of good faith compliance may include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, good faith compliance with the requirements of the specific plan. Upon conclusion of the annual review, the Commission may extend the approval period for 12 months at a time. M. The final landscape plan shall utilize trees and palms along Highway 111 and Jefferson Street and the entry drives into the project. Palms should not be used as shade trees for the parking lot areas unless they are massed because the applicant will not be able to meet the City's landscape shading requirements which call for 50% of the parking shall be shaded. Canopy shade trees may be used in the parking lot. N. Accent tree uplighting shall be used along both major streets and along the main entry drives. +O. A master sign program shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to any on -site building construction. The program should include uniform materials and colors for each tenant space. +P. A trellised or tiled roofed pedestrian arcade shall be built along the front of the shopping center to shield the customers and store owners from the intense summer sun. The location and design of the arcade shall be approved by Staff during plan check. The maroon canvas awnings may be used under the trellis or roofed arcade as an accent treatment to the overall design of the shopping complex. The awning color shall be a softer color. CONAPRVL.071` 6 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 + + +Q. The neon tubing which is mounted to the top of the building complex should be used sparingly throughout the shopping center because the neon will distract from the architectural elements of the center plus it could be a distraction to Highway 111 traffic. The neon tubing may be used on buildings C, F, and G on the sides of the building which face the shopping complexes primary parking lot (south side). The neon tubing shall be mounted in a recessed stucco channel and the location and /or color shall be approved by the Staff prior to construction plan check. The neon tubing should create a "soft" light accent on the building but should not create glare. R. A special landscape design shall be submitted for the intersection of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street because it is a "gateway" intersection. The applicant should prepare a formal landscape plan which uses citrus trees, decorative hardscape, desert landscape, uplighting, and public art as a focal point for this primary intersection. The landscape area should be approximately 50 feet by 100 feet (5,000 square feet). The plan shall be approved by the Design Review Board and by the Arts in Public Places Committee. S. All roof mounted mechanical equipment should be screened by the building wall parapet (e.g., 32 -inch parapet). T. The minimum dimension for a parking lot planter should be seven feet wide. +U. The final concept building plans shall be reviewed by the Staff during plan check. + +V. A trellised pedestrian cover between Buildings A & B is not necessary unless the applicant desires the facility for his patrons. If desired, the height of the structure shall be approved by the City Fire Marshall during plan check. The design and its location shall be approved by the Planning Department. + +W. The building parapet heights throughout the project shall be continual around each respective building mass to assure architectural continuity for the project. + +X. The design features of the south elevation should be reflective in the north elevations, where appropriate. GRADING 25. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department an interim landscape program for the entire site, which shall be for the purpose of wind erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blowsand and dust control measures during the grading and site development. CONAPRVL.071 7 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 These shall include but not be limited to: A. The use of irrigation during all construction activities; B. Planting of cover crop or vegetation upon previously graded but undeveloped portions of the site; and C. Provision of wind breaks or wind rows, fencing, and /or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The land owner shall comply with requirements of the Director of Public Works and Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent the emission of dust and blowsand. 26. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a condition so as to prevent a dust and blowsand nuisance and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures as approved by the Planning and Development and Public Works Departments. 27. Applicant shall comply with provisions of the Master Plan of Drainage, including payment of fees required therewith, and the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. 28. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490 which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a building permit. Prior to final building inspection approval, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigating measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490. The Planning and Development Director may require inspections or other monitoring to assure such compliance. 29. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. The plan must meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report. The soils engineer and /or the engineering geologist shall certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. CONAPRNL.071 8 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 DRAINAGE 30. The project shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow into the Whitewater River Channel. Pipes shall be sized to prevent ponding in parking areas from exceeding six inches during a one hundred year storm event. The project shall be graded to receive storm flow from adjoining property at locations that have historically received flow. 31. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of any public street contiguous to the site. 32. In design of retention facilities, the percolation rate shall be considered to be zero unless Applicant provides site - specific data that indicates otherwise. A trickling sand filter and leachfield shall be installed to percolate nuisance water in conformance with requirements of the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of drainage area. 33. The design of the project shall not cause any change in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the project. 34. Applicant shall construct storm water facilities along the north side of Highway 111 as required by the City Engineer. 35. All existing and proposed utilities adjacent to or on the proposed site or shall be installed in underground facilities. Electric power lines over 12,500 volts are not subject to this requirement. 36. Underground utilities in areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned shall be installed prior to construction of the surface improvements. Applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. 37. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District including dedication of parcels, lining of the Whitewater River Channel and other requirements of their letter of October 2, 1992. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 38. The City is contemplating adoption of a Major Thoroughfare Improvements Ordinance. The Ordinance is intended to distribute the cost of major thoroughfare construction evenly and fairly on undeveloped land at the time the land is subdivided or developed for beneficial use. CONAPRVL.071 9 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 If the Ordinance is adopted at least 60 days prior to the issuance of a building permit, this project shall be subject to the provisions of the ordinance. If the Ordinance is not adopted the Applicant shall construct street improvements within and contiguous to the project as listed below. 39. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. Improvements to State Route 111 shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of Caltrans and the City Engineer. Other improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the La Quinta Municipal Code, adopted Standard Drawings and as approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall perform an alignment study of S.R. 111 and Jefferson Street to determine the design of the Jefferson /S.R. 111 intersection. The study shall extend 500 - feet in all directions beyond the boundaries of the applicant's site. If total required improvements to S.R. 111 exceed $300,000, the applicant shall perform a Project Study Report if and as required by Caltrans. Pavement design shall consider soil strength, anticipated traffic loading and design life. The minimum pavement section shall be 3" AC /4" Class 2 base for on -site work and 41/2"/6" for arterial and collector streets. 40. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and centralized mail delivery units approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. Enhancements to existing improvements may be required to integrate the proposed improvements with existing conditions. This includes street width transitions extending beyond tract boundaries. 41. The following street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS CONAPRVL.071 1. Jefferson Street - Three travel lanes on west side (39' curb to curb) plus required turn lanes. Install 8 -foot sidewalk. 10 Conditions of Approval specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 2. S.R. 111 - Install three travel lanes and shoulder on north side (estimated 46' curb to curb), median island, required turn lanes, exclusive bus turnout with pedestrian walkway to site, and 8 -foot sidewalk. B. ON -SITE STREETS 1. As required by the City Engineer. Shall include at least one 24' access road each to Jefferson Street and S.R. 111. + + +C. TRAFFIC SIGNALS 1. S.R. 111 at West Entry Drive - Full traffic signal. If the signal is warranted when this development occurs (as determined by the City Engineer), the applicant shall design and construct the signal at the applicant's expense. 1 If the signal is deferred until warranted at a later date, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for 25% of the cost to design and construct the signal. 2. S.R. 111 at Jefferson - Traffic signal modifications as determined by the alignment study and as approved by the City Engineer. If the modifications are warranted when this development occurs (as determined by the City Engineer), the applicant shall design and construct the modifications at the applicant's expense. If the modifications are deferred until warranted at a later date, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for 25% of the cost to design and construct the modifications. 42. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted as follows: A. S.R. 111 - Unrestricted at most westerly access drive. Right -in /right -out at drive approximately midway between the. west property line and Jefferson Street. B. Jefferson Street - Unrestricted at intersection with Vista Grande. Right -in only at drive between this intersection and S.R. 111. C. Applicant shall provide signage and traffic control devices along entry drives as required by the City Engineer. CONAPRVL.071 11 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 LANDSCAPING 43. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the setback lots along Jefferson Street and State Route 111. Design of these setbacks shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board and approved by the Planning Commission. The applicant is encouraged to minimize steep slope designs. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 5 -feet of street curb. 44. Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall prepare a water conservation plan which shall include consideration of: A. Methods to minimize the consumption of water, including water saving features incorporated into the design of the structures, the use of drought tolerant and low - water usage landscaping materials, and programs to increase the effectiveness of landscape, as recommended by Coachella Valley Water District and the State Department of Water Resources. B. Methods for maximizing groundwater recharge, including the construction of groundwater recharge facilities. C. Methods for minimizing the amount of water used for on -site irrigation, including the use of reclaimed water from sewage treatment facilities. The water energy plan shall be subject to review and acceptance by CVWD prior to final approval by the City Engineer. 45. Applicant/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan which is in compliance with Ordinance 220, pertaining to water efficient landscaping, and which shall be designated to feature drought tolerant plant species, and the latest water conserving irrigation technology. The plan(s) shall be subject to initial review by the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission, with subsequent final review and acceptance by Coachella Valley Water District prior to landscape construction. Evidence of CVWD acceptance shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 46. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planning materials shall be encouraged. Provision shall also be made for planting materials which provide forage and nesting areas for nearby wildlife. 47. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, common retention basins and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of, and be signed by, the Planning Director, the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. CONAPRVL.071 12 v Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Common basins shall be designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor - mounted equipment. 48. Applicant shall insure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above - ground utility structures. 49. Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to the Coachella Valley Water District for review and approval with respect to the District's Water Management Program. PUBLIC SERVICES 50. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City Fire Marshal, who may approve alternate means of compliance where deemed appropriate and equivalent to these standards: A. The access road proposed along the northern boundary of the project shall be completed during Phase I to provide through circulation. B. All future building expansions shall be subject to a site plan review /approval prior to issuance of building permits. C. A minimum unobstructed width of 24 feet shall be maintained for all access roads, with certain areas designated as fire lanes. D. The water mains shall be capable of providing a fire flow of 5000 gpm and an actual fire flow available from any two adjacent hydrants shall be 2500 gpm for two hours duration at 20 psi. E. A combination of on -site and off -site Super hydrants (6" X 4" X 2 -1/2" X 2 -1/2 ") shall be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. F. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the Coachella Valley Water District prior to any combustible building material being placed on the site. G. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review /approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location spacing, and the system shall be designed to meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall CONAPRVL.071 13 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 be designed to meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed /approved by the local water company and a registered civil engineer with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department. H. Buildings shall be constructed so that the fire flow required for any individual building or unseparated area does not exceed 3500 gpm. I. Final conditions and requirements with regards to type of construction, area separations, or built -in fire protection systems will be addressed when the building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. 51. Applicant/developer shall work with Waste Management of the Desert to implement provisions of AB 939 and AB 1462. The applicant/developer is required to work with Waste Management in setting up the following programs for this project: A. Developer shall prepare a plan to provide enlarged trash enclosures for inclusion of separate facilities for storage of recyclables such as glass, plastics, newsprint and steel & aluminum cans. B. All on -site recycling bins shall be by approved masonry walls or other architectural features. 52. Applicant/developer shall provide for transit amenities as may be necessary. These amenities shall include, at a minimum, a bus turnout location and passenger waiting shelter along Highway 111, the precise location of which shall be determined by Sunline Transit. QUALITY ASSURANCE 53. The City is contemplating adoption of a quality- assurance program for privately- funded construction. If the program is adopted prior to the issuance of permits for construction of the improvements required of this map, applicant shall fully comply with the quality- assurance program. If the quality- assurance program has not been adopted, applicant shall employ or retain a California registered civil engineer, geotechnical engineer or land surveyor, as appropriate, to exercise sufficient supervision and quality control during construction of the tract grading and improvements to certify compliance with the plans, specifications, applicable codes, and ordinances. CONAPRVL.071 14 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 The engineer shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. Upon completion of the improvements, a statement on the "as built" plans as follows: "The construction of all improvements on these plans was properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision for compliance with the plans and specifications. The work shown hereon was constructed as approved except as otherwise noted. Noted exceptions have been approved by the City Engineer." B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, a separate document bearing the engineer's or surveyor's seal and signature, that lists actual building pad elevations. The document shall, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the difference, if any. The data shall be organized by phase and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at different times. 54. Applicant shall provide the City a set of "as built" reproducible drawings of all grading and improvements except water and sewer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "As- Built" or "As- Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer certifying to the as -built condition. MAINTENANCE 55. Adequate provision shall be made for continuous maintenance of all landscaping and related features. 56. Applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas of the project such as the landscaped setback lots and retention basins. Applicant shall maintain all off -site improvements until final acceptance of the improvements by the City. MISCELLANEOUS 57. Grading, drainage, street, lighting, landscaping & irrigation, park, gate, and perimeter wall plans are not approved for construction until they have been signed by the City Engineer. 58. Appropriate approvals shall be secured prior to establishing any construction or sales facilities, and /or signs on the subject property. CONAPRVL.071 15 r �'� Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 59. The City shall retain a qualified archaeologist, with the Developer to pay costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. At a minimum, the plan shall: (1) identify the means for digging test pits; and (2) provide for further testing if the preliminary results show significant material are present. The final plan shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for final review and approval. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Developer shall have retained a qualified cultural resources management firm and completed the testing and data recovery as noted in the plan. The management firm shall monitor the grading activity as required by.the plan or testing results. A list of the qualified archaeological monitor(s), cultural resources management firm employees, and any assistant(s) /representative(s), shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department. The list shall provide the current address and phone number for each monitor. The designated monitors may be changed from time to time, but no such change shall be effective unless served by registered or certified mail on the Planning and Development Department. The designated monitors or their authorized representatives shall have the authority to temporarily diver, redirect, or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation, or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until appropriate mitigation measures are completed. Upon completion of the data recovery, the Developer shall cause three copies of the final report containing the data analyses to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 60. All on -site billboards shall be removed prior to the issuance of a building permit. 61. The on -site parking spaces fronting Highway 111 will be allowed to be within 25 feet of the new property line provided visual screening is constructed. 62. A parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and'Development Department prior to any developer of the freestanding pad buildings in the future. The study shall be presented to the Planning Commission for their review and approval. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. CONAPRVL.071 16 � � v: �, , r .i Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) February 2 1993 * *63. Angled parking stalls shall be used for the northerly one -half of the parking lot to the south of the shopping center complex. CONAPRVL.071 17 �' .; J � R 4r .9 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 19, 1993 (CONTINUED FROM DECEMBER 15, 1992) ITEM TITLE: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 - A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR FUTURE SHOPPING CENTER, AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 - A REQUEST TO DEVELOP A 267,275 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL CENTER LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. APPLICANT: EFP CORP (ED CARNES) BACKGROUND: N AGENDA CATEGORY: PUBLIC HEARING: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: The Applicant has proposed the development of an "off- price" shopping center (approximately 267,275 square feet) on 21.7 acres of a 23 acre site in the CPS Zone (commercial) at the northwest corner of Jefferson Street & Highway 111. The site is presently vacant and a portion of the site is in the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (no development is proposed in the channel). The Planning Commission recommended approval of the project at their November 24, 1992 meeting with a 4 -0 -1 vote. On December 15, 1992, the City Council continued the case to January 19, 1993, to allow the Applicant additional time to refine his final architectural drawings with the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. The Applicant was unable to meet the City Council's scheduling requirements of December 15, 1992, therefore, the case should be continued to February 2, 1993. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None APPROVED BY: RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council move to continue the public hearing for Specific Plan 92 -022, and Plot Plan 92 -490, to February 2, 1993. Submitted by: CC #1 /19.F1 /CS Approved for submission to City Council: TOM GENOVESE, CITY MANAGER -1- �} �� mss` COUNCIL ACTION SUMMARY 1. By Minute Motion 93- move to continue this matter to March 2, 1993. S UPPOR TING DOCUMENTATION ATTACHED 'r - �Lj Fred Waring Drive Miles Avenue Westward Ho Drive '�''' •--� ��=- wESiwVOM Hio�wa 111 0 a G i Avenue 48th �•� p t,', ,•,• of h.� •� Q venue 50th Y M w. 'r - �Lj Fred Waring Drive Miles Avenue Westward Ho Drive '�''' •--� ��=- wESiwVOM Hio�wa 111 0 a G i Avenue 48th �•� p t,', ,•,• of h.� •� Q venue 50th EXISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONS MUM OF THROUGH LANES ® 4 LANES ® 7 LANE{ Z LANES r(mSECTION COKTAOL ` s I SIGNALIZED ® STOP SIGN (4 von ® FUTLIRE STOP SIGN E9 H -Tziij CI' •o w ea V4 Sri -- I bK MAC I >mK ,�Ki MO•aEi 0 1 t M w. r • � 1 e EXISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONS MUM OF THROUGH LANES ® 4 LANES ® 7 LANE{ Z LANES r(mSECTION COKTAOL ` s I SIGNALIZED ® STOP SIGN (4 von ® FUTLIRE STOP SIGN E9 H -Tziij CI' •o w ea V4 Sri -- I bK MAC I >mK ,�Ki MO•aEi 0 1 t •i Ole O �•c �G > MUM .�. nc v. 4VQ�w COUNCIL MEETING DATE: DECEMBER 15, 1992 ITEM TITLE: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 - A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR FUTURE SHOPPING CENTER, AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 - A REQUEST TO DEVELOP A 267,275 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL CENTER LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND, JEFFERSON STREET. APPLICANT: EFP CORP (ED CARNES) BACKGROUND: AGENDA CATEGORY: PUBLIC HEARING: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: The applicant has proposed the development of an "off- price" shopping center (approximately 267,275 square feet) on 21.7 acres of a 23 acre site in the CPS Zone (commercial) at the northwest corner of Jefferson Street & Highway 111. The site is presently vacant and a portion of the site is in the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (no development is proposed in the channel). The Planning Commission recommended approval of the project at their November 24, 1992 meeting with a 4 -0 -1 vote. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: APPROVED BY: RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution 92- , approving Specific Plan 92 -022, and Plot Plan 92 -490, subject to conditions and confirmation of the environmental determination. Submitted by: Approved for submission to City Council. __ u I � " c 11n /nc TOM GENOVESE, CITY MANAGER 001 I COUNCIL ACTION S UMMAR Y 1. Move to adopt City Council Resolution 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CONCURRING WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 92 -241 AND APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 CASE NO. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 & PLOT PLAN 92 -490 EFP CORPORATION (ED CARNFS) SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION ATTACHED 004 I TO: FROM: DATE: PROJECT: APPLICANT: ARCHITECT: •' M MEMORANDUM HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DECEMBER 15, 1992 SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) E.F.P. CORP. (ED CARNES, PROJECT MANAGER) MHA ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING; MICHAEL HURST REQUEST: 1. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 - A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A FUTURE SHOPPING CENTER PROPOSED FOR THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. 2. PLOT PLAN 92 -490 - REQUEST TO DEVELOP A +267,275 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER ON A PORTION OF A +23 ACRES SITE. THE CENTER WILL INCLUDE ON -SITE PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. EXISTING C -P -S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL) & W -1 (WATER COURSE) ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: AN ENVIRONMEN BEEN PREPARED ASSESSMENT IT NOT HAVE A ENVIRONMENT. ENVIRONMENTAL SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: rAL ASSESSMENT (EA 92 -241) HAS FOR THE ABOVE PROJECT. BASED UPON THIS HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT WILL SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE AFFECT ON THE THEREFORE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF IMPACT HAS BEEN PREPARED. NORTH - WHITE WATER STORM CHANNEL, W -1, BEYOND CHANNEL IS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, R -1 & GOLF COURSE, R -5 SOUTH - VACANT & 111 TRAILER PARK, R -T & CPS (PORTION-OF PROPERTY IS IN CITY OF INDIO) EAST - CIRCLE K MARKET /GAS STATION & INDIAN SPRINGS APARTMENT (INDIO) AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, R -1 (LA QUINTA), WEST - VACANT, CPS 003 BACKGROUND: The subject plot plan was submitted concurrently with Specific Plan 92 -022. Plot Plan 92 -490 proposes an approximately 267,275 square foot shopping center on a portion of a 23 acre site generally north of Highway 111, south of the White Water Wash, and west of Jefferson Street. The property south of the White Water Wash is zoned C -P -S and the property in the wash is zoned W -1. STATISTICAL DATA: Land Building Area Parking Provided Parking Ratio DESCRIPTION OF SITE: Approximately 21.3 acres (developable) Approximately 267,275 square feet Approximately 1000 spaces 1/267 square feet The project site is approximately 23 acres but 1.7 acres are in the existing flood control channel. The channel to the north of this site is not lined at this time. The property is presently vacant and the site is void of any significant vegetation. The property is made up of two contiguous parcels which are owned by the applicant's company. The parcel has approximately 1,450 feet of frontage on Highway 111 and approximately 860 feet on Jefferson Street. SITE DESIGN: The applicant has proposed an L- shaped shopping center with a majority of the site facing Highway 111, a major arterial. Future pad site building sites have been proposed along Highway 111 and Jefferson Street (Pads A, G, H, I, J & K). Various access driveways have been proposed which provide two -way traffic into the site. The applicant proposed two access driveways on Highway 111 and two driveways on Jefferson Street. Guest parking is interspersed on the south side of the building and intertwined with the on -site landscaping. The parking lot design proposes groups of 20 to 40 parking spaces per parking area (double- sided). ARCHITECTURE: The architect has proposed a primarily single story contemporary Spanish shopping center with portions that are two story. Various architectural elements have been used which include stain -glass accent windows, exposed neon tubing, stucco walls, and other textures. A tile roof has been included on the building to create diversity for the main entrance (Buildings D & E) and along portions of the pedrstrian arcade. Desert hues will be used on the building. The exposed rose and blue neon tubing will accentuate the upper area of the building parapet. 00 ;1 f In order to lend variety to the building architecture, the store -front areas have included a stair -step window pattern which is accented by a speckled rose colored tile (Megara or Delphi Rose). A pedestrian arcade (covered or latticed) has been developed along the south side'of the shopping center. SPECIFIC PLAN DOCUMENTS REQUIRED: A specific plan was required because of the CPS Zoning Code standards which requires that all properties greater than 15 acres have a specific plan document approved prior to any project approval for the site. The applicant has chosen to process both the specific plan and plot plan together since the owner has a particular type of development proposed at this time. The developer has stated to staff that he is interested in building a shopping center primarily for discount or off -price retailers. The center would be similar to the Cabazon Shopping Center near Banning off Interstate 10. STAFF COMMENTS A. IMAGE CORRIDOR: The General Plan designates the frontage streets along the exterior portion of the site as "primary image corridor" thoroughfares, and the signalized intersection is a "gateway" image intersection. A copy of the adopted material is attached. The primary function of the program is to provide boulevard streets with raised, landscaped medians and heavily landscaped areas within and contiguous to the street rights -of -way. The General Plan states that "primary image corridors shall include landscape themes which are reminiscent of La Quinta's agricultural past and desert environment ". Overall, the applicant's request is generally consistent with the intent of the General Plan. We would recommend that the applicant enhance the intersection of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street to include an area for a public art piece surrounded by citrus trees. The citrus trees are required in order to preserve the city's agricultural past. A geometric type design might be appropriate for Jefferson Street and Highway 111. B. EXPOSED NEON: The architect has proposed exposed neon light tubes for the outside of the main building along the top of the building parapet. Two separate blue and rose colored light bars are proposed. The light tubes are used along the south side of the main building complex to accent a majority of the building complex. 00U P Staff generally is not opposed to the use of exposed neon tubing bands on the outside of the building, provided they do not detract from the overall character of the shopping complex. It might be beneficial to have the tubes recessed into the building envelope and restrict the use of the light system to one color and /or one neon tube. We also would like the use of neon to be used sparingly along the Highway 111 frontage. C. LANDSCAPING: The concept landscape plan has been submitted. The plan includes a variety of plant material which is used on a regular basis in this area (e.g. palms, Mesquite, Acacia, and other type of desert material). The primary architectural element is the palm tree throughout the parking lot area. Whereas, the street frontages use a combination of groundcover, lawn and trees /palms to accent this important intersection. The City's Off- Street Parking Ordinance discusses project landscaping especially within the parking lot areas. The code states: "Shade trees shall be placed so as to shade a portion of the total parking area with tree canopies within 15 years per the following Table. Professional landscaping judgement shall be used to evaluate the plan as to its 15 -year growth and coverage." % of Total Parking Parking Area Spaces Required to be Shaded 5 - 24 spaces 25 - 49 spaces 50 + spaces 30% minimum 40% minimum 50% minimum Tree coverage shall be determined by the approximate crown diameter of each tree at 15 years of age. The Applicant's use of palm trees in the customer parking lot would not allow the applicant to meet the 50% minimum shade coverage requirements of the City. It might be appropriate to use the palm trees along the entry driveways into the site plus along the main east /west drive aisles. In this way, the palms are a focal point for the project but shade trees are used to shade the vehicle parking areas. Staff is not opposed to the use of palm trees along _each respective street frontage. The landscape requirements are required to be met during plan check considerations. D. SITE PLAN MODIFICATIONS: On October 23, 1992, staff met with the applicant to discuss the submittal and to review the public agency comments of the other agencies of the valley (see the Specific Plan Booklet for the original drawings). Based on this meeting the applicant revised the initial site plan in the following fashion: 1. Eliminated two driveway access points onto Highway 111 per Caltran's request; 2. Provided a bus shelter location on Highway 111 which is not a part of a deceleration lane per Sunline Transit Authority's request; 3. Modified the access driveways on Jefferson Street to account for the existing raised medians per the requests of the City's t Engineering Department; 4. Modified the site plan to accommodate the City's General Plan street widths based on the newly adopted General Plan for Hwy 111; 5. Revised the landscaping areas along each street frontage; 6. Revised the on -site parking design to include angled parking areas along the south side of the shopping complex to assist vehicle maneuverability; 7. Revised the building layout and reduced to project square footage to accommodate the above changes; and, 8. Added a-covered pedestrian arcade along the south side of the building for shade protection to the client and store owners. The new revision is date stamped November 10, 1992. The plan has a 50 -foot setback along Highway 111 and varies the setback along Highway 111 for on -site parking areas. E. HIGHWAY 111 CORRIDOR TREATMENT: The recent adoption of the Updated General Plan by the City Council on October 6, 1992, requires the Applicant to dedicate and improve 86 feet (1/2 street) of property along Highway 111. The new requirement is 26 -feet larger than the City's past requirement of 60 feet. The larger width requirement was requested by Caltrans. The 26 feet is to be reserved for future highway widening in the advent that additional travel lanes are needed in the next 20 to 30 years. The new property line location is therefore 86 feet. The City's Off- Street Parking Code and General Plan require a 50 foot landscape buffer on Highway 111. However, the setback can be varied, if certain design standards can be written into the proposed specific plan. In the past, the city did not try to make allowances for reductions to the 50 feet requirement, but with the new requirement to increase the property dedication from 60 feet (half - width) to 86 feet (half - width) it might be appropriate to examine setback variations along Highway 111. The applicant has proposed an optional design for the front yard setback along Highway 111 of 25 feet for customer parking. Staff is not opposed to the customer parking encroaching in the 50 -foot setback provided the cars are screened from view by appropriate methods. However, a 50 -foot setback should be retained for the buildings. �� t t F. PARKING LOT DESIGN: The parking lot circulation pattern has been redesigned due to the confusion around the south side of the building becaus;.: of the intersecting driveways which meet the aisle way periodically. The new plan insures that sight visibility problems will not occur, ar angled parking lanes will be added along the south side of the build- l complex to assist on -site parking needs as requested by the P_,anning Commission. G. DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO HIGHWAY 111: The project is located along a State Highway. Caltrans officials have reviewed the proposal and they have requested that the City limit the number,of driveways along Highway 111 to one or two. Their preference would be to have the main driveway 1/4 mile to the west of Jefferson Street just in case a traffic signal is installed in the future based on traffic warrants. A secondary (right in /right out) driveway should be located between the main driveway and the intersection of Jefferson Street and Highway 111. In the past, the City has accommodated the wishes of the State when they have made comments on a proposed project. Staff supports the design concept of the Caltrans staff because it will assist traffic flow along this major arterial street over the next 30 years. The city's General Plan predicts that approximately 75,000 vehicle trips per day will traverse Highway 111 once the city has been fully developed. The revised submittal meets the requirements of Caltrans. The other requirement of Caltrans is that the city require a 172 foot right -of -way along Highway 111 and that additional right -of -ways might be required at the intersection of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street. The letter from Caltrans states 24 feet might be necessary to assure that dual left -hand turn pockets can be built, and an exclusive right -hand turn land can also be installed to increase traffic flow patterns along the Highway 111 corridor. The City's Engineering Department will evaluate this last request with Caltrans during plan check. H. DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO JEFFERSON STREET: Engineering Department has evaluated the access plan of the applicant and its relationship to the properties to the east. The conclusion reached by the City is that this area will be heavily used in the future and any driveway into the site should be designed to reduce the traffic impacts on Jefferson Street. The Engineering Department is requiring the northern driveway to align with Vista Grande (to the east) in order to permit full- turning movements into and out of the project. A second driveway.will be permitted to the south of this driveway but the driveway shall be a right -turn in only driveway. The current plan, dated November 23, 1992, meets the requirements of the Engineering Department. 1 � 10 Y DESIGN REVIEW BOARD EVALUATION: The Design Review Board reviewed the initial submittal on November 4, 1992. At the meeting the members requested that the Applicant and his architect revise the architectural character of the shopping complex to include elements and materials consistent with a more traditional or early Spanish heritage. However, this recommendation did not preclude the architect from examining other contemporary styles as long as the proposed architecture had design elements that reflect the desert area. On November 10, 1992, the architect for the project submitted his revision to the project. Minor adjustments have been made to the site plan and the architect has revised the exterior elevations of the shopping center. A tile roof has been added to various portions of the building complex pursuant to the general discussions of November 4, 1992, and other exterior modifications have been made to soften the project architecture (e.g. elimination of the concave notches at the building ends, a revision to the parapet design, a reduction in the number of leaded glass windows, and a revision to the design of the covered pedestrian arcade). A special meeting was held by the Design Review Board on November 18, 1982, to discuss the third revision to the project (November 10, 1992 submittal). The Board felt it was an improvement to the plan they first saw on November 4, 1992, but they felt it hard to give their final stamp of approval since not all sides of the buildings were submitted for review. The Board, as a group, voted to recommend the project provided the architect and his client submit their final conceptual elevation drawings to them for approval prior to the plans being submitted to the Building Department for plan check. They said they were interested to review all building elevations, location of the pedestrian arcade, the design and color of the neon tubing, roof tile color (light color or hue), final landscaping /lighting, signs, and any. other items which are an integral part of the overall exterior appearance of the project. The final vote was six members for the project with one member abstaining. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: The Planning Commission reviewed the project at their November 24, 1992 meeting. The Commission asked various questions of the applicant and architect concerning the proposed development. The Commission expressed an interest in the developers tenant mix, how the neon lighting would work, if the proposed movie theater should be in another location, whether the overhead utilities would be removed, should Buildings D & E be enclosed buildings, whether or not a trellis would be built along the south side of the shopping complex, and other general questions. The project manager, Mr. Ed Carnes, stated that he is marketing the center to be an off - price. center, but that the quality would be better than Cabazon and the users would be an upper -end brand name (e.g. Adolpho, Nike, etc.). Mr. Carnes submitted a new site plan (dated November 23, 1992) at the meeting which was similar to the plan that was reviewed by the Design Review Board except that the movie theater building had been removed from Building F to become Pad G, and the amount of project square footage had been increased to approximately 267,275 square feet from 260,000 square feet. r�,r, P Mr. Carnes stated that it is his intention to create a shopping center that La Quinta residents would be proud of. He felt his architect had prepared drawings which were architecturally pleasing on bo° the north and south sides of the project. Mr. Carnes said he has use;.. he neon in another project in Texas and he was tying to use a non--- ire (soft) neon element for this center too. He said he would work w- the Design Review Board to develop a color and /or hue which wa cc..:)table to the city. Mr. Hurst, the project architect, stated tha;. 3uildings D & E would be fully enclosed, but skylights would be used 9- conjunction with the thermo -pane glass. The architect further stated ..hat a trellis or tiled roof arcade would be built on the south ide of the shopping center. In terms of the overhead utility lines, Mr. Carnes stated that he would meet the requirements in the attached Conditions. The public hearing was opened, and several members of the public spoke. The members were from the Indian Springs Country Club and wanted to know how their homes would be effected by the development of the shopping center. The Planning Commission responded that they felt the shopping center would buffer the road noise from Highway 111 and the city will also require a noise study for the project to determine if it will comply with the City's General Plan. The Planning Commission noted that the city will either require a masonry wall or living fence (chain link with landscaping) along the Coachella Valley storm channel to enhance the rear area of the shopping center. If security lights are installed, the city will require that the lights be hooded and they are required to meet the City's Dark Sky Ordinance provisions. Mr. Carnes stated the site will have 24 -hour security and he will also have an office on the premises. The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the case to the City Council with minor amendments to the draft Conditions of Approval. The final vote was 4 -0 -1. CONCLUSION: The request of the developer is consistent with the zoning and design standards of the City provided certain conditions of approval are met. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the City Council adopt Resolution 92- , approving Specific Plan 92 -022, and Plot Plan 92 -490, subject to conditions and confirmation of the environmental determination. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. Environmental Assessment 3. Agency comments 4. Excerpts from the General Plan 5. Jefferson Street access plan 6. Revised plans date stamped November 10 & 23, 1992 ; 010 7. Planning Commission Minutes 8. Draft. Conditions of Approval Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 5. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 6. Construction shall comply with all local and State building code requirements as determined by the Building and Safety Director. FEES AND DEPOSITS 7. In order to mitigate impacts on public schools, applicant shall comply with the following: Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall provide the Planning and Development Department with written clearance from the DSUSC stating that their impact fees have been paid. 8. The California Fish and Game Environmental filing fees shall be paid. The fee is $1,250.00 plus $25.00 for the Riverside County document processing. The fee shall be paid within 24 hours after approval by the City Council. 9. Applicant shall pay all fees and deposits required by the City for processing, plan checking, and construction inspection. The fee and deposit amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the City. 10. Prior to issuance of any land disturbance permit, the applicant shall pay the required mitigation fees for the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Program, as adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 11. Applicant shall construct, or enter into an agreement to construct, the on- and off -site grading, streets, utilities, landscaping, on -site common area improvements, and any other improvements required by these conditions before approval of the final map. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. If improvements are phased, off -site improvements and property -wide improvements such as perimeter walls and landscaping, common drainage basins or mains, and perimeter landscaping shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the plot plan. 12. The applicant shall develop phases in the order of the approved phasing plan so that CONAPRVL.066 2 0153 r Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 improvements required of each phase are complete prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy within any subsequent phases. The City Engineer may consider proposals by the applicant to stage the installation of off -site and property -wide improvements normally secured with the first phase (i.e., off -site improvements, perimeter w .ills and perimeter landscaping) with the orderly development of all phases within the plot plan. 13. Applicant shall dedicate public street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans if any, and as required by Caltrans and the - City Engineer. Right of way geometry for cul -de -sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs for State Route 111 improvements shall conform with Caltrans requirements or as approved by the City Engineer. Right of way geometry for cul -de -sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs for all other improvements shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Dedications shall include: A. Jefferson Street - 60 -foot half width, plus additional to accommodate any right turn refuges and dual left turn lanes and an exclusive right turn lane at SR 111, plus additional as required by the intersection alignment study required herein. B. State Route 111 - 86 -foot half width, exclusive bus turnout, additional width as necessary to accommodate exclusive left and right turn lanes and alignment changes resulting from the intersection alignment study required below. C. Right -of -way or easements as required to provide access for emergency service equipment. D. Mutual access easement to adjacent property to the west over the most westerly access drive. E. Parcels and easements as required by CVWD. 14. Applicant shall create, and offer to dedicate, common area setback lots, of minimum width as noted, adjacent to the following street rights of way: A. Highway 111 - 50 feet wide; and B. Jefferson Street - 20 feet wide. 15. Applicant shall dedicate blanket easements over the setback lots for the purpose of sidewalks and /or bikepaths. CONAPRVL.066 3 05141' Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 16. The applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to abutting public streets. Access to those streets shall be restricted to street intersections and approved emergency access locations. 17. Applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, common areas, and centralized mail delivery units. PROJECT DESIGN: 18. Development of the project site shall comply with Specific Plan 92-022 and Plot Plan 92- 490 and the following conditions, which conditions shall take precedence in the event of any conflict with the plans and exhibits. 19. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be submitted to the Planning & Development Department for review and approval prior to final map approval. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on the tract from perimeter arterial streets, and recommend alternative mitigation. techniques. Recommendations of the study shall be incorporated into the project design. The study shall consider use of building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (terming, walls, and landscaping, etc.), and other techniques. *20. A six-foot -high masonry wall or chain link fence (living fence) shall be provided along the north side of the project. The exact location, design, and materials shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning and Development Department in conjunction with the noise study and approved by the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission. Landscaping shall be provided on both sides of the future wall or fence. 21. The requirements of the City's Off -Street Parking Ordinance shall be met for each development phase of the project. 22. This approval does not authorize the construction of the pad sites. These buildings' specific locations, design, height, and size shall be subject to separate plot plan review and approval by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. 23. All lighting facilities shall comply with Chapter 9.210 (Outdoor Light Control) and be designed to minimize light and glare impacts to surrounding property. All lighting to be installed shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning and Development Department. Applicant shall submit plans for street lighting along roads, if any, for review and approval by the Planning and Development Department. CONAPRVL.066 4 r. 5 5 r Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN 24. The development shall be governed by the following: A. All ground - mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened _)m view by methods approved by the Planning and Development Department. B. No two -story buildings shall be allowed within 150 -feet of Jefferson Street or Highway 111. C. All roofing material within the project shall be clay or concrete tile barrel. The color of the roof tiles shall consist of desert hues and be approved by the Design Review Board. D. A building addressing plan shall be submitted to Building and Safety and to the Fire Department for review during plan check. The minimum building address size lettering shall be eight inches. E. Screening of the parking lot surface' shall be provided from all adjacent streets through use of berming, landscaping and /or short decorative walls. The minimum vertical height shall be 42 inches. F. Handicap access, facilities and parking shall be provided per Federal, State, and local requirements. G. No overhead or similar door shall open to the north or towards any residentially zoned property unless adequate screened from noise and visibility to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Director. H. Variety in setbacks and siting shall occur in development of the future pad sites, but in no case shall the building setback line be less than the minimum building setback requirement. I. No outside cart or other storage shall be permitted unless completely screened in a City approved area, excluding cart return areas within parking lot area. J. Parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of building permits. K. Plot plan or conditional use permit applications, as deemed necessary by C -P -S Zone requirements, shall be processed for each pad site. CONAPRVL.066 5 0 5 0 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 L. The Planning Commission shall conduct annual reviews of this specific plan until the project is completed. During each annual review by the Commission, the developer /applicant shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the specific plan. The applicant/developer of this project hereby agrees to furnish such evidence of compliance as the City, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require: Evidence of good faith compliance may include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, good faith compliance with the requirements of the specific plan. Upon conclusion of the annual review, the Commission may extend the approval period for 12 months at a time. M. The final landscape plan shall utilize trees and palms along Highway 111 and Jefferson Street and the entry drives into the project. Palms should not be used as shade trees for the parking lot areas unless they are massed because the applicant will not be able to meet the City's landscape shading requirements which call for 50% of the parking shall be shaded. Canopy shade trees may be used in the parking lot. N. Accent tree uplighting shall be used along both major streets and along the main entry drives. O. A master sign program shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to any on -site building construction. P. A trellised or tiles roofed pedestrian arcade shall be built along the front of the shopping center to shield the customers and store owners from the intense summer sun. The maroon canvas awnings may be used under the trellis or roofed arcade as an accent treatment to the overall design of the shopping complex. The location and design of the arcade shall be approved by the Design Review Board. *Q.. The exposed neon tubing which is mounted to the top of the building complex should be used sparingly throughout the shopping center because the neon will distract from the architectural elements of the center plus it could be a distraction to Highway 111 traffic. The exposed neon may be used on buildings C, F, and G on the sides of the building which face the shopping complexes primary parking lot (south side). The exposed neon tubing shall be mounted in a recessed stucco channel and the location and /or color shall be approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to construction plan check. The neon tubing should create a "soft" light accent on the building but should not create glare. R. A special landscape design shall be submitted for the intersection of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street because it is a "gateway" intersection. The applicant should prepare a formal landscape plan which uses citrus trees, decorative hardscape, CONAPRVL.066 6 05 1 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 desert landscape, uplighting, and public art as a focal point for this primary intersection. The landscape area should be .approximately 50 feet by 100 feet (5,000 square feet). The plan shall be approved by the Design Review Board and by the Arts in Public Places Committee. S. All roof mounted mechanical equipment should be screened by the building wall parapet (e.g., 32 -inch parapet). T. The minimum dimension for a parking lot planter should be seven feet wide. *U. The final concept building plans (all sides) shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to submittal of the construction drawings to the Building and Safety Department. The Board shall review all items generally noted above plus include the items discussed by the Design Review Board at their meeting of November 18, 1992. GRADING 25. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department an interim Iandscape program for the entire tract, which shall be for the purpose of wind erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blowsand and dust control measures during the grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: A. The use of irrigation during all construction activities; B. Planting of cover crop or vegetation upon previously graded but undeveloped portions of the site; and C. Provision of wind breaks or wind rows, fencing, and /or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The land owner shall comply with requirements of the Director of Public Works and Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent the emission of dust and blowsand. 26. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a condition so as to prevent a dust and blowsand nuisance and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures as approved by the Planning and Development and Public Works Departments. 27. Applicant shall comply with provisions of the Master Plan of Drainage, including payment of fees required therewith, and the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. CONAPRVL.066 7 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 28. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490 which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a building permit. Prior to, final building inspection approval, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigating measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490. The Planning and Development Director may require inspections or other monitoring to assure such compliance. 29. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. The plan must meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to approval of the plot plan. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report. The soils engineer and /or the engineering geologist shall certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. DRAINAGE 30. The project shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess .of retention capacity to flow into the Whitewater River Channel. Pipes shall be sized to prevent ponding in parking areas from exceeding six inches during a one hundred year storm event. The project shall be graded to receive storm flow from adjoining property at locations that have historically received flow. 31. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of any public street contiguous to the site. 32. In design of retention facilities, the percolation rate shall be. considered to be zero unless Applicant provides site - specific data that indicates otherwise. A trickling sand filter and leachfield shall be installed to percolate nuisance water in conformance with requirements of the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of drainage area. 33. The design of the project shall not cause any change in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the project. CONAPRVL.066 8 ('S9 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 34. Applicant shall construct storm water facilities along the north side of Highw,� 111 as required by the City Engineer. UTILITIES 35. All existing and proposed utilities adjacent to or on the proposed site or sh= ; installed in underground facilities. Electric power lines over 12,500 volts are not .ect to this requirement. 36. Underground utilities in areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned shall be installed prior to construction of the surface improvements. Applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. 37. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District including dedication of parcels, lining of the Whitewater River Channel and other requirements of their, letter of October 2, 1992. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 38. The City is contemplating adoption of a Major Thoroughfare Improvements Ordinance. The Ordinance is intended to distribute the cost of major thoroughfare construction evenly and fairly on undeveloped land at the time the land is subdivided or developed for beneficial use. If the Ordinance is adopted at least 60 days prior to the issuance of a building permit, this project shall be subject to the provisions of the ordinance. If the Ordinance is not adopted the Applicant shall construct street improvements within and contiguous to the project as listed below. 39. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets shall be prepared by a,registered civil engineer. Improvements to State Route 111 shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of Caltrans and the City Engineer. Other improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the La Quinta Municipal Code, adopted Standard Drawings and as approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall perform an alignment study of S.R. 111 and Jefferson. Street to determine the design of the Jefferson /S.R. 111 intersection. The study shall extend 500 - feet in all directions beyond the boundaries of the applicant's site. If total required improvements to S.R. 111 exceed $300,000, the applicant shall perform a Project Study Report if and as required by Caltrans. Pavement design shall consider soil strength, anticipated traffic loading and design life. The minimum pavement section shall be 3" AC /4" Class 2 base for on -site work and 41/2"/6" for arterial and collector streets. CONAPRVL.066 9 060 V Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 40. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and centralized mail delivery units approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. } Enhancements to existing improvements may be required to integrate the proposed improvements with existing conditions. This includes street width transitions extending beyond tract boundaries. 41. The following street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1. Jefferson Street - Three travel lanes on west side (39' curb to curb) plus required turn lanes. Install 8 -foot sidewalk. 2. S.R. 111 - Install three travel lanes and shoulder on north side (estimated 46' curb to curb), median island, required turn lanes, exclusive bus turnout with pedestrian walkway to site, and 8 -foot sidewalk. B. ON -SITE STREETS 1. As required by the City Engineer. Shall include at least one 24' access road each to Jefferson Street and S.R. 111. C. TRAFFIC SIGNALS CONAPRVL . 0 6 6 1. Jefferson Street at North Entry Drive - Full traffic signal. If the signal is warranted when this development occurs (as determined by the City Engineer), the applicant shall design and construct the signal at the applicant's expense. If the signal is deferred until warranted at a later date, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for 50% of the cost to design and construct the signal. 2. S.R. 111 at West Entry Drive - Full traffic signal. If the signal is warranted when this development occurs (as determined by the City Engineer), the applicant shall design and construct the signal at the applicant's expense. If the signal is deferred until warranted at a later date, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for 25% of the cost to design and construct the signal. 10 061 T � 1 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 3. S.R. 111 at Jefferson - Traffic signal modifications as determine:: by the alignment study and as approved by the City Engineer. . If the modifications are warranted when this development occurs (as , -mined by the City Engineer), the applicant shall design and cor: z act the modifications at the applicant's expense. If the modifications a -- deferred until warranted at a later date, the applicant shall .pay cash r provide security in guarantee of cash payment for 25% of the cost design and construct the modifications. 42. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted as follows: A. S.R. 111 - Unrestricted at most westerly access drive. Right -in /right -out at drive approximately midway between the west property line and Jefferson Street. B. Jefferson Street - Unrestricted at intersection with Vista Grande. Right -in only at drive between this intersection and S.R. l I l (Exhibit "G "). LANDSCAPING 43. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the setback lots along Jefferson Street and State Route 111. Design of these setbacks shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board and approved by the Planning Commission. The applicant is encouraged to minimize steep slope designs. Use of (awn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 5 -feet of street curb. 44. Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall prepare a water conservation plan which shall include consideration of: A. Methods to minimize the consumption of water, including water saving features incorporated into the design of the structures, the use of drought tolerant and low - water usage landscaping materials, and programs to increase the effectiveness of landscape, as recommended by Coachella Valley Water District and the State Department of Water Resources. B. Methods for maximizing groundwater recharge, including the construction of groundwater recharge facilities. C. Methods for minimizing the amount of water used for on -site irrigation, including the use of reclaimed water from sewage treatment facilities. The water energy plan shall be subject to review and acceptance by CVWD prior to final approval by the City Engineer. CONAPRVL.066 11 n • Conditions of Approval specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 45. Applicant/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan, which shall be designated to feature drought tolerant plant species, and the latest water conserving irrigation technology. The plan(s) shall be subject to initial review by the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission, with subsequent -final review and acceptance by Coachella Valley Water District prior to landscape construction. Evidence of CVWD acceptance shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 46. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planning materials shall be encouraged. Provision shall also be made for planting materials which provide forage and nesting areas for nearby wildlife. 47. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, common retention basins and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of, and be signed by, the Planning Director, the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Common basins shall be designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor - mounted equipment. 48. Applicant shall insure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above - ground utility structures. 49. Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to the Coachella Valley Water District for review and approval with respect to the District's Water Management Program. PUBLIC SERVICES 50. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City Fire Marshal, who may approve alternate means of compliance where deemed appropriate and equivalent to these standards: A. The access road proposed along the northern boundary of the project shall be completed during Phase I to provide through circulation. B. All future building expansions shall be subject to a site plan review /approval prior to issuance of building permits. CONAPRVL.066 12 0603 1 f Conditions of Approval specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 45. Applicant/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan, which shall be designated to feature drought tolerant plant species, and the latest water conserving irrigation technology. The plan(s) shall be subject to initial review by the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission, with subsequent -final review and acceptance by Coachella Valley Water District prior to landscape construction. Evidence of CVWD acceptance shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 46. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planning materials shall be encouraged. Provision shall also be made for planting materials which provide forage and nesting areas for nearby wildlife. 47. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, common retention basins and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of, and be signed by, the Planning Director, the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Common basins shall be designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor - mounted equipment. 48. Applicant shall insure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above - ground utility structures. 49. Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to the Coachella Valley Water District for review and approval with respect to the District's Water Management Program. PUBLIC SERVICES 50. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City Fire Marshal, who may approve alternate means of compliance where deemed appropriate and equivalent to these standards: A. The access road proposed along the northern boundary of the project shall be completed during Phase I to provide through circulation. B. All future building expansions shall be subject to a site plan review /approval prior to issuance of building permits. CONAPRVL.066 12 0603 r Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 C. A minimum unobstructed width of 24 feet shall be maintained for all access roads, with certain areas designated as fire lanes. D. The water mains shall be capable of providing a fire flow of 5000 gpr.: and an actual fire flow available from any two adjacent hydrants shall be 2500 gpm for two hours duration at 20 psi. E. A combination of on -site and off -site Super hydrants (6" X 4" X 2 -1/2" X 2 -1/2 ") shall be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. F. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the Coachella Valley Water District prior to any combustible building material being placed on the site. G. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review /approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location spacing, and the system shall be designed to meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be designed to meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed /approved by the local water company and a registered civil engineer with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department. H. Buildings shall be constructed so that the fire flow required for any individual building or unseparated area does not exceed 3500 gpm. I. Final conditions and requirements with regards to type of construction, area separations, or built -in fire protection systems will be addressed when the building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. 51. Applicant/developer shall work with Waste Management of the Desert to implement provisions of AB 939 and AB 1462. The applicant/developer is required to work with Waste Management in setting up the following programs for this project: A. Developer shall prepare a plan to provide enlarged trash enclosures for inclusion of separate facilities for storage of recyclables such as glass, plastics, newsprint and steel & aluminum cans. CONAPRVL.066 13 0,64 Y w Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 B. All on -site recycling bins shall be by approved masonry walls or other architectural features. 52. Applicant/developer shall provide for transit amenities as may be necessary. These amenities shall include, as a minimum, a bus turnout location and passenger waiting shelter along Highway 111, the precise location of which shall be determined by Sunline Transit. QUALITY ASSURANCE 53. The City is contemplating adoption of a quality- assurance program for privately - funded construction. If the program is adopted prior to the issuance of permits for construction of the improvements required of this map, applicant shall fully comply with the quality - assurance program. If the quality- assurance program has not been adopted, applicant shall employ or retain a California registered civil engineer, geotechnical engineer or land surveyor, as appropriate, to exercise sufficient supervision and quality control during construction of the tract grading and improvements to certify compliance with the plans, specifications, applicable codes, and ordinances. The engineer shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. Upon completion of the improvements, a statement on the "as built" plans as follows: "The construction of all improvements on these plans was properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision for compliance with the plans and specifications. The work shown hereon was constructed as approved except as otherwise noted. Noted exceptions have been approved by the City Engineer." B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, a separate document bearing the engineer's or surveyor's seal and signature, that lists actual building pad elevations. The document shall, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the difference, if any. The data shall be organized by phase and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at different times. CONAPRVL.066 14 065 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 54. Applicant shall provide the City a set of "as built" reproducible drawings of all grading and improvements except water and sewer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "As- Built" or "As- Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer certifying to the as -built condition. MAINTENANCE ` 55. Adequate provision shall be made for continuous maintenance of all landscaping and related features. 56. Applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas of the project such as the landscaped setback lots and retention basins. Applicant shall maintain all off -site improvements until final acceptance of the improvements by the City. MISCELLANEOUS 57. Grading, drainage, street, lighting, landscaping & irrigation, park, gate, and perimeter wall plans are not approved for construction until they have been signed by the City Engineer. 58. Appropriate approvals shall be secured prior to establishing any construction or sales facilities, and /or signs on the subject property. 59. The City shall retain a qualified archaeologist, with the Developer to pay costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. At a minimum, the plan shall: (1) identify the means for digging test pits; and (2) provide for further testing if the preliminary results show significant material are present. The final plan shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for final review and approval. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Developer shall have retained a qualified cultural resources management firm and completed the testing and data recovery as noted in the plan. The management firm shall monitor the grading activity as required by the plan or testing results. A list of the qualified archaeological monitor(s), cultural resources management firm employees, and any assistant(s) /representative(s), shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department. The list shall provide the current address and phone number CONAPRVL.066 15 fr r � n n S 6 i.7 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 temporarily diver, redirect, or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or, recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation, or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until appropriate mitigation measures are completed. Upon completion of the data recovery, the Developer shall cause three copies of the final report containing the data analyses to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 60. All on -site billboards shall be removed prior to the issuance of a building permit. 61. The on -site parking spaces fronting Highway 111 will be allowed to be within 25 feet of the new property line provided visual screening is constructed. 62. A parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department prior to any developer of the freestanding pad buildings in the future. The study shall be presented to the Planning Commission for their review and approval. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. * *63. Angled parking stalls shall be used for the northerly one -half of the parking lot to the south of the shopping center complex. CONAPRVL.066 16 e r� v� 'a Y M Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 temporarily diver, redirect, or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or, recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation, or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until appropriate mitigation measures are completed. Upon completion of the data recovery, the Developer shall cause three copies of the final report containing the data analyses to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 60. All on -site billboards shall be removed prior to the issuance of a building permit. 61. The on -site parking spaces fronting Highway 111 will be allowed to be within 25 feet of the new property line provided visual screening is constructed. 62. A parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department prior to any developer of the freestanding pad buildings in the future. The study shall be presented to the Planning Commission for their review and approval. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. * *63. Angled parking stalls shall be used for the northerly one -half of the parking lot to the south of the shopping center complex. CONAPRVL.066 16 e r� 1 �4 .�'�' T H E C I T Y Z M Quinta 1981 - 1992 Ten Cara[ Decade Cep CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 78 -105 CALLE ESTADO LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 1992 — 3:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER a. Pledge of Allegiance b. Roll Call CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES - `Minutes of November 17, 1992 - Minutes of November 30, 1992 - Minutes of December 1, 1992 - Minutes of December 3, 1992 ANNOUNCEMENTS PRESENTATIONS PUBLIC COMMENT Beginning Res. No. 92 -96 Ord. No. 220 This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for a public hearing. Please complete a "request to speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE a. Letter from Desert Protection Fund regarding Eagle Mountain Landfill. BUSINESS SESSION 1. Consideration of Request for Financial Assistance by the Palm Desert High School Aztec Songleaders. a) Minute Order Action. 2. Consideration of New Chapter 8.13 to Title 8, Building & Construction Pertaining to Water Efficient Landscaping. a) Motion to take up Ordinance No. by title and number only and waive further reading. b) Motion to introduce Ordinance No. on first reading. 3. Consideration of Extension of Fee Waiver Policy Building Permits in Conjunction with Parcel Merger and Lot Line Adjustment Applications to December 31, 1993. a) Minute Order Action. 4. Consideration of Acceptance of Art Project for Painted Cove Located on the East Side of Park Avenue, South of 50th Avenue. Applicant: Ministrelli Construction. a) Minute Order Action. 5. Consideration of Riverside County Growth Management Strategy. a) Minute Order Action. 6. Consideration of Approval of Civic Center Contract Change Order #31 Relative to Sculpture Garden. a) Minute Order Action. 7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 219 re: Fugitive Dust -PM10 CONSENT CALENDAR Note: Consent Calendar Items are considered to be routine in nature and will be approved by one motion. 1. Demand Register Dated December 15, 1992. 2. Approval of Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement - Tract 27031 -1 at Washington Street, North of 47th Avenue - Applicant: Birtcher. 3. Authorization to Release Monument Bond for Tract 27332 COUNCIL REORGANIZATION 1. Election of Mayor Pro Tem. 2. Review of Committee Assignments. STUDY SESSION 1. Review and Discussion of a Sample Travel and Expense Policy. REPORTS AND INFORMATION ITEMS a. Planning Commission Minutes of November 24, 1992. b. Community Services Commission Minutes of November 23, 1992. C. Design Review Board Minutes of November 4, 1992. d. Art in Public Places Minutes of October 5, 1992 & November 2, 1992. e. CVAG Committee Reports f. SunLine Reports g. C. V. Mountains Conservancy Sunrise Company at PGA West. 4. Acceptance of Right -of -Way Parcel on Bottlebrush Drive from Mr. & Mrs. Noel Q. Lucas. 5. Award of Contract for Furnishing a Toro Groundsmaster 72" Recycler. 6. Adoption of Resolution Authorizing Temporary Closure of Streets During the La Quinta Arts Festival March 18, 1993 - March 21, 1993. 7. Approval of Master Agreement and Program Supplements with Caltrans Regarding Transportation Grant Funds. COUNCIL REORGANIZATION 1. Election of Mayor Pro Tem. 2. Review of Committee Assignments. STUDY SESSION 1. Review and Discussion of a Sample Travel and Expense Policy. REPORTS AND INFORMATION ITEMS a. Planning Commission Minutes of November 24, 1992. b. Community Services Commission Minutes of November 23, 1992. C. Design Review Board Minutes of November 4, 1992. d. Art in Public Places Minutes of October 5, 1992 & November 2, 1992. e. CVAG Committee Reports f. SunLine Reports g. C. V. Mountains Conservancy DEPARTMENT REPORTS a. Interim City Manager b. City Attorney Report Regarding Options on Filling Council Vacancy C. Administrative Services Director d. Building and Safety Director e. Finance Director - Transmittal of Treasurer's Report - October 31, 1992 Transmittal of Statement of Financial Position - October 31, 1992 Transmittal of Statement of Financial Position - October 31, 1992 f. Planning and Development Director g. Public Works Director - Civic Center Construction Manager's Month Report MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS ITEMS RECESS TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING RECESS UNTIL 7:00 P.M. PRESENTATIONS Presentation of La Quinta Beautiful - "Landscaped for Ecology" for November to Kirk E Pamela Mullen, 51 -405 Rubio. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set -aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for a public hearing. Please complete a "request to speak" form and limit your comment to three minutes. PUBLIC HEARINGS ' Specific Plan 90 -018, Tentative Tract 26008 & Tentative Tract 26009 - First One -Year Time Extension for a Specific Plan to Allow Two Residential Subdivisions Consisting of (TT 26008) 15.4 Acres into 14 Lots and (TT 26009) for 21.49 Acres into 50 Lots at the Northeast Corner of the Intersection of 54th Avenue and Madison. Applicant: Vista Development /Bob Pippen. a) Resolution Action. �1,� Tentative Tract 24774 Request for First, One -Year Extension of Time for a Tract Which Creates 118 Single Family Lots on 40 Acres in the R -1 Zone Located at the Northwest Corner of 54th Avenue & Madison St. Applicant: Vista Development Co. a) Resolution Action. at i. — too Consideration of Actions Relating to Application Submitted by EFP Corp. (Ed Carnes) for Jefferson Square Located at the Northwest Corner of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street: a. Specific Plan 92 -022 -To Establish Development Standards for a Future Shopping Center Proposed for the Northwest Corner of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street. b. Plot Plan 92 -490 - To Develop a 267,275 sq. ft. Commercial Shopping Center on a Portion of a 23+ Acre Site. The Site is Vacant and Zoned CPS Commercial. C. Environmental Determination. a) Resolution Action. 4. Consideration of Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (EA 92 -240), Change of Zone 92 -072 and Tentative Tract 27613 for Change of Zone for 446 Acres from R -1 *+ +10,000 and R- 2 *20,000 to R -2 (Multiple Family) and 19.4 Acres from H -C (Hillside Conservation) to R -2, to Allow Subdivision on 746+ Acres for 399 Residential Units, 18 -Hole Golf Course and Tennis Complex on Property Located South of 52nd Ave. , East of Avenida Bermudas, and North of Coral Reef Mountains. Applicant: J. Burton Gold. Note: Applicant has requested continuance to January 19, 1993. CLOSED SESSION a. Discussion of on -going litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) - International Treasury Management /Denman - Iowa Trust b. Discussion of pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) - Coachella Valley Joint Powers Insurance Authority Settlement Decision C. Discussion of negotiations pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 - Potential acquisition of properties located adjacent and between Saguaro Drive and Bottlebrush Drive - Yessayian Family ADJOURNMENT DECLARATION OF POSTING I, SAUNDRA L. JUHOLA, City Clerk of the City of La Quinta, California, do hereby declare that the foregoing agenda for the City Council Meeting of December 15, 1992 was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78 -105 Calle Estado and on the bulletin board at the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce on Friday, December 11, 1992. Date December 11, 1992 NDRA L. JUHOLA, y Clerk City of La Quinta, California CITY OF LA QUINTA CITY COk;VCIL V�lLE Copj NOTICE OF PUBLIC. HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of La Quinta City Council will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on December 15, 1992, at 7 :00 P.M. in the La Quinta City Hall Council Chambers, 78 -105 Calle Estado, on the following item: ITEM: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 & PLOT PLAN 92 -490 - JEFFERSON SQUARE APPLICANT: EFP CORPORATION (ED CARNES, VICE PRESIDENT) LOCATION: NORTH OF HWY 111, WEST OF JEFFERSON ST., AND SOUTH OF THE WHITEWATER STORM CHANNEL. THE SITE HAS APPROXIMATELY 1,424 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON HWY 111 AND APPROXIMATELY 850 FEET ALONG JEFFERSON STREET. Westward Ho Drive T Highway -111-1 0� l a� w w N W f' _ r') North REQUEST: APPROVAL TO DEVELOP A SHOPPING CENTER ( ±260,000 SQ. FT.) ON APPROXIMATELY 21 ACRES ZONED C -P -S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL). THE SPECIFIC PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO 9.88.040 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE. THE SPECIFIC PLAN WILL ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE PROJECT. LEGAL: PORTION OF THE NORTH 1/2 SECTION 29, T.5.S., R.7.E., S.B.B.M.; APN x/617- 080 -017 & 021. The La Quinta Planning and Development Department has completed Environmental Assessment #92 -241. Based upon this assessment, the proposal will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment; therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared. The La Quinta Planning Commission will consider a recommendation for the adoption of the Negative Declaration along with the two cases at the Hearing. Any person may submit written comments on this case to the Planning and Development Department prior to the Hearing and /or may appear and be heard in support of or opposition to the project at the time of the Hearing. If you challenge the decision of this Tentative Tract Map in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues that you or someone else raised either, at the Public Hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning and Development Department, at or prior to the Public Hearing. The proposed Tentative Tract Map file may be viewed by the public Monday through Friday from 8:00 A.M. until 5:00 P.M. at the Planning and Development Department, La Quinta City Hall, 78 -099 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California. DO NOT PRINT BELOW THIS LINE PUBLISH ONCE ON NOVEMBER 24, 1992 IL r. M` City Council Minutes PUBLIC COMMENT Con 16 February 2, 1993 SCOTT BREITHAUPT, 51 -150 Calle Obispo, addressed the Council advising that he and his neighbor are present to express support for the City in their lawsuit with Mike Hudson. KEVIN MOSER, 51 -200 Calle Obispo, also offered support to the City in the lawsuit with Mike Hudson. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, stated that after a review of the site, both the CVJPIA and the City's Attorney handling the case, feel the suit is totally groundless. The property more than likely increased in value due to installation of the wall. Therefore, a settlement offer isn't being made at this point. She felt that it will be dismissed very soon. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF ACTIONS RELATING TO APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY EFP CORP. (ED CARNES.) FOR JEFFERSON SQUARE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET: A. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 - TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A FUTURE SHOPPING CENTER PROPOSED FOR THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. B. PLOT PLAN 92 -490 - TO DEVELOP A 267,275 SQ. FT. COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER ON A PORTION OF A 23+ ACRES SITE. THE SITE IS VACANT AND ZONED CPS - COMMERCIAL. C. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION. Mr. Trousdell, Associate Planner, advised that this matter was continued from December 15th due to some concerns expressed by the Council. The request is for an off -price shopping center at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Jefferson St. The tenants have not yet been specified. 'He presented the revised elevations and proceeded to review the modifications which have been made by the architect as related in the staff report on file in the City Clerk's office. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of the revised plan. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Trousdell advised that the lining of the storm channel is a condition of C.V.W.D. He added that the applicant may be back in the future to ask for assistance with that cost. Mr. Trousdell advised that Condition No. 8 has been revised to reflect changes in the County's fee policy. City Council Minutes 17 February 2, 1993 MICHAEL HURST, 31 -910 Avenida Olivera, Cathedral City; Architect for the project, advised that they agree with all recommended conditions. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. There being no one wishing to speak the PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. RESOLUTION NO. 93 -8 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CONCURRING WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 92 -241 AND APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 92- 022.AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490. CASE NO. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 APPLICANT: EFP CORP. (ED CARNES). It was moved by Council Members Sniff /McCartney that Resolution No. 93 -8 be adopted with an amendment to Condition No. 8. Motion carried unanimously. CONSENT CALENDAR.... continued 10. APPROVAL OF MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH CALTRANS FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT INTERSECTION OF WASHINGTON STREET AND THE ARCO AM /PM MARKET. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Speer advised that at a cost of $2,000, Caltrans will maintain and make any necessary repairs to the signal on Washington at the Arco Station. It will eventually be tied into the signal at Highway 111 and Washington, which will in -turn be tied into the other signals on Highway 111. Regarding phasing and timing, the City will work jointly with Caltrans. MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Perkins /Sniff to approve the maintenance agreement with Caltrans for the traffic signal at Washington and the Arco Station at a cost up to $2,000 and authorize the Mayor to execute same. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 93 -42. BUSINESS SESSION.... continued 12. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SUGGESTED ACTIONS REGARDING THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS. Mr. O'Reilly, Finance Director, presented and reviewed staff's proposals for implementation of the eight (8) recommendations made by the City's Investment Policy-Task Force Committee in February 1992 as follows: r• City Council Minutes 17 February 2, 1993 MICHAEL HURST, 31 -910 Avenida Olivera, Cathedral City; Architect for the project, advised that they agree with all recommended conditions. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. There being no one wishing to speak the PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. RESOLUTION NO. 93 -8 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CONCURRING WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 92 -241 AND APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 92- 022.AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490. CASE NO. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 APPLICANT: EFP CORP. (ED CARNES). It was moved by Council Members Sniff /McCartney that Resolution No. 93 -8 be adopted with an amendment to Condition No. 8. Motion carried unanimously. CONSENT CALENDAR.... continued 10. APPROVAL OF MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH CALTRANS FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT INTERSECTION OF WASHINGTON STREET AND THE ARCO AM /PM MARKET. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Speer advised that at a cost of $2,000, Caltrans will maintain and make any necessary repairs to the signal on Washington at the Arco Station. It will eventually be tied into the signal at Highway 111 and Washington, which will in -turn be tied into the other signals on Highway 111. Regarding phasing and timing, the City will work jointly with Caltrans. MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Perkins /Sniff to approve the maintenance agreement with Caltrans for the traffic signal at Washington and the Arco Station at a cost up to $2,000 and authorize the Mayor to execute same. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 93 -42. BUSINESS SESSION.... continued 12. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SUGGESTED ACTIONS REGARDING THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS. Mr. O'Reilly, Finance Director, presented and reviewed staff's proposals for implementation of the eight (8) recommendations made by the City's Investment Policy-Task Force Committee in February 1992 as follows: i- :i. HUADV PH u3 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JANUARY 26, 1993 PROJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 A PLOT PLAN 92 -490, EFFERSON SQUARE APPLICANT: E. F. P. CORPORATION (ED CARVES, VICE PRESIDENT) ARCHITECT: MHA; MICHAEL HURST REQUEST: 1. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022: A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A FUTURE SHOPPING CENTER PROPOSED FOR THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY .111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. 2. PLOT PLAN 92 -490: REQUEST TO DEVELOP A ±251,550 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER ON A PORTION OF A ±23 ACRE SITE. THE CENTER WILL INCLUDE ON -SITE PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. EXISTING ZONING: C -P -S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL) AND W -1 (WATER COURSE) BACKGROUND: The project was tentatively recommended for approval by the Design Review Board on November 18, 1992, and approved by the Planning Commission on November 24, 1992, subject to the final plans being reviewed by both groups prior to construction plan check. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW: The City Council reviewed the proposal at their meeting of December 15, 1992, as a report of Planning Commission action. The City Council felt that the project architect and developer should reach a consensus on the final design of the shopping center prior to acquiring final approval of the project. PCST.102 1 001 The City Council voted to continue the case and requested that the project be re -examined by the Design Review Board on January 6th and by the Planning Commission on January 12th, if possible. The City Council concerns or questions on the case were: 1. Could the roof line on Building "B" be redesigned so that it is similar in design to the rest of the shopping center? 2. Could the architect refine or upgrade the pedestrian arcade along the south side of building, mainly Buildings "C" and "F "? 3. Was the exposed neon tubing necessary? 4. Would a more traditional Spanish design theme be more appropriate for this location? The City Council discussed other elements of the project. However, their directive to. the Design Review Board was that they would like the Board and the architect to refine the project architecture so that everybody involved knows exactly how the design of the shopping center will look, if approved. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD: The Design Review Board reviewed the revised plans on January 6, 1993 and January 13, 1993. The project architect has modified the architectural plans of the project in the following ways: 1. Upgraded the covered pedestrian arcade to include another design theme along portions of the south elevation (tile with double arch); 2. Varied the roof pitch throughout the project (4:12 & 3:12). 3. Changed the roof parapet design to include a rounded design and a file roofed design (fake two story design) to accentuate the original design scenario; 4. Revised the access driveway on Jefferson Street so that the main entry is south of Building "G "; 5. Angled parking has been added to the overall parking lot design theme; and, 6. Changed the design of Building "B" to include some of the design features noted above plus modified the entryway design on both sides of the building (north and east). 7. An enlarged pedestrian arcade plan was prepared as well as a roof plan. 8. The colorboard was updated. MST. 102 2 002 As mentioned, the Design Review Board spend additional time with the Architect and his client to examine the finite features of the project. The major topics which were discussed were: 1. Neon Lighting - The Board requested that if neon lighting is to be used, they would prefer that the light tubes be recessed behind stucco channels so that the light source cannot be seen from within the parking lot. The Board stated that the final solution would be designed so that the light created is "soft" and does not create glare. Neon should only be used on the south side of the buildings and along Jefferson Street. 2. Building Colors - The Board initially was not comfortable with the foam -green accent color along the pedestrian arcade. However, after some discussion, they instructed staff to evaluate whether or not the colors blend well with one another. 3. Canopy Awning The Board would like the color of the maroon awning material to be lightened so that it is not so dark. 4. Trellis Building Connection - The Board did not feel that Building "B" and Pad Building "A" needed to be connected by a covered pedestrian walkway. They felt the architectural character of pad Building "A" should stand alone as an independent facility. The Board stated they would evaluate the architectural character of the pad site once a separate application was received. S. Building Parapet Design - The parapet design was discussed and the Board felt that since there are various heights to the building complex it would be appropriate to have each building masses at particular height have its parapet be continual around all four sides of the building. This design would insure that the connections between each level of the building had uniformity and could stand alone as independent features. 6. North Side Building Elevation - The members expressed a desire to make sure that the north side of the structure (facing the wash) had many of the architectural characteristics as the south side with the exception of the neon lighting. 7. Glass Skylite Design - There was some discussion on whether the glass skylite was necessary, and whether another design would be more practical. The Board agreed that it was up to the developer to design the structure and pay for the cooling of the building, but it might be more cost effective to examine a prefabricated design instead of a field assembled custom design. The Board was not opposed to the overall design. S. Sign Program - The Sign Program should be submitted so that the members can get an idea of how the tenants will be identified. The Board stated that it would have been nice to see the program during the overall discussion of the center. PCST.102 3 003 In conclusion, the Design Review Board voted 4 -3 to accept the attached revised plan date stamped January 11, 1993, provided the above cited items are evaluated. A modified version of the original Planning Commission Conditions of Approval are attached based on the Design Review Boards action of January 13, 1993. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission should recommend approval of the attached plans with any modifications that the Planning Commission would feel are necessary. A copy of the recommended revised Conditions of Approval are attached. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. Modified Conditions of Approval 3. New plans date stamped January 20, 1993 POST. 102 4 004 ' GMANNEI. VALCEY fTORMWAT[R 1 CD HIGHWAY _ HIGHWAY O ' Ul opment SITE 1 , I � 1 111 I. oil ti �t t ' i i- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 93- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - PROPOSED SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 & PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (REVISED) JANUARY 26, 1993 * Modified by Planning Commission on November 24, 1992 ** Added by Planning Commission on November 24, 1992 + Revised by Design Review Board on 1/13/93 + + Added by Design Review Board on 1/ 13/93 GENERAL: 1. Specific Plan 92-022 and Plot Plan 92 -490 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the City of La Quinta Municipal Code, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 2. This approval shall expire and become void within one year unless extended pursuant to the City's Municipal Code. 3. Phasing plans, including phasing of public improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer and the Planning and Development Department prior building permit issuance. 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and /or clearances from the following public agencies: - City Fire Marshal - Public Works Department - Planning and Development Department - Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department - Desert Sands Unified School District - Coachella Valley Water District Imperial Irrigation District California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) Caltrans District II Applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approvals and signatures on the plans. Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building Division at the time of the application for a building permit for CONAPRVL.071 1 006 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building Division at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 6. Construction shall comply with all local and State building code requirements as determined by the Building and Safety Director. FEES AND DEPOSITS 7. In order to mitigate impacts on public schools, applicant shall comply with the following: Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall provide the Planning and Development Department with written clearance from the DSUSC stating that their impact fees have been paid. 8. The California Fish and Game Environmental filing fees shall be paid. The fee is $1,250.00 plus $25.00 for the Riverside County document processing. The fee shall be paid within 24 hours after approval by the City Council. 9. Applicant shall pay all fees and deposits required by the City for processing, plan checking, and construction inspection. The fee and deposit amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the City. 10. Prior to issuance of any land disturbance permit, the applicant shall pay the required mitigation fees for the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Program, as adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 11. Applicant shall construct, or enter into an agreement to construct, the on- and off -site grading, streets, utilities, landscaping, on -site common area improvements, and any other improvements required by these conditions before approval of the final map. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. CONAPRVL . 071 2 007 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 If improvements are phased, off -site improvements and property -wide improvements such as perimeter walls and landscaping, common drainage basins or mains, and perimeter landscaping shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the plot plan. 12. The applicant shall develop phases in the order of the approved phasing plan so that improvements required of each phase are complete prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy within any subsequent phases. The City Engineer may consider proposals by the applicant to stage the installation of off -site and property-wide improvements normally secured with the first phase (i.e., off -site improvements, perimeter walls and perimeter landscaping) with the orderly development of all phases within the plot plan. 13. Applicant shall dedicate public street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans if any, and as required by Caltrans and the City Engineer. Right of way geometry for cul-de -sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs for State Route 111 improvements shall conform with Caltrans requirements or as approved by the City Engineer. Right of way geometry for cul-de -sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs for all other improvements shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Dedications shall include: A. Jefferson Street - 60 -foot half width, plus additional to accommodate any right turn refuges and dual left turn lanes and an exclusive right turn lane at SR 111, plus additional as required by the intersection alignment study required herein. B. State Route 111 - 86 -foot half width, exclusive bus turnout, additional width as necessary to accommodate exclusive left and right turn lanes and alignment changes resulting from the intersection alignment study required below. C. Right -of -way or easements as required to provide access for emergency service equipment. D. Mutual access easement to adjacent property to the west over the most westerly access drive. E. Parcels and easements as required by CVWD. CONAPRVL.071 3 008 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 6 Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 14. Applicant shall create, and offer to dedicate, common area setback lots, of minimum width as noted, adjacent to the following street rights of way: A. Highway 111 - 50 feet wide,; and B. Jefferson Street - 20 feet wide. 15. Applicant shall dedicate blanket easements over the setback lots for the purpose of sidewalks and /or bikepaths. 16. The applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to abutting public streets. Access to those streets shall be restricted to street intersections and approved emergency access locations. 17. Applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, common areas, and centralized mail delivery units. PROTECT DESIGN: 18. Development of the project site shall comply with Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92= 490 and the following conditions, which conditions shall take precedence in the event of any conflict with the plans and exhibits. 19. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be submitted to the Planning & Development Department for review and approval prior to final map approval. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on the tract from perimeter arterial streets, and recommend alternative mitigation techniques. Recommendations of the study shall be incorporated into the project design. The study shall consider use of building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (berming, walls, and landscaping, etc.), and other techniques. *20. A six- foot -high masonry wall or chain link fence (living fence) shall be provided along the north side of the project. The exact location, design, and materials shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning and Development Department in conjunction with the noise study and approved by the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission. Landscaping shall be provided on both sides of the future wall or fence. 21. The requirements of the City's Off -Street Parking Ordinance shall be met for each development phase of the project. 22. This approval does not authorize the construction of the pad sites. These buildings' specific locations, design, height, and size shall be subject to separate plot plan review and approval by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. CONAPRVL.071, 4 009 . _ .__ . IZA .r a. Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 23. All lighting facilities shall comply with Chapter 9.210 (Outdoor Light Control) and be designed to minimize light and glare impacts to surrounding property. All lighting to be installed shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning and Development Department. Applicant shall submit plans for street lighting along roads, if any, for review and approval by the Planning and Development Department. BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN 24. The development shall be governed by the following: A. All ground - mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from view by methods approved by the Planning and Development Department. B. No two -story buildings shall be allowed within 150 -feet of Jefferson Street or Highway 111. C. All roofing material within the project shall be clay or concrete tile barrel. The color of the roof tiles shall consist of desert hues and be approved by the Design Review Board. D. A building. addressing plan shall be submitted to Building and Safety and to the Fire Department for review during plan check. The minimum building address size lettering shall be eight inches. E. Screening of the parking lot surface shall be provided from all.adjacent streets through use of berming, landscaping and /or short decorative walls. The minimum vertical height shall be 42 inches. F. Handicap access, facilities and parking shall be provided per Federal, State, and local requirements. G. No overhead or similar door shall open to the north or towards any residentially zoned property unless adequate screened from noise and visibility to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Director. H. Variety in setbacks and siting shall occur in development of the future pad sites, but in no case shall the building setback line be less than the minimum building setback requirement. 010 CONAPRVL.071 5 Conditione.of Approval, Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 I. No outside cart'or other storage shall be permitted unless completely screened in a City approved area, excluding cart return areas within parking lot area. J. Parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of building permits. +K. Plot plan or conditional use permit. applications, as deemed necessary by C -P -S Zone requirements, shall be processed for each pad site. The architectural features of the pad sites shall be consistent with the design theme of the main structure. L. The Planning Commission shall conduct annual reviews of this specific plan until the project is completed. During each annual review by the Commission, the developer /applicant shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the specific plan. The applicant/developer of this project hereby agrees to furnish such evidence of compliance as the City, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require. Evidence of good faith compliance may include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, good faith compliance with the requirements of the specific plan. Upon conclusion of the annual review, the Commission may extend the approval period for 12 months at a time. M. The final landscape plan shall utilize trees and palms along Highway 111 and Jefferson Street and the entry drives into the project. Palms should not be used as shade trees for the parking lot areas unless they are massed because the applicant will not be able to meet the City's landscape shading requirements which call for 50% of the parking shall be shaded. Canopy shade trees may be used in the parking lot. N. Accent tree uplighting shall be used along both major streets and along the main entry drives. +O. A master sign program shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to any on -site building construction. The program should include uniform materials and colors for each tenant space. +P. A trellised or tiled roofed pedestrian arcade shall be built along the front of the shopping center to shield the customers and store owners from the intense summer sun. The location and design of the arcade shall be approved by Staff during plan check. The maroon canvas awnings may be used under the trellis or roofed arcade as an accent treatment to the overall design of the shopping complex: The awning color should be muted to a softer color. CONAPRVL. 071 6 011 Conditions of "Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 *Q. . The exposed neon tubing which is mounted to the top of the building complex should be used sparingly throughout the shopping center because the neon will distract from the architectural elements of the center plus it could be a distraction to Highway 111 traffic. The exposed neon may be used on buildings C, F, and G on the sides of the building which face the shopping complexes primary parking lot (south side). The exposed neon tubing shall be mounted in a recessed stucco channel and the location and /or color shall be approved by the Staff prior to construction plan check. The neon tubing should create. a "soft" light accent on the building but should not create glare. R. A special landscape design shall be submitted for the intersection of Highway 1 I1 and Jefferson Street because it is a "gateway" intersection. The applicant should prepare a formal landscape plan which uses citrus trees, decorative hardscape, desert landscape, uplighting, and public art as a focal point for this primary intersection. The landscape area should be approximately 50 feet by 100 feet (5,000 square feet). The plan shall be approved by the Design Review Board and by the Arts in Public Places Committee. S. All roof mounted mechanical equipment should be screened by the building wall parapet (e.g., 32 -inch parapet). T. The minimum dimension for a parking lot planter should be seven feet wide. *U.. The final concept building plans shall be reviewed by the Staff during plan check. + +V. A trellised pedestrian cover between Buildings A & B is not necessary unless the applicant desires the facility for his patrons. If desired, the height of the structure shall be approved by the City Fire Marshall during plan check. The design and its location shall be approved by the Planning Department. + +W. The building parapet heights throughout the project shall be continual around each respective building masses to assure architectural continuity for the project. + +X. The design features of the south elevation should be reflective in the north elevations where appropriate. GRADING 25. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department an interim landscape program for the entire tract, which shall be for the purpose of wind erosion and dust control., The land owner shall institute blowsand and dust control measures during the grading and site development. 012 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 These shall include but not be limited to: A. The use of irrigation during all construction activities; B. Planting of cover crop or vegetation upon previously graded but undeveloped portions of the site; and C. Provision of wind breaks or wind rows, fencing, and /or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The land owner shall comply with requirements of the Director of Public Works and Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent the emission of dust and blowsand. 26. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a condition so as to prevent a dust and blowsand nuisance and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures as approved by the Planning and Development and Public Works Departments. 27. Applicant shall comply with provisions of the Master Plan of Drainage, including payment of fees required therewith, and the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. 28. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to the issuance -of a building permit, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490 which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a building permit. Prior to final building inspection approval, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigating measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490. The Planning and Development Director may require inspections or other monitoring to assure such compliance. 29. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. The plan must meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to approval of the plot plan. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report. The soils engineer and /or the engineering geologist shall certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. 013 y Conditions of- Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 DRAINAGE 30. The project shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow into the Whitewater River Channel. Pipes shall be sized to prevent ponding in parking areas from exceeding six inches during a one hundred year storm event. The project shall be graded to receive storm flow from adjoining property at locations that have historically received flow. 31. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of any public street contiguous to the site. 32. In design of retention facilities, the percolation rate shall be considered to be zero unless Applicant provides site - specific data that indicates otherwise. A trickling sand filter and leachfield shall be installed to percolate nuisance water in conformance with requirements of the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of drainage area. 33. The design of the project shall not cause any change in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the project. 34. Applicant shall construct storm water facilities along the north side of Highway 111 as required by the City Engineer. UTILITIES 35. All existing and proposed utilities adjacent to or on the proposed site or shall be installed in underground facilities. Electric power lines over 12,500 volts are not subject to this requirement. 36. Underground utilities in areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned shall be installed prior to construction of the surface improvements. Applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. 37. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District including dedication of parcels, lining of the Whitewater River Channel and other requirements of their letter of October 2, 1992. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 38. The City is contemplating adoption of a Major Thoroughfare Improvements Ordinance. The Ordinance is intended to distribute the cost of major thoroughfare construction evenly and fairly on undeveloped land at the time the land is subdivided or developed for beneficial use. 014 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 6 Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 If the Ordinance is adopted at least 60 days prior to the issuance of a building permit, this project shall be subject to the provisions of the ordinance. If the Ordinance is not adopted the Applicant shall construct street improvements within and contiguous to the project as listed below. 39. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. Improvements to State Route 111 shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of Caltrans and the City Engineer. Other improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the La Quinta Municipal Code, adopted Standard Drawings and as approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall perform an alignment study of S.R. 111 and Jefferson Street to determine the design of the Jefferson /S.R. 111 intersection. The study shall extend 500 - feet in all directions beyond the boundaries of the applicant's site. If total required improvements to S.R. 111 exceed $300,000, the applicant shall perform a Project Study Report if and as required by Caltrans. Pavement design shall consider soil strength, anticipated traffic loading and design life. The minimum pavement section shall be 3" AC /4" Class 2 base for on -site work and 41/2"/6" for arterial and collector streets. 40. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and centralized mail delivery units approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. Enhancements to existing improvements may be required to integrate the proposed improvements with existing conditions. This includes street width transitions extending beyond tract boundaries. 41. The following street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1. Jefferson Street - Three travel lanes on west side (39' curb to curb) plus required turn lanes. Install 8 -foot sidewalk. C0NAPRVL.071 10 015 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 i Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) 0 January 26, 1993 2. S.R. 111 - Install three travel lanes and shoulder on north side (estimated 46' curb to curb), median island, required turn lanes, exclusive bus turnout with pedestrian walkway to site, and Moot sidewalk. B. ON -SITE STREETS 1. As required by the City Engineer. Shall include at least one 24' access road each to Jefferson Street and S.R. 111. C. TRAFFIC SIGNALS 1. Jefferson Street at North Entry Drive - Full traffic signal. If the signal is warranted when this development occurs (as determined by the City Engineer), the applicant shall design and construct the signal at the applicant's expense. If the signal is deferred until warranted at a later date, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for 50% of the cost to design and construct the signal. 2. S.R. 111 at West Entry Drive - Full traffic signal. If the signal is warranted when this development occurs (as determined by the City Engineer), the applicant shall design and construct the signal at the applicant's expense. If the signal is deferred until warranted at a later date, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for 25% of the cost to design and construct the signal. 3. S.R. 111 at Jefferson - Traffic signal modifications as determined by the alignment study and as approved by the City Engineer. If the modifications are warranted when this development occurs (as determined by the City Engineer), the applicant shall design and construct the modifications at the applicant's expense. If the modifications are deferred until warranted at a later date, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for 25% of the cost to design and construct the modifications. 42. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted as follows: A. S.R. 111 - Unrestricted at most westerly access drive. Right -in /right -out at drive approximately midway between the west property line and Jefferson Street. B. Jefferson Street - Unrestricted at intersection with Vista Grande. Right -in only at drive between this intersection and S.R. 111 (Exhibit "G "). CONAPRVL.071 11 016 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 6 Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 LANDSCAPING 43. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the setback lots along Jefferson Street and State Route 111.. Design of these setbacks shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board and approved by the Planning Commission. The applicant is encouraged to minimize steep slope designs. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 5 -feet of street curb. 44. Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall prepare a water conservation plan which shall include consideration of: A. Methods to minimize the consumption of water, including water saving features incorporated into the design of the structures, the use of drought tolerant and low - water usage landscaping materials, and programs to increase the effectiveness of landscape, as recommended by Coachella Valley Water District and the State Department of Water Resources. B. Methods for maximizing groundwater recharge, including the construction of groundwater recharge facilities. C. Methods for minimizing the amount of water used for on -site irrigation, including the use of reclaimed water from sewage treatment facilities. The water energy plan shall be subject to review and acceptance by CVWD prior to final approval by the City Engineer. 45. Applicant/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan, which shall be designated to feature drought tolerant plant species, and the latest water conserving irrigation technology. The plan(s) shall be subject to initial review by the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission, with subsequent final review and acceptance by Coachella Valley Water District prior to landscape construction. Evidence of CVWD acceptance shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 46. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planning materials shall be encouraged. Provision shall also be made for planting materials which provide forage and nesting areas for nearby wildlife. 47. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, common retention basins and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The plans and proposed Iandscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of, and be signed by, the Planning Director, the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. CONAPRVL.071 12 017 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Common basins shall be designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor - mounted equipment. 48. Applicant shall insure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above - ground utility structures. 49. Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to the Coachella Valley Water District for review and approval with respect to the District's Water Management Program. PUBLIC SERVICES 50. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City Fire Marshal, who may approve alternate means of compliance where deemed appropriate and equivalent to these standards: A. The access road proposed along the northern boundary of the project shall be completed during Phase I to provide through circulation. B. All future building expansions shall be subject to a site plan review /approval prior to issuance of building permits. C. A minimum unobstructed width of 24 feet shall be maintained for all access roads, with certain areas designated as fire lanes. D. The water mains shall be capable of providing a fire flow of 5000 gpm and an actual fire flow available from any two adjacent hydrants shall be 2500 gpm for two hours duration at 20 psi. E. A combination of on -site and off -site Super hydrants (6" X 4" X 2 -1/2" X 2 -1/2 ") shall be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. F. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the Coachella Valley Water District prior to any combustible building material being placed on the site. CONAPRVL.071 13 018 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 6 Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 G. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review /approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location spacing, and the system shall be designed to meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be designed to meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by the local water company and a registered civil engineer with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department. H. Buildings shall be constructed so that the fire flow required for any individual building or unseparated area does not exceed 3500 gpm. I. Final conditions and requirements with regards to type of construction, area separations, or built -in fire protection systems will be addressed when the building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. 51. Applicant/developer shall work with Waste Management of the Desert to implement provisions of AB 939 and AB 1462. The applicant/developer is required to work with Waste Management in setting up the following programs for this project: A. Developer shall prepare a plan to provide enlarged trash enclosures for inclusion of separate facilities for storage of recyclables such as glass, plastics, newsprint and steel & aluminum cans. B. All on -site recycling bins shall be by approved masonry walls or other architectural features. 52. Applicant/developer shall provide for transit amenities as may be necessary. These amenities shall include, as a minimum, a bus turnout location and passenger waiting shelter along Highway 111, the precise location of which shall be determined by Sunline Transit. QUALITY ASSURANCE 53. The City is contemplating adoption of a quality- assurance program for privately- funded construction. If the program is adopted prior to the issuance of permits for construction of the improvements required of this map, applicant shall fully comply with the quality- assurance program. CONAPRVL.071 14 019 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 If the quality - assurance program has not been adopted, applicant shall employ or retain a California registered civil engineer, geotechnical engineer or land surveyor, as appropriate, to exercise sufficient supervision and quality control during construction of the tract grading and improvements to certify compliance with the plans, specifications, applicable codes, and ordinances. The engineer shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. Upon completion of the improvements, a statement on the "as built" plans as follows: "The construction of all improvements on these plans was properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision for compliance with the plans and specifications. The work shown hereon was constructed as approved except as otherwise noted. Noted exceptions have been approved by the City Engineer." B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, a separate document bearing the engineer's or surveyor's seal and signature, that lists actual building pad elevations. The document shall, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall'clearly identify the difference, if any. The data shall be organized by phase and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at different times. 54. Applicant shall provide the City a set of "as built" reproducible drawings of all grading and improvements except water and sewer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "As- Built" or "As- Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer certifying to the as -built condition. MAINTENANCE 55. Adequate provision shall be made for continuous maintenance of all landscaping and related features. 56. Applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas of the project such as the landscaped setback lots and retention basins. Applicant shall maintain all off -site improvements until final acceptance of the improvements by the City. CONAPRVL.071 15 020 Conditions of Approval specific Plan 92 -022 6 Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 MISCELLANEOUS 57. Grading, drainage, street, lighting, landscaping & irrigation, park, gate, and perimeter wall plans are not approved for construction until they have been signed by the City Engineer. 58. Appropriate approvals shall be secured prior to establishing any construction or sales facilities, and /or signs on the subject property. 59. The City shall retain a qualified archaeologist, with the Developer to pay costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. At a minimum, the plan shall: (1) identify the means for digging test pits; and (2) provide for further testing if the preliminary results show significant material are present. The final plan shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for final review and approval. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Developer shall have retained a qualified cultural resources management firm and completed the testing and data recovery as noted in the plan. The management firm shall monitor the grading activity as required by the plan or testing results. A list of the qualified archaeological monitor(s), cultural resources management firm employees, and any assistant(s) /representative(s), shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department. The list shall provide the current address and phone number for each monitor. The designated monitors may be changed from time to time, but no such change shall be effective unless served by registered or certified mail on the Planning and Development Department. The designated monitors or their authorized representatives shall have the authority to temporarily diver, redirect, or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation, or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until appropriate mitigation measures are completed. Upon completion of the data recovery, the Developer shall cause three copies of the final report containing the data analyses to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. CONAPRVL.071 16 021 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 (Revised) January 26, 1993 60. All on -site billboards shall be removed prior to the issuance of a building permit. 61. The on -site parking spaces fronting Highway 111 will be allowed to be within 25 feet of the new property line provided visual screening is constructed. 62. A parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department prior to any developer of the freestanding pad buildings in the future. The study shall be presented to the Planning Commission for their review and approval. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. * *63. Angled parking stalls shall be used for the northerly one -half of the parking lot to the south of the shopping center complex. CONAPRVL.071 17 02P t PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 1992 PROJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) APPLICANT: E.F.P. CORP. (ED CARNES) ARCHITECT: MHA ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING; MICHAEL HURST PH #4 REQUEST: 1. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 - A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A FUTURE SHOPPING CENTER PROPOSED FOR THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. 2. PLOT PLAN 92 -490 - REQUEST TO DEVELOP A +260,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER ON A PORTION OF A +23 ACRES SITE. THE CENTER WILL INCLUDE ON -SITE PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. EXISTING C -P -S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL) & W -1 (WATER COURSE) ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION:. AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA 92 -241) HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THE ABOVE PROJECT. BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE AFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. THEREFORE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT HAS BEEN PREPARED. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: NORTH - WHITE WATER STORM CHANNEL, W -1,. BEYOND CHANNEL IS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, R -1 & GOLF COURSE, R -5 BACKGROUND: SOUTH - VACANT & 111 TRAILER PARK, R -T & CPS (PORTION OF PROPERTY IS IN CITY OF INDIO) EAST - CIRCLE K MARKET /GAS STATION & INDIAN SPRINGS APARTMENT (INDIO) AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, R -1 (LA QUINTA), WEST - VACANT, CPS The subject project. was submitted concurrently with Specific Plan 92 -022. Plot Plan 92 -490 proposes an approximately 260,000 square foot shopping center on a portion of a 23 acre site generally north of Highway 111, south of the White Water Wash, and west of Jefferson Street. The property south of the White Water Wash is zoned C -P -S and othe property in the wash is zoned W -1. STAFFRPT.001 /CS -1- qty � ''� � ��;�: I 14 STATISTICAL DATA: Land Approximately 21.3 acres (developable) Building Area Approximately 260,000 square feet Parking Provided Approximately 1104 spaces Parking Ratio 1/235 square feet DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The project site is approximately 23 acres but 1.7 acres are in the existing flood control channel. The channel to the north of this site is not lined at this time. The property is presently vacant and the site is void of any significant vegetation. The property is made up of two contiguous parcels which are owned by the applicant. The parcel has approximately 1,450 feet of frontage. on Highway 111 and approximately 860 feet on Jefferson Street. SITE DESIGN: The applicant has proposed an L- shaped shopping center with a majority of the site facing Highway 111, a major arterial. Future pad site building sites have been proposed along Highway 111 and Jefferson Street (Pads A, K, J, I & H). Various access driveways have been proposed which provide two -way traffic into the site. The applicant proposed two access driveways on Highway 111 and two driveways on Jefferson Street. Guest parking is interspersed on the south side of the building and intertwined with the on -site landscaping. The parking lot design proposes groups of 20 to 40 parking spaces per parking area (double- sided). ARCHITECTURE: The architect has proposed a primarily single sto shopping center with portions that are two story. elements have been used which include stain -glass neon tubing, stucco walls, and other textures. A included on the buildings to create diversity for (Buildings D & E). ry contemporary Spanish Various architectural accent windows, exposed tile roof has been the main entrance Desert hues will be used on the building. The exposed rose and blue neon tubing will accentuate the upper area of the building parapet. In order to lend variety to the building architecture, the store -front areas have included a stair -step window pattern which is accented by a speckled rose colored tile (Megara or Delphi Rose). A pedestrian arcade (covered or latticed) has been developed along the south side of the shopping center. SPECIFIC PLAN DOCUMENTS REQUIRED: A specific plan was required for this case based upon the provisions of the CPS Zoning Code standards which requires that all properties greater than 15 acres must have a specific plan document approved prior to any project approval for the site. STAFFRPT.001 /CS -2- The applicant has chosen to process both the specific plan and plot plan together since the owner has a particular type of development proposed at this time. The developer has stated to staff that he is interested in building a shopping center primarily for discount or off -price retailers. The center would be similar to the Cabazon Shopping Center in Banning off Interstate 10. STAFF COMMENTS A. IMAGE CORRIDOR: The General Plan designates the frontage streets along the exterior portion of the site as "primary image corridor" thoroughfares, and the signalized intersection is a "gateway" image intersection. A copy of the adopted material is attached. The primary function of the program is to provide boulevard streets with raised, landscaped medians and heavily landscaped areas within and contiguous to the street rights -of -way. The General Plan states that "primary image corridors shall include landscape themes which are reminiscent of La Quinta's agricultural past and desert environment ". Overall, the applicant's request is generally consistent with the intent of the General Plan. We would recommend that the applicant enhance the intersection of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street to include an area for a public art piece surrounded by citrus trees. The citrus trees are required in order to preserve the city's agricultural past. A geometric type design might be appropriate for Jefferson Street and Highway 111. B. EXPOSED NEON: The architect has proposed exposed neon light tubes for the outside of the building along the top of the.building parapet. Two separate light bars are proposed. The colors are blue and rose. The light tubes are used along the south side of the building complex to accent a majority of the building complex. The tubing colors match the proposed color palette for the shopping center. Staff generally is not opposed to the use of exposed neon tubing bands on the outside of the building, provided they do not detract from the overall character of the shopping complex. It might be beneficial to have the tubes recessed into the building envelop and restrict the use of the light system to one color and /or one neon tube. We also would like the use of neon to be used sparingly along the Highway 111 frontage. It might be appropriate to use the neon lighting system for the major tenants or to reverse it and use it only for the in -line shop tenants. C. LANDSCAPING: The concept landscape plan has been submitted. The plan includes a variety of plant material which is used on a regular basis in this area (e.g. palms, Mesquite, Acacia, and other type of desert material). The primary architectural element is the palm tree throughout the parking lot area. Whereas, the street frontages use a combination of groundcover, lawn and trees /palms to accent this important intersection. STAFFRPT.001 /CS -3- The City's Off- Street Parking Ordinance discusses project landscaping especially within the parking lot areas. The code states: "Shade trees shall be placed so as to shade a portion of the total parking area with tree canopies within 15 years per the following Table. Professional landscaping judgement shall be used to evaluate the plan as to its 15 -year growth and coverage." % of Total Parking Parking Area Spaces Required to be Shaded 5 - 24 spaces 25 - 49 spaces 50 + spaces 30% minimum 40% minimum 50% minimum Tree coverage shall be determined by the approximate crown diameter of each tree at 15 years of age. The Applicant's use of palm trees in the customer parking lot would not allow the applicant to meet the 50% minimum shade coverage requirements of the City. It might be appropriate to use the palm trees along the entry driveways into the site plus along the main east /west drive aisles. In this way, the palms are a focal point for the project but shade trees are used to shade the vehicle parking areas. Staff is not opposed to the use of palm trees along each respective street frontage. The landscape requirements should be met during plan check considerations. D. SITE PLAN MODIFICATIONS: On October 23, 1992, staff met with the applicant to discuss the submittal and to review the public agency comments of the other agencies of the valley (see the Specific Plan Booklet for the original drawings). Based on this meeting the applicant revised the initial site plan in the following fashion: 1. Eliminated two driveway access points onto Highway 111 per Caltran's request; 2. Provided a bus shelter location on Highway 111 which is not a part of a deceleration lane per Sunline Transit Authority's request; 3. Modified the access driveways on Jefferson Street to account for the existing raised medians per the requests of the City's Engineering Department; 4. Modified the.site plan to accommodate the City's General Plan street widths based on the newly adopted General Plan for Hwy 111; 5. Revised the landscaping areas along each street frontage; 6. Revisied the on -site parking design to include angled parking areas along the south side of the shopping complex to assist vehicle maneuverability; STAFFRPT.001 /CS -4- 7. Revised the building layout and reduced to project square footage to accommodate the above changes; and, 8. Added a covered pedestrian arcade along the south side of the building for shade protection to the client and store owners. The new revision is date stamped November 10, 1992. The plan has a 50 -foot setback along Highway 111 and varies the setback along Highway 111 for on -site parking areas. E. HIGHWAY 111 CORRIDOR TREATMENT: The recent adoption of the Updated General Plan by the City Council on October 6, 1992, requires the Applicant to dedicate and improve 86 feet (1/2 street) of property along Highway 111. The new requirement is 26 -feet larger than the City's past requirement of 60 feet. The larger width requirement was requested by Caltrans. The 26 feet is to be reserved for future highway widening in the advent that additional travel lanes are needed in the next 20 to 30 years. The new property line location is therefore 86 feet. The City's Off - Street Parking Code and General Plan require a 50 foot landscape buffer on Highway 111. However, the setback can be varied, if certain design standards can be written into the proposed specific plan. In the past, the city did not try to make allowances for reductions to the 50-feet requirement, but with the new requirement to increase the property dedication from 60 feet (half - width) to 86 feet (half- width) it might be appropriate to examine setback variations along Highway 111. The applicant has proposed an optional design for the front yard setback along Highway 111 of 25 feet for customer parking. Staff is not opposed to the customer parking encroaching in the 50 -foot setback provided the cars are screened from view by appropriate methods. However, a 50 -foot setback should be retained for the buildings. F. JEFFERSON STREET: Jefferson Street is planned ultimate right -of -way should applicant has proposed a 45_ setback. We recommend that the city's existing General which requires the applicant G. PARKING LOT DESIGN: to be a primary arterial thoroughfare. The be 120 feet (60 -foot half street). The foot right -of -way with a 20 foot landscape the applicant revise the plan to conform to Plan standards. A condition is attached to meet this requirement. The parking lot circulation pattern has been redesigned due to the confusion around the south side of the building because of the intersecting driveways which meet the aisle way periodically. The new plan insures that sight visibility problems will not occur, and angled parking lanes been added along the south side of the building complex to assist on -site parking needs. STAFFRPT.001 /CS -5- H. DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO HIGHWAY 111: The project is located along a State Highway. Caltrans officials have reviewed the proposal and they have requested that the City limit the number of driveways along Highway 111 to one or two. Their preference would be to have the main driveway 1/4 mile to the west of Jefferson' Street just in case a traffic signal is installed in the future based on traffic warrants. A secondary (right in /right out) driveway should be located between the main driveway and the intersection of Jefferson Street and Highway 111. U In the past, the City has accommodated the wishes of the State when they have made comments on a proposed project. Staff supports the design concept of the Caltrans staff because it will assist traffic flow along this major arterial street over the next 30 years. The city's General Plan predicts that approximately 75,000 vehicle trips per day will traverse Highway 111 once the city has been fully developed. The revised submittal meets the requirements of Caltrans. The other requirement of Caltrans is that the city require a 172 foot right -of -way along Highway 111 and that additional right -of -ways might be required at the intersection of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street. The letter from Caltrans states 24 feet might be necessary to assure that dual left -hand turn pockets can be built, and an exclusive right -hand turn land can also be installed to increase traffic flow patterns along the Highway 111 corridor. The City's Engineering Department will evaluate this last request with Caltrans during plan check. I. DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO JEFFERSON STREET: Engineering Department has evaluated the access plan of the applicant and its relationship to the properties to the east. The conclusion reached by the City is that this area will be' heavily used in the future and any driveway into the site should be designed to reduce the traffic impacts on Jefferson Street. The Engineering Department is requiring the northern driveway to align with Vista Grande to the east in order to permit full- turning movements into and out of the project. A second driveway will be permitted.to the south of this driveway but the driveway shall be a right -turn in only driveway. The current plan shows a two -way driveway to the north of Pad H, however, the Engineering Department would prefer a driveway centered between Pad H & I. The new location would discourage north bound vehicles on Jefferson Street from trying to make a left -hand turn into the shopping center at the he existing median break to the east of Building H. The applicant has requested that the Planning Commission allow the proposed driveway as shown on the November 10, 1992 proposal. A sketch of the Engineering Departments request is attached, and the Condition of Approval requires the driveway to be right -in only. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD EVALUATION: The Design Review Board reviewed the initial submittal on November 4, 1992. At the meeting, the members requested the Applicant and his architect revise the architectural character of the shopping complex to include elements and materials consistent with a more traditional or early Spanish heritage. STAFFRPT.001 /CS -6- However, this recommendation did not preclude the architect from examining other contemporary styles as long as the proposed architecture had design elements that reflect the desert area. On November 10, 1992, the architect for the project submitted his revision to the project. Minor adjustments have been made to the site plan and the architect has revised the exterior elevations of,the shopping center. A tile roof has been added to various portions of the building complex pursuant to the general discussions of November 4, 1992, and other exterior modifications have been made to soften the project architecture (e.g. elimination of the concave notches at the building ends, a revision to the parapet design, a reduction in the number of leaded glass windows, and a revision to the design of the covered pedestrian arcade). A special meeting was held by the Design Review Board on November 18, 1982, to discuss the third revision to the project (November 10, 1992 submittal). The Board felt it was an improvement to the plan they first saw on November 4, 1992, but they felt it hard to give their final stamp of approval since not all sides of the buildings were submitted for review. The Board, as a group, voted to recommend the project provided the architect and his client submit their final conceptual elevation drawings to them for approval prior to the plans being submitted to the Building Department for plan check. They said they were interested to review all building elevations, location of the pedestrian arcade, the design and color of the neon tubing, roof tile color (light color or hue), final landscaping /lighting, signs, and any other items which are an integral part of the overall exterior appearance of the project. The final vote was six members for the.project with one member abstaining. CONCLUSION• The request of the developer is generally consistent with the zoning and design standards of the City provided certain conditions of approval are met. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution 92- , recommending to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 92 -022, and Plot Plan 92 -490, subject to conditions and confirmation of the environmental determination. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. Environmental Assessment 3. Agency comments 4. Excerpts from the General Plan 5. Jefferson Street access plan 6. Revised plans date stamped November 10, 1992 7. Draft Conditions of Approval . STAFFRPT.001 /CS -7- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 92- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 & PLOT PLAN 92 -490 November 24, 1992 GENERAL: 1. Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the City of La Quinta Municipal Code, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 2. This approval shall expire and become void within one year unless extended pursuant to the City's Municipal Code. 3. Phasing plans, including phasing of public improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer and the Planning and Development Department prior building permit issuance. 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and /or clearances from the following public agencies: - City Fire Marshal - Public Works Department - Planning and Development Department - Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department - Desert Sands Unified School District - Coachella Valley Water District - Imperial Irrigation District - California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) - Caltrans District II Applicant. is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approvals and signatures on the plans. Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building Division at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. CONAPRVL.066 1 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 6. Construction shall comply with all local and State building code requirements as determined by the Building and Safety Director. FEES AND DEPOSITS 7. In order to mitigate impacts on public schools, applicant shall comply with the following: Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall provide the Planning and Development Department with written clearance from the DSUSC stating that their impact fees have been paid. 8. The California Fish and Game Environmental filing fees shall be paid. The fee is $1,250.00 plus $25.00 for the Riverside County document processing. The fee shall be paid within 24 hours after approval by the City Council. 9. Applicant shall pay all fees and deposits required by the City for processing, plan checking, and construction inspection. The fee and deposit_amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the City. 10. Prior to issuance of any land disturbance permit, the applicant shall pay the required mitigation fees for the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Program, as adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 11. Applicant shall construct, or enter into an agreement to construct, the on- and off -site grading, streets, utilities, landscaping, on -site common area improvements, and any other improvements required by these conditions before approval of the final map. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. If improvements are phased, off -site improvements and property -wide improvements such as perimeter walls and landscaping, common drainage basins or mains, and perimeter landscaping shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the plot plan. 12. The applicant shall develop phases in the order of the approved phasing plan so that improvements required of each phase are complete prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy within any subsequent phases. The City Engineer may consider proposals by the applicant to stage the installation of off -site and property -wide improvements CONAPRVL.066 2 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 normally secured with the first phase (i.e., off -site improvements, perimeter walls and perimeter landscaping) with the orderly development of all phases within the plot plan, 13. Applicant shall dedicate public street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans if any, and as required by Caltrans and the City Engineer. Right of way geometry for cul -de -sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs for State Route 111 improvements shall conform with Caltrans requirements or as approved by the City Engineer. Right of way geometry for cul -de -sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs for all other improvements shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Dedications shall include: A. Jefferson Street - 60 -foot half width, plus additional to accommodate any right turn refuges and dual left turn lanes and an exclusive right turn lane at SR 111, plus additional as required by the intersection alignment study required herein. B. State Route 111 - 86 -foot half width, exclusive bus turnout, additional width as necessary to accommodate exclusive left and right turn lanes and alignment changes resulting from the intersection alignment study required below. C. Right -of -way or easements as required to provide access for emergency service equipment. D. Mutual access easement to adjacent property to the west over the most westerly access drive. E. Parcels and easements as required by CVWD. 14. Applicant shall create, and offer to dedicate, common area setback lots, of minimum width as noted, adjacent to the following street rights of way: A. Highway 111 - 50 feet wide; and B. Jefferson Street - 20 feet wide. 15. Applicant shall dedicate blanket easements over the setback lots for the purpose of sidewalks and /or bikepaths. 16. The applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to abutting public streets. Access to those streets shall be restricted to street intersections and approved emergency access locations. CONAPRVL.066 3 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 17. Applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, common areas, and centralized mail delivery units. PROTECT DESIGN: 18. Development of the project site shall comply with Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92- 490 and the following conditions, which conditions shall take precedence in the event of any conflict with the plans and exhibits. . 19. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be submitted to the Planning & Development Department for review and approval prior to final map approval. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on the tract from perimeter arterial streets, and recommend alternative mitigation techniques. Recommendations of the study shall be incorporated into the project design. The study shall consider use of building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (terming, walls, and landscaping, etc.), and other techniques. 20. A minimum six - foot -high, masonry wall shall be provided along the north side of the project. The exact location, design, and materials shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning and Development Department. 21. The requirements of the City's Off - Street Parking Ordinance shall be met for each ' development phase of the project. , 22. This approval does not authorize the construction of the pad sites. These buildings' specific locations, design, height, and size shall be subject to separate plot plan review and approval by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. 23. All lighting facilities shall comply with Chapter 9.210 (Outdoor Light Control) and be designed to minimize light and glare impacts to surrounding property. All lighting to be installed shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning and Development Department. Applicant shall submit plans for street lighting along roads, if any, for review and approval by the Planning and Development Department. BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN 24. The development shall be governed by the following: CONAPRVL.066 4 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 A. All ground - mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from view by methods approved by the Planning and Development Department. B. No two -story buildings shall be allowed within 150 -feet of Jefferson Street or Highway 111. C. All roofing material within the project shall be clay or concrete tile barrel. The color of the roof tiles shall consist of desert hues and be approved by the Design Review Board. D. A building addressing plan shall be submitted to Building and Safety and to the Fire Department for review during plan check. The minimum building address size lettering shall be eight inches. E. Screening of the parking lot surface shall be provided from all adjacent streets through use of berming, landscaping and /or short decorative walls. The minimum vertical height shall be 42 inches. F. Handicap access, facilities and parking shall be provided per Federal, State, and local requirements. G. No overhead or similar door shall open to the north or towards any residentially zoned property unless adequate screened from noise and visibility to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Director. H. Variety in setbacks and siting shall occur in development of the future pad sites, but in no case shall the building setback line be less than the minimum building setback requirement. I. No outside cart or other storage shall be permitted unless completely screened in a City approved area, excluding cart return areas within parking lot area. J. Parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of building permits. K. . Plot plan or conditional use permit applications, as deemed necessary by C -P -S Zone requirements, shall be processed for each pad site. L. The Planning Commission shall conduct annual reviews of this specific plan until the project is completed. During each annual review by the Commission, the developer /applicant shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the specific plan. The applicant/developer of this project hereby CONAPRVL.066 5 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 agrees to furnish such evidence of compliance as the City, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require. Evidence of good faith compliance may include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, good faith compliance with the requirements of the specific plan. Upon conclusion of the annual review, the Commission may extend the approval period for 12 months at a time. M. The final landscape plan shall utilize trees and palms along Highway 111 and Jefferson Street and the entry drives into the project. Palms should not be used as shade trees for the parking lot areas unless they are massed because the applicant will not be able to meet the City's landscape shading requirements which call for 50% of the parking shall be shaded. Canopy shade trees may be used in the parking lot. N. Accent tree uplighting shall be used along both major streets and along the main entry drives. O. A master sign program shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to any on -site building construction. P. A trellised pedestrian arcade shall be built along the front of the shopping center to shield the customers and store owners from the intense summer sun. The maroon canvas awnings may be used under the trellis as an accent treatment to the overall design of the shopping complex. The location and design of the trellis arcade shall be approved by the Design Review Board. Q. The exposed neon tubing which is mounted to the top of the building complex should be used sparingly throughout the shopping center because the neon will distract from the architectural elements of the center plus it could be a distraction to Highway 111 traffic. The exposed neon may be used around buildings C, D, E, and F.The exposed neon tubing shall be mounted in a recessed stucco channel and the location and /or color shall be approved by the Design Review Board during plan check. R. A special landscape design shall be submitted for the intersection of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street because it is a "gateway" intersection. The applicant should prepare a formal landscape plan which uses citrus trees, decorative hardscape, desert landscape, uplighting, and public art as a focal point for this primary intersection. The landscape area should be approximately 50 feet by 100 feet (5,000 square feet). The plan shall be approved by the Design Review Board and by the Arts in Public Places Committee. CONAPRVL.066 6 Conditions of Approval specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 S. All roof mounted mechanical equipment should be screened by the building wall parapet (e.g., 32 -inch parapet). T. The minimum dimension for a parking lot planter should be seven feet wide. U. The final concept building plans (all sides) shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board prior to submittal of the construction drawings to the Building and Safety Department. The Board shall review all items generally noted above plus include the items discussed by the Design Review Board at their meeting of November 18, 1992. GRADING 25. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department an interim landscape program for the entire tract, which shall be for the purpose of wind erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blowsand and dust control measures during the grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: A. The use of irrigation during all construction activities; B. Planting of cover crop or vegetation upon previously graded but undeveloped portions of the site; and C. Provision of wind breaks or wind rows, fencing, and /or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The land owner shall comply with requirements of the Director of Public Works and Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent the emission of dust and blowsand. 26. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a condition so as to prevent a dust and blowsand nuisance and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures as approved by the Planning and Development and Public Works Departments. 27. Applicant shall comply with provisions of the Master Plan of Drainage, including payment of fees required therewith, and the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. 28. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the CONAPRVL.066 7 1t conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490 which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a building permit. Prior to final building inspection approval, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigating measures of Environmental Assessment 92 -241, Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490. The Planning and Development Director may require inspections or other monitoring to assure such compliance. 29. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. The plan must meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to approval of the plot plan. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report. The soils engineer and /or the engineering geologist shall certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. DRAINAGE 30. The project shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow into the Whitewater River Channel. Pipes shall be sized to prevent ponding in parking areas from exceeding six inches during a one hundred year storm event. The project shall be graded to receive storm flow from adjoining property at locations that have historically received flow. 31. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of any public street contiguous to the site. 32. In design of retention facilities, the percolation rate shall be considered to be zero unless Applicant provides site - specific data that indicates otherwise. A trickling sand filter and leachfield shall be installed to percolate nuisance water in conformance with requirements of the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of drainage area. 33. The design of the project shall not cause any change in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the project. 34. Applicant shall construct storm water facilities along the north side of Highway 111 as required by the City Engineer. CONAPRVL.066 8 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 UTILITIES 35. All existing and proposed utilities adjacent to or on the proposed site or shall be installed in underground facilities. Electric power lines over 12,500 volts are not subject to this requirement. 36. Underground utilities in areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned shall be installed prior to construction of the surface improvements. Applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. 37. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District including dedication of parcels, lining of the Whitewater River Channel and other requirements of their letter of October 2, 1992. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 38. The City is contemplating adoption of a Major Thoroughfare Improvements Ordinance. The Ordinance is intended to distribute the cost of major thoroughfare construction evenly and fairly on undeveloped land at the time the land is subdivided or developed for beneficial use. If the Ordinance is adopted at least 60 days prior to the issuance of a building permit, this project shall be subject to the provisions of the ordinance. If the Ordinance is not adopted the Applicant shall construct street improvements within and contiguous to the project as listed below. 39. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. Improvements to State Route 111 shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of Caltrans and the City Engineer. Other improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the La Quinta Municipal Code, adopted Standard Drawings and as approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall perform an alignment study of S.R. 111 and Jefferson Street to determine the design of the Jefferson /S.R. 111 intersection. The study shall extend 500 - feet in all directions beyond the boundaries of the applicant's site. If total required improvements to S.R. 111 exceed $300,000, the applicant shall perform a Project Study Report if and as required by Caltrans. Pavement design shall consider soil strength, anticipated traffic loading and design life. The minimum pavement section shall be 3 AC /4" Class 2 base for on -site work and 41/2"/6" for arterial and collector streets. CONAPRVL.066 9 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 40. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and centralized mail delivery units approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. Enhancements to existing improvements may be required to integrate the proposed improvements with existing conditions. This includes street width transitions extending beyond tract boundaries. 41. The following street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1. Jefferson Street - Three travel lanes on west side (39' curb to curb) plus required turn lanes. Install 8 -foot sidewalk. 2. S.R. 111 - Install three travel lanes and shoulder on north side (estimated 46' curb to curb), median island, required turn lanes, exclusive bus turnout with pedestrian walkway to site, and 8 -foot sidewalk. B. ON -SITE STREETS 1. As required by the City Engineer. Shall include at least one 24' access road each to Jefferson Street and S.R. 111. C. TRAFFIC SIGNALS 1. Jefferson Street at North Entry Drive - Full traffic signal. If the signal is warranted when this development occurs (as determined by the City Engineer), the applicant shall design and construct the signal at the applicant's expense. If the signal is deferred until warranted at a later date, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for 50% of the.cost to design and construct the signal. 2. S.R. 111 at West Entry Drive - Full traffic signal. If the signal is warranted when this development occurs (as determined by the City Engineer), the applicant shall design and construct the signal at the applicant's expense. If the signal is deferred until warranted at a later date, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for 25% of the cost to design and construct the signal. CONAPRVL.066 10 • Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 3. S.R. 111 at Jefferson - Traffic signal modifications as determined by the alignment study and as approved by the City Engineer. If the modifications are warranted when this development occurs (as determined by the City Engineer), the applicant shall design and construct the modifications at the applicant's expense. If the modifications are deferred until warranted at a later date, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for 25% of the cost to design and construct the modifications. 42. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted as follows: A. S.R. 111 - Unrestricted at most westerly access drive. Right -in /right -out at drive approximately midway between the west property line and Jefferson Street. B. Jefferson Street - Unrestricted at intersection with Vista Grande. Right -in only at drive between this intersection and S.R. 111 (Exhibit "G "). LANDSCAPING 43. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the setback lots along Jefferson Street and State Route 111. Design of these setbacks shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board and approved by the Planning Commission. The applicant is encouraged to minimize steep slope designs. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 5 -feet of street curb. . 44. Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall prepare a water conservation plan which shall include consideration of: A. Methods to minimize the consumption of water, including water saving features incorporated into the design of the structures, the use of drought tolerant and low - water usage .landscaping materials, and programs to increase the effectiveness of landscape, as recommended by Coachella Valley .Water District and the State Department of Water Resources. B. Methods for maximizing groundwater recharge, including the construction of groundwater recharge facilities. C. Methods for minimizing the amount of water used for on -site irrigation, including the use of reclaimed water from sewage treatment facilities. The water energy plan shall be subject to review and acceptance by CVWD prior to final approval by the City Engineer. CONAPRVL.066 11 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 45. Applicant/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan, which shall be designated to feature drought tolerant plant species, and the latest water conserving irrigation technology. The plan(s) shall be subject to initial review by the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission, with subsequent final review and acceptance by Coachella Valley Water District prior to landscape construction. Evidence of CVWD acceptance shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 46. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planning materials shall be encouraged. Provision shall also be made for planting materials which provide forage and nesting areas for nearby wildlife. 47. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, common retention basins and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements' shall be in conformance with requirements of, and be signed by, the Planning Director, the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Common basins shall be designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor - mounted equipment. 48. Applicant shall insure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above - ground utility structures. 49. Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to the Coachella Valley Water District for review and approval with respect to the District's Water Management Program. PUBLIC SERVICES 50. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City Fire Marshal, who may approve alternate means of compliance where deemed appropriate and equivalent to these standards: A. The access road proposed along the northern boundary of the project shall be completed during Phase I to provide through circulation. B. All future building expansions shall be subject to a site plan review /approval prior to issuance of building permits. CONAPRVL.066 12 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 C. A minimum unobstructed width of 24 feet shall be maintained for all access roads, with certain areas designated as fire lanes. D. The water mains shall be capable of providing a fire flow of 5000 gpm and an actual fire flow available from any two adjacent hydrants shall be 2500 gpm for two hours duration at 20 psi. E. A combination of on -site and off -site Super hydrants (6" X 4" X 2 -1/2" X 2 -1/2 ") shall be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. F. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the Coachella Valley Water District prior to any combustible building material being placed on the site. G. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review /approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location spacing, and the system shall be designed to meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be designed to meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed /approved by the local water company and a registered civil engineer with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department. H. Buildings shall be constructed so that the fire flow required for any individual building or unseparated area does not exceed 3500 gpm. I. Final conditions and requirements with regards to type of construction, area separations; or built -in fire protection systems will be addressed when the building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. 51. Applicant/developer shall work with Waste Management of the Desert to implement provisions of AB 939 and AB 1462. The applicant/developer is required to work with Waste Management in setting up the following programs for this project: A. Developer shall prepare a plan to provide enlarged trash enclosures for inclusion of separate facilities for storage of recyclables such as glass, plastics, newsprint and steel & aluminum cans. CONAPRVL.066 13 Conditions of Approval. Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 B. All on -site recycling bins shall be by approved masonry walls or other architectural features. 52. Applicant%developer shall provide for transit amenities as may be necessary. These amenities shall include, as a minimum, a bus turnout location and passenger waiting shelter along Highway 111, the precise location of which shall be determined by Sunline Transit. QUALITY ASSURANCE 53. The City is contemplating adoption of a quality- assurance program for privately - funded construction. If the program is adopted prior to the issuance of permits for construction of the improvements required of this map, applicant shall fully comply with the quality - assurance program. If the quality- assurance program has not been adopted, applicant shall employ or retain a California registered civil engineer, geotechnical engineer or land surveyor, as appropriate, to exercise sufficient supervision and quality control during construction of the tract grading and improvements to certify compliance with the plans, specifications, applicable codes, and ordinances. The engineer shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. Upon completion of the improvements, a statement on the "as built" plans as follows: "The construction of all improvements on these plans was properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision for compliance with the plans and specifications. The work shown hereon was constructed as approved except as otherwise noted. Noted exceptions have been approved by the City Engineer. " B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, a separate document bearing the engineer's or surveyor's seal and signature, that lists actual building pad elevations. The document shall, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the difference, if any. The data shall be organized by phase and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at different times. CONAPRVL.066 14 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24,.1992 54. Applicant shall provide the City a set of "as built" reproducible drawings of all grading and improvements except water and sewer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have.the words "As- Built" or "As- Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer certifying to the as -built condition. MAINTENANCE 55. Adequate provision shall be made for continuous maintenance of all landscaping and related features. 56. Applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas of the project such as the landscaped setback lots and retention basins. Applicant shall maintain all off -site improvements until final acceptance of the improvements by the City. MISCELLANEOUS ,57. Grading, drainage, street, lighting, landscaping & irrigation, park, gate, and perimeter wall plans are not approved for construction until they have been signed by the City Engineer. 58. Appropriate approvals shall be secured prior to establishing any construction or sales facilities, and /or signs on the subject property. 59. The City shall retain a qualified archaeologist, with the Developer to pay costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. At a minimum, the plan shall: (1) identify the means for digging test pits; and (2) provide for further testing if the preliminary results show significant material are present. The final plan shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for final review and approval. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Developer shall have retained a qualified cultural resources management firm and completed the testing and data recovery as noted in the plan. The management firm shall monitor the grading activity as required by the plan or testing results. A list of the qualified archaeological monitor(s), cultural resources management firm employees, and any assistant(s) /representative(s), shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department. The list shall provide the current address and phone number CONAPRVL.066 15 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 November 24, 1992 for each monitor. The designated monitors may be changed from time to time, but no such change shall be effective unless served by registered or certified mail on the Planning and Development Department. The designated monitors or their authorized representatives shall have the authority to temporarily diver, redirect, or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation, or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until appropriate mitigation measures are completed. Upon completion of the data recovery, the Developer shall cause three copies of the final report containing the data analyses to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 60. All on -site billboards shall be removed prior to the issuance of a building permit. 61. The on -site parking space front Highway 111 will be allowed to be within 25 feet of the new property line provided visual screening is constructed. 62. A parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department prior to any developer of the freestanding pad buildings in the future. The study shall be presented to the Planning Commission for their review and approval. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. CONAPRVL.066 16 CITY OF LA QU' °ITA PLANNING COMMISSIONLr CUP1 TILE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of La Quinta Planning Commission will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on November 24, 1992, at 7:00 P.M. in the La Quinta City Hall Council Chambers, 78 -105 Calle Estado, on the following item: ITEM: SPECIFIC PLAN 92-022 & PLOT PLAN 92-490 - JEFFERSON SQUARE APPLICANT: EFP CORPORATION (ED CARNES, VICE PRESIDENT) LOCATION: NORTH OF HWY 111, WEST OF JEFFERSON ST., AND SOUTH OF THE WHITEWATER STORM CHANNEL. THE SITE HAS APPROXIMATELY 1,424 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON HWY 111 AND APPROXIMATELY 850 FEET ALONG JEFFERSON STREET. REQUEST: APPROVAL TO DEVELOP A SHOPPING CENTER (±281,000 SQ. FT.) ON APPROXIMATELY 23 ACRES ZONED C -P -S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL). THE SPECIFIC PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO 9.88.040 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE. THE SPECIFIC PLAN WILL ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE PROJECT. LEGAL: PORTION OF THE NORTH 1/2 SECTION 29, T.5. S. , R.7. E. , S. B. B. M. ; APN #617 -080-017 & 021. The La Quinta Planning and Development Department has completed Environmental Assessment 1/92 -241. Based upon this assessment, the proposal will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment; therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared. The La Quinta Planning Commission will consider a recommendation for the adoption of the Negative Declaration along with the two cases at the Hearing. Any person may submit written comments on this case to the Planning and Development Department prior to the Hearing and/or may appear and be heard in support of or opposition to the project at the time of the Hearing. If you challenge the decision of this Tentative Tract Map in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues that you or someone else raised either at the Public Hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning and Development Department, at or prior to the Public Hearing. The proposed Tentative Tract Map file may be viewed by the public Monday through Friday from 8:00. A.M. until 5:00 P.M. at the Planning and Development Department, La Quinta City Hall, 78-099 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California. DO NOT PRINT BELOW THIS LINE PUBLISH ONCE ON OCTOBER 31, 1992 i �-,� (ir�.,.i ,'v,� �� ,tt� ; 11 t J BI #D STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING 10PV DATE: JANUARY 6, 1993 PROJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490, JEFFERSON SQUARE APPLICANT: E. F. P. CORPORATION (ED CARVES, VICE PRESIDENT) ARCHITECT: MHA; MICHAEL HURST REQUEST: 1. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022: A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A FUTURE SHOPPING CENTER' PROPOSED FOR THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. 2. PLOT PLAN 92 -490: REQUEST TO DEVELOP A ±251,550 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER ON A PORTION OF A +23 ACRE SITE. THE CENTER WILL INCLUDE ON -SITE PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. EXISTING ZONING: C -P -S (SCENIC HIGHWAY .COMMERCIAL) AND W -1 (WATER COURSE) BACKGROUND: The project was tentatively recommended for approval by the Design Review Board on November 18, 1992, and approved by the Planning Commission on November 24, 1992, subject to the final plans being reviewed by both groups prior to construction plan check. A copy of the original conditions are attached. CITY COUNCEL REVIEW: The City Council reviewed the proposal at their meeting of December 15, 1992, as a report of Planning Commission action. The City Council felt that the project architect and developer should reach a consensus on the final design of the shopping center prior to acquiring final approval of the project. The City Council voted to continue the case to their January 19, 1993 meeting and requested that the project be re- examined by the Design Review Board on January DRBST.074 G i 6th and by the Planning Commission on January 12th, if possible. The City Council concerns or questions on the case were: 1. Could the roof line on Building # "B be redesigned so that it is similar in design to the rest of the shopping center? 2. Could the architect refine or upgrade the pedestrian arcade along the south side of building, mainly Buildings "C" and "F "? 3. Was the exposed neon tubing necessary? 4. Would a more traditional Spanish design theme be more appropriate for this location? The City Council discussed other elements of the project. However, their directive to the Design Review Board was that they would like the Board and the architect to refine the project architecture so that everybody involved knows exactly how the design of the shopping center will look if approved on January 19, 1993. RESUBMITTAL BY THE APPLICANT: The project proponent submitted the attached plans on December 23, 1992. The project architect has modified the architectural plans of the project in the following ways: 1. Upgraded the covered pedestrian arcade to include another design theme along portions of the south. elevation (tile with double arch); 2. Varied the roof pitch throughout the project (4:12 & 3:12). 3. Changed the roof parapet design to include a rounded design and a tile roofed design (fake two story design) to accentuate the original design scenario; 4. Revised the access driveway on Jefferson Street so that the main entry is south of Building "G "; 5. Angled parking has been added to the overall parking lot design theme; and, 6. Changed the design of Building "B" to include some of the design features noted above plus modified the entryway design on both sides of the building (north and east). CONCLUSION: Staff appreciates any comments the Design Review Board has on the attached plans since the Applicant is under a limited time period in which to be placed on the City Council meeting of January 19, 1993, and we feel the new plan is superior to the other proposed plans. DRBST.074 2 RECOMMENDATION: That the Design Review Board should recommend approval of the attached plans with any modifications that the Design Review Board would feel are necessary. Further, the Applicant has requested that Condition #24.u. should be modified so that the final plans are reviewed by Staff and the Building and Safety Department during plan check. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. Original Planning Commission Conditions of Approval of November 24, 1992. 3. New plans date stamped December 23, 1992. DRBST.074 3 y •. Fred Waring Drive •A -� J I IJ1 p Miles Avenue i� Ill�l Westward Ho Drive OVA NiLwa ] 11 Avenue ' 48th 1 z r r� •. C. OQ J i� I i .,.• Q �� V1 C venue 50th 14A bad /' .! 1 Iiii � 1— EXISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONS NUUUA Of TI POVGN LANE$ ® 4 LANES u 7 LANES EE ! LANES INTERSECTION CONTROL XSIGNALIZED ® STOP SIGN a won ® PJPU E STOP $04 HA"'- aK i u **AG w�t►tE .• Ho �xr 0 lt r' Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 i Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 BUILDING AND SITE-DESIGN' 24. The development shall be governed by the following: EXHIBIT E � _�CASE N0. g= A. . All ground - mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened ` .gym view by methods approved by the Planning and Development Department. B. No two-story buildings shall be allowed within 150 -feet of Jefferson Street or Highway 111. C. All roofing material within the project shall be clay or concrete tile barrel. The color of the roof tiles shall consist of desert hues and be approved by the Design Review Board. D. A building addressing plan shall be submitted to Building and Safety and to the Fire Department for review during plan check. The minimum building address size lettering shall be eight inches. E. Screening of the parking lot surface shall be provided from all adjacent streets through use of berming, landscaping and/or short decorative walls. The minimum vertical height shall be 42 inches. F. Handicap access, facilities and, parking shall be provided per Federal, State, and local requirements. G. No overhead or similar door shall open to the north or towards any residentially zoned property unless adequate screened from noise and visibility to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Director. H. Variety in setbacks and siting shall occur in development of the future pad sites, but in no case shall the building setback line be less than the minimum building setback requirement. I. No outside cart or other storage shall be permitted unless completely screened in a City approved area, excluding cart return areas within parking lot area. J. Parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of building permits. K. Plot plan or conditional use permit applications, as deemed necessary by C -P -S Zone requirements, shall be processed for each pad site. CONAPRVL.066 5 05 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 92 -022 i Plot Plan 92 -490 December 15, 1992 desert landscape, uplighting, and public art as a focal point for this primary intersection. The landscape area should be approximately 50 feet by 100 feet (5,000 square feet). The plan shall be approved by the Design Review Board and by the Arts in Public Places Committee. S. All roof mounted mechanical equipment should be screened by the building wall parapet (e.g., 32 -inch parapet). T. The minimum dimension for a parking lot planter should be seven feet wide. *U. The final concept building plans (all sides) shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to submittal of the construction drawings to the Building and Safety Department. The Board shall review all items generally noted above plus include the items discussed by the Design Review Board at their meeting of November 18; 1992. GRADING 25. Prior to issuance of any grading or. building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department an interim landscape program for the entire tract, which shall be for the purpose of wind erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blowsand and dust control measures during the grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: A. The use of irrigation during all construction activities; B. Planting of cover crop or vegetation upon previously graded but undeveloped portions of the site; and C. Provision of wind breaks or wind rows, fencing, and/or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The land owner shall comply with requirements of the Director of Public Works and Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent the emission of dust and blowsand. 26. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a condition so as to prevent a dust and blowsand nuisance and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures as approved by the Planning and Development and Public Works Departments. 27. Applicant shall comply with provisions of the Master Plan of Drainage, including payment of fees required therewith, and the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. CONAPRVL.066 7 f) m STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 1992, (CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 4. 1992) CASE NO: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 APPLICANT: E.F.P. CORPORATION (ED CARNES) ARCHITECT: MHA ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING (MICHAEL HURST) REQUEST: 1. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022: A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A FUTURE SHOPPING CENTER. 2. PLOT PLAN 92 -490: REQUEST TO DEVELOP A ±253,400 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER ON A PORTION OF A +23 ACRE SITE. THE CENTER WILL INCLUDE ON -SITE PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. EXISTING ZONING: C -P -S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL) AND W -1 (WATER COURSE) BACKGROUND: The Design Review Board reviewed the initial submittal on November 4, 1992. At the meeting, the members requested the Applicant and his architect revise the architectural character of the shopping complex to include elements and materials consistent with a more traditional or early Spanish heritage. However, this recommendation did not preclude the architect from examining other contemporary styles as long as the proposed architecture had design elements that reflect the desert area. On November 10, 1992, the architect for the project submitted his revision to the project. Minor adjustments have been made to the site plan and the architect has revised the exterior elevations of the shopping center. A tile roof has been added to various portions of the building complex pursuant to the general discussions of November 4, 1992, and other exterior modifications have been made to soften the project architecture (e.g., elimination of the concave notches at the building ends, a revision to the parapet design, a reduction in the number of leaded glass windows, and a revision to the design of the covered pedestrian arcade). The plans do not describe all the proposed materials being used, but the architect has stated he will bring a colored exhibit to the meeting to explain the recent changes. Staff would appreciate the DRBST.068 I Board's comments on the November 10th submittal because the Applicant would like to have his project reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 24, 1992. RECOMMENDATION: Move to recommend approval of the revised plans to the Planning Commission based on any final comments of the Design Review Board, and the attached recommended conditions and approval. Attachments: 1. Revised plan exhibits 2. Recommended conditions (Exhibit "C ") DRBST.068 2 EXHIBIT "C" RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS: 1. The final construction plans should be reviewed by the Design Review Board. The final plans should include landscaping, lighting, building(s), grading, signs, and any other plans deemed necessary by Staff. 2. The final landscape plan should utilize trees and palms along Highway 111 and Jefferson Street and the entry drives into the project. Palms should not be used as shade trees for the parking lot areas unless they are massed because the applicant will not be able to meet the city's landscape shading requirements which call for 50% of the parking shall be shaded. We recommend that canopy shade trees be used in the parking lot. 3. Accent tree uplighting should be used along both major streets and along the main entry drives. 4. A master sign program should be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to any on -site building construction. 5. A trellised pedestrian arcade should be build along the front of the shopping center to shield the customers and store owners from the intense summer sun. 6. No exposed neon tubing should be permitted. 7. A special landscape design shall be submitted for the intersection of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street because it is a "gateway" intersection. The applicant should prepare a formal landscape plan which uses citrus trees, decorative hardscape, desert landscape, uplighting, and public art as a focal point for this primary intersection. The landscape area should be approximately 50 feet by 100 feet (5,000 square feet). The plan should be approved by the Design Review Board and by the Arts in Public Places Committee. 8. All roof mounted mechanical equipment should be screened by the building wall parapet (e.g. 32 -inch parapet). 9. The minimum dimension for a parking lot planter should be seven feet wide. 10. Pitched roofing should be used for the freestanding pad buildings to improve the image of the Highway 111 corridor. The roofs should include tile. DRB11/4.F1 /CS -5- DATE: PROJECT: APPLICANT: ARCHITECT: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT NOVEMBER 4, 1992 RU CDPV D. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) E.F.P. CORP. (ED CARNES) MHA ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING; MICHAEL HURST REQUEST: 1. SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 - A REQUEST TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A FUTURE SHOPPING CENTER PROPOSED FOR THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. 2. PLOT PLAN 92 -490 - REQUEST TO DEVELOP A +253,400 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER ON A PORTION OF A +23 ACRES SITE. THE CENTER WILL INCLUDE ON -SITE PARKING AND LANDSCAPING. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND JEFFERSON STREET. EXISTING C -P -S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL) & W -1 (WATER COURSE) ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: AN ENVIRONMEN' BEEN PREPARED ASSESSMENT IT NOT HAVE A ENVIRONMENT. ENVIRONMENTAL PAL ASSESSMENT (EA 92 -241) HAS FOR THE ABOVE PROJECT. BASED UPON THIS HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT WILL SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE AFFECT ON THE THEREFORE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF IMPACT HAS BEEN PREPARED. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: NORTH - WHITE WATER STORM CHANNEL, W -1 SOUTH - VACANT & 111 TRAILER PARK, R -T & CPS (PROPERTY IS ALSO IN CITY OF INDIO) EAST - GAS STATION (INDIO) AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES (LA QUINTA), (INDIO) AND R -1 (ONE FAMILY DWELLING) WEST - VACANT, CPS BACKGROUND: The subject project was submitted concurrently with-Specific Plan 92 -022. Plot Plan 92 -490 proposes an approximately 253,400 square foot shopping center on a portion of a 23 acre site generally north of Highway 111, south of the White Water Wash, and west of Jefferson Street. The property south of the White Water Wash is zoned C -P -S and the property in the wash is zoned W -1. DRB11 /4.F1 /CS -1- �.7' 7�,''�� '�, . � � �� C� � � c� STATISTICAL DATA: Land "Approximately 21.3 acres (developable) Building Area Approximately 253,400 square feet Parking Provided *Approximately 972 to 1104 spaces Parking Ratio 1/260 to 1/229 square feet * NOTE: two alternatives DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The project site is approximately 23 acres but 1.7 acres are in the existing flood control channel. The property is presently vacant and the site is void of any significant vegetation. The property is made up of two contiguous parcels which are owned by the applicant. SITE DESIGN: The applicant has proposed an L- shaped shopping center with a majority of the site facing Highway 111, a major arterial. Future pad site building sites have been proposed along Highway 111 and Jefferson Street (Pads A, K, J, I & H). Various access driveways have been proposed which provide two -way traffic into the site. The applicant proposed two access driveways on Highway 111 and two driveways on Jefferson Street. Guest parking is interspersed on the south side of the building and intertwined with the on -site landscaping. The parking lot design proposes groups of 20 to 40 parking spaces per parking area (double- sided). ARCHITECTURE: The architect has proposed a primarily single story shopping center. However, there are portions of the complex which are two story. We believe that the complex will be constructed of wood and stuccoed. Various architectural elements have been used which included stain -glass accent windows, exposed neon tubing, canvas awnings, and other textures. Desert hues will be used on the building. The awning for the storefronts and for the roof will be a maroon color (Madera Wine.). The exposed red and hue green neon tubing will accentuate the upper area of the building parapet. Concave notches of the building corners are also prevalent throughout the building complex. In order to lend variety to the building architecture, the store -front areas have included a stair -step window pattern which is accented by a speckled rose colored tile (Megara or Delphi Rose). The design is consistent with the proposed entry theme at buildings D & E. DRB11 /4.F1 /CS -2- 0 STAFF COMMENTS: The architectural style of the project is somewhat whimsical because of the concave features which are a part of each building complex, plus the maroon colored canvas which is used for the store -front awnings and as a roof covering is some areas. Our comments for this project are: IMAGE CORRIDOR: The General Plan designates the frontage streets along the exterior portion of the site as "primary image corridor" thoroughfares, and the signalized intersection is a "gateway" image intersection. A copy of the adopted material is attached. The primary function of the program is to provide boulevard streets with raised, landscaped medians and heavily landscaped areas within and contiguous to the street rights -of -way. The General Plan states that "primary image corridors shall include landscape themes which are reminiscent of La Quintals agricultural past and desert environment ". Overall, the applicant's request is generally consistent with the intent of the General Plan. We would recommend that the applicant enhance the intersection of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street to include an area for a public art piece surrounded by citrus trees. The citrus trees are required in order to preserve the city's agricultural past. A geometric type design might be appropriate for Jefferson Street and Highway 111. EXPOSED NEON: The architect has proposed exposed neon light tubes for the outside of the building along the top of the building parapet. Two separate light bars are proposed. The colors are blue /green and.maroon. The light tubes are used along the south side of the building complex to accent a majority of the building complex. The tubing colors match the proposed color palette for the shopping center. Staff is not opposed to the use of exposed neon tubing bands on the outside of the building, provided they do not detract from the overall character of the shopping complex. It might be beneficial to have the tubes recessed into the building envelop and restrict the use of the light system to one color and /or one neon tube. We also would like the use of neon to be used sparingly along the Highway 111 frontage. It might be appropriate to use the neon lighting system for the major tenants or to reverse it and use it only for the in -line shop tenants. In either case, we would appreciate the Board's review of this design feature. LANDSCAPING: The concept landscape plan has been submitted. The plan includes a variety of plant material which is used on a regular basis in this area (e.g. palms, Mesquite, Acacia, and other type of desert material). The primary architectural element is the palm tree throughout the parking lot area. Whereas, the street frontages use a combination of groundcover, lawn and trees /palms to accent this important intersection. DRB11 /4.F1 /CS -3- The City's Off- Street Parking Ordinance discusses project landscaping especially within the parking lot areas. The code states: "Shade trees shall be placed so as to shade a portion of the total parking area with tree canopies within 15 years per the following Table. Professional landscaping judgement shall be used to evaluate the plan as to its 15 -year growth and coverage." % of Total Parking Parking Area Spaces Required to be Shaded 5 - 24 spaces 25 - 49 spaces 50 + spaces 30% minimum 40% minimum 50% minimum Tree coverage shall be determined by the approximate crown diameter of each tree at 15 years of age. The Applicant's use of palm trees in the customer parking lot would not really help. the applicant meet the 50% minimum shade coverage requirements of the-City. It might be appropriate to use the palm trees along the entry driveways into the site plus along the main east /west drive aisles. In-this way, the palms are a focal point for the project but shade trees are used to shade the vehicle parking areas. Staff is not opposed to the use of palm trees along each respective street frontage. The landscape requirements should be met during plan check considerations. ARCHITECTURE: The design for the project is similar to the Canyon Mall project being proposed by the Tucker Company on the south side of Highway 111 to the west of this site. In most respects, no pitched roofs with tile are used. For this project, staff would like to see tile used for the future freestanding pad buildings. We feel that the pedestrian scale of the project at each street frontage would be enhanced if concrete or- clay barrel tile were utilized in addition to the other exterior textures of the complex, plus it would add a secondary color tone to the proposal. The TDC project has used a similar technique in its proposal. At this time the City does not have any guidelines for architectural character for Highway 111, but in the future, the city is considering development of a Highway 111 Specific Plan which could examine this type of issue or any other issue deemed desirable. PEDESTRIAN AREAS: The project lacks outdoor shopping at this facility. seating areas to the east This area could include a raised planters, or other is ideal for this type of driveway and /or abuts the occur on this topic. DRB11 /4.F1 /CS plazas for the patrons to enjoy while One thought would be-to design an outdoor of Building E but in front of Building F. shade trellis, concrete or wood benches, types of recreational amenities. This area amenity since it is abutting the main entry two story arcade. Further discussion should -4- RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS: 1. The final construction plans should be reviewed by the Design Review Board. The final plans should include landscaping, lighting, building(s), grading, signs, and any other plans deemed necessary by Staff. 2. The final landscape plan should utilize trees and palms along Highway 111 and Jefferson Street and the entry drives into the project. Palms should not be used as shade trees for the parking lot areas unless they are massed because the applicant will not be able to meet the city's landscape shading requirements which call for 50% of the parking shall be shaded. We recommend that canopy shade trees be used in the parking lot. 3. Accent tree uplighting should be used along both major streets and along the main entry drives. 4. A master sign program should be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to any on -site building construction.' 5. A trellised pedestrian arcade should be build along the front of the shopping center to shield the customers and store owners from the intense summer sun. We recommend that the maroon canvas awnings be used under the trellis as an accent treatment to the overall design of the shopping complex. 6. The exposed neon tubings which are mounted to the top of the building complex should be used sparingly throughout the shopping center because the neon will distract from the architectural elements of the center plus it could be a distraction to Highway 111 traffic. We recommend that the exposed neon be used around buildings C, D, E & F. All exposed neon tubing should be mounted in a recessed stucco channel, and only one color should be used. Our preference would be the maroon color. 7. A special landscape design shall be submitted for the intersection of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street because it is a "gateway" intersection. The applicant should prepare a formal landscape plan which uses citrus trees, decorative. hardscape, desert landscape, uplighting, and public art as a focal point for this primary intersection. The landscape area should be approximately 50 feet by 100 feet (5,000 square feet). The plan should be approved by the Design Review Board and by the Arts in Public Places Committee. 8. All roof mounted mechanical equipment should be screened by the building wall parapet (e.g. 32 -inch parapet). 9. The minimum dimension for a parking lot planter should be seven feet wide. DRB11 /4.F1 /CS -5- 10. Pitched roofing should be used for the freestanding pad buildings to improve the image of the Highway 111 corridor. The roofs should include tile. CONCLUSION: The request of the developer is generally consistent with the design standards of the City provided certain conditions of approval are met. RECOMMENDATION: That the Design Review Board recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission provided the above mentioned staff comments are incorporated. Attachments: 1. Vicinity map 2. Large plans (9- 22 -92) 3. Revised site plan (10- 28 -92) 4. Specific Plan Document (9- 18 -92) DRB11 /4.F1 /CS -6- �t LO - s Ism= biiiisiiim Awirm 0 JEF loom I c04CNE'Q4 i f VALLEY STORMWATER i j ' i ! I ! 1 i Ax � r C yP I i TRACT -"05 `HpNNEI. Development 1► i� SITE f HIGHWAY III STATE HIGHWAY III _. EXISTING .WATER . SERV_IC.E__ t Lt .' �W Qui�rw 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO — LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 FROM: PLANNING i DEVELOPMENT DIVISION _i P"'City Manager -;7-Assistant City Manager gblic Works Director Vy Engineer lding & Safety ks 6 Recreation e Marshal knn ber of Commerce. rial Irrigation Dist. hern California Gas rt Sands School Dist. CV Unified School Dist. �V Water District la to Management L_ <rincipal S Postal Service Pi nner eneral Telephone -Cssociate ony Cable P1&nner aline Transit � sociate altrans (District II) P1 ner R� _Agricultural Commission ning CV Archaeological Soc. Director BI - Desert Council ty of Indio/ CV Mount. Conservacy CV Recreation 6 Parks iverside County: heriff's Department Planning Department rnv{rnmm�ntsl UnAI*h Note: 0- Received Reductions w/o Large Map LA QUINTA CASE NO(S) : �l"i RAn/ —0Z2— c ± 10 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: // 7Tme: EX f,E� 5"10o -J .2!g �iH�'1E�taiAt PROJECT LOCATION: / 1 :2p'y L Df A j1> T4L64w' The City of La Quinta Development Review Committee is conducting environmental study pursuant to the California Envie7ig i c (CEQA) for the above referenced project(s). Attach submitted by the project proponent. Your comments are requested with respect to: 1. Physical impacts the project presents on publ and /or services; 2. Recommended conditions: a) that you or your agency any potential adverse effects; b) or should apply to c) or improvements to satisfy other regulations and agency is responsible; and 3. If you find that the ident effects on the environment please recommend the scope be helpful. Please send your response by attend the DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Date: ' -_65— Contact Comments Date: ified impacts which cannot and focus of COMMITTEE me Time: _-Orfr— Person: - Title:Oc • ,/L�},�„�,�� made by: 4�LS(L`;J�i ,��idr Title: O�_�� Phone: Agency /Division will have be avoided additional V sting at La eve would mitigate the project design; concerns which your significant adverse through conditions, study(ies) which may You are invited tc Quinta City Hall: MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 f. H E C I T Y Olt ■:4Vo a AL February 12, 1993 R LE La �}U111.� r 1981 - 1992 Ten Carat Decade Mr. Ed J. Carnes Vice President, Development 48 -630 Monroe Street Indio, CA 92201 SUBJECT: PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) Dear Ed: I have been informed by the Engineering Department that your site at the northwest corner of Jefferson Street and Highway 111 has been graded without permission from the City. Your Conditions of Approval for the Jefferson Square project require payment of the Fringe -Toed Lizard Mitigation Fee prior to any land disturbance of the site (Condition #10) . In conclusion, please send to our department a check payable to the City of La Quinta in the amount of $13,800.00 within 7 days to correct this problem. We will then forward the fee to the Nature Conservancy for their use at the preserve in Thousand Palms. No additional work at the site shall be done unless you have permission by either the Planning Department or the Engineering Department because you are required to complete an on -site archaeological investigation per Condition #59 of Resolution 93-8. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. i tPlanner MENT DIRECTOR GT : cs LTRGT . 045 City of La Qu inta Post Office Box 1504 ♦ 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619) 564 -5617 Design & Production: Mark Palmer Design. 619346 -0772 t • H E C I T Y 0 ALI \ La rota !982 - 1992 Ten Carat Decade February 3, 1993 Mr. Ed Carnes, Vice President EFP Corporation 48 -630 Monroe Street Indio, CA 92201 SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 & PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) Dear Mr. Carnes: Your project was approved by the City Council on February 2, 1993. A copy of the final Conditions of Approval are attached for your benefit.< We will need you to comply with Condition #8 in order for our department to be able to file a Notice of Determination with the County of Riverside as specified by the California Environmental Quality Act. Our department has five days in which to file a Notice of Determination with the County of Riverside pursuant to Government Section 15075, and our filing will begin your 30 -day legal challenge period. We will need two checks made out to the County of Riverside in the amount of $1,300.00 and $50.00. The second check is a handling fee charged to process your Fish & Game Mitigation Fee. We would appreciate receiving 8 1/2 x 11 -inch reductions of your January 20, 1993 submittal as soon as they are available. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, JE DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR W u sdell Associate Planner GT:ccs Attachment " City of La Quinta :Z ^F Post Office Box 1504 • 78 -105 Calle Estado - La Quinta, California 92253 Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619) 564 -5617 LTRGT • 2 0 2 / C S Design & Production: Mark Palmer Design, 679- 33b -1Z Adv .05- January 27, 1993 H E C I T Y ■:4 &#■ A La! rota 1982 - 1992 Ten Carat Decade 0 ' � W F§ Mr. Michael Hurst, MHA w' PO Box 1362 Palm Desert, CA 92261 SUBJECT: PLOT PLAN 92 -490 & SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 Dear Mr. Hurst: The Planning Commission recommended approval of your revised architectural drawings at their meeting of January 26, 1993. Their action will be submitted to the City Council on February 2, 1993 for there review and consideration. The City Council meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. We will also need a colored site plan exhibit which we discussed prior to yesterdays Planning Commission meeting, and any other colored exhibits you .feel will be helpful for the Council meeting delivered to the Planning Department by 5:00 p.m., Monday, February 1, 1993. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Vautue ours, - EVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ll anner GT:ccs cc: Ed Carnes, EFP Corp. City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 • 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 T (�f}l /(� Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619564 -5617 T TR`' k . 1 9 9 / C S Design & Production: Mark Palmer Design. 61T9 -0772 H E C I T Y 0 0 via VIE La Qqinta 1982 - 199 Cara[ Decade January 14, 1993 y, Mr. Michael Hurst, MHA PO Box 1362 Palm Desert, CA 92261 SUBJECT: PLOT PLAN 92 -490 & SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 =< Dear Mr. Hurst: The Design Review Board recommended approval of your revised architectural drawings at their meeting of January 13, 1993. Their action will be submitted to the Planning Commission on January 26, 1993 for their review and consideration. In order to be on the agenda, please send to my attention eleven (11) copies of your most recent plans so that they can be distributed to the Planning Commission and the City Council. We need the copies by 5:00 p.m. January 20, 1993, or your project will be rescheduled to February 9, 1993. We believe it will be helpful for you and your client if you also prepare eleven (11) 8 1/2 -inch by 11 -inch attachments of two important- features of the project. The first is the neon tubing design and its method of installation. A cross section would be beneficial. The second item is the column design. It would be appropriate to have an enlargement of the inverted tile insert design on the column based on last nights discussion. In closing, please make sure that your colorboard is it includes every piece of material involved in the your shopping center. We wish also to state that at yesterday, the Board stated that they would like you color palette to make sure your proposal blends well architectural elements. complete and .that';;:- development of your meeting to examine your with your If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, JERRY gG/& EgMAN P NNI DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR A r cirousdell Ass ate Planner GT • Ccs City of La Quinta N . Post Office Box 1504 ♦ 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 cc: Ed Carnes; EFP pf7W�-19) 564 -2246, Fax (619) 564 -5617 Design 8 Production: Mark Palmer Design, 619 -346 -0772 T rT D/7 R1 1 O'i /(`Q i H E C I T Y ■��' ■ 8, A January 1993 La Quinta 1982 - 1992 Ten Carat Decade Mr. Ed Carnes, Vice President r= EFP Corporation 48 -630 Monroe Street Indio, CA 92201 0 SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -0224& PLOT PLAN 92- 490 -(JEFFERSON SQUARE) Dear Mr. Carnes: The Design Review Board examined your case at their meeting of January 6, 1993, and their recommendation was to continue your case to January 13, 1993. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m. The Design Review Board requested at the meeting that your architect prepare the following graphics for their review prior to the January 13, 1993 meeting. The information that they were interested in was: 1. Colored exhibits of each side of the shopping complex; 2. Roof plan; 3. Building delineation plan and pedestrian arcade; and 4. Precise graphics which are coordinated with your color board. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, JERRY RMAN ANN N & DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ire reg ousdell Asso iate Planner GT : ccs cc: Michael Hurst, MHA LTRGT . 037 City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 ♦ 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619) 564 -5617 Design & Production: Mark Palmer Design. 619 -346 -0772 -r H E C 1 T Y 0 F#LE copy La Quinta 1982 - 199 a December 18, 1992 Mr. Ed Carnes, Vice President EFP Corporation 48 -630 Monroe Street Indio, CA 92201 SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 & PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) Dear Mr. Carnes: The City Council continued your case to January 19, 1993, based on their discussion of December 15, 1992. City Council voted to 1) refer your case back to the Design'Review Board and Planning Commission for further review of the architectural features of the project, 2) have staff reevaluate your driveway access plan on Jefferson Street, and 3) determine the possible land use which will be part of the development (e.g. the location:of the future theatre). In order to be on the January 19, 1993 City Council meeting, we will need your project to be on the Design Review Board meeting of January 6th, and the Planning Commission meeting of January 12th. Therefore, please submit 9 copies of your new plans to our office by December 23, 1992. In conclusion, it might be to your benefit to submit two or three alternative design scenarios for your south elevation in order to assist the decision making process at the Design Review Board meeting of January 6, 1993. Our department would recommend that your architect submit a Spanish revival design, a Spanish contemporary design, and any other designs which might stimulate the Board members to reach a final consensus as to the type of design they would prefer at this section of the city. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, J Y HE N N N -& DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR r Tr usdell ci to Planner GT : ccs City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 • 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619) 564 -5617 Ly �1 RGT 1 8 5 / C S Design & Production: Mark Palmer Design. 6! nA 07; 2 GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF To: City of La Quinta Planning Division Attn: Greg Trousdell Re: Plot Plan 92 -490 Revised No. 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE • PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370 (714) 657 -3183 December 15, 1992 DEC 9 7 1992 GiTY OF LA ell WAP No change in Fire Department letter dated October 1, 1992. jmp /TH lJ NDIO OFFICE 79 -733 Country Club Drive, Suite F, Indio, CA 92201 (619) 342 MM • FAX (619) 775 -2072 Sincerely, RAY REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner By l o„-. 1%kt� Tom Hutchison Fire Safety Specialist PLANNING DIVISION ❑ RIVERSIDE OFFICE 3760 12th Street, Riverside, CA 92501 (714) 275.4777 • FAX (714) 369 -7451 ❑ TEMECUTA OFFICE 41002 County Center Drive, Suite 225, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694 -5070 • FAX (114) 694.5076 4 printed on recycled paper I,— AGENCY COMMENTS - SUMMARY ISSUES (JEFFERSON SQUARE) 1. CALTRANS a. Street median breaks at 1.4 mile intervals b. Limit site to right -turns only C. Minimum right -of -way of 172 feet d. Major intersections may require up to an additional 24 feet of right -of -way to accommodate dual left turn lands and /or exclusive right turn lanes. 2. FIRE DEPARTMENT a. The service road shall be build during Phase I b. Minimum unobstructed on -site access shall be 24 feet C. The developer should contribute to a fire protection mitigation program and /or assessment district. 3. SUNLINE TRANSIT a. The bus shelter shall not be located in a deceleration lane. 4. CVWD a. Construct concrete slope protection on the White Water Storm Channel b. Water District review (e.g. grading, drainage inlets, landscaping, roadways, etc.) C. Zone X - Federal Flood Insurance Rate Map 5. SHERIFF DEPARTMENT a. Project lighting should .provide for pedestrian safety b. Angled parking is recommended C. Discourage drop -off d. Require right -turn access on Highway 111 e. Review handicap parking f. Examine wider aisleways g. Review building addressing (e.g. 8 -inch minimum) 6. WASTE MANAGEMENT a. Submit plan to serve agency which includes trash quantities and locations and includes recycling facilities. DOCGT.003 /CS -1- - Department. v AGENDA ITEM TITLE:' �lo.•- ��- ''+�io ' G " �vr%:or- c,►�'Swt L�i�'�,i*'�'1`•+�'t ►h , �lor%jeA A6 AGENDA AUTHORIZATION REQUEST TOO CITY MANAGER Public Hearing FROM: �fiw (J�a 1 Consent Item Dept. Report - Department. v COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM TITLE:' �lo.•- ��- ''+�io ' G " �vr%:or- c,►�'Swt L�i�'�,i*'�'1`•+�'t ►h , �lor%jeA A6 AGENDA PLACEMENT: Public Hearing Business Session el Consent Item Dept. Report _S 0 s , Study Session Closed Session AA REQUIRED ACTION: - Ordinance - Resolution Minute Order - No-Action Required City. Manager - ,_APProval NOTE: Please list the agenda item exactly as you wish for it to appear on the published agenda. 7 H E C 1 T Y La,,Quinta !9S - 1Teu Catar Decidc December 10, 1992 Mr. Ed Carnes, Vice President EFP Corporation 48 -630 Monroe Street Indio, CA 92201 0F RLE CUPW SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 & PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) Dear Mr. Carnes: If your project is approved by the City Council on December 15, 1992, we will need you to comply with Condition #8 in order for our department to be able to file a Notice of Determination with the County of Riverside as specified by the California Environmental Quality Act. Our department has five days in which to file a Notice of Determination with the County of Riverside pursuant to Government Section 15075, and our filing will begin your 30 -day legal challenge period. We will need two checks made out to the County of Riverside in the amount of $1,250.00 and $25.00. The second check is a handling fee charged to process your Fish & Game Mitigation Fee. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Very tru1-f-"urs, NG & DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR I ro sdell A to Planner GT:ccs City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 • 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619 564 -5617 LTRGT.182 /CS �P.Gns F,,m„ ;,sIs H E C I T Y Olt RLE COPW La,,Quinta 1982 - 1Teu O 11 Decade December 4, 1992 Mr. Ed Carnes, Vice President EFP Corporation 48 -630 Monroe Street Indio, CA 92201 t SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 & PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) Dear Mr. Carnes: As you are aware, the City Council will examine your project on December 15, 1992. In order to assist your case, it might be beneficial if you have your project architect submit a colored front view elevation for the entire shopping center for the upcoming City Council meeting. Please submit the colored exhibit to our Department by December 14, 1992. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. ° Very tr yours, PLNIN DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ousdell fate Planner GT:ccs cc: Mr. Michael Hurst, Architect City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 ♦ 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 p(� /'. �+ Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619) 564 -5617 LTRGT • 1 O 0 / r Q Desicr 3 P=-nw may Primer Desian -3197 a 07x2 It 0 H E C I T Y 0 La Uinta 1962 - 1992 7e❑ earal PecaJe November 30, 1992 Mr. Ed Carnes, Vice President EFP Corporation 48 -630 Monroe Street Indio, CA 92201 SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 & PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) Dear Mr. Carnes: The Planning Commission recommended approval of your development request at their meeting of November 24, 1992. Your case will be heard by the City Council on Tuesday, December 15, 1992, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Very tru yours, JE Y H N PL NIN DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR CzEW Tr usdell Ac,jof to Planner GT:ccs cc: Mr. Michael Hurst, Architect City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 ♦ 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619) 564 -5617 b i RG i. 1 7 2 / C S Design d P:oc- c:,on. %lark Palmer Design, 67S -e'4 0;T C -. H E C I T Y ■0� ® or, a A Lauinta ,Q 1982 - 1992 Ten Carat Decade 0 r[.'7� rr((jjF 1r�I 1�L1y1j1yV November 9, 1992 ; Mr. Michael Hurst MHA Architecture and Planning P. O. Box 1362 Palm Desert, CA 92261 m "' SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92- 022 /PLOT PLAN 92 -490 Dear Mr. Hurst: The Design Review Board met on November 4, 1992, to discuss your Jefferson Square project on Highway 111. The Board recommended modification to your project beyond that which was included in the Staff report for the meeting. Your case was continued to November 18, 1992, based on their initial review. Please submit your revised concept plans to our Department by November 10, 1992 (15 copies). If your plans are in our office on this date, we will be able to insure that your case will be on the November 18, 1992, Design Review Board meeting. Should you have any questions concerning the above information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, JERRY AN PL G & DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 4ssOUSDE LL te Planner 0 GT:bja LTRGT.094 `a City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 • 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619) 564 -5617 Des,gn 8 Production: Mark Palmer Design, 619 -346 -0772 1, NIP an October 26, 1992 ,9`ez i,,QgCarat Mr. Michael Hurst MHA Architecture . PO Box 1362a q., Palm Desert, CA 92260' SUBJECT: PLOT PLAN 92 -490 & SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 Dear Mike: Thank you for attending our Staff meeting last week to, discuss your Jefferson Square project on Highway 111 at Jefferson Street. I thought the meeting was very productive, and as you are aware, we need to include the following features in your ^s plan for the upcoming Design Review Board meeting. 1. Dedication along Highway 111 at 172 -feet with only two points of access. The mid - section driveway (i.e 600 feet) is to be a right -turn only access driveway, and a second driveway should be developed at the westerly end of your site. The westerly driveway should be a shared access point with the property owner to the west. 2. Redesign your access driveways on Jefferson Street to account for the existing street medians. One driveway (the north one) should be.for full -turn movements and the other driveway can be a right -turn only driveway. 3. Redesign Building G to accommodate the new access driveways onto Jefferson Street. 4. The landscape setback on Highway 111 is 50 -feet and on Jefferson Street it is 20 -feet. 5. The two -way aisleways within the shopping center shall be a minimum width of 26 -feet. 6. Examine the redesign of the proposed freestanding pad buildings based on the above mentioned comments. 11p 7. Consider the redesign of the on -site parking lot to include angled parking spaces in front of the shopping center versus 90 degree parking. A map was handed out at the meeting. 8. No parking should be allowed along any on -site driveway All into the project. This will help eliminate traffic #ZT' congestion at these main access ways. City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 ♦ 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253. Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619) 564 -5617 LTRGT . 15 9 /CS Design 8 Production: Marc Palmer Design. WrCj D772 U is j �% C � C.:.. G ti- r A J 9. The pedestrian -arcade along the south side of the building should be minimum width of 10 -feet wide. 10. Please redesign the driveway in the front of Buildings D & E to reduce the traffic congestion and site visibility problems that are currently apparent with your September, 1992 submittal. 11. The bus turn -out and shelter shall be separated from any proposed off -site deceleration lane on Highway 111. . 12. Please provide a 32 -foot wide driveway access lane to the south of Building B which will connect the westernly most driveway with the proposed on -site parking lots and Building A will probably have to be relocated or merged with Building K. 13. Please try to provide proper east /west & north /south parking aisles which will help channel patrons in to and out of the site in a safe and efficient manner. We would appreciate 10 copies of the revised site plan for the November 4, 1992 Design Review Board meeting no later than 5:00 pm, October 28, 1992, or this item will be rescheduled to their December 2, 1992 meeting. If you would like to submit an alternative site plan which varies the setback along Highway 111, please include these additional copies for our review. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, JERRY N PL I G & DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR A i� Greg /Tr- ousdell Associate Planner GT:ccs LTRGT.159 /CS -2- STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRANSfuiTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 11, P.O. BOX 85408, SAN DIEGO, 921865408 (619) 688 -2503 October 15, 1992 Mr. Greg Trousdell City of La Quinta 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Specific Plan 92 -022 and Plot Plan 92 -490 Dear Mr. Trousdell: 0 C T 19 1997 GItY 4E :�: GLlr�7 -- PLAN NINO rEIAPT:" NT PETE WILSON. Gomm ► 11 -RIV-1 11 PM 33.1 We have reviewed Jefferson Square Specific Plan which proposes to construct a 280,000 square foot commercial shopping center on 23 acres located on the northwest comer of State Route 111 (SR -111) and Jefferson Street. Please refer to the enclosed letter submitted to our Planning department by the Caltrans engineer responsible for this portion of SR -111. It states the issues which we wish the City to address as part of our review of this proposed project. We also wish to add these additional comments: • This development should be phased and coordinated with proposed improvements to SR -111. This will avoid and minimize traffic congestion. • Caltrans supports the concept of "Fair Share Contributions" on the part of developers. Therefore, it is our recommendation that developers contribute their fair share towards transportation improvements for the Jefferson Street and SR -111 intersection. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any questions, please contact Famaz Badiei at (619) 688 -2503. Sincerely, JESUS M. GARCIA District Director �� . BILL DILLON, Chief Planning Studies Branch Enclosure ca CWest AKosup PHardin FYazdan/MDobbin FBadiei T/P File Aa— CaIifornia Memorandum To :WILLIAM DILLON, Chief Planning Studies Branch Attn: Farnaz Badier From : DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION District ll /Project Studies Bu s, Transportation and Housing Agency Date October 13, 1992 File No.:11 -RIV -111 Specific Plan 92 -022 Subject: SPECIFIC PLAN - CITY OF LA QUINTA - STATE ROUTE 111 (SR 111)/ JEFFERSON STREET We have reviewed the Jefferson Square Specific Plan which proposes to construct a 280,000 square foot commercial shopping center on 23 acres located on the northwest corner of SR 111 and Jefferson Street and have the following comments. On March 14, 1991, a Project Study Report /Project Report (PSR /PR) for improvements on SR 111, between Washington Street and Adams Street in the City of La Quinta, was approved by the District. A conceptual plan for upgrading the existing four -lane highway to a six -lane conventional highway through this area was included in that report. We have also had very preliminary discussions with the City of La Quinta concerning a second project which would extend this widening east to Dune Palms Road near the City of La Quinta limits. Improvements proposed as part of this project should be coordinated with the development of the proposed State Highway improvements and improvements to the existing local street system in order to minimize potential congestion and safety concerns. Since the Specific Plan does not address impacts to SR 111 which would be generated by the proposed development, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a detailed traffic study would be required to determine impacts and the appropriate mitigation. If it is determined that the mitigation for this project exceeds $300,000, a Project Study Report (PSR) would be required. In addition, land use decisions should not be made at this time which would limit alternatives or the scope of the PSR. The EIR for the development should include a section that incorporates a detailed Traffic Impact Analysis based on Year 2015 traffic. The Traffic Analysis should include the expected cumulative traffic impacts to SR 111. Any traffic impacts to SR 111 generated by the Jefferson Square development need to be addressed in the environmental document. Adequate noise mitigation should also be among the impacts addressed in the EIR. The mitigation should be based on 2015 traffic and the ultimate configuration of the highway. William Dillon October 13, 1992 Page 2 Since signals could be installed at any median break or unsignalized intersection once signal warrants are met, spacing of median breaks or unsignalized intersections should not be less than one quarter mile. Access to SR 111 should be limited to one access point per parcel in newly developing areas. Attempts should be made to limit access between intersections to one point (right turns only), midway between the adjacent intersections. In cases where there are multiple ownerships with potential for additional access points between intersections, we recommend that the local agencies use their land use authority to combine access points, where practical, as those parcels are developed. SR 111 is currently classified as a six -lane conventional highway in this area. Dedication of right of way may be necessary in order to meet the current Transportation Concept Report. A minimum right of way width of 172 feet would be required to accommodate the six -lane highway. The typical section for the six -lane highway assumes a raised median and does not include additional right of way which may be required for structures, additional grading, intersection channelization and drainage facilities. In the area of major intersections up to an additional 24 feet may be required to accommodate dual left -turn lanes and /or exclusive right -turn lanes. In areas of limited grading and existing development, the right of way width can be reduced to 150 feet. It should be noted that existing development adjacent to SR 111 may require the non - symmetrical widening of existing SR 111 in some areas to minimize the cost right of way acquisitions. It is recommended that right of way be reserved or dedicated for this future expansion. Close coordination with Caltrans is encouraged. If we can be of any additional help or if you have any questions regarding our comments, please contact Dan Martin at 688 -3211. ALLAN KOSUP Project Manager Project Studies ARK: sr bcc:KHBarnes /SFPfiles ARKosup /DJMartin GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE • PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370 (714) 657 -3183 October It 1992 Tos City of La Quinta Planning Division u 4 [ ) Attn: Greg Trousdel l O CT 02 1992 Re: Plot Plan 92 -490 P!_�I;�.'.1�a 4l1l;!dT With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced plot plan, the Fire Department requires that the following fire /life safety measures be provided in accordance with the La Quinta Municipal Code, Uniform Fire code and other recognized fire protection standards: ACCESS 1. The access road proposed along the northern boundary of the project shall be completed during Phase I to provide through circulation. 2. All future building expansions shall be subject to a site plan review /approval prior to issuance of building permits. 3. A minimum unobstructed width of 24 feet shall be maintained for all access roads, with certain areas designated as fire lanes. WATER 1. The water mains shall be capable of providing a fire flow of 5000 gpm and an actual fire flow available from any two adjacent hydrants shall be 2500 gpm for 2 hours duration at 20 psi. 2. A combination of on -site and off -site Super hydrants (6" x 4" x 2 -1/2" x 2 -1/2 ") shall be located not less than 25' or more than 165' from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. -I- PLANNING DIVISION 0 INDIO OFFICE 0 TEMECUI A OFFICE 79.733 Country Club Drive, Suite F, Indio, CA 92201 41002 County Center Drive, Suite 225, Temecula, CA 92390 (619) 342-8886 • FAX (619) 775.2072 ❑ RIVERSIDE OFFICE (714) 694.5070 • FAX (114) 694 -5076 3760 12th Stmt, Riverside, CA 92501 (714) 275 -4777 • FAX (714) 369 -7451 printed on recycled papa To: Planning Division October 1, 1992 Re: PP 92 -490 Page 2 3. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the Coachella Valley Water District prior to any combustible material being placed on the site. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant /developer shall furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review /approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location spacing, and the system shall be designed to meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed /approved by the local water company and a registered civil engineer with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department. GENERAL 1. Buildings shall be constructed so that the fire flow required for any individual building or unseparated area does not exceed 3500 gpm. 2. Final conditions and requirements with regards to type of construction, area separations, or built -in fire protection systems will be addressed when the building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff at (619) 863 -8886. Sincerely, RAY REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner By / vim• Tom Hutchison Fire Safety Specialist imp GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF To: City of La Quinta Planning Division Attn: Greg Trousdell Re: Specific Plan 92 -022 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE • PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370 (714) 657 -3183 -s= Oc tob�p ' 1092 OCT 0 2 1991 iii k ek :_, With respect to the review /approval of the above referenced document, the Fire Department has the following comments: The "Fire -In" (initial attack) fire stations are located within 3 to 4 miles, and have a response time of five to six minutes. The response times of emergency vehicles could be delayed during peak travel hours at intersections receiving a Level of Service of "E" or "F ". This project will contribute to the need for additional equipment, personnel, and /or facilities. Impacts associated with capitol improvements such as land, buildings, and equipment can be mitigated with appropriate budget action, and /or developer participation in a fire protection mitigation program or assessment district. The proposed project will have a cumulative adverse impact on the Department's ability to provide an acceptable level of service. These impacts are due to the increased number of emergency or public service calls generated by additional buildings and human population. The continuing costs necessary for an increased service level could be mitigated by an increase in the Fire Department's operating budget. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning Engineering Staff at (619) 863 -8886. Sincerely, RAY REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner By Tom Hutchison Fire Safety Specialist PLANNING DIVISION O INDIO OFFICE ❑ TEMECUTA OFFICE 79.733 Country Club Drive, Suite F, Indio, CA 92201 41002 County Center Drive, Suite 225, Temecula, CA 92390 (619) 3428886 • FAX (619) 7752072 C3 RIVERSIDE OFFICE (714) 694 -5070 • FAX (714) 694.5076 3760 12th Street, Riverside, CA 92501 (714) 275 -4777 • FAX (714) 369.7451 printed on recycled paper SunLine- Transit Agency- MEMBER AGENCIES Cathedral City Coachella Desert Hot Springs Indian Wells Indio La Quinta Palm Desert Palm Springs Rancho Mirage Riverside County Mr. Greg Trousdell, City of La Quinta P. O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Associate Planner October 6, 1992 RE: Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 Dear Greg: Thank you for allowing SunLine Transit Agency to review the plans for the Jefferson Square Commercial Center to be located on Hwy 111 and Jefferson. SunLine Transit Agency does currently operate Line 19 on 15 minute peak hour service past this site. This project will have a definite impact on our need to provide transit services to the site. Therefore, we are requesting the city's assistance in obtaining transit mitigation measures for this property. We note that the developer has placed a bus turnout on the south east corner of the property. This bus turnout is located in a deceleration lane for the first driveway into the property. SunLine Transit Agency has experimented with placing bus turnouts in deceleration lanes and finds that this is not the preferable solution. What generally happens in this case is that, as the bus stops, drivers turn in behind the bus, not realizing that the bus will be stopping, or they cut very close to the bus when the bus is trying to pull back out and many conflicts occur. There- fore, we would prefer to see a bus turnout that was separate from the deceleration lane. The location they have it in is an excellent one. We do note that there are four driveways off of Hwy 111 into the site. We believe that with a little bit of creativity, this could be reduced to three and the eastern most driveway could be eliminated. We also note that the current plans include a passenger waiting shelter. Both the turnout and the passenger waiting shelter will be needed. We have an additional concern in that a pedestrian path way does need to be provided from the bus stop into the main stores. 32.505 Harry Oliver Trail -Thousand Palms, CA 92276 • (619) 343 -3456 • FAX (619) 343.3845 A Public Agency Mr. Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner City of La Quinta October 6, 1992 Page 2 SunLine Transit Agency will be more than happy to work with the city and the developer to design a mutually acceptably stop. Please let me know how I can assist you further. Yours very truly, S INE AGENCY :TRANSIT _ -_ -� De ra Astin Director of Planning DA/ n cc: File y'ATEq , ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY TRICt` COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058 • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (619) 398 -2651 DIRECTORS OFFICERS TELLIS CODEKAS, PRESIDENT THOMAS E. LEVY, GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER RAYMOND R. RUMMONDS, VICE PRESIDENT BERNARDINE SUTTON, SECRETARY JDHN W. McFADDEN October Z 1992 OWENMCCOOK ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER , DOROTHY M. DE LAY REDWINE AND SHERRILL, ATTORNEYS THEODORE J. FISH Planning Commission City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 La Quinta, California. 92253 Gentlemen: File: 0163.1 Subject: Specific Plan 92 -022, Portion of the Northeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Meridian This area is protected from stormwater flows by the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel and may be considered safe from stormwater flows except in rare instances. This area is designated Zone X on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. There may be erosion of the banks of the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel during periods of unusual rainfall and discharge. The developer shall construct concrete slope protection on the bank of the stormwater channel to prevent erosion. Plans for concrete slope protection shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Water District for review. A portion of this area is adjacent to the right -of -way of the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel. We request that the developer be required to install suitable facilities to prohibit access to this right -of -way. The developer shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Coachella Valley Water District prior to any construction within the right -of -way of the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel. This includes, but is not limited to, surface improvements, drainage inlets, landscaping, and roadways. The district will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area in accordance with the current regulations of this district. These regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the subdivider and said fees and charges are subject to change. TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY Planning Commission -2- October 2, 1992 The district will need additional facilities to, provide for the orderly expansion of its domestic water system. These facilities may include wells, reservoirs and booster pumping stations. The developer will be required to provide land on which some of these facilities will be located. These sites shall be shown on the tract map as lots to be deeded to the district for such purpose. This area shall be annexed to Improvement District No. 55 of Coachella Valley Water District for sanitation service. Plans for grading, landscaping, and irrigation systems shall be submitted to Coachella Valley Water District for review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management. The area is within Improvement District No. 1 of the Coachella Valley Water District for irrigation water service. Water from the Coachella Canal is available to the area. The developer shall use this water for landscape irrigation. If you have any questions please call Bob Meleg, stormwater engineer, extension 264. Yours very truly, Tom Levy General Manager -Chief Engineer RF:kf /ed4 cc: Don Park Riverside County Department of Public Health 79 -733 Country Club Drive, Suite D. Bermuda Dunes, California 92201 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT RIVERSIDE COUNTY COLS BYRD, SHERIFF City of La Quinta Planning Department 78105 Calle Estado La Quinta CA 92253 Atten: Greg Trousdell Associate Planner Dear Mr. Trousdell. Sheriff 82 -695 DR. CARREON BLVD. • INDIO, CA 92201 • (619) 342 -8990 October 14, 1992 NJ 0 C T 1 5 1992 CITY OF 0. GUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT RE. Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 The Sheriff's Department would like to comment on a number of significant problems the plans show. The complex will have a significant impact on police services for the City of La Quinta. Traffic congestion, patrol requests and calls for service will impact the Department at least 25 %. This service will require an additional need for police manpower for La Quinta. There are some deficiencies on the design of the complex. These deficiencies are: Lighting must not exceed City of La Quinta's requirements to ensure customer safety as within La Quinta's standards. Angled parking is recommended for better field of vision while backing in to traffic. Theater drop -off should be moved away from entrance to shopping center so as not to block incoming traffic. Exits on to Highway 111 should be right hand turn only. Need more handicapped parking near main building D & E. Wider aisles for shipment drop -off out front of pads J,K,H,1 or loading docks to the rear of stores. This will allow safe passing of stopped vehicles. Page 2 EIR: Specific Plan 92 -022 & Plot Plan 92 -490 October 14, 1992 Main entrance traffic signal - Is there going to be one? Buildings should have large numerical addresses; must be consistent with east /west addressing. No suite numbers. Addresses must be at least eight inches tall on contrasting backgrounds. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the project from a law enforcement point of view. Sincerely, COIS BYRD, SHERIFF Ronald F. Dye, Capt in Indio Station Commander •M "S C6-MM l T- L o CAT SON 1I.11 -71 T E r J Cr Lo 5 U 2 S_ W E vim► ► Lk.- A L-S c) N �- - -D c �t,r" �1 � roc k �=e,/L �-�- $ ens i v S 1 �A IL H E C I T Y 0 l A La,,Qqinta 1982 - 11 Carat Decade October 15, 1992 u Mr. Ed Carnes, Vice President EFP Corporation 48 -630 Monroe Street Indio, CA 92201 SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) Dear Mr. Carnes: Your case(s) has been tentatively scheduled for review by our in -house Departments on October 23, 1992. The meeting will be held in the Council Chambers Conference Room at 9:30 A.M. Please contact me next week to confirm your.meeting schedule. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, JEId�RY HERMAN PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR J GI2EGrTROUSDELL Associate Planner GT:bja cc: Mr. Michael Hurst, Architect LTRGT.091 City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 • 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619) 564 -5617 Design & Production: Mark Palmer Design. 619- 346 -0772 sa. H E C I T Y A October 12, 1992 La inta - 1992 Ten Carat Decade r Mr. Ed Carnes, Vice President ,pv EFP Corporation 48 -630 Monroe Street Indio, CA 92201 U SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) Dear Mr. Carnes: Your property might be a historic archaeological site, however, we do not have any active information in our Department which would confirm or disprove this issue. We would like you to contact the University of Riverside (Archaeological Research Unit) to ascertain whether or not they have any known archaeological sites on your 23 acre site. Typically, they will prepare a one page letter (for a nominal fee) which will state whether or not the site has any recorded historical artifacts. Their address and phone is: ARU, University of California Riverside, CA 92521 (714) 787 -3885 The letter from UCR will be included in your environmental assessment which we are currently working on for your Planning Commission meeting in November. The City will typically defer the on -site archaeological report until after the case has had review by the Planning Commission and City Council. However, there are occasions when an on -site report has been required in advance. We will base our decision on whether to require an on -site report prior to the Planning Commission meeting on the forthcoming letter from UCR. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, Y AN P NG & DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR GR -TROUSDELL Associate Planner GT:bja City of La Quinta -Post Office Box 1504 ♦ 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 LTRGT.088 Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619) 564 -5617 Design 8 P,oducoon: Mark Palmer Design. 619346 -0772 'A g�, H E C I T Y A October 12, 1992 La inta p 1982 - 1992 Ten Carai Decade Mr. Ed Carnes, Vice President 'wv EFP Corporation 48 -630 Monroe Street Indio, CA 92201 C SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) Dear Mr. Carnes: Your property might be a historic archaeological site, however, we do not have any active information in our Department which would confirm or disprove this issue. We would like you to contact the University of Riverside (Archaeological Research Unit) to ascertain whether or not they have any known archaeological sites on your 23 acre site. Typically, they will prepare a one page letter (for a nominal fee) which will state whether or not the site has any recorded historical artifacts. Their address and phone is: ARU, University of California Riverside, CA 92521 (714) 787 -3885 The letter from UCR will be included in your environmental assessment which we are currently working on for your Planning Commission meeting in November. The City will typically defer the on -site archaeological report until after the case has had review by the Planning Commission and City Council. However, there are occasions when an on -site report has been required in advance. We will base our decision on whether to require an on -site report prior to the Planning Commission meeting on the forthcoming letter from UCR. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, . x J Y AN P Nei & DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR wti I r ✓J!/- A L / v „f OUSDELL Associate Planner GT:bja City of La Quinta 1 Post Office Box 1504 • 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 LTRGT.088 Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619) 564 -5617 Design 8 Proaucuon. Mark Palmer Desgn. 619 -346 -0772 9 r � 78-106 CALLE ESTADO — LA OUINTA. CALIFORNIA. 92263 . 18191 664 -2248 FAX (619) 664 -6617 FROM: PLANNING i DEVELOPMENT DIVISION DATE: q - 20.- gz ✓City Manager * Waste Management rinci al 9 P ✓Public Works /Engineering _ General Telephone Planner(s-) :/Fire Marshal * Palmer Cable Vision Agiociate z, Building i Safety �S"unline Transit `,Planner(s) * Chamber of Commerce 76-ltrans (District II) C 11 D _assistant Agricultural Commission P1 ner Imperial Irrigation City of Indian Wells anning southern California Gas ✓pity of Indio Director * Desert Sands School Dist. SUS Postal Service Coachella Valley School Dist. Riverside County: *-V Archaeological Society Planning Department Property Environmental Health Owner's Association �1`ieriff's Department * Parks Dept. * Reduced Site Plan LA QUINTA CASE NO(S) : - SpK�?-t,l-, c, q;2 - 62z 1 ?U7 tc,9-,.a '7,2-4170 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: aif PROJECT LOCATION: A/A/ Sim -0 T The City of La Quinta Development Review Committee is conducting an initial environmental study pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the above referenced project(s). Attached is the information submitted by the project proponent. Your comments are requested with respect to: 1. Physical impacts the project presents on public resources, facilities, and /or services; 2. Recommended conditions: a) that you or your agency believe would miti- gate any potential adverse effects; b) or should apply to the project design; c) or improvements to satisfy other regulations and concerns which your agency is responsible; and 3. If you find that the identified impacts will have significant adverse effects on the environment which cannot be avoided through conditions, please recommend the scope and focus of additional study(ies) which may be helpful. Please send your response by to - 12 - 92 and return the C mans /plans if not needed for your files. You are invited to attend the DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE meeting at La Quinta City Hall scheduled for: Date: io BE Time: Contact Persons Greg Trousdell Title: Assoc. Planner Comments made : Title: Date: %� %;7- Phone: Agency /Division , s,. H E C I T Y ■& an A M uinta 1982 - 1992 Carat Decade August 31, 1992 Mr Ed Carnes, Vice President EFP Corporation 48 -630 Monroe Street Indio, CA 92201 N P5 1110, go� SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 92 -022 AND PLOT PLAN 92 -490 (JEFFERSON SQUARE) Dear Mr. Carnes: Thank you for submitting your preliminary application(s) to our attention on August 21, 1992. The following items are needed to complete your application. 1. Submit 14 copies of your specific plan document. 2. A minimum number of 25 copies of the large exhibits which shall include the site planning, landscape plan, building elevations, and any other exhibits as required by the plot plan application form. a 3. A colored exhibit (unfolded) of the building elevations and a sample materials board. 4. Update and submit 25 copies of the landscape plan and describe the size and number of the plant material to be installed. The plan should distinguish the difference been palms and other types of trees and shrubs. 5. Elevation drawings for each side of each proposed building are required in order for the plot plan application to be complete. The drawings should be drawn to scale and drawn at a scale of 1/4" to 1' or something close to this scale. An arcade detail which defines the pedestrian areas along the store -front shopping area would be helpful. It can be a typical detail but it should show column details, materials and actual widths from the parking lot curb to the front building wall. We can provide examples of this requirement if it would be of benefit to your project designer. A building cross - section detail would also be helpful. 6. Please return the City documents which were loaned to Mr. Michael Hurst and Mr. Ken Phillips two weeks ago. City of La Quinta 'Vr Post Office Box 1504 ♦ 78 -105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 LTRGT.079 Phone (619) 564 -2246, Fax (619) 564 -5617 Design 8 Productions Mark Palmer Desigc. 919- 346 -C -2 Once we receive these items, the application is complete, we will schedule your case for review with the inter - department staff and the Design Review Board. We anticipate these meetings will be held in October. Should you have any questions concerning the above information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, JEAN P NG &DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 2121UOSDELL Associate Planner GT: bja cc: Michael Hurst, Architect LTRGT.079 h c� rti1p I r., a ----------- dot VA tc , "' i V ICi2%c `i5 CD ►l Of ` E I ¢�1-s ! Tl ;✓ ate_ �� I� �� al',rlrn � NORTH CASE N0 _ - - - -- - Jefferson Square Proposed Access Plan for Jefferson Street SCALE - -. 1" = ±100' (approx.) Jefferson Square Property c EX. 00' f f ti I f'I'/ do i 2zo.96 2. JOAc. : _ ice. ifv.of' ®res 1� 6786 4 • • i O /Att Highway 111 I _ t•„ Hi g way_? Vacant Circle K Center CASE MAP CASE W. Plot Plan 92 -490 NORTH and Specific Plan 92 -022 Existing c�p�NE� i4 Land Use �• 0 39 6/6� 0R ►��p1£F 51 ,.• �o Q �0 ��G Iltl Y O • CV Stormwater Channel , _,✓ 10 , . . i B . , • • v1s�a is ©.. O . �.�•�' � t , r O �i X0.29 � (�� R +44 • -Aet� w OI w _ �o IJ.JJ O _ r qs /B90 /ND /O Indian Jefferson Square Property c EX. 00' f f ti I f'I'/ do i 2zo.96 2. JOAc. : _ ice. ifv.of' ®res 1� 6786 4 • • i O /Att Highway 111 I _ t•„ Hi g way_? Vacant Circle K Center CASE MAP CASE W. Plot Plan 92 -490 NORTH and Specific Plan 92 -022 Existing Land Use Map SCALE : nts } 1-0 L CA- IrA �,. - - O`�' CPSE�� w. _ = - CD r JAN i 0 199 CITY OF LA QUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT EXHIBIT ...... _,__, .. �! i�+ i ..� ti.. r ilia . �F Energy Efficient 3-0 .-"Lwn JL.�, It- � :n d 5 L by K-1 For any skylighting, sloped glazing, or glazed structure application on any type of building! . The System transmits dif- fused daylight, to eliminate lighting energy usage in the daytime. It also controls solar heat transmission to allow maxi- mum heat pin for passive solar applications, or as little as 10% compared to glass to save air conditioning costs. And, it insu- lates up to 86% more efficiently than single glazing. There just isn't any other skylight system that can compare! With our exclusive pret:' - engineered aluminum struc- tural system we can provide clearspan skyroofs designed; engineered, manufactured, delivered, and installed com- plete - under only one contrac4 one responsibility! For maximum perform- ance, from Z x 2! square.-sky- fights, through shed, ridge, pyramid, segmented dome, Kalcurve.' or any geometric shape, on your structure or complete with ours (100' + spans) — Kalwall/ Structures Unlimited, Inc.! FLEXCON Spencer, MA Irvin A. Regent & Assoc., Inc., Architects OVER 37 YEARS EXPERIENCE P ' Ro SINGLE SOURCE RESPONSIB11 4 V M. UTWI -n- IRMO ,6, , f.. MM2 g .,gS MAKES THE STRUCTURea jNgMI TED SYSTEM THE ULTIMATE PeoORMER - Kalwall insulated, translu =`' Ott sandwich panels. No other material emulates thermally, dramatically cuts solar heat build-up, and also transmits softly '<< diffused natural daylight! NEW .t F y f �terior : ace of all standard panels has ftfym.; LENT GLASS WEATHERING '90N BARRIER built.in , your guarantee; »_ 'dlong-term "performance! :ter FICATION SUMMARY: _ ' tre- Rigid frames of 6061T6 and /or 6005 = ainum box beams. Corrosion resistant I finish in a variety of colors. _ Clear spans to 100 feet. Consult factory Panels 23/4 ".thick comprised of 12"x24" I-beam grid core, in a shoji pattern, F fiberglass faces, with special weathering tion. Roof is engineered to meet local live wind leading building conditions. :Translucent insulated panels similar fconstructiom Optional tempered insu- z., ,, glass. f System Overlap and /or T batten. Fasteners 3 3. Wind @ 2 m.p.h.;12 "x24" Grid; 23/4" Panel; Perime- A ASTM E -84 tunnel tests are available to meet rainless steel. Corrosion resistant finished t ter Alu minum excluded. Expressed as BTU /hr.- l local building codes. Kalwall is listed by: I.C. B.O. sq.-degree F `lean TemperaturL" + 30'F for .24, # #PFC 1705; SSBCC #8722; MEA 374- 85 -ivt; and Wdation:.24 ' ?U" Factors standard for 23/4" . . .19, .15; +7'F for .40. s several state and local areas. 0�'— .10,.15,.19,.40,and.05optional. 4 4. At0' incidenceangle .Numbersforvarious r eireferenceismadeto�iretests ,tl�enumerical 491allation: Delivered and erected b Struc- p panels are calculated based on tests. r ratinS e sUnlimitedpersonneL C Check with Technical Services Department for y an other material under actual reconditions. �tither options — consult factory. f further clarification. Since this table is of a very �SIGN . technical nature, please consult your heating B Bond Strength: The adhesive shall be heatand . iND TEST DATA a proper p pressure resin type engineered for structural ?at& Light Transmission: Listed below are the i interpretation. s sandwich panel use and shall pass rigorous rbhttransmissions, shading coefficients, and I Impact: The exterior will repel a 31/ "diameter t testing requirements specified by the Interna- of common face combinations of - steel ball, 6.3716s., dropped from 95 (60 ft. -lbs t Criteria for Sandwich Panel Adhesive.' 'a0able. Weath b"I't • Tlie color of th f 11 th" k f v vt" h h 11 b 750 PSI 1 r k BICESHEET %LIGHT SHADING OOt191NAT1ONS+ TRANSMISSIONS= COEFFlCIENT4 024 0.19 .10&.15 0.40 024 0.19 .106.15 OA v� tr v^ v tr v' v� :4INTERIOR I4 5 3 0.45 0.32 0.12 0.06 17 6 4 0.47 0.33 0.12 0.06 17 10 6 0.41 0.18 0.11 0.06 1 20 12 1 8 0.62 0.27 0.13 0.06 u 1c ness o n mums trengt s a a tense e the exterior face :hall not change more than 3.0. strength by ASTM C -297 after two exposures to Units (Delta E by ASTM D- 2244), determined by six cvcles each of severe aging conditions pre - an average of three white samples after at least 60 scribed by ASTM D -1037; and 500 PSI shear months of outdoor exposure in South Florida at strength average of ASTM D -1002 after five 7' facing South without protective coating or different exposure conditions. film. Fire Tests: Although some Kalwall panels con- tain combustible binder resins (ignition tempera- ndard ture greater than S00'17), they will withstand a 1200'F flame for :our hours with no flame pene- Since Kalwall is a composite sandwich, various mall . U — .41.. Solar Energy Transmis- tration. Kalwall panels pass the Class'A" Burn- combinations are possible, and test data should ,ion 75%. Light transmission 74 %. ing Brand Test (A�-TNI E -108). A special be interpreted from this point of view. Consult ?�y other combinations available. configuration of Kalwall is a U.L. listed Class A Technical Services Department for clarification *roximate values by ASTM E -972, Transmis- Roof system. Interior faces are 1 in. or less Burn on your specific job requirements. F� non values over 30 percent not recommended for Extent, by AST%I D -635. Several categories of I: r4ost applications. interior flame- spread /smoke developed by u 1c ness o n mums trengt s a a tense e the exterior face :hall not change more than 3.0. strength by ASTM C -297 after two exposures to Units (Delta E by ASTM D- 2244), determined by six cvcles each of severe aging conditions pre - an average of three white samples after at least 60 scribed by ASTM D -1037; and 500 PSI shear months of outdoor exposure in South Florida at strength average of ASTM D -1002 after five 7' facing South without protective coating or different exposure conditions. film. Fire Tests: Although some Kalwall panels con- tain combustible binder resins (ignition tempera- ndard ture greater than S00'17), they will withstand a 1200'F flame for :our hours with no flame pene- Since Kalwall is a composite sandwich, various mall . U — .41.. Solar Energy Transmis- tration. Kalwall panels pass the Class'A" Burn- combinations are possible, and test data should ,ion 75%. Light transmission 74 %. ing Brand Test (A�-TNI E -108). A special be interpreted from this point of view. Consult ?�y other combinations available. configuration of Kalwall is a U.L. listed Class A Technical Services Department for clarification *roximate values by ASTM E -972, Transmis- Roof system. Interior faces are 1 in. or less Burn on your specific job requirements. F� non values over 30 percent not recommended for Extent, by AST%I D -635. Several categories of I: r4ost applications. interior flame- spread /smoke developed by ,. f .� f t = i J }` .. s. 1. .. - � ��. _ ' �� .. � f f t }` .. s. .. 1 �� 1 ��. c© �. ZP JAN 1 ® 1993 Cliiiti't -- - -- -- - — PLANNING pA T@4FF-,Vr room ow9w� _ -- 1 EXHIBIT ,...... - - V - - h -- _- - - - CASE NO - - - - - �. '72 ._ ::. ,� . � '. • i ` .` .�.,� -� -- �:_t�� _ ._.______ .. �--,� -te r - -- �� -� �� f' �► __. .:at� �� r� Energy Effide ,, : _,. -r> : T1 hl -and s ; 'T For any skylighting, sloped j glazing, or glazed structure t application on any type of .j . building! The System transmits dif- sed daylight, to eliminate ghting energy usage in the daytime. It also controls solar heat transmission to allow maxi- mum heat gain for passive solar applications, or as little as 10% compared to glass to save air conditioning costs. And, it insu- lates up to 86% more efficiently than single glazing. There just isn't any other skylight system that can . r +. compare! With our exclusive pre= — engineered aluminum struc- tural system, we can provide i clearspan skyroofs designed; engineered, manufactured, j delivered, and installed com - under only one contract, plete one responsibility! �! For maximum perform - ance, from 2` x 2! square -sky- lights, through shed, ridge, pyramid, segmented dome, Kalcurve7 or any geometric shape, on your structure or complete with ours (100` + spans) - Kalwall/ Structures Unlimited, Inc.! FLEXCON Spencer, MA Irzoin A. Regent & Assoc., Inc., j Architects } r OVER 37 YEARS EXPERIENCE SINGLE SOURCE RESPON., / olk ts-4 ��M&H ,,..,.�; •lass >'':.�.i's� ° : "�s� °;'�; tiny' outstan(4,` • Lowest constructiono • Passive solar capabilgi ` • Rugged, vet lightW4 • Glare -f; e°, diffused, no direct sun "hot • Wide range of desiV possibilities; • Optional screened opening roof; • Virtually Mal ntena ! • Plants thrive; • Engineered for local Ll • CORRC'5I0N RFS .rte; . IWO Tf•IIS MAKES THE STRUCTURES �N IMITED SYSTEM THE ULTIMATE PWORMER — Kalwall insulated, translir cent sandwich panels. No other material •rt insulates thermally, dramatically cuts solar peatbuild -up and also transmits softly-.., :diffused natural daylight! NEW ..: the�� r, *.r. :e%kior face of all standard panels has a. `pEgMl: 'LENT GLASS WEATHERING ERO- 9pN BARRIER built.in . your guarantee &long term performance! i Y CIFICATION SUMMARY: _ :Rigid frames of 6061 -T6 and /or 6005- aluminum box beams. Corrosion resistant Y.4;6 finish in a variety of colors. _ Clear spans to 100 feet. Consult factory .t ?' ✓ip 3 Vii... �s l Y. N Y. �ISTS_ M I t 'Panels 23/4 "'thick comprised of 12 "x24" x: ^: ture greater than S00 °F), they will withstand a :,:- .. um I -beam grid core, in a shoji pattern, 1200 °F flame for four hours with no flame pene- Since Kalwall is a composite sandwich, various fiberglass faces, with special weathering -� combinations are possible, and test data should be interpreted from this of view Consult r>ritiilation. Roof is engineered to meet local live ivi special point wtnd loading building conditions.' configuration of Kalwall is a U.L. listed Class A Technical Services Department for clarification :Translucent insulated panels similar on your specific job requirements. >' fconstruction. Optional tempered insu- j •' "F'�rJi�i,��j '� YS 3. Wind @ 2 m.p.h.;12 "x24" Grid; 23/4" Panel; Perime- t1Y�"i''1•iY,.'�!:.�`'..:•:�r.; �Cless steel. Corrosion resistant finished Sill local building codes. Kalwall is listed by: I.C.B.O. )� � sq.-degree F. `lean Temperature: + 30 °F for .24, #PFC 1705; SSBCC #8722, MEA 374 -85 -M; and a4lation:.24 'V" Factors standard for 23/4" .19, .15; +7 °F for .40. �.: � :q . zre.,;L;� Mart j•r a': ;:.t,' ; '?'3 . Vii... �s l Y. N Y. �ISTS_ M I t 'Panels 23/4 "'thick comprised of 12 "x24" x: ^: ture greater than S00 °F), they will withstand a :,:- .. um I -beam grid core, in a shoji pattern, 1200 °F flame for four hours with no flame pene- Since Kalwall is a composite sandwich, various fiberglass faces, with special weathering -� combinations are possible, and test data should be interpreted from this of view Consult r>ritiilation. Roof is engineered to meet local live ivi special point wtnd loading building conditions.' configuration of Kalwall is a U.L. listed Class A Technical Services Department for clarification :Translucent insulated panels similar on your specific job requirements. >' fconstruction. Optional tempered insu- 'glass. = . Mystem: Overlap and /or 2" batten. Fasteners 3. Wind @ 2 m.p.h.;12 "x24" Grid; 23/4" Panel; Perime- ASTM E -84 tunnel tests are available to meet �Cless steel. Corrosion resistant finished ter Aluminum excluded. Expressed as BTU /hr.- local building codes. Kalwall is listed by: I.C.B.O. )� � sq.-degree F. `lean Temperature: + 30 °F for .24, #PFC 1705; SSBCC #8722, MEA 374 -85 -M; and a4lation:.24 'V" Factors standard for 23/4" .19, .15; +7 °F for .40. several state and local areas. .40, and .05 optional. 4. At 0° incidence angle. Numbers for various Whenever reference is made to fire tests, the numerical ' astallation: Delivered and erected by Struc- '1kcLhilimitedpersonneL panels are calculated based on tests. p Check with Technical Services Departmentfor . rating is not intended to reflect hazards presented by this or an other material under actual reconditions. y fl 91otheroptions— consult factory. {�`i.. further clarification. Since this table is of a very technical nature, please consult your heating Bond Strength: The adhesive shall be heat and FSIGN . uND TEST DATA and ventilation engineer for proper pressure resin type engineered for structural r leaf& Light Transmission: Listed below are the interpretation. sandwich panel use and shall pass rigorous transmissions, shading coefficients, and Impact: The exterior will repel a 3' /2" diameter testing requirements specified by the Interna- �factors of common face combinations of �lwall steel ball, 6.37 lbs., dropped from 95' (60 ft. -lbs tional Conference Building Officials 'Acceptance Structural Roof Panels. Many others impact). S.PI. Method B. Criteria for Sandwich Panel Adhesive.' 'ran7able. Weatherabilit • The color of the full th k f M' ; m stren th shall be 750 PSI tensile COH 4a NY'k Gr>ml IACESHEET %LIGHT SHADING BINA110NSY TRANSMISSIONS2 COEFFICIENT4 INTERIOR 0.40 024 0.19 .108.15 0.40 024 0.19 .10&.15 COLOR T73 'v V 'v' V 'U' V 'v' u We 25 14 5 3 0.45 0.32 0.12 0.08 'While 29 17 8 4 0.47 0.33 0.12 0.08 'Nhite 30 17 10 8 0.41 0.18 0.11 0.08 venire w za 1z a o.a o.z7 0.13 o.oe J . a Hess o unu u g the exterior face shall not change more than 3.0. strength by ASTM C -297 after two exposures to Units (Delta E by AST�I D- 2244), determined by six cycles each of severe aging conditions pre - an average of three white samples after at least 60 scribed by ASTM D -1037; and 500 PSI shear months of outdoor exposure in South Florida at strength average of ASTM D -1002 after five 7° facing South without protective coating or different exposure conditions. film. Fire Tests: Although some Kalwall panels con- tain combustible binder resins (ignition tempera- Nndard ture greater than S00 °F), they will withstand a +all 1200 °F flame for four hours with no flame pene- Since Kalwall is a composite sandwich, various • .. U — .41... Solar Energy Tr- �75 %. Light transmission 74 %. tration. Kalwall panels pass the Class'A" Burn- ing Brand Test (AS E -108). A combinations are possible, and test data should be interpreted from this of view Consult Many ivi special point other combinations available. ZAPproximate configuration of Kalwall is a U.L. listed Class A Technical Services Department for clarification values by ASTM E -972, Transmis- Roof system. Interior faces are 1 in. or less Burn ' �n values over 30 percent not recommended for Extent, by AST1%I D -635. Several categories of on your specific job requirements. 'Rost applications. interior flame- spread /smoke developed by J . a Hess o unu u g the exterior face shall not change more than 3.0. strength by ASTM C -297 after two exposures to Units (Delta E by AST�I D- 2244), determined by six cycles each of severe aging conditions pre - an average of three white samples after at least 60 scribed by ASTM D -1037; and 500 PSI shear months of outdoor exposure in South Florida at strength average of ASTM D -1002 after five 7° facing South without protective coating or different exposure conditions. film. Fire Tests: Although some Kalwall panels con- tain combustible binder resins (ignition tempera- Nndard ture greater than S00 °F), they will withstand a +all 1200 °F flame for four hours with no flame pene- Since Kalwall is a composite sandwich, various • .. U — .41... Solar Energy Tr- �75 %. Light transmission 74 %. tration. Kalwall panels pass the Class'A" Burn- ing Brand Test (AS E -108). A combinations are possible, and test data should be interpreted from this of view Consult Many ivi special point other combinations available. ZAPproximate configuration of Kalwall is a U.L. listed Class A Technical Services Department for clarification values by ASTM E -972, Transmis- Roof system. Interior faces are 1 in. or less Burn ' �n values over 30 percent not recommended for Extent, by AST1%I D -635. Several categories of on your specific job requirements. 'Rost applications. interior flame- spread /smoke developed by �.ii::,;��fi '''',.•.:7yr�':'. -.:Yx as le ti 41- ....... ........ 1111111111�`,,.. .......... .......................... It IVA% _A1 7 -T F:79 7-1 t�4 f P/ ZI It ! I i `j � � s I I � � �.ti►I:� .,o �l � - -j "" � •,t �, _ , ��=' �,..:;�'� �tjy,� ./ l � f ! j 1.,�' • - *r-- •r --f-- I -- -'-t � �: F , �,.•,' . -•.,�; :�� . . �i •, I !1 ;; � � ^j,�_�.•.� -I t" 1 r� C �'�'r�' `�� ICP' ,; CLG;E jc, )� -D h � '•• � �► � �j j , i � i I �. 1. }-_-!• , •� 1, %�''t I �w•I\��` ' ' `� v � a- '�a •-$ � {� � r. �.y ^".i �" °� Ot. F-T ✓ mg TT41 or 000 'ZIP C) CW Ilk v/,10 oo_ 7 ' , f in Av"Ar rA LJ icy ,Z PtI 4 I t 111 C, -7 C'11 Y 0 C I cg tt- �u'. to 7F -rj r-F-� Ou 14 rz- 11Z ED .......... 7 11 a ,s Lo J I too Iry X Zoo- 7 f:;. - R. MMf�. L 47' Af�'-e�6 r "00, • q PA x OR IA cl qWIA 01, Ll I F Ll iAfltrEtt .t t !} VA dIA a o A r f. ? WAY U-1 HITY m RL Q, Air lia 4WO A% C(UL LA INTA r 7 -TW U. U) LL 4 �"�4 4" ej ED, By CI COUN C IL TY t >A' t o6- <; . . . . . . . . . . . s1 s ................ 7, 4 Yl �Ll i. I too Iry X Zoo- 7 f:;. - R. MMf�. L 47' Af�'-e�6 r "00, • q PA x OR IA cl qWIA 01, Ll I F Ll iAfltrEtt .t t !} VA dIA a o A r f. ? WAY U-1 HITY m RL Q, Air lia 4WO A% C(UL LA INTA r 7 -TW U. U) LL 4 �"�4 4" ej ED, By CI COUN C IL TY t >A' t o6- <; . . . . . . . . . . . s1 s ................ 7, 4 Yl �Ll Ar, 4� P e- i-A TD_ 4_1 ;4v ell R.I AI Nye, f I Ir eJ 1 ru, 1110 YA- MRAI" _3 t I 1., 7 kq- 0., J -AiT 7 �l � . 01 q.020 A JV T� lie F -,V i ", I, I I , I i . A 7-- (j,1vv WrIlM At,j � I .. ',4 ;zw_ �R 4r_1 !97, 7ZA 100 M, :5 `7 ell k, 1/4 q ei� 1;7% 7� IT: 1:11161. , VVI, W. vi Tot, AN, ts 1; 7, 'M f4 4 CF Y 4.1 I k Jj 1 [4 -4 '10 oe, �r7 z w �1;1� 1,117 1 tit �g 1 IM rr 9 It T7 A 17 T__ rX i7r-W7 ;M1 '77 �t nw jZ 777, 77 1'�, M RW 4" ViV A- t �A' ni V�_ NJ Wit— wi401_ poo LA 4,t J 2 R FP- -Ar— Ir 4-- \� _4?, 4 i P 1, i, f J-77 z All vJ\\ 06 bffi Y'l 0 .s QA 1J Vt t; a - t �. s+wm�nas ` l ) t� � � F A 1. 1 it'. J !3 4 � � {!' �.'.' �, v+ ryeu�+! �?"^'"' "�.w�.,.vc�.�- Y•.' r'• M+ K+,"' f"-, r" y�"" r^ ",xn7""'f" y�•,�.F "^ "^'l�Mfi';'°5F"rvwr Ct, C t .F -p^3x a. 1 y" t �.�!y�w''- hr t' l C P ; ' 1 .,y�fj r ' f i �.. '..areiwmsr rce.•c= xursrJr ' rtb `(F k' 'Y �.o c 4 A � i IT A. i I 1 rr s: ` 1, 1 .A .ts t .:A 0 .s QA 1J Vt t; a 4' l 4 ' f i 0 .s QA 1J Vt t; 'LL 71' , 7Z77- '74 1 7 1, 4-7 ilk eat Fj F r I t7 rr +4 Acc.-o:H-nss NA ffff is QlA 7 mo .41 qj 14 s. N 7 ',)oASO 0', Al t� ell, V1,13 A 4. 5x -4 - . . . . . . . . . . 20 QTT- fin{ - f .. i i I i 4,. p" t� 1 4 1 S 1 ' _ '4h t y Y ! i UP !f, f - C � 1 1 _... ._ . , .. �; � � .. !.... .............- ..: <:. r IM...�+i.�'r. f ^x......w+.rw �r r..•. r Maa...+WV4nr.+M + ww._+• :r.s�' �, FM3x, u-r (. r `! +`!T •''''.' �.Y r wn..•,•' r.., w. v+ n' rrr. aa+ uerw.. uw, n. r.. rweu. Tns. rr .+u- ,�a..w�ra,...+r..www,....+- ,u.��.w.r rr�wr.+ M..+ .M+.u�..wa +ww— +:- Y+++w.+.4•a -s, a+•«/ fy' x. r t a• , f 03 s i I '- +f rf � t xY y � 4 'r d "✓d f ! �_� � �'z�' x'x; 1 f � 4 a• , f 03 - - 41mammm EZ ITTI 000 I r` el* I� rte- 1. •4 F ji• 5. 7. lu In Ile Iv IIIIILU IIII44, IIIIIe, IIIIIIIIIIIIII • jx • • ii • 4rY Q, i 9 0 0 y cis+ c�u�c�a -y � 19g•. k 1 "Y� mv, • pp IDA