Loading...
PP 1993-495 (2)t T4,ht 78 -095 CALLE TAMPICO — LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 APPLICATION FOR APPEAL OF FINDINGS OR CONDITIONS Appellant's Name SIMON PLAZA, INC. Date 5 -27 -94 Mailing Address 78 -61.1 Hwy. 111 Box La Quinta, CA 92253 Phone: (619)346 -2345 RE: Case No. Plot Plan 93 -495 Type of Appeal: Conditional Use Permit Outdoor Advertising Variance Consistency with General Plan Change of Zone Environmental Assessment Public Use Permit Setback Adjustments Surface Mining & Temporary Use Permit Reclamation Permit X Plot Plan Please state basis for appeal and include any supportive evidence. If applicable, indicate the number of the'specific condition which is being protested. Please see attached. Use additional sheets if necessai FORM-003/CS ire . Simon, Sr., President - MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 r <,. 1 -. �- >�; r <,. 1 Case No. Plot Plan 93 -495 Simon Plaza, Inc. This appeal from the Planning Commission action extending Plot Plan 93 -495 for one year deals with several of the conditions which were modified from the conditions previously approved by the City Council in 1993. Condition 38: This condition has been modified to require the applicant to improve Washington Street from the centerline to the property line. The previous Condition 39, which has been deleted, required that the applicant reimburse the City for the cost of all improvements from the current curbline to the east. Condition 39: This condition represented a compromise between the City and the applicant and should not be modified. The current owners of the property have already dedicated right -of -way and installed the street improvements on Washington Street at the time the property was originally developed. The City may not now legally require us to tear those improvements out, dedicate additional property and then reinstall the street and other improvements. It is our position that if the City wants to widen Washington, it must buy the right -of -way and pay for the improvements. However, last year we agreed to compromise our position and accepted Condition 39. We cannot accept Condition 38 because it, along with several of the other conditions, makes the project financially infeasible. Condition 40: This condition has been modified to require that this project pay the entire cost of modifying the Washington/ Highway 111 intersection and traffic signals. Previously, this condition provided that we would reimburse the City 5% of the cost. Our position with respect to. this condition is the same as our position with respect to Condition 38. We already paid for the intersection and the traffic signal when we subdivided the property in 1982. The City may not legally require us to do it again. Finally, this condition will make the project financially infeasible. Condition 43: This condition has been modified to require us to pay 50% of the cost of medians on Washington and Highway 111. Previously, the condition was that we pay 50% of the cost of the Highway 111 median only. We may not legally be required to pay for this improvement as indicated above. Condition 44: This condition has been modified to require that we post security with the City to guarantee that we install the improvements listed above. The previous condition provided that we would post security to reimburse the City for our share of the costs. It is our understanding that the City will be doing the work. We have no objection to posting the security, but it should be for the cost of reimbursing the City, and then, only for the costs of the improvements we have agreed to. PTS48128:APPEAL Plot Plan 93 -495 — 2 — ' a � Condition 48: When we agreed to this condition last year, we were told that the City intended to build a storm drain from the intersection to the Whitewater Channel, and that we could contribute a fair share toward it. We have previously submitted a hydrology report to the City which indicates that our property, after development, would contribute only 4% of the water which causes the problem. Accumulation of water at the intersection is a problem which currently exists, and we are not responsible for it. Furthermore, we are not responsible for water that falls offsite to the center of Highway 111 and Washington Street. We will provide for onsite retention, or will pay a fair share of the cost, but we cannot pay for it all. Finally, we would respectfully request that the City Council consider modifying Condition 2 and give us two (2) years to use the plot plan. This project is complicated and expensive. For the past two years we have worked long and hard to find financing in a most difficult financial market. Last year, we finally put our financing in place, just as our plot plan approval needed to be extended. As you know, you reduced the size of the project by over 40,000 square feet, and we lost our financing. This year, again, we have finally found a financing source, but again face the prospect of the conditions changing which would result in losing our commitment. In view of the foregoing, we would like to have you consider giving us two years to put this project together. Thank you for your consideration of our request. SIMON PLAZA, INC. 'J. Simon, Sr., President PTS48128:APPEAL Plot Plan 93 -495 — 3 — MAY -25 -1994 1637 FROM SANBORN WEBB TO 5643489 P.02/09 r' NEIM� 0 11H 5AN80It:ti/ WF.58 INC. Cwrr Enginr•+•z: • 1. ,:� :vrvrtYD•c September 27, 1941 91 -224 Mr. Fred Simon Simon Motors P.O. Box 1461 La Qulnta, Ca. 922253 -1461 Bear Fred: Attached is a copy of the hydrology study prepared for the Simon Plaza site. We have submitted two copies of the report to Jerzy Herman at the City. The Simon Plaza is a small part (5* Ac.) of the total drainage area (150 ±Ac). There amently exists a sump condition along Washmgton Street from Highway 111 southerly from the Simon Plaza site appro;dt ately 15001 feet. This condition should be viewed as a regional dxahtage concern since it is a result zinc -off from the development and mountains wWcb lie to the west as well as the undeveloped land southerly and easterly of the Simon site. None of the developed parcels were designed to retain any runoff. ,A, conservative estimate of the water sited tributary to the Washington Street sump is 150± acres, Based upon the amount of runoff generated by the Simon Plaza site as it relates to the over all area we estimate that the Simon Plaza site will contribute No of the total runoff. We would recommend that Simon Plaza make a commitment to participate in the amount of 2% for the cost of the installation of a regional storm drain. With the pending development in the areas and the ongoing sump problem we feel the City should commence with the design and construction of a suitable storm drain system If you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, S RN BBy INC. inn Sa nbbo�rnn JL5:im Encl. P:NDA TA,94DATA,91 WO\,=4XM SM 255 N. EI Cieio Road • Suite 315 • Palm Springs, California 9 ?_262 • (619) 325 -2245 • (619) 325 -9426 0 FAX (61 -q) 325.5130 r - � .,` � s I S%X�O�Ra- WW 05141401 -OD SIMON MOTORS LA QUINTA, CA 54:36 500. 0(--) DETACH AT PERFORATION BEFORE DEPOSITING CHECK REMITTANCE ADVICE RECEIPT City of LaOt 1, 78 - 105 Calle Estado, P. O. Box 1504-, :a Quinta CA 92253 DATE 19 NO. RECEIVED FROM. ADDRESS - i 'eli nO FOR n ACCOUNT HOW PAID fI � MAy q jqq4,jjj;j AMT. CASHI�� gg NT / I . AMT. lll) CHECK X BALANCE BY DUE ORDER BY Q-' CITY OF LA QUINTA 78 -495 CALLE TAMPICO LA QUINTA, CA 92253 Fee: + !' "� "'yw� Date Received: ! - 9 Received By: I REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PLOT PLANS MAYO 3 1994 (Section 9.182.090 - La Quinta Municipal Code) Please complete this application form. The fee process this request isi$F5 when no Publicu Hearing is required and $500 with a Public Hearing. All approvals of time extensions must be consistent with the pertinent elements of the La Quinta General Plan, Zoning Development,Standards and Conditions of Approval. Plot Plan Number: /mr Location/Address': '1-L &Iyq�-4 � Assessor' s'- Parcel Number: �yG, 6 Section /Township /Range: Extension Request: First fib Second Third Applicant's Name: �1?0 049 -' )i�L �� nl��Elao-p , Mailing Address: (76 '1�6`F �I y Phone: 64'r 773 - 2355 Signature: S=-e- � 'L Date: a Owner's Name: J`h 6),, 1 l I�'1 -/� `j�i'LIS�- t� 15 e�Qg �� b(o /L/ Mailing Address: 356 )-, 491�l�e1i �. &OO_ (.(d Phone: (%1 " / 23 3 23 Signature: TIMEXTENS ty Sta Date: �---- i MAY 2 1994 PLAN N a 1. .' I fF AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 CONSENT CALENDAR: ITEM TITLE: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Continued Public Hearing on Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revised), a request by Simon Plaza, Inc. to appeal the Planning Commission's approval of a one year extension of time for a previously approved project on +5.6 acres on Highway 111, east of Washington Street 0u u W%, LIAVIL1114 Deny the appeal and time extension request for Plot Plan 93 -495 (1st Extension of lime) based on the attached information. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. This plot plan request was originally approved by the Planning Commission on May 11, 1993, and accepted by the City Council on May 18, 1993. The approved plans allow a three story medical office building, additional retail/office buildings, and a multi-level parking structure. On May 24, 1994, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the request for a one year extension of time (Attachment 1). Modifications to the original Conditions of Approval were made. The changes were necessary because the Washington Street dedication had not been made by the applicant(s). The Planning Commission determined that the one year extension should be allowed based on the State's current economic environment. The Planning Commission voted 3 -1 (Commissioner Adolph voted no) to approve the applicant's submittal pursuant to amended Conditions of Approval (Attachment 2). The Planning Commission minutes from the meeting are attached (Attachment 3). The applicant is not appealing the one year time extension approval, but is requesting that the City Council reconsider seven of the Planning Commission's amended Conditions (Conditions 2, 38, 39, 40, 43, 44, and 48). Six of the conditions address off -site improvements with the last requesting a CCSTFGT.003 r The attached Planning Commission report explains the reasons for the proposed changes to the original conditions. The Planning Commission retained conditions which are pertinent to the development of the site. The Planning Commission's original reduction of the applicant's off -site improvement costs was also based on the property owner(s) conveying Washington Street right -of -way to the City so that improvements could be made. The street dedication paperwork has not been signed nor conveyed to the City as required by original Condition 35. The applicant has requested the City. Council permit a two year approval for the project versus a one year period as noted in Condition 2. .Chapter 9.182.090 (Approval Period) states "a time extension of up to one year may be considered." Therefore, only a one year period is permissible based on the City's current Municipal Zoning Code provision. Staff is considering an amendment to this provision this year during the City's update of the Zoning Code. Previous Appeal Hearings The case was scheduled for review by the City Council on June 7, 1994, as a report of action by the Planning Commission. However, on May 31, 1994, the applicant filed an appeal with the Planning Department requesting a public hearing before the City Council. The initial City Council public hearing was held on June 21, 1994; however, at the meeting, the applicant requested and received a continuance to August 2, 1994. On August 2, 1994, the Council continued the request to September 20th as requested by the applicant. On September 8, 1994, the applicant again requested a continuance of the September 20th public hearing to October 18, 1994, to permit additional time to review their on -site storm water requirements. On October 18, 1994, the Council continued the project to December 6, 1994, at the request of the applicant. The City Council, on December 6, 1994, requested the applicant revise the project because they did not control the piece of property at the intersection that is owned. by Pomona First Federal Bank. The City Council directed the applicant to revise the project and resubmit their plans to the Planning Commission for consideration in the next few months. The revised project would be considered by the City Council on April 4, 1995. On April 4, and May 2, 1995, additional continuances were granted even though no new information or plans were received.. Letter from Mr. Robert L. Golish On September 26, 1994, staff received a letter from Mr. Robert L. Golish, Senior Counsel for Pomona First . Federal Savings & Loan, indicating legal ownership to one of the parcels in the Simon project site, and their position on future and current legal issues regarding their parcel at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street (Attachment 5). The letter was submitted by Mr. Golish on behalf of an applicant who had submitted plans for a car wash on their ± 1.01 acre parcel. On April 11, 1995, staff sent a letter to the applicant informing him of the Council's decision to continue the appeal request to May 2. In this letter, we also notified the applicant that he must file another one year extension request with our staff because the expiration date for this case is May 24, 1995, based on the Planning Commission's time extension approval in 1994. A second letter was sent on May 8, 1995. A new application request has not been received. CCSTFar.00s 2 FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: Staff Comments The City Council extended the appeal initially to May 2, 1995, and then to May 16, 1995, permitting the applicant time to revise the site plan or obtain authorization from Pomona First Federal Bank to include Parcel 6 in their extension request. No new information has been received. The options available to Council are as follows: 1. Deny the appeal and time extension request; 2. Accept the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission on May 24, 1994 if Parcel 6 is controlled by the applicant; 3. Revise the Planning Commission Conditions of Approval as they relate to the project without Parcel 6. Development Director 1. Planning Commission report of May 24, 1994 2. Conditions of Approval 3. Planning Commission minutes of May 24, 1994 4. Appeal filed by Mr. Fred Simon, Sr. 5. Letter from Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan 6. Location map 7. Reduced Plans ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT FROM: . PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: MAY 24, 1994 CASE NO: PLOT PLAN 93 -495 (REVISED) APPLICANT: SIMON PLAZA, INC. (PHILIP DEAD) OWNERS: 3S PARTNERSHIP AND POMONA FIRST FEDERAL BANK LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY iii AND WASHINGTON STREET.. THE DEVELOPMENT, ON +5.6 ACRES OF LAND, IS LOCATED TO THE WEST OF THE EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOTIVE DEALERSHIP ON HIGHWAY 111. ARCHITECT: MERLIN J. BARTH EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: MIXED /REGIONAL COMMERCIAL WITH NON - RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS: NORTH: 111 LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER SOUTH: WASHINGTON SQUARE SPECIFIC PLAN PROPERTY (VACANT) EAST: EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP WEST: EXISTING PLAZA LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER BACKGROUND: Proiect History A one year extension of time, has been requested in order to retain the applicant's 1993 approval of an $2,013 square foot commercial project on approximately 5.6 acres zoned C -P -S Commercial. The project includes a three story office building, a restaurant or bank, an eye institute or office, a two level panting structure, and related at -grade parking. This case is a resubmittal of Plot Plan 91 -466 (Revised) which was approved in 1992 and expired in 1993. This project is approximately 44,000 square feet smeller than the previous plan in order to conform with the newly adopted General Plan Floor Area Ratio Policy. The applicant originally proposed a four story medical office building, a restaurant or bank, an office, and two level parking garage on a ♦5.6 acres site. ( See attached Minutes from the meeting) . The Planning Commission aid not approve the four story medical building, but they did approve a three story building and allowed the developer to reallocate the fourth floor building square footage to other locations within the project. The Planning Commission approved this case at their meeting of May 119 1993. aear. a� 5 Description of Site The proposed +5.6 acre site is comprised of six parcels. The flat and undeveloped parcels were created by the division of land under Parcel Map 18418 in 1982. The property has frontage on three streets with 650 feet along Washington Street, 700 feet along Highway 111, and 180 feet along'Simon Drive. The site elevation along Washington Street is approximately 60 feet above sea level. The site is improved with street improvements. However, additional widening is necessary on Washington street to conform with the city's adopted Specific. Plan Alignment Program and General Plan. A future raised median island is proposed for both Washington Street and Highway 111. The property was subdivided in the early 1980's for the development of Simon Motors automobile Dealership as well as to establish commercial lots which could be sold or developed with commercial land uses. Previous Planning Commission Review On April 13, 1993, the Planning Commission continued discussion of this project to May 11, 1993, to allow the applicant additional time to revise the project pursuant to the newly adopted provisions of the General Plan. The applicant did modify the proposal by reducing the overall size of the project from +126,411 square feet to +82,013 square feet. On May 11, 1993, the Planning Commission examined the revised application of Simon Plaza to develop their project at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. The Planning Commission reviewed the comments of the Design Review Board and they concurred that further refinements to the project were warranted. The Planning Commission felt the downscaled proposal was more fitting to this corner parcel, but were opposed to the proposed four story medical office building because it was too massive for this small site. The majority of ,Commission members stated they would prefer a three story project because it would be more consistent with the existing uses in the area. They noted that the tallest projects approved at this time are the three story El Mirador Medical Center (Desert Hospital) at 47th Avenue and Washington Street and the three story Eisenhower Medical facility at Washington Street and 48th Avenue. The Commission recognized that the applicant could apply for a four story building, but also felt the site could not accommodate such a large structure and retain a pedestrian character (see Condition #73). Mr. Philip Pead, the applicant, present at the meeting. spoke concerning his project. He went through some of the Conditions of Approval he wished to see modified and the Planning Commission discussed each item at length. The applicant also brought additional Highway ill renderings which were modified after the May 5th Design Review Board meeting. Mr. Pead stated that his architect addressed most of the items identified in the report. However, there were a few items he felt were not necessary as they would add additional costs to the project either in future maintenance or construction. Many of the items requested by the Design Review Board were either modified by the Planning Commission or deleted at the applicant's request. Nogm.as MU The Planning Commission amended a few of the recommendations of the Engineering Department at the meeting. Two of these items were the amount of improvements required by the applicant on Washington street and the percentage amount the applicant needed to contribute to the existing traffic signal at Simon Drive and Highway 111. The Planning Commission felt the developer should not be required to reimburse the City for the future raised median nor perform street improvements westerly of the existing curb and gutter facilities on Washington Street. The Commission however thought the developer should be required to install new street improvements per the provisions of the Washington Street Specific Plan Alignment Schedule ( Condition #39) . The Commission thought the site was too small to justify all' the requirements of the Engineering Department. The applicant also requested that the Planning Commission reduce his traffic signal fair -share contribution from 25% to something less than this because they felt their project did not justify this fee based on the size of their project. Mr. Pead thought the larger projects in the area should pay for this existing signal. The Planning Director stated that the other projects in the area were contributing, but 25% was the remaining amount since the One .Eleven La Quinta Center contributed 50% and Washington Square will contribute 25 %. Staff stated that if Simon Motors was not built, the City would ask this property owner to contribute to the signal during the development process. But since it is a currently existing business, the City cannot request the traffic signal money from their business. The Commission felt the project did benefit from the existing traffic signal but they thought 12.3% was a more reasonable fee (Condition #41) . The final vote of the Planning Commission was 4 -1 to approve the project provided the project does not exceed three stories in overall height. The City Council accepted the Planning Commission approval of the project at their May 18, 1993, meeting. Public Hearinz In 1993, staff began requiring that all time extensions be a public hearing in order to inform the general public and surrounding property owners of the time extension request. This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 3, 1994, and notices were mailed to the abutting property owners within 300 -feet of the project. Prior to the meeting, staff received no letters in support or in opposition to the one year extension request.' Metal Dump * In 1993, staff informed an individual contractor that no fill dirt could be imported to the site until the on -site archaeological study had been completed. However, some dumping was done on the southeast corner of the site before a stop work order could be issued. No additional on -site work shall be done until proper clearances are secured from the Engineering and Planning Departments. Proposed Condition Chances (1) Condition 2 - The now expiration date would be May 24, 1995 provided the Planning Commission approves the applicant's request. (2) Condition 35 - The applicant is requesting that Condition 35 be amended to require the land dedication for street widening be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Staff has modified the condition as requested by the applicant. HOOR.as 7 (3) Condition 39 - This condition was imposed by the Planning Commission on May .11, 1994, in order to reduce the applicant's off-site improvement costs. The City Attorney has requested that the original condition be reimposed ( Condition 38) . The City Attorney is of the opinion that the applicant should negotiate with the City Council or Redevelopment Agency for any reduction in their on or off -site improvements through a formal request. Because the reduction in improvement obligations of the developer is a fiscal matter which should be handled in an independent process separate from the review of the project. (4) The conditions which identified the Design Review Board have been modified to state that the Planning Director will finalize the project during plan check (Conditions 23, 65 & 73). (5) The conditions which referred to the four story building have been changed to state three story (Conditions, 23 h 73) . STAFF CONCLUSION: Staff supports the time extension request because it meets the provisions of the City's Zoning Code, the adopted General Plan, and the provisions of the Washington Street/Highway III Specific Plans as conditioned. RECOMMENDATION:. By Minute Motion 94 -_, approve a one year extension of time for Plot Plan 93 -495 ( Revised) pursuant to the attached Finding and revised Conditions. Nowt. "$ . ,i7ACHMENT #2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL'- RECOMMENDED PLOT PLAN 93-495 (REVISED) MAY 24, 1994 SIMON PLAZA * Modified by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 ** Added by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 ** Deleted by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 + Modified by Planning Commission on 5 -24 -94 IKI1 19 1. The revised project and time extension request are consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 2. The project will not have an adverse environmental impact on the surrounding properties based on the proposed Conditions of Approval. 3. The project is a logical progression of development for this community zoned area. 4. The proposed project is consistent with the intent and purpose of the General Plan. 1. The development of the property shall be generally in conformance with the exhibits contained in the file for PP 93-495 (Revision), unless amended otherwise by the following conditions. +2. The approved plot plan shall be used by May 24, 1995; otherwise it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Be used" means the beginning of substantial construction which is contemplated by this approval, not including grading which is begun within the one year period and is thereafter diligently pursued until completion. A one year time extension may be requested as permitted by Municipal Code provided an extension request is filed-by April 24, 1995. 3. There shall be no outdoor storage or sales displays without specific approval of the Planning Commission. 4. All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed so as not to shine directly on surrounding adjoining properties or public rights -of -way. Light standard type with recessed light source shall also be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Exterior lighting shall comply with Outdoor Light Control Ordinance and Off - Street Parking requirements. CONAPRVL.037 W Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 5. Adequate masonry trash enclosures shall be provided for all structures and provided with opaque metal doors. Plans for trash enclosures to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall contact the local waste management company to insure that the number of enclosures and size of the enclosures are adequate. 6. Decorative enclosures may be required by the City around any retention basins depending on site grading requirements. The color, location, and placement of said fence(s) shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. 7. Phased improvement plans shall be subject to Planning Commission review. 8. Handicap parking spaces and facilities shall be provided per Municipal Code, State, and Federal requirements. 9. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to submission of building plans for plan check or issuance of grading permit, whichever comes first. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on building interior areas from perimeter streets, and impacts on the proposed abutting and provide mitigation of noise as alternative mitigation measures for incorporation into the project design such as building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (terming, landscaping and walls, etc.), and other techniques. 10. The project shall comply with all existing Off - Street Parking requirements, including but not limited to, shading of parking lot areas and bicycle parking spaces. 11. Perimeter landscaping planters shall be provided at maximum widths possible adjacent to property lines and planted with landscaping. 12. The project shall comply with all applicable Art in Public Places Ordinances. A public art piece shall be installed on the property at a location agreeable to the Art in Public Places Committee (e.g., at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street). A public easement shall be offered to the City for the site that any art piece may occupy which has been established by-the Art in Public Places Committee. 13. * The developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist and pay all associated 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. The Planning and Development Director shall approve the firm to be used in the study prior to any on -site activities. CONAPRVL.037 10 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza .May 24, 1994 The plan shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society (CVAS) for a two -week review and comment period. At a minimum, the plan shall: 1) identify the means for digging test pits; 2) allow sharing the information with the CVAS; and 3) provide for further testing if the preliminary results show significant materials 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 divert, 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 areas 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 analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of. any building or use contemplated by this use, the applicant shall obtain permits or clearances from the following agencies: • City Fire Marshal • City of La Quinta Public Works Department • City of La Quinta Planning and Development Department • Coachella Valley Water District • Desert Sands Unified School District • Imperial Irrigation District • Caltrans (District .11) CONAPRVL.037 11 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of application for a building permit for the proposed project. 15. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City adopted infrastructure fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 16. Final landscaping plans shall include approval stamps and signatures from the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioners office and the Coachella Valley Water District. 17. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit to the Engineering Department an interim landscape program for the entire site which shall be for the purpose of wind and erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blow sand and dust control measures during grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a) use of irrigation during construction and grading activities; b) areas not constructed on during first phase shall be planted in temporary ground cover or wildflowers and provided with temporary irrigation system; and c) provisions of wind breaks or wind rolls, fencing and /or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The landowner shall comply with requirements of the Directors of Public Works and Planning and Development Departments. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent emission of dust and blow sand. 18. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit as determined by the Building Official. 19. 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 which must be satisfied prior to issuance of a building permit. Prior to a final building inspection approval, the applicant shall _prepare and submit a written report demonstrating - compliance. with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection of other monitoring to assure such compliance. 20. A parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, and parking spaces shall, be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. All roof equipment shall be screened from view by parapet walls of building or other architecturally matching materials. CONAPRVL.037 12 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 22. All compact spaces shall be clearly marked "compact cars only". 2.3. + That all conditions of the Planning Commission shall be complied with as follows: A. The landscape plan shall include an eight foot wide meandering pedestrian/bike trail. The plans should be reviewed by the Planning Director prior to submission of the final landscape plan by the applicant/developer. B. The landscape program for Washington Street shall include a variation of planting materials, i.e., palm trees, accent shade trees, lawn, shrubs, and groundcover. The use of mature California Pepper, Australian Willow, Mesquite, Crape Myrtle, Bottle trees, and Washington Robusta Palms shall be encouraged. Varieties of flowering shrubs such as Texas Ranger, Cassia, Crepe Myrtle, and Dwarf Oleander shall be utilized. Native (low water use) plants shall be used, and the landscape architect should consult the Coachella Valley Water District's plant material list prior to designing their proposal. Uplighted trees or palms shall be used along Washington Street and Highway 111. Incandescent light fixtures will be required (less than 160 watt). Landscaping plan shall conform to Ordinance 220 regarding water conservation. C. + Any proposed parking lot lighting plan shall be reviewed by the Design Re i Board Planning Director prior to building plan check. A photometric study shall be developed which analyzes the lighting pattern on the project and meets the City's Lighting Ordinance provisions as explained in Chapter 9.210 and 9.160 (Off- Street Parking).. The height of the light poles shall not exceed 18 feet in height, and the lighting contractor should reduce this height if physically possible during review of the project. D. A maximum building height of 28 feet shall be maintained along Washington Street and Highway 111 within 150 feet of the ultimate property line (after street dedication has been included) excluding minor architectural appendages (e.g., chimneys, towers, building columns,. etc.). E. + Decorative concrete entryways shall be provided for all two -way driveways into the project site. The concrete shall be stamped and colored to accentuate the proposed development. The color, design, and location of the concrete should be reviewed by the Design Review Board Planning Director during a final plan check review. CONAPRVL.037 13 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 F. + The revised concept design plan shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board Planning Director prior to the submission of the plans to the Building and Safety Department for final plan check consideration. The plans should include but are not limited to landscaping and irrigation, building elevations, signs, and any other major exterior design features of the project as noted at the Design Review Board meeting of May 5, 1993. G. Bike racks shall be provided at convenient areas within the site for usage by bicycle riders. One space for every 50 parking spaces shall be provided as noted in the Off - Street Parking Code. H. The landscape setback on Washington Street shall be a minimum of 20 feet from the new property line. I. All open parking stalls shall be screened by berm walls, landscape hedges, or a combination thereof to a minimum height of 42 inches. J. The maximum floor area ration (F.A.R.) for this project shall be 0.35 per the Policy Standards of the General Plan (LU Table #4). K. + The roof design for the 3 -story medical office building shall be either 4:12 or higher to give the building balance and proper scale to its mass. NUT M. + The parking structures tile roof facade shall be eliminated because it is not compatible with the design motif of the four three story medical office building. The applicant should evaluate another design style which incorporates a cornice design feature (similar to the upper portion of the four story building) and other articulated features which will soften the elevation and not enhance its presence. N. * The parking structure ramp on the south side of the project shall be stuccoed to match the building. The structure shall be landscaped along its westerly side to conceal its presence. O. + The applicant shall include the following features into the three story medical office building: CONAPRVL.037 14 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 .aye Pre east stone window trint- 2. * Individual pane windows or grid molded windows can be used. 3 . * + Additional building column connections should be used where agreed upon with the Planning Commission. 4. Accented building roof Board heights. 5. Revision to the elevator shaft design and its relationship to Highway 111. 6.... Energy eattservatieft measttres shall be reviewed. 7.... The two story elements on the west side of the fattr story bttilding shall redesigned so that the roof eanneets into the bttiid* (dplefe the existing Winded. GSM• - I" U - • ._C _3111 1 24. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 3500 gpm for a three hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. Fire flow is based upon all buildings being equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. 25. A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6" X 4" X 21/2" X 2' /z "), will 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. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 26. Prior to issuance of any building permit, 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 and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed /approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company 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. " The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to start of construction. 27. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13. The post indicator valve and Fire Department connection shall be located to the front within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). System plans must be submitted with a plan check/inspection fee to the Fire Department for review. A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans. CONAPRVL.037 15 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 28. Install a supervised waterflow fire alarm system as required by the Uniform Building Code. 29. Install a Hood Duct automatic fire extinguishing system. System plans must be permitted, along with a plan check/inspection fee, to the Fire Department for review. 30. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2AlOBC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 31. Occupancy separation will be required as per the Uniform Building Code, #503. 32. Install Panic Hardware and "Exit" signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. 33. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. 34. Install a Class I Standpipe System. 35. 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 these Conditions of Approval noted as follows: A. Washington Street - Provide right -of -way as required by the Washington Street Specific Plan. B. Washington Street/Highway 111 Intersection - Provide right -of -way cut back as needed to accommodate a 55 -foot curb return (45 -feet right -of -way). C. *+ Applieant shall dediettfe the reqttired right of-way withift OSR" (30) days a Property owner(s) shall dedicate the required right -of -way prior to the issuance of a building permit. 36. Applicant shall provide a fully improved landscaped setback area of noted minimum width adjacent to the following street right -of -way: A. Washington Street - 20 -feet wide; B. Highway 111, 50 feet wide; C. Simon Drive, 10 feet wide CONAPRVL.037 16 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 D 37. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to all streets from the project site except for three locations as proposed by the applicant as shown on the site plan drawing. 38.+ Applicant shall fund and install all street improvements located east of Washington Street Specific Plan centerline and contiguous to the project site. The new improvements include street widening, curb and gutter, asphalt concrete overlay, 8 -foot wide sidewalk, traffic striping and signing and signing along with all appurtenant incidentals and improvements needed to properly integrate and join together the new and existing improvements in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. Applicant shall retain registered professionals as needed to prepare plans for the improvements required by these Conditions of Approval. 40. + Applicant shall modify the traffic signal and intersection improvements at the Washington Street/Highway 111 intersection as requied by Caltrans to accommodate the Washington Street widening improvements. 41.* Applicant shall reimburse City for 2-5* 12.5% of the cost to design and install traffic. signal at the Simon Drive /Highway 111 intersection. 42.+ Applicant shall install a bus stop "pullout" and bus shelter on Highway 111 in compliance with Caltrans, Sunline Transit, and City requirements. 43. + Applicant shall pay for half of the cost to design and install raised median improvements and landscaping on Highway 111 and Washington Street in the portion contiguous to the project site. 44. + Applicant shall enter into a secured agreement with the City to `ensure installation of improvements required by these Conditions of Approval before the grading permit is issued. 45. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological, and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted with a report submitted for review along with grading plan. The report recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and /or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. CONAPRVL.037 17 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 46. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 47. The site shall be designed and graded in a manner so the elevation difference between the building pad elevations on site and the adjacent street curb do not exceed three (3.0) feet. 48.+ Applicant shall provide storm drain facilities with sufficient capacity to evacuate all water that falls on -site and off -site to the centerline of the streets adjoining the site during the, 1 -hour duration, 25 -year storm event. The storm drain facility shall convey the storm water from the site to the Whitewater Channel. The applicant may purchase capacity on a fair share basis in a storm drain designed and constructed in Washington Street by the City, if the City proceeds with said storm drain facility within time constraints which. suit the applicant. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of Washington Street, Highway 111, and Simon Drive. 49. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped setback areas. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of the Planning Director, City Engineer, and Coachella Valley Water District and the plans shall be signed by these officials prior to construction. 50. 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. 51. Applicant shall landscape and maintain the landscaped setback area and right -of -way between all street curbing and property lines. 52.. Applicant shall construct an eight -foot wide meandering bike path in the combined easterly parkway of Washington Street .and southerly parkway of Highway 111 in lieu of the standard six-foot wide sidewalk. A six foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed on Simon Drive. 53. All existing and proposed telecommunication, television cable, and electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, that are adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 54. Underground utilities that lie directly under street improvements or portions thereof shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to installation of that portion of the street improvement. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. 18 CONAPRVL.037 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 55. Applicant shall pay all fees charged by the city as required for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the city. 56. Applicant shall retain a California registered civil engineer, or designate one who is on applicant's staff, 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 retained or designated by the applicant to implement this responsibility shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. The engineer shall sign and seal a statement placed on the "as built" plans that says "all (grading and grades) (improvements) on these plans were properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision during construction for compliance with the plans and specifications and the work shown hereon was constructed as approved, except where otherwise noted hereon and specifically acknowledged by the City Engineer". B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the engineer shall provide a separate document, signed and sealed, to the City Engineer that documents the building pad elevations.. The document shall, for each pad, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as built elevation, and 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. C. Provide to the City Engineer a signed set of "as built" reproducible drawings of the site grading and all improvements installed by the applicant. 57. The parking stalls on the north side of the office complex as determined by Staff, shall be restricted to either handicapped parking or reserved parking to help eliminate queuing at the Highway 111 access driveway. 58. The driveways on Washington Street and on Highway 111 shall be restricted to right turn movements only. 59. Turning movements at the intersection of Washington Street and Simon Drive shall be restricted to right turns only in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. 60. All required improvements shall be completed prior to first site occupancy of the proposed development. CONAPRVL.037 T 9 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 61. The parking structure shall not exceed 15 feet in overall height as measured from finished grade pad elevation within 100 feet of Highway 111. Exterior lighting on top level of parking structure shall not exceed six feet and not be within ten feet of outside wall. 62. All mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 91 -211 shall be met. 63. The parcels shall be legally merged prior to building permit issuance. 64. 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, so adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. 65. +* The north side of the parking structure shall include perimeter grade planting as deemed appropriate by the Planning Director. 66: Prior to issuance of the first building permit, a parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department to verify compliance with the Off - Street Parking requirements. Prior to each subsequent phase beginning construction a new parking study based on existing usage and potential demand shall be submitted: In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. 67. Appropriate and adequate service delivering areas (loading facilities) and trash facilities shall be provided as required by the Off - Street Parking Code.. The facilities shall include areas for recycling bins and be approved by Staff during the final review process. The standards and requirements of AB 939 (recycling) shall be met. This shall include provisions for on -site recycling of recyclable materials by the tenants in conjunction with the City's franchise hauler contract provisions. 68. An on -site elevator(s) shall service the site and provide accessibility from the parking garage to each respective building floor level. The design and installation of the elevator shall meet both Uniform Building Code standards and any other California State requirements. 69. The existing six foot high soundwall along the Washington Street frontage road shall be extended between the frontage road and Washington Street northerly of its present location . to the northeasterly corner of Lot 27 of Tract 2043 (Singing Palms Drive and Washington Street) to mitigate traffic noise impacts on the existing R -1 single family neighborhood. CONAPRVL.037 20 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 70. A Transportation Demand Management Plan shall be submitted (Ordinance 217) if . the project or the ultimate development of the site employs 100 or more persons. The plan can be prepared by either the property owner or the tenant(s) within the development. The plan shall be submitted and approved by the Director of Planning and Development. 71. The provisions of the City's newly adopted Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance ( #220) shall be met. 72. ** The applicant shall provide a theme plaza at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street as required by the General Plan which shall include landscaping, public furniture and a public art piece. The art piece can contain the developers main identification sign (Sign #1), if it is an integral part of the theme plaza and /or the public art piece.. The design shall be approved by the Art in Public Places Committee and the City Council as required by Chapter 2.65 of the Municipal Code. The developer shall retain an artist to help design the theme plaza. The theme plaza size shall not be less than 2,000 square feet and the overall design should be similar to the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center theme plaza at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. 73.+-- The medical office building shall not exceed three stories with a maximum 40 -foot height. The height of the building shall be measured from the existing grade (top of 'curb) on Highway 111. The developer can reallocate the fourth floor square footage into the project (e.g., over the parking structure) provided the new site plan does include adding two story elements into the 150 -foot setback requirement on either arterial street. The revised design shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to preparation of final working drawings. CONAPRVL.037 .21 ATTACHMENT 3 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION'- CITY OF LA QUINTA A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California May 24, 1994 A. The meeting Commissioner y 7:00 P.M. eT to order at 7 :00 P.M. by Chairwoman Barrows. led the flag salute. U. BOLO CALL _ -- A. Chairwoman Barrows ed the roil call. Present: Commissioners Adolph, Ellson, Abels, and Oman Barrows. B. Commission Abels/Ellson moved and second motion to excuse Commis ' er Marrs. Unanimously approved. C. Present: Planning Director Jerry He , City Attorney Dawn Honeywei enior Engineer Steve Speer, Prind tanner Stan Sawa,_ Associate P er Greg Trousdell, and Department S etary Betty Sawyer. D. Commissioners Ellson /Abel ved to amend the agenda to pla ublic Hearing 93 (Plot Plan 93 -495- ' n Plaza) as Item I and anize the agenda accordingly. Unani ly approved. M. PUBLIC HEARINGS. A. PLOT PLAN 93 -495; a request of Simon Plaza for a one year extension of time for a commercial project at the southeast corner of Washington Street and Highway I11. 1.• Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in die staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. - Commissioner Adolph asked staff what the status of the street dedication was. Staff stated the dedication had not taken place as of yet but the street dedication would have to take place. prior to any building permits being issued. DRAFT= Manning Ctwneuf.wro Minwdb may 24. 1"A 3. Commissioner Adolph asked if the restaurant planned for the corner was. still required to have the two copulas on the top of the building and if the signage would remain the same. Staff stated all the conditions originally approved would remain. 4. Commissioner Ellson asked if the project could be built in phases. Staff stated it could as long as it met all the conditions. S. Commissioner Ellson asked if the upper level patio would have a trellis cover. Staff stated the original approval did not require a trellis patio cover. 6. iltere being no further questions of staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the public hearing. Mr. Mark Moran, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission regarding the project and the concerns they had with the modified conditions. in particular was an objection to Condition ,038, in place of Condition 39. 7. Mr. Paul Seltzer, co -owner in the project, elaborated on the objections to Conditions #38, #40. #42, x43, and /44. Air. Seltzer stated the project did not cause the problem for the widening of the street. They had paid to put the street in once and they should not be required to do it again. S. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained the conditions were added to the project as this was a new development that came after a circulation specific plan was adopted by the City. She further stated that only the City Council can waive any costs by entering into a Development Agreement or Owner ' Participation Agreement with the Redevelopment Agency. 9. Mr. Seltzer reiterated that the Planning Commission and City Council approved Condition 039 last year and he can't understand why it cwuw be date again with this request.. Discussion followed as to why the strew is.being widened and who is responsible for that widening. 10. Mr. Freed Simon, co- owner. addressed the condition regarding the funding of the street improvements as required by Condition 038. He stated that if the additional costs of the street improvements are placed on the project be will be unable to fund the project and it will not be built. 11. Assistant City Engineer Steve Spar stated that since the City had not been able to widen Washington Street for two years and since Simon Plaza had been unable to get their project started, staff want to the City Council to discuss the widening of Washington Street in two phases. The City would fund the first phase and Simon Plaza would incur the cost of the second Pte- 23 FURnin' C1Mn11 i%"In M11w5 May 24. 1944 12. Commissioners Ellson and Abels asked staff to clarify what the difference was between Conditions #38 and #39. Staff stated the difference was in regard to how much of the street Simon Plaza would be required to improve. Whether it would be all of the right -of -way east of the centerline for Washington Street or, east of the curb and gutter improvements and contiguous to the project site. Discussion followed relative to those improvements. 13. There being no further public comment, Chairwoman Barrows closed the public hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion. 14. Following the discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Ellson /Barrows to adopt Minute Motion 94 -015 to recommend a one year extension of time for Plot Plan 93 -495 as conditioned. Unanimously approved. Commissioner Abels withdrew from the Chambers due to a possible future conflict of interest on the following item. _ PCS-24 B. PLOT PLAN 94 -522• 3Auest of DoDco Construction ices for approval to develop a two story it /office. building in the C-V-QoEbne on a 0.37 acre site. 1. As=i Planner Greg Trousdell presegifil the information contained in the,smit report, a copy of wh' s on file in the Planning and dopment Department. 2., *. Commissioner Adolph ask what the sign program was for the p ect. Staff explained the sign s to be painted on the.southeast c of the upper. floor of the bu' ing. Discussion followed regardin lettering f and size of the si i 3. There being further commenu of staff, Chairw Barrows opened die public ring. Mr. Dan Featheringill the Commission regardin he project and stated they were ab o modify the sign if the Com sign so desired. He further sta his concern regarding the ion to require French doors in the of the building as this would a security problem. Mr. F ngill watt on to explain hi* evelopment request. Mr. Greg Butler, draftsyff for the project, stated his requiring decorative c uric file around the door frame windows on the nogrooelevation. The Pueblo style ambi% 24 ;lions to display does not ' T ATTACHMENT 4 79495 CALLE TAMPICO — LA GUINTA. CALIFORNIA 92253. . (619) 777.7000 FAX (619 ) 777.7161 APPLICATION FOR APPEAL OF FINDINGS OR CONDITIONS Appellant's Name SIMON PLAZA, INC. Date 5 -27-94 Mailing Address _ 78 -611 Hw�r. 111 . U. 50X 14 01 La Quint &, CA 92253 Phone: (6191346 -2345 RE: Case No. Plot Plan 93 -495 Type of Appeal: Conditional Use Permit .Variance Change of,Zone Public Use Permit _Surface Mining i Reclamation Permit Outdoor Advertising _Consistency with General P1i _Environmental Assessment _Setback Adjustments _Temporary Use Permit _Plot Plan Please state basis for appeal and include any supportive evidence. if applicable, indicate the number of the specific condition which is beinc protested. Please see attached. Use additional sheets if necessary. A4. igna re Fre Va. Simon, Sr., President 25 WJLINO ADDRESS - P.Q BOX 1506 LA QUINTA. GALOMNA 9225.1 �w -.• www I -� Case No. Plot Plan 93 -495 Simon Plaza, Inc. This appeal from the Planning Commission action extending Plot Plan 93 -495 for one year deals with several of the conditions which were modified from the conditions previously approved by the City Council in 1993. Condition 38: This condition has been modified to require the applicant to improve Washington Street from the centerline to the property line. The previous Condition 39, which has been deleted, required that the applicant reimburse the City for the cost of all improvements from the current curbline to the east. Condition 39: This condition represented a compromise between the City and the applicant and should not be modified. The current owners of the property have already dedicated right -of -way and installed the street improvements on Washington Street at the time the property was originally developed. The City may not now legally require us to tear those improvements out, dedicate additional property and then reinstall the street and other improvements. it is our position that if the City wants to widen Washington, it must buy the right -of -way and pay for the improvements. .,gowever, last year we agreed to compromise our position and accepted Condition 39. We cannot accept Condition 38 because it, along with several of the other conditions, makes the project financially infeasible. Condition 40: This condition has been modified to require that this project pay the entire cost of modifying the Washington/ Highway 111 intersection and traffic signals. Previously, this condition provided that we would reimburse-the City St of the coat. our position with respect to this condition is the same as our position with respect to Condition 38. We already paid for the intersection and the traffic signal when we subdivided the property in 1982. The City may not legally require us to do it again. Finally, this condition will make the project financially infeasible. Condition 43: This condition has been modified to require us to pay SO of the cost of medians on Washington and Highway 111. Previously, the condition was that we pay SO of the cost of the Highway 111 median only. We may not legally be required to pay for this improvement as indicated above. Condition-44: This condition has been modified to require that we post security with the City to guarantee that we install the improvements listed above. The previous condition provided that we would post security to reimburse the City for our share of the costs. it is our understanding that the City will be doing the work. we have no objection to posting the security, but it should be for the cost of reimbursing the City, and then, only for the costs of the improvements we have agreed to. "VAIM4nck floc FUR a -4" 26 Condition 48: When we agreed to this condition last year, we were told that the City intended to build a storm drain from the intersection to the Whitewater Channel, and, that we could contribute a fair share toward it. We have previously submitted a hydrology report to the City which indicates that our property, after development, would contribute only 4% of the water which causes the problem. Accumulation.of water, at the intersection is a problem which currently exists, and we'are not responsible for it Furthermore, we are not. responsible for water that falls offsite to the center of Highway 111 and Washington Street.. We will provide for onsite retention, or will pay a fair share of the cost, but we cannot pay for it all. Finally, we would respectfully request that the City Council consider modifying Condition 2 and give us two (2) years to use the plot plan-. This project is complicated and expensive. For the past two.years we have worked long and hard to find financing in a most difficult financial market. Last year, we finally put our financing in place, just as our plot plan approval needed to be extended. As you know, you reduced the site of the project by over 40,000 square feet, and we lost our financing. This year, again, we have finally found a financing source, but again face the prospect of the conditions changing which would result in losing our commitment. In view of the foregoing, we would like to have you consider giving us two years to put this project together. Thank you for your consideration of our request. SI14ON PIM, INC. ., President 5UMAPPM filet Ilan 93•499' 27 ATTACHMENT 5 - Pomona first Federal Savings and loan Association Since 1092 City of La Quinta Mr. JERRY HERMAN 78-495 Cane Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mr. Herman: September 23 4 U SEP 2 6 194 ' PLAN Subject: Parcel 6 of Parcel Map 18418; Hwy I I I and Washington; PP 93-495 It was a pleasure meeting with you yesterday to discuss Pomona First Federars concerns regarding proposed dedications of the subject parcel to the City. As we discussed, Pomona First Federal had an agreement to sell the parcel until the additional 10' dedication came to fight. I still find it difficult to understand how the City can propose to require this additional dedication when the landowner whose property will be taken has not been notified. In any event, we expect to proceed with the proposed Buyer to seek a variance from the 20• setback requirement in an effort to ameliorate the adverse effect of the additional taking. If successful, this effort should diminate the need for pursuing other avenues of redress. This will confirm for you Pomona First Federars position with regard to the Simon Plaza project. We do not object to any extensions granted on their application for Plot Plan Approval, nor to the Plot Plan itself. However, this non - objection should not be taken as any type of authorization for the Simon applicant(s) to speak on behalf of Pomona First Federal. Pomona First Federal h2s no 2g=msIIt with Simon regarding the property and Simon- has absolnt no rights to the property. As reflected by our listing the property for sale, we are proceeding independently to dispose of our parcel. We would appreciate any efforts you take to notify Pomona First Federal of any matters relating to our parcel, even it they are not matters to which we are entitled to notice as a matter of law. Any such notice can be directed to me at the address indicated below. Thank you again for taking the time to discuss this situation with us. We appreciate your cooperation and assist-rice. Very truly yotas, 44-*,t/ . f/. e 1w, Robot L. Goliish Vice Presidettt Senior Counsel cc: Shannon, Rinehart, Baxley, Selz. 28 AdnWAW@ A. QM 3w Sam orw Arww • ►A. On 150 • ►ear. COftme 9170.17151 U34= • 0131 aLNM • (6161 IN-700 • 0141 972-OW ATTACHMENT 6 CASE MAP Vicinity Map Simon Plaza, Inc. 29 NORTH SCALE : nts Highway 111 R l� Nrrf in. Approved as a 3 st. Complex in 1993/94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I il"TT-T` iron al ga I 11, ��Ii � it �� ►�,��I�����i II a�'i •�0 a�� a�4 m�nnn� i l N I NIY1r1d r 10 A113 nn E6Sl S - Ad W UU STk T- MUM ., x 32 11,11al � s 16 A 6 Ell: "oil 4 F I r F- Boll 71 w ON 21 Eil I pm Ir '1 0 A1191 I' uan c iic rsl@ 34 8 a e a ,,Ww V, Approved as a 3 story in The 4th moved. r � ■ P. L i /� i V ��1i d4 .n //n Iu1 OF-nn... w1 lu/ . . i.. /II/ MII 1111 _ _7 `AEI �i1L'1 F ti s� � r w w r �1� CA) rn Approved as a 3 story building complex in 1993 and 1994. The fourth floor will be removed on the attached Conditions. based D �i wi -/,rte ll S o LAY- CITY Gf tA GUINTA PLANNING CzPyPTfAENT�� _, 4 W V MAY - 5 1993 4 1.I1V G i LALUIPIA PLAMNINS KPrflff"T PARKING PLAN LMVOIL - 1 1 `r Le ..i w w w r�a�� n i I �t o J i 38 c&t!t 4 J*p Q" AGENDA ITEM PROCESSING FORM ITEM NO: MEETING DATE: MaV 16 v 1995 CITY �� I RDA I OTHER: ITEM TITLE: Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revised) -.Cont,i nusd - An appeal by Sanmn Plaza %a , of the Planning CaTudssion°s conditions to the approval of a one year extension of tim for a previously approved project on 15.6 acres on Hic y 111, east of vTG6r�•6 WSA � I:CYIra DEPARTMENT HEAD: Jerry jet STAFF CONTACT: Greg Ttousdell �� •' ' ' DATE: May 50 1995 CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Deny the appeal and time extension request for Plot Plan 93 -495 (first lion of tirm ) based ontthe attached infcriation BOARD /COMMISSION /RECOMMENDATION (If Applicable): Plant 0=aission voted to approve the rest on May 24, 1994, as reques by the applicant. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION: APPROVAL REQUIRED: I l YES NO APPROVAL CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE LEGAL FINANCE DIRECTOR OTHER (LIST): PRESENTATIONS YES NO ORDINANCE STUDY SESSION MAYOR & COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS RESOLUTION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS XX PUBLIC HEARINGS AGREEMENT 11 CLOSED SESSION SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT X COMMISSION REPORT X CITY ATTORNEY OPINION BID PACKAGE OTHER APPROVAL REQUIRED: I l YES NO APPROVAL CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE LEGAL FINANCE DIRECTOR OTHER (LIST): PRESENTATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR DEPARTMENT REPORTS WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE STUDY SESSION MAYOR & COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS BUSINESS SESSION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS XX PUBLIC HEARINGS 1 11 11 CLOSED SESSION COPIES OF THIS ITEM SHOULD BE SENT TO: X PRIOR TO MEETING AFTER MEETING NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY /STATE /ZIP CODE Tted Simon, Sko , Po Oo Box 461, La Quinta, CA 92253 tiix°o Lo Golish, V.P., Pcmna First Federal Savings & Loan, 350 So Garev Avanue,q qgq ORIGINAL: STAFF REPORT YELLOW: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PINK: DEPARTMENT con T4ht 4 Z COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: May 1, 1995 ITEM TITLE: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: Continued Public Hearing on Plot Plan 93-495 (Revised), a request PUBLIC HEARING: by Simon Plaza, Inc. to appeal the Planning Commission's approval of a one year extension of time for a previously approved project on ±5.6 acres on Highway 111, east of Washington Street RECONEWENDATION: Deny the applicant's appeal and request for a one year time extension for Plot Plan 93-495 (1st Extension of Time) based on the attached Findings. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Case History This plot plan request was originally approved by the Planning Commission on May 11, 1993, and accepted by the City Council on May 18, 1993. The approved plans allow a three story medical office building, additional retail office buildings, and a multi-level parking structure. • • •j • • On May 24, 1994, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the request for a one year extension of time (Attachment 1). Modifications to the original Conditions of Approval were made. The changes were. necessary because the Washington Street dedication had not been made by the applicant(s). The Planning Commission determined that the one year extension should be allowed based on the State's current economic environment. The Planning Commission voted 3 -1 (Commissioner Adolph voted no) to approve the applicant's submittal pursuant to amended Conditions of Approval (Attachment 2). The Planning Commission minutes from the meeting are attached (Attachment 3). • =971 ' The applicant is not appealing the one year time extension approval, but is requesting that the City Council reconsider seven of the Planning Commission's amended Conditions (Conditions 2, 38, 39, 40, 43, 44, and 48). Six of the conditions address off -site improvements with the last .requesting a two year extension period instead of the standard one year extension (Attachment 4). CC3TFar.om The attached Planning Commission report explains the reasons for the proposed changes to the original conditions. The Planning Commission retained conditions which are pertinent to the development of the site. The Planning Commission's original reduction of the applicant's off_ site improvement costs was also based on the property owner(s) conveying Washington Street right -of -way to the City so that improvements could be made. The street dedication paperwork has not been signed nor conveyed to the City as required by original Condition 35. f The applicant has requested the City Council permit a two year approval for the project versus a one year period as noted in Condition 2. Chapter 9.182.090 (Approval Period) states "a time extension of up to one year may be considered." Therefore, only a one year period is permissible based on the City's current Municipal Zoning Code provision, Staff is considering an amendment to this provision this year during the City's update of the Zoning Code. The case was scheduled for review by the City Council on June 7, 1994, as a report of action by the Planning Commission. However, on May 31, 1994, the applicant filed an appeal with the Planning Department requesting a public hearing before the City Council. The initial City Council public hearing was held-on June 21, 1994; however, at the meeting, the applicant requested and received a continuance to August 2, 1994. On August 2, 1994, the Council continued the request to September 20th as requested by the applicant. On September 8, 1994, the applicant again requested a continuance of the September 20th public hearing to October 18, 1994, to permit additional time to review their on -site storm water requirements. On October 18, 1994, the Council continued the project to December 6, 1994, at the request of the applicant. The City Council, on December 6, 1994, requested the applicant revise the project because they did not control the piece of property . at the intersection that is owned by Pomona First Federal Bank. The City Council directed the applicant to revise the project and resubmit their plans to the Planning Commission for consideration in the next few months. The revised project would be considered by the City Council on April 4, 1995. On April 4, 1995, a sixth continuance was granted even though no new information or plans were received. On September 26, 1994, staff received a letter from Mr. Robert L. Golish, Senior Counsel for Pomona First Federal Savings & Loan, indicating legal ownership to one of the parcels in the Simon project site, and their position on future and current legal issues regarding their parcel at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street (Attachment 5). The letter was submitted by Mr. Golish on behalf of an applicant who had submitted plans for a car wash on their +1.01 acre parcel. On April 11, 1995, staff sent a letter to the applicant informing him of the Council's decision to continue the appeal request to May 2. In this letter, we also notified the applicant that he must file another one year extension request with our staff because the expiration date for this case is May 24, 1995, based on the Planning Commission's time extension approval in 1994. A new application request has not been received. 2 ccsrFar.OM FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The City Council extended the appeal to May 2, 1995, permitting the applicant time to revise the site plan or obtain authorization from Pomona First Federal Bank to include Parcel 6 in their extension request. No new information has been received. Therefore, the Council can grant an extension of the appeal, however, the approval expires on May 24, 1995. The options available to Council are as follows: 1. Deny the appeal and time extension request; 2. Accept the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission on May 24, 1994 if Parcel 6 is controlled by the applicant; 3. Revise the Planning Commission Conditions of Approval as they relate to the project without Parcel 6. Development Director Attachments: 1. Planning Commission report of May 24, 1994 2. Conditions of Approval 3. Planning Commission minutes of May 24, 1994 4. Appeal filed by Mr. Fred Simon, Sr. 5. Letter from Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan 6. Location map 7. Reduced Plans ccsrnvr.oaa 3 ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT FROM: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: MAY 24, 1994 CASE NO: PLOT PLAN 93 -495 (REVISED) APPLICANT: SIMON PLAZA, INC. (PHILIP PEAD) OWNERS: 3S PARTNERSHIP AND POMONA FIRST FEDERAL BANK LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND WASHINGTON STREET. THE DEVELOPMENT, ON +5.6 ACRES OF LAND, IS LOCATED TO THE WEST OF THE ETUSTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOTIVE DEALERSHIP ON HIGHWAY 111. ARCHITECT: MERLIN J. BARTH EXISTING GENERALPLAN DESIGNATION: MIXED /REGIONAL COMMERCIAL WITH NON - RESIDENTIAL . OVERLAY . SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS: NORTH: 111 LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER SOUTH: WASHINGTON SQUARE SPECIFIC PLAN PROPERTY (VACANT) EAST: EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP . WEST: EXISTING PLAZA LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER BACKGROUND: Proiect History A one year extension of time has been requested in order to retain the applicant's 1993 approval of an 82,013 square foot commercial project on approximately 5.6 acres zoned C -P -S Commercial. The project includes a three story office building, a restaurant or bank, an eye institute or office, a two level parting structure, and related at -grade parting. This case is a resubmittal of Plot Plan 91 -466 (Revised) which was approved in 1992 and expired in 1993. This project is approximately 44,000 square feet smaller than the previous plan in order to conform with the newly adopted General Plan Floor Area Ratio Policy. The applicant originally proposed a four story medical office building, a restaurant or bank, an office, and two level parking enrage on a +5.6 acres site. (See attached Minutes from the meeting) . The Planning Commission aid not approve the four story medical building, but they did approve a three story building and allowed the developer to reallocate the fourth floor. building square footage to other locations within the project. The Planning Commission approved this case at their meeting of May 11, 1993. 90M. N9 4 Description of Site The proposed +5.6 acre site is comprised of six parcels The flat and undeveloped parcels were created by the division of land under Parcel Map 18418 in 1982. The property has frontage on three streets with 650 feet along Washington Street, 700 feet along Highway 111, and 180 feet along Simon - Drive. The site elevation along Washington Street is approximately 60 feet above sea level. The site is improved with street improvements. However, additional widening is necessary on Washington street to conform with the city's adopted Specific. Plan Alignment Program and General Plan. A future raised median island is proposed for both Washington Street and Highway 111. The property was subdivided' in the early 1980's for the development of Simon Motors automobile Dealership as well as to establish commercial lots which could be sold or developed with commercial land uses. Previous Planning Commission Review On April 13, 1993, the Planning Commission continued discussion of this project to May 11, 1993, to allow the applicant additional time to revise the project pursuant to the newly adopted provisions of the General Plan. The applicant did modify the proposal by reducing the overall size of the project from +126,411 square feet to +82,013 square feet . On May 11, 1993, the Planning Commission examined the revised application of Simon Plaza to develop their project at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. The Planning Commission reviewed the comments of the Design Review Board and they concurred that further refinements. to the project were warranted. The Planning Commission felt the downscaled proposal was more fitting to this corner parcel, but were opposed to the proposed four story medical office building because it was too massive for this small site. The majority of Commission members stated they would prefer a three story project because it would be more consistent with the existing uses in the area. They noted that the tallest projects approved at this time are the three story II Mirador Medical Center (Desert Hospital) at 47th Avenue and Washington Street and the three story Eisenhower Medical facility at Washington Street and 48th Avenue. The Commission recognized that the applicant could apply for a four story building, but also felt the site could not accommodate such a large structure and retain a pedestrian character (see Condition #73) . Mr. Philip Pead, the applicant, present at the meeting. spoke concerning his project. He went through some of the Conditions of Approval he wished to see modified and the Planning Commission discussed each item at length. The applicant also brought additional Highway 111 renderings which were modified after the May Sth Design Review Board meeting. Mr. Pead stated that his architect addressed most of the Item identified in the report. However, there were a few items he felt were not necessary as they would add additional costs to the project either in future maintenance or construction. Many of the items requested by the Design Review Board were either modified by the Planning Commission or deleted at the applicant's request. im4or.a� 5 The Planning Commission amended a few of the recommendations of the Engineering Department at the meeting. Two of these items were the amount of improvements required by the applicant on Washington street and the percentage amount the applicant needed to contribute to the existing traffic signal at Simon Drive and Highway 111. The Planning Cc: (3) Condition 39 - This condition was imposed by the Planning Commission on May, 11, 1994, in order to reduce the applicant's off -site improvement costs. The City Attorney has requested that the original condition be reimposed ( Condition 38) . The City Attorney is of the opinion that the applicant should negotiate with the City Council or Redevelopment Agency for any reduction in their on or off -site improvements through a formal request. Because the reduction in improvement obligations of the developer is a fiscal matter which should be handled in an independent process separate from the review of the project. (4) The conditions which identified the Design Review Hoard have been modified to state that the Planning Director will finalize the project during plan check ( Conditions 23, 65 g 73) . (5) The conditions which referred to the four story building have been changed to state three story (Conditions, 23 g 73) . STAFF CONCLUSION: Staff supports the time extension request because it meets the provisions of the City's Zoning Code, the adopted General Plan, and the provisions of the Washington Street/Highway 111 Specific Plans as conditioned. RECOMMENDATION:. By Minute Motion 94 -_, approve a one year extension of time for Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revised). pursuant to the attached Finding and revised Conditions. ter. aI F1 ATTACHMENT 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED PLOT PLAN 93-495 (REVISED) MAY 24, 1994 SIMON PLAZA * Modified by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 ** Added by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 . * ** Deleted by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 + Modified by Planning Commission on 5 -24 -94 1. The revised project and time extension request are consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 2. The project will not have an adverse environmental impact on the surrounding properties based on the proposed. Conditions of Approval. 3. The project is a logical progression of development for this community zoned area. 4. The proposed project is consistent with the intent and purpose of the General Plan. 1. The development of the property shall ' be generally in conformance with the exhibits contained in the file for PP 93 -495 (Revision), unless amended otherwise by the following conditions. +2. The approved plot plan shall be used by May 24, 1995; otherwise it-shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Be used" means the beginning of substantial .construction which is contemplated by this approval, not including grading which is begun within the one year period and is thereafter diligently pursued until completion. A one year time extension may be requested as permitted by Municipal Code provided an extension request is filed by April 24, 1995. 3. There shall be no outdoor storage or sales displays without specific approval of the Planning Commission. 4. All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed so as not to shine directly on surrounding adjoining properties or public rights -of -way. Light. standard type with recessed light ' source shall also be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Exterior lighting shall comply with Outdoor Light Control Ordinance and Off - Street CONAPRVL.037 8 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 Parking requirements. Adequate masonry trash enclosures shall be provided for all structures and provided with opaque metal doors. Plans for trash enclosures to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall contact the local waste'management company to insure that the number of enclosures and size of the enclosures are adequate. 6. Decorative enclosures may be required by the City around any retention basins depending on site grading requirements. The color, location, and placement of said fence(s) shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. 7. Phased improvement plans shall be subject to Planning Commission review. 8. Handicap parking spaces and facilities shall be provided per Municipal Code, State, and Federal requirements. 9. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to submission of building plans for plan check or issuance of grading permit, whichever comes first. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on building interior areas from perimeter streets, and impacts on the proposed abutting and provide mitigation of noise as alternative mitigation measures for incorporation into the project design such as building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (berming, landscaping and walls, etc.), and other techniques. 10. The project shall comply with all existing Off - Street Parking requirements including but not limited to, shading of parking lot areas and bicycle parking spaces. 11. Perimeter landscaping planters shall be provided at maximum widths possible adjacent to property lines and planted with landscaping. 12. The project shall comply with all applicable Art in Public Places Ordinances. A public art piece shall be installed on the property at a location agreeable to the Art in Public Places Committee (e.g., at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street).. A public easement shall be offered to the City for the site that any art piece may occupy which has been established by the Art in Public Places Committee. 13. * The developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist and pay all associated costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior to CONAPRVL,.037 r. Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information, shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. The Planning and Development Director shall approve the firm to be used in the study prior to any on -site activities. The plan shall be submitted to.the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society (CVAS) for a two -week review and comment period. At a minimum, the plan shall: 1) identify the means for digging test pits; 2) allow sharing the information with the CVAS; and 3) provide for further testing if the preliminary result show significant materials 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 divert, 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 areas 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 analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this use, the applicant shall obtain permits or clearances from the following agencies: • City Fire Marshal • City of La Quinta Public Works Department • City of La Quinta Planning and Development Department • Coachella Valley Water District CONAPRVL.037 10 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24,- 1994 • Desert Sands Unified School District • Imperial Irrigation District' • Caltrans (District 11) Evidence of said permits or clearances from - the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of application for a building permit for the proposed project. 15. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City adopted infrastructure fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 16. Final landscaping plans shall include approval stamps and signatures from the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioners office and the Coachella Valley Water District. 17. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit to the, Engineering Department an interim landscape program for the entire site which shall be for the purpose of wind and erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blow sand and dust control measures during grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a) use of irrigation during construction and grading activities; b) areas not constructed on during first phase shall be planted in temporary ground cover or wildflowers and provided with temporary irrigation system; and c) provisions of wind breaks or wind rolls, fencing and /or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The landowner shall comply with requirements of the Directors of Public Works and Planning and Development Departments. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent emission of dust and blow sand. 18. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit as determined by the Building Official. 19. 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 which must be satisfied prior to issuance of a building permit. Prior to a final building inspection approval, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. The Planning and Development. Director may require inspection of other monitoring to assure such compliance. 20. A parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, and parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of a building permit. CONAPRVL.037 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 21. All roof equipment shall be screened from view by parapet walls of building or other architecturally matching materials. 22. All compact spaces shall be clearly marked "compact cars only" 23. + That all conditions of the Planning Commission shall be complied with as follows: A. The landscape plan shall include an eight foot wide meandering pedestrian/bike trail. The plans should be reviewed by the Design Review Beard Planning Director prior to submission of the final landscape plan by the applicant/developer. B. The landscape program for Washington Street shall include a variation of planting materials, i.e., palm trees, accent shade trees, lawn, shrubs, and groundcover. The use of mature California Pepper, Australian Willow, Mesquite, Crape Myrtle, Bottle trees, and Washington Robusta Palms shall be'encouraged. Varieties of flowering shrubs such as Texas Ranger, Cassia, Crepe Myrtle, and Dwarf Oleander shall be utilized. Native (low water use) plants shall be used, and the landscape architect should consult the Coachella Valley Water District's plant material list prior to designing their proposal. Uplighted trees or palms shall be used along Washington Street and Highway 111. Incandescent light fixtures will be required (less than 160 watt). Landscaping plan shall conform to Ordinance 220 regarding water conservation. C. + Any proposed parking lot lighting plan shall be reviewed by the Design Beard Planning Director prior to building plan check. A photometric study shall be developed which analyzes the lighting pattern on the project and meets the City's Lighting Ordinance provisions as explained in Chapter 9.210 and 9.160 (Off- Street Parking). The height of the light poles shall not exceed 18 feet in height, and the lighting contractor should reduce this height if physically possible during review of the project. D. A maximum building height of 28 feet shall be maintained along Washington Street and Highway 111 within 150 feet of the ultimate property line (after street dedication has been included) excluding minor architectural appendages (e.g., chimneys, towers, building columns, etc.). E. + Decorative concrete entryways shall be provided for all two -way driveways into CONAPRVL.037 12 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 the project site. The concrete shall be stamped and colored to accentuate the proposed development. The color, design, and location of the concrete should be reviewed by the Design Review Board Planning Director during a final plan check review. F-+ The revised concept design plan shall be reviewed by the Design Review Beard Planning Director prior to the submission of the plans to the Building and Safety Department for final plan check consideration. The plans should include but are not limited to landscaping and irrigation, building elevations, signs, and any other major exterior design features of the project as noted at the Design Review Board meeting of May 5, 1993. G. Bike racks shall be provided at convenient areas within the site for usage by bicycle riders. One space for every 50 parking spaces shall be provided as noted in the Off - Street Parking Code. H. The landscape setback. on Washington Street shall be a minimum of 20 feet from the new property line. I. All open parking stalls shall be screened by berm walls, landscape hedges, or a combination thereof to a minimum height of 42 inches. J. The maximum floor area ration (F.A.R.) for this project shall be 0.35 per the Policy Standards of the General Plan (LU Table #4). K. + The roof design for the 3 -story medical office building shall be either 4:12 or higher to give the building balance and proper scale to its mass. MEOP-41 "'".0 M. + The parking structures tile roof facade shall be eliminated because it is not compatible with the design motif of the few three story medical office building. The applicant should evaluate another design style which incorporates a cornice design feature (similar to the upper portion of the four story building) and other articulated features which will soften the elevation and not enhance its presence. N-* The parking structure ramp on the south side of the project shall be stuccoed to match the building. The structure shall be landscaped along its westerly side to CONAPRVL.037 13 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24., 1994 conceal its presence. 0.+ The applicant shall include the following features into the three story medical office building: 1..,. . 2. * Individual pane windows or grid molded windows can be used. 3 . * + Additional building column connections should be used where agreed upon with the Planning Commission. 4. Accented building roof heights. 5. Revision to the elevator shaft design and its relationship to Highway 111. 6.... 7..., The two sfM elemenB on the west side of the four story building shftfl bp redesigned so that the roof eenneets into the bttiiding (deiete the existing 24. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 3500 gpm for a three hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. Fire flow is based upon all buildings being equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. 25. A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6" X 4" X 2'/z " X 2'/z "), will 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. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 26. Prior to issuance of any building permit, 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 and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the ,local water company 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. " The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to start of construction. 27. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13. The post indicator valve and Fire Department connection shall be located to the front within 50 feet of a hydrant,. and a CONAPRVL.037 14 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). System plans must be submitted with a plan check/ inspection fee to the Fire Department for review. A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans. 28. Install a supervised waterflow fire alarm system as required by the Uniform Building Code. 29. Install a Hood Duct automatic fire extinguishing system. System plans must be permitted, along with a plan check/inspection fee, to the Fire Department for review. 30. . Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2A1OBC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. , 31. Occupancy separation will be required as per the Uniform Building Code, #503. 32. Install Panic Hardware and "Exit" signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. 33. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. 34. Install a Class I Standpipe System. 35. 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 these Conditions of Approval noted as follows: A. Washington Street - Provide right -of -way as required by .the Washington Street Specific Plan. B. - Washington Street/Highway 111 Intersection - Provide right -of -way cut back as needed to accommodate a 55 -foot curb return (45 -feet right -of- way). C. *+ Apphe� shafl dedieste the required right-of-way within dtirty (39) days a Property owner(s) shall dedicate the required right -of -way prior to the issuance of a building permit. 36. Applicant shall provide a fully improved landscaped setback area of noted minimum width adjacent to the following street right -of -way: CONAPRVL.037 15 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 A. Washington Street - 20 -feet wide; B. Highway 111, 50 feet wide; C. Simon Drive, 10 feet wide 37. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to all streets from the project site except for three locations as proposed by the applicant as shown on the site plan drawing. 38.+ Applicant shall fund and install all street improvements located east of Washington Street Specific Plan centerline and contiguous to the project site. The new improvements include street widening, curb and gutter, asphalt concrete overlay, 8 -foot wide sidewalk, traffic striping and signing and signing along with all appurtenant incidentals and improvements needed to properly integrate and join together the new and existing improvements in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. Applicant shall retain registered' professionals as needed to prepare plans for the improvements required by these Conditions of Approval. ............. il�111. iz 40. + Applicant shall modify the traffic signal and intersection improvements at the Washington Street/Highway 1.11 intersection as requied by Caltrans to accommodate the Washington Street widening improvements. 41.* Applicant shall reimburse City for 2-5,% 12.5% of the cost to design and install traffic signal at the Simon Drive /Highway 111 intersection. 42. + Applicant shall install a bus stop "pullout" and bus shelter on Highway 111 in compliance with Caltrans, Sunline Transit, and City requirements. 43. + Applicant shall pay for half of the cost to design and install raised median improvements and landscaping on Highway 111 and Washington Street in the portion contiguous to the project site. 44. + Applicant shall enter into a secured agreement with the City to ensure installation of improvements required by these Conditions of Approval before the grading permit is issued. 45. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological, and soils engineering investigation shall 16 CONAPRVL.037 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 be conducted with a report submitted for review along with grading plan. The report recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and/or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. 46. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 47. The site shall be designed and graded in a manner so the elevation difference between the building pad elevations on site and the adjacent street curb do not exceed three (3.0) feet. 48.+ Applicant shall provide storm drain facilities with sufficient capacity to evacuate all watet that falls on -site and off -site to the centerline of the streets adjoining the site during the, 1 -hour duration, 25 -year storm event. The storm drain facility shall convey the storm water from the site to the Whitewater Channel. The applicant may purchase capacity on a fair share basis in a storm drain designed and constructed in Washington Street by the .City, if the City proceeds with said storm drain facility within time constraints which suit the applicant. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of Washington Street, Highway 111, and Simon Drive. 49. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped setback areas. The plans and proposed landscaping inprovements shall be in conformance with requirements of the Planning Director, .City Engineer, and Coachella Valley Water District and the plans shall be signed these officials prior to construction. 50. 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. 51. Applicant shall landscape and maintain the landscaped setback area and right -of -way between all street curbing and property lines. 52. Applicant shall construct an eight -foot wide meandering bike path in the combined easterly parkway of Washington Street and southerly parkway of Highway 111 in lieu of the standard six-foot wide sidewalk. A six foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed on Simon Drive. 53: All existing and proposed telecommunication, television cable, and electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, that are adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 17 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 54. Underground utilities that lie directly under street improvements or portions thereof shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to installation of that portion of the street-improvement. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. 55. Applicant shall pay all fees charged by the city as required for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the city. 56. Applicant shall retain a California registered civil engineer, or designate one who is on applicant's staff, 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 retained or designated by the applicant to implement this responsibility shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. The engineer shall sign and seal a statement placed on the "as built" plans that says "all (grading and grades) (improvements) on these plans were properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision during construction for compliance - with the plans and specifications and the work shown hereon was constructed as approved, except where otherwise noted hereon and specifically acknowledged by the City Engineer ". B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the engineer shall provide a separate document, signed and sealed; to the City Engineer that documents the building pad elevations. The document shall, for each pad, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as built elevation, and 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. C. Provide to the City Engineer a signed set of "as built" reproducible drawings of the site grading and all improvements installed by the applicant. 57. The parking stalls on the north side of the office complex as determined by Staff, shall be restricted to either handicapped parking or reserved parking to help eliminate queuing at the Highway 111 access driveway. 58. The driveways on Washington Street and on Highway 111 shall be restricted to right turn movements only. 59. Turning movements at the intersection of Washington Street and Simon Drive shall be restricted to right turns only in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. CONAPRVL.037 18 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 60. All required improvements shall be completed prior to first site occupancy of the proposed development. 61. The parking structure shall not exceed 15 feet in overall height as measured from finished grade pad elevation within 100 feet of Highway 111. Exterior lighting on top level of parking structure shall not exceed six feet and not be within ten feet of outside wall. 62. All mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 91 -211 shall be met. 63. The parcels shall be legally merged prior to building permit issuance. 64. 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, so adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. 65. + - The north side of the parking structure shall include perimeter grade planting as deemed appropriate by the Desigit Review Board Planning Director. 66. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, a parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department to verify compliance with the Off - Street Parking requirements. Prior to each subsequent phase beginning construction a new parking study based on existing usage and potential demand shall be submitted. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. 67. Appropriate and adequate service delivering areas (loading facilities) and trash facilities shall be provided as required by the Off- Street Parking Code. The facilities shall include areas for recycling bins and be approved by Staff during the final review process. The standards and requirements of AB 939 (recycling) shall be met. This shall include provisions for on -site recycling of recyclable materials by the tenants in conjunction with the City's franchise hauler contract provisions. 68. An on -site elevator(s) shall service the site and provide accessibility from the parking garage to each respective building floor level. The design and installation of the elevator shall meet both Uniform Building Code standards and any other California State requirements. CONAPRVL.037 19 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 69. The existing six foot high soundwall along the Washington Street frontage road shall be extended between the frontage road and Washington Street northerly of its present location to the northeasterly corner of Lot 27 of Tract 2043 (Singing Palms Drive and Washington Street) to mitigate traffic noise impacts on the existing R -1 single family neighborhood. 70. A Transportation Demand Management Plan shall be submitted (Ordinance 217) if the project or the ultimate development of the site employs 100 or more persons. The plan can be prepared by either the property owner or the tenants) within the development. The plan shall be submitted and approved by the Director of Planning and Development. 71. The provisions of the City's newly adopted Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance ( #220) shall be met. 72.** The applicant shall provide a theme plaza at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street as required by the General Plan which shall include landscaping, public furniture and a public art piece. The art piece can contain the developers in identification sign (Sign #1), if it is an integral part of the theme plaza and/or the public art piece. The design shall be approved by the Art in Public Places Committee and the City Council as required by Chapter 2.65 of the Municipal Code. The developer shall retain an artist to help design the theme plaza. The theme plaza size shall not be less than 2,000 square feet and the overall design should be similar to the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center theme plaza at the northeast comer of Highway 111 and Washington Street. 73.+-- The medical office building shall not exceed three stories with a maximum 40 -foot height. The height of the building shall be measured from the existing grade (top of curb) on Highway 111. The developer can reallocate the fourth floor square footage into the project (e.g., over the parking structure) provided the new site plan does include adding two story elements into the 150 -foot setback requirement on either arterial street. The revised design shall be reviewed and approved by the mtd Planning Commission prior to preparation of final working drawings. CONAPRVL.037 20 ATTACHMENT 3 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUiNTA A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California May 24, 1994 7 :00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER A. The meeting I to order at 7 :00 P.M. by Chairwoman Barrows. Commissioner gAd:h led the flag salute. U, ROLL CALL A. Chairwoman Barrows ed the roll call. Present: Commissioners Adolph, Ellson, Abels, and oman Barrows. B. Commission Abels/Ellson moved and second motion to excuse Commis ' er Marrs. Unanimously approved. C. Present: Planning Director Jerry He ,City Attorney Dawn Honeywel r En gineer Steve Speer, Princi lanner Stan Sawa, Associate P er /00"GeZ, - Trousdell, and Department S etary Betty Sawyer. D. Commissioners Ellson /Abel ved to amend the agenda to pla ublic Hearing .13 (Plot Plan 93 -493- ' on Plaza) as Item I and anize the agenda accordingly. Unani ly approved. -[smalla.1:�l►lR�� A. PLOT PLAN 93 -495; a request of Simon Plata for a one year extension of time for a commercial project at the southeast corner of Washington Street and Highway 111. 1.- Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in die staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and .Development Department. 2. Commissioner Adolph asked staff what the status of the street dedication was. Staff stated the dedication had not taken place as of yet but the street dedication would have to take place prior to any building permits being issued. DRAFT-. , Fuming C"wmmna.w+n Minwe. May 24. 1"4 3. Commissioner Adolph asked if the restaurant planned for the corner was still required to have the two copulas on the top of the building and if the signage would remain the same. Staff stated all the conditions originally approved would remain. 4. Commissioner Ellson asked if the project could be built in phases. Staff stated it could as long as it met all the conditions. S. Commissioner Elison asked if the upper level patio would have a trellis cover. Staff stated the original approval did not require a trellis patio cover. 6. There being no further questions of staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the public hearing. Mr. Mark Moran, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission regarding the project and the concerns they had with the modified conditions. In particular %as an objection to Condition 138, in place of Condition 39. 7. Mr. Paul Seltzer, co -owner in the project, elaborated on the objections to Conditions 138, #40, 142, 143, and 144. Mr. Seltzer stated the project did not cause the problem for the widening of the street. They had paid to put the street in .once and they should not be required to do it again. S. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained the conditions were added to the project as this was a new development that came after a circulation specific plan was adopted by the City. She further stated that only the City Council can waive any costs by entering into a Development Agreement or Owner Participation Agreement with the Redevelopment Agency. 9. Mr. Seltzer reiterated that the Planning Commission and City Council approved Condition 139 last year and he can't understand why it cannot be done again with this request.. Discussion followed as to why the street is being widened and who is responsible for that widening. 10. Mr. Fred Simon, co- owner, addressed the condition regarding the funding of the street improvements as required by Condition 138. He stated that if the additional costs of the street improvements are placed on the project he will be unable to fund the project and it will not be built. 11. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated that since the City had not been able to widen Washington Street for two years and since Simon Plaza had been unable to get their project started, staff went to the City Council to discuss the widening of Washington Street in two phases. The City would fund the first phase and Simon Plaza would incur the cost of the second phase- Z2 ,. MaemnF Cnnnu..«n1 M�nw� May 24. 1"4 12. Commissioners Ellson and Abels asked staff to clarify what the difference .was between Conditions #38 and #39. Staff stated the difference was in regard to how much of the street Simon Plaza would be required to improve. Whether it would be all of the right -of -way east of the centerline for Washington Street or, east of the curb and gutter improvements and contiguous to the project site. Discussion followed relative to those improvements. 13. There being no further public comment. Chairwoman Barrows closed the public hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion. 14. Following the discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Ellson /Barrows to adopt Minute Motion 94-015 to recommend a one year extension of time for Plot Plan 93 -495 as conditioned. Unanimously - approved. Commissioner Abels withdrew from the Chambers due to a possible future conflict of interest on the following item. _ MS-24 B. PLOT PLAN 94 -522; 3Auest of DoDco Construction ,Ices for approval to develop a two story tl /office~ building in the C-V-gXone on a 0.37 acre site. 1. Associ Planner Greg Trousdell prese the information contained in the ff report, a copy of wh' son file in the Planning and elopment Department. 2.,•` Commissioner Adolph ask what the sign program was for the p ect. �r Staff explained the sign to be painted on the southeast c of the upper floor of the bu' tng. Discussion followed regardin lettering f and size of the si r 3. There being further comments of staff, Chairw Barrows opened the public ring. Mr. Dan Featheringill the Commission regardin he project and stated they were ab o modify the sign if the Com sion so desired. He further sta his concern regarding the ion to require French doors in the of the building as this would a security problem. Mr. F ngill watt on to explain him evelopment request. Mr. Greg Butler, drafts for the project, stated his requiring decorative c uric cite around the door frame windows on the no elevation. The Pueblo style archi% 23 aeons to display does not 0 l/ , ATTACHMENT 4 ceq 4 w t 7849S CALLE TAMPICO — LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92252 • (619) 777.70W FAX (619 ) 777.71ol APPLICATION FOR APPEAL OF FINDINGS OR CONDITIONS Appellant's Name SIMON PLAZA, INC. Date 5 -17 -94 Mailing Address 18 -611 Hwy. 111 ox La Quinta, CA 92253 Phone: (6191346 -2345 RE: Case No. -Plot Plan 9.3 -495 Type of Appeal: Conditional Use Permit .Variance _Change of, Zone Public Use Permit _Surface Mining i Reclamation Permit _Outdoor Advertising _Consistency with General Pli _Environmental Assessment _Setback Adjustments Temporary Use Permit. Plot Plan Please state basis for appeal and include any supportive evidence. If applicable, indicate the number of the specific condition which is beinc protested. Please see attached. Use additional sheets if necessarL7)Fiire gn o a z• Simon, Sr., President 24 WALM ADDRESS P.Q BOX ISO . LA QUINTA. CALIFON" 9= Case No. Plot Plan 93 -495 Simon Plaza, Inc. This appeal from the Planning Commission action extending Plot Plan 93 -495 for one year deals with several of the conditions which were modified from the conditions previously approved by the City Council in 1993. Condition 38: This condition.has been modified to require the applicant to improve Washington Street from the centerline to the property liner The previous Condition 39, which has been deleted, required that the applicant reimburse the City for the cost of all improvements from. the current curbline to the east. Condition 39: This condition represented a compromise between the City and the applicant and should not be modified. The current owners of the property have already dedicated right -of -way and installed the street improvements on Washington Street at the time the property was originally developed. The City may not now legally require us to tear those improvements out, dedicate additional property and then reinstall the street and other improvements. It is our position that if the City wants to widen Washington, it must buy the right -of -way and pay for the improvements. . gowever, last year we agreed to compromise our position and accepted Condition 39. We cannot accept Condition 38 because it, along with several of the other conditions, makes the project financially infeasible. Condition 40: This condition has been modified to require that this project pay the entire cost of modifying the Washington/ Highway 111 intersection and traffic signals. Previously, this condition provided that we would reimburse-the City 5t of the cost. our position with. respect to this condition is the same. as our position with respect to Condition 38. We already paid for the intersection and the traffic signal when we subdivided the property in 1982. The City may not legally require us to do it again. Finally, this condition will make the project financially infeasible. Condition Us This condition has been modified to require us to pay 50* of the cost of medians on Washington and Highway 111. Previously, the condition was that we pay SO% of the cost of the Highway ill median only. We may not legally be required to pay for this improvement as indicated above. Condition 44: This condition has been modified to require that we poet security with the City to guarantee that we install the improvements listed above. The previous condition provided that we would post security to reimburse the City for our share of the costs. It is our understanding that the City will be doing the' work. We have no objection to posting the security, but it should be for the cost of reimbursing the City, and then, only for the costs of the improvements we have agreed to. PIVAIn..Appm ►lOt �tM 9S-�4S 25 Condition 48: When we agreed to this condition last year, we were told that. the City intended to build a storm drain from the intersection to the Whitewater Channel, and that we could contribute a fair share.toward it. We have previously submitted a hydrology report to the City which indicates that our property, after development, would contribute only, 4% of the water which causes the problem. Accumulation of water at the intersection is a problem which currently exists, and we are not responsible for it Furthermore, we are not responsible for water that falls offsite to the center of Highway lil and Washington Street. We will provide for onsite retention, or will pay a fair share of the cost, but we cannot pay for it all. Finally, we would respectfully request that the City Council consider modifying Condition 2 and give us two (2) years to use the plot plan. This project is complicated and expensive. For the past two years we have worked long and hard to find financing in a most difficult financial market. Last year, we finally put our financing in place, just as our plot plan approval needed to be extended. As you know, you reduced the size of the project by over 40,000 square feet, and we lost our financing. This year, again, we have finally found a financing source, but again face the prospect of the conditions changing which would result in.losing our commitment. In view of the foregoing, we would like to have you consider giving us two years to put this project together. Thank you for your consideration of our request. 26 PAIZB:A►►EAL Met ►lOn 93.4". � T% ATTACHMENT 5 -. Pomona First Fe erai Swings and Loan Association Since 1892 City of 1-a Quinta Mr. JERRY HERMAN 78495. Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mr. Herman: September 23 1004 SEP 2 6 X94 U C.iY iii• A Subject: Parcel 6 of Parcel Map 18418; Hwy 111 and Washington; PP 93.495 It was a pleasure meeting with you yesterday to discuss Pomona Furst Federal's concerns regarding proposed dedications of the subject parcel to the City. As we discussed, Pomona First Federal had an agreement to sell the parcel until the additional 10' dedication came to light. I still find it difficult to understand how the City can propose to require this additional dedication when the landowner whose property will be taken has not been notified. In any event, we expect to proceed with the proposed Buyer to seek a variance from the 20' setback requirement in an effort to ameliorate the adverse effect of the additional taking. If successful, this effort should eliminate the need for pursuing other avenues of redress. This will confirm for you Pomona First Federal's position with regard to the Simon Plaza project. We do not object to. any extensions granted on their application for Plot Plan Approval, nor to the Plot Plan itself. However, this non-objection should not be taken as any type of authorization for the Simon applicant(s) to speak on behalf of Pomona First Federal. Pomona Furst Federal has no a=sment with Simon regarding the property and Simon-has absolutely no rights to the property. As reflected by our listing the property for sale, we are proceeding independently to dispose of our parcel. We would appreciate any efforts you take to notify Pomona First Federal of any matters relating to our parcel, even it they are not matters to which we are entitled to notice as a matter of law. Any such notice can be directed to me at the address indicated below. Thank you again for taking the tine to discuss this situation with us. We appreciate your cooperation and assistance. 27 cc: Shannon, Rinehart, Baxley, Sets► Very truly yours, Robert L. CoFA Vice President Savor Counsel A.w.rau..O11M: xo satin acing *Aftw • P.C. 9aa IS= • ray M Camw Me elm. 0141 esa•tan • ma1 as7eee • (M$ +6.•7000. m•► en-=, ATTACHMENT 6 CASE Na CASE MAP Vicinity Map Simon Plaza, Inc. 28 NORTH . SCALE: nts Highway 111 �- s i EXHIBIT '" 3 3E-- cPSE MO �QPROVEO M►�LSSLO� � 1p QUINIA PLANNING W Wr 41'� , \ � N dshj�I � 19 Oee t Approved as a 3 st. Complex in 1993/94 r2olrr.r �a��wRir M.�.r A�r1. l.•..I �,41k V ..n • O � 1 e � ~� O Z �,41k V ..n • O � 1 ..� ^T-��. r[�..i = j. �• _ __ _ ..`...._. _�.. _... ,__ .. _�- �1 ...., �`_' -.. ra+� `� -`ice. ►V. JL J'a J'� i atra, .1►a.dG i ITT L Q'a ( I ��!� d� /r4' � II QI� ;a1 ►+� ;a1s { ►�� �4r �wi j i II 1 t • -:._I it :i_1 _ll:� "_ _' .i �II�� i _• _p -iili� • -_ I I Ir 1 r u �1 NiNNY1d �1NIt1J Yl 10 Aill X661 5 - Avw i u 1 Q i II i - -- 8 4, A ga 8 6 J f MID� TnT T. r�.��ww r•w�� 1�1 /i�! N 1111® 8 ®I a' t: 19 (d w w i.m Rlr-� Approved as a 3 story in The 4th moved. E: ->_. MMMI= .111 1111 M.1 1111 'iiii i•ii ..11 1111 F. 0 MMMU-:] d..1� I rMAY - 5 1993 r i LA �JIi`ir+� DZFj- Fi!mEriT . MEN i M 30 1 a Approved as a 3 story building complex in 1993 and 1994. The fourth floor will be removed based on the attached Conditions. .E CO3 N a _i ►i.Rt�i GLavwr�` N ' N. MAY - 5 X993 - - — CITY GI!,1 GUINA PLANNING CcP+►RTIAENT�� .. ! 4- co I e MAY — 5 1993 Q I.IIV l,r LA CUTA:I A PLAMNW! lKP;'nfl tNT PARKING PLAN LEVEL -I l V mommm Y <�YC� Iusussn x 1 I+ of I 37 t Ti'T 4 4 QuIA AGENDA ITEM PROCESSING FORM ITEM NO: MEETING DATE: April 4, 1995 CITY X RDA I OTHER: ITEM TITLE: Continued Public Hearing on Plot Plan 93-495 (Revised) , appeal of Simn Pla Inc., of the Planning Cma>:iission's conditions to the approval of a one year extens' of time for a previously approved project on ¢506 acres on Highway 111, east of V.Tn c ' v.rrd- C•8. cw� .6- DEPARTMENT HEAD: Jerry Heenan rejg `Imisdell r 1 STAFF CONTACT: r "��9 DATE: 31, 1995 CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: i STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. DF-my the applicant's @ppeal regarding the Conditions of Approval; 2. Approve the tip extension subject to this Planning Commission conditions BOARD /COMMISSION/RECOMMENDATION (If Applicable): The Planing Conmi.saon voted to appmve the request on May 24, 1994, as gequem by the applicant. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION: PRESENTATIONS WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE BUSINESS SESSION APPROVAL REQUIRED: v �n CONSENT CALENDAR STUDY SESSION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS COPIES OF THIS ITEM SHOULD BE SENT TO: XPRIOR TO MEETING AFTER MEETING DEPARTMENT REPORTS MAYOR & COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS XXPUBLIC HEARINGS CLOSED SESSION NAME YES NO ORDINANCE P. 0. Box 461 La Quinta, 01 92253 RESOLUTION na Fire Federal Savings & Loan 350 S. Garey Avenue AGREEMENT Parlona, ro 9 SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT X COMMISSION REPORT X CITY ATTORNEY OPINION BID PACKAGE OTHER PRESENTATIONS WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE BUSINESS SESSION APPROVAL REQUIRED: v �n CONSENT CALENDAR STUDY SESSION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS COPIES OF THIS ITEM SHOULD BE SENT TO: XPRIOR TO MEETING AFTER MEETING DEPARTMENT REPORTS MAYOR & COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS XXPUBLIC HEARINGS CLOSED SESSION NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY /STATE /ZIP CODE kk. iced Simon. . SSr., P. 0. Box 461 La Quinta, 01 92253 k1 c. Rob art L. G-olish, V.Po, P na Fire Federal Savings & Loan 350 S. Garey Avenue Parlona, ro 9 4194 ORIGINAL: STAFF REPORT YELLOW: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PINK: DEPARTMENT i• AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 4, 1995 CONSENT CALENDAR: ITEM TITLE: STUDY SESSION: Continued Public Hearing on Plot Plan 93-495 (Revised), a request PUBLIC HEARING: by Simon Plaza, Inc. to appeal the Planning Commission's approval of a one year extension of time for a previously approved project on ±5.6 acres.on Highway 111, east of Washington Street RECOMMENDATION: Deny the applicant's appeal and request for a one year time extension for Plot Plan 93-495 (1st Extension of Time) based on the attached Findings. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: This plot plan request was originally approved by the Planning Commission on May 11, 1993, and accepted by the City Council on May 18, 1993. The approved plans allow a three story medical office building, additional retail /office buildings, and a multi-level parldng structure. Planning Commission Approval On May 24, 1994, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the request for a one year extension of time (Attachment 1). Modifications to the original Conditions of Approval were made. The changes were necessary because the Washington Street dedication had not been made by the applicant(s). The Planning Commission determined .that the one year extension should be allowed based on the State's current economic environment. The Planning Commission voted 3 -1 (Commissioner Adolph voted no) to approve the applicant's submittal pursuant to amended Conditions of Approval (Attachment 2). The Planning Commission minutes from the meeting are attached (Attachment 3). The applicant is not appealing the one year time extension approval, but is requesting that the City Council reconsider seven of the Planning Commission's amended Conditions (Conditions 2, 38, 39, 40, 43, 44, and 48). Six of the conditions address off -site improvements with the last requesting a two year extension period instead of the standard one year extension (Attachment.4). CCSTFGT.003 . ,. :1 The attached Planning Commission report explains the reasons for the proposed changes to the original conditions. The Planning Commission retained conditions which are pertinent to the development of the site. The Planning Commission's original reduction of the applicant's off -site improvement costs was also based on the property owner(s) conveying Washington Street right -of -way to the City so that improvements could be made: The street dedication paperwork has not been signed nor conveyed to the City as required by original Condition 35. The applicant has requested the City Council permit a two year approval for the project versus a one year period as noted in Condition 2. Chapter 9.182.090 (Approval Period) states "a time extension of up to one year may be considered." Therefore, only a one year period is permissible based on the City's current Municipal Zoning Code provision. Staff is considering an amendment to this provision this year during the City's update of the Zoning Code. Previous ApRol Hearing, The case was scheduled for review by the City Council on June 7, 1994, as a report of action by the Planning Commission. However, on May' 31, 1994; the applicant filed an appeal with the Planning Department requesting a public hearing before the City Council. The initial City Council public hearing was held on June 21, 1994; however, at the meeting, the applicant requested and received a continuance to August 2, 1994 (Attachment 5). On August 2, 1994, the Council continued the request to September 20th as requested by the applicant. On September 8, 1994, the applicant again requested a continuance of the September 20th public hearing to October 18, 1994, to permit additional time to review their on -site storm water requirements. On October 18, 1994, the Council continued the project to December 6, 1994, at the request of the applicant. The City Council, on December 6, 1994, requested the applicant revise the project because they did not control the piece of property at the intersection that is owned by Pomona First Federal Bank. The City Council directed the applicant. to revise the project and resubmit their plans to the Planning Commission for consideration in the next few months. The revised project would be considered by the City Council on April 4, 1995. On March 20, 1995, Mr. Fred Simon, Sr., representative for the owners, filed a sixth request for a further continuance (Attachment 5). !: I l, •-:! On September 26, 1994, staff received a letter from Mr. Robert L. Golish, Senior Counsel for Pomona First Federal Savings & Loan, indicating legal ownership to one of the parcels in the Simon project site, and their position on future and current legal issues regarding their parcel at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street (Attachment 6). The letter was submitted by Mr. Golish on behalf of an applicant who had submitted plans for a car wash on their +1.01 acre parcel. ccswanom 2 FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: Staff Comments The City Council extended the appeal to April 4, 1995, permitting the applicant time to revise the site plan without Parcel 6 (not under the control of the applicant) and submit the revised plan to the Planning Commission for review. As of this date, the site plan has not been changed or reviewed by the Planning Commission. Instead, the applicant is requesting another extension of time on the appeal. The Council can grant an extension. of the appeal, however, the approval expires on May 24, 1995. The options available to Council are as follows: 1. Deny the appeal and time extension request; 2. Continue the public hearing for 30 days; 3. Accept the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission on May 24, 1994 if Parcel 6 is controlled by the applicant; 4. Revise the Planning Commission Conditions of Approval as they relate to the project without Parcel 6. Attachments: 1. Planning Commission report of May 24, 1994 2. Conditions of Approval 3. Planning Commission minutes of May 24, 1994 4. Appeal filed by Mr. Fred Simon, Sr. 5.. better from Mr. Fred Simon, Sr., received March 20, 1995 6. Letter from Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan 7. Location map 8. Reduced Plans [sick Uc, 01 k] 11 ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT FROM: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: MAY 24, 1994 CASE NO: PLOT PLAN 93 -495 (REVISED) APPLICANT: SIMON PLAZA, INC. (PHILIP PEAD) OWNERS: 3S PARTNERSHIP AND POMONA FIRST FEDERAL BANK LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY III AND WASHINGTON STREET. THE DEVELOPMENT, ON +5.6 ACRES OF LAND, IS LOCATED TO THE WEST OF THE EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOTIVE DEALERSHIP ON HIGHWAY 111. ARCHITECT: EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS: BACKGROUND: MERLIN J. BARTH MIXED /REGIONAL COMMERCIAL WITH NON - RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY. NORTH: 111 LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER SOUTH: 'WASHINGTON SQUARE SPECIFIC PLAN PROPERTY (VACANT) EAST: _ EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP WEST: EXISTING PLAZA LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER Project History A one year extension of time has been requested in order to retain the applicant's 1993 approval of an 82,013 square foot commercial project on approximately 5.6 acres zoned C -P -S Commercial. The project includes a three story office building, a restaurant or bank, an eye institute or office, a two level parting structure, and related at -grade parting. This case is'a resubmittal of Plot Plan 91 -466 (Revised) which was approved in 1992 and expired in 1993. This project is approximately 44,000 square feet smaller than the previous plan in order to conform with the newly adopted General Plan Floor Area Ratio Policy. The applicant originally proposed a four story medical office building, a restaurant or bank, an office, and two level parking garage on a +5.6 acres site. (See attached Minutes from the meeting) . The Planning Commission said not approve the four story medical building, but they did approve a three story building and allowed the developer to reallocate the fourth floor building square footage to other locations within the project. The Planning Commission approved this case at their meeting of May 11, 1993. Now".at 4 Description of Site. The proposed +5.6 acre site is comprised of six parcels. The flat and undeveloped parcels were created by the division of land under Parcel Map 18418 in 1982. The property has frontage on three streets with 650 feet along Washington Street, 700 feet along Highway 111, and 180 feet along Simon Drive. The site elevation along Washington Street is approximately 60 feet above sea level. The site is improved with street improvements. However, additional widening is necessary on Washington street to conform with the city's adopted Specific. Plan Alignment Program and General Plan. A future raised median island is proposed for both Washington Street and Highway 111. The property was subdivided in the early 1980's for the development of Simon Motors automobile Dealership as well as to establish commercial lots which could be sold or developed with commercial land uses. Previous Planning Commission Review On April 13, 1993, the Planning Commission continued discussion of this project to May 11, 1993, to allow the applicant additional time to revise the project pursuant to the newly adopted provisions of the General Plan. The applicant did modify the proposal by reducing the overall size of the project from +126,411 square feet to +82,013 square feet. On May 11, 1993, the Planning Commission examined the revised application of Simon Plaza to develop their project at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. The Planning Commission reviewed the comments of the Design Review Board and they concurred that further refinements to the project were warranted. The Planning Commission felt the downscaled proposal was more fitting to this corner parcel, but were opposed to the proposed four story medical office building because it was too massive for this small site. The majority of Commission members stated they would prefer a three story project because it would be more consistent with the existing uses in the area. They noted that the tallest projects approved at this time are the three story El Mirador Medical Center (Desert Hospital) at 47th Avenue and Washington Street and the three story Eisenhower Medical facility at Washington Street and 48th Avenue. The Commission recognized that the applicant could apply for a four story building, but also felt the site could not accommodate such a large structure and retain a pedestrian character (see Condition #73). Mr. Philip Pead, the applicant, present at the, meeting spoke concerning his project. He went through some of the Conditions of Approval he wished to see modified and the Planning Commission discussed each item at length. The applicant also brought additional Highway 111 renderings which were modified after the May 3th Design Review Board meeting. Mr. Pead stated that his architect addressed most of the items identified in the report. However, there were a few items he felt were not necessary as they would add additional costs to the project either in future maintenance or construction. Many of the Items requested by the Design Review Board were either modified by the Planning Commission or deleted at the applicant's request. MOCO. a9 5 The Planning Commission amended a few of the recommendations of the Engineering Department at the meeting. Two of these items were the amount of improvements required by the applicant on Washington street and the percentage amount the applicant needed to contribute to the existing traffic signal at Simon Drive and Highway 111. The Planning Commission felt the developer should not be required to reimburse the City for the future raised median nor perform street improvements westerly of the existing curb and gutter facilities on Washington Street. The Commission however thought the developer should be required to install new street improvements per the provisions of the Washington Street Specific Plan Alignment Schedule (Condition 039) . The Commission thought the site was too small to justify all the requirements of the Engineering Department. The applicant also requested that the Planning Commission reduce his traffic signal fair -share contribution from 25% to something less than this because they felt their project did not justify this fee based on the size of their project. Mr. Pead thought the larger projects in the area should pay for this existing signal. The Planning Director stated that the other projects in the area were contributing, but 25% was the remaining amount since the One Eleven La Quinta Center contributed 50% and Washington Square will contribute 25 %. Staff stated that if Simon Motors was not built, the City would ask this property owner to contribute to the signal during the development process. But since it is a currently existing business, the City cannot request the traffic signal money from their business. The Commission felt the project did benefit from the existing traffic signal but they thought 12.5% was a more reasonable fee (Condition #41) . The final vote of the Planning Commission was 4 -1 to approve the project provided the project does not exceed three stories in overall height. The City Council accepted the Planning Commission approval of the project at their May 18, 1993, meeting. Public Hearing In 1993, staff began requiring that all time extensions be a public hearing in. order to inform the general public and surrounding property owners of the time extension request. This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 3; 1994, and notices were mailed to the abutting property owners-within 300 -feet of the project. Prior to the meeting, staff received no letters in support or in opposition to the one year extension request. IlleaW Dumpinz In 1993, staff informed an individual contractor that no fill dirt could be imported to the site. until the on -site archaeological study had been completed. However, some dumping was done on the southeast corner of the site before a stop work order could be issued. No additional on -site work shall be done until proper clearances are secured from the Engineering and Planning Departments. Proposed Condition Chances (1) Condition 2 - The new expiration date would be May 24, 1995 provided the Planning Commission approves the applicant's request. (2) Condition 35 - The applicant is requesting that Condition 35 be amended to require the land dedication for street widening be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Staff has modified the condition as requested by the applicant. MIN=. oN 8 (3) Condition 39 This condition was imposed by the Planning Commission on May 11, 1994, in order to reduce the applicant's off -site improvement costs. The City Attorney has requested that the original condition be reimposed ( Condition 38) . The City Attorney is of the opinion that the applicant should negotiate with the City Council or Redevelopment Agency for any reduction in their on or off -site improvements through a formal request. Because the reduction in improvement obligations of the developer is a fiscal matter which should be handled in an independent process separate from the review of the project. (4) The conditions which identified the Design Review Board have been modified to state that the Planning Director will finalize the project during plan check ( Conditions 23, 65 & 73) . (3) The conditions which referred to the four story building have been changed to state three story (Conditions 23 h 73) . STAFF CONCLUSION: Staff supports the time extension request because it meets the provisions of. the City's Zoning Code, the adopted General Plan, and the provisions of the Washington Street/ Highway 111 Specific Plans as conditioned. RECOMMENDATION:. By Minute Motion 94 -_, approve a one year extension of time for .Plot Plan 93 -495 ( Revised) pursuant to the attached Finding and revised Conditions. 90M. at 7 ;I ATTACHMENT 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED PLOT PLAN 93 -495 (REVISED) MAY 24, 1994 SIMON PLAZA * Modified by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 ** Added by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 * ** Deleted by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 + Modified by Planning Commission on 5 -24 -94 1. The revised project and time extension request are consistent with.the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 2. The project will not have an adverse environmental impact on the surrounding properties based on the proposed. Conditions of Approval. 3. The project is a logical progression of development for this community zoned area. 4. The proposed project is consistent with the intent and purpose of the General Plan. 1. The development of the property shall be generally in conformance with the exhibits contained in the file for PP 93 -495 (Revision), unless amended otherwise by the following conditions. +2. The approved plot plan shall be used by May 24, 1995; otherwise it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Be used" means the beginning of substantial construction which is contemplated by this approval, not including grading which is begun within the one year period and is thereafter diligently pursued until completion. A one year time extension may be requested as permitted by Municipal Code provided an extension request is filed by April 24, 1995. 3. There shall be no outdoor storage or sales displays without specific approval of the . Planning Commission. 4. All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed so as not to shine directly on surrounding adjoining properties or public rights -of -way. Light standard type with recessed light source shall also be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Exterior lighting shall comply with Outdoor Light Control Ordinance and Off - Street CONAPRVL.037 A Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 Parking requirements. 5. Adequate masonry trash enclosures shall be provided for all structures and provided with opaque metal doors. Plans for trash enclosures to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall contact the local waste management company to insure that the number of enclosures and size of the enclosures are adequate. 6. Decorative enclosures may be required by the City around any retention basins depending on site grading requirements. The color, location, and placement of said fence(s) shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. 7. Phased improvement plans shall be subject to Planning Commission review. 8. Handicap parking spaces and facilities shall be provided per Municipal Code, State, and Federal requirements. 9. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to submission of building plans for plan check or issuance of grading permit, whichever comes first. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on building interior areas from perimeter streets, and impacts on the proposed abutting and provide mitigation of noise as alternative mitigation measures for incorporation into the project design such as building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (berming, landscaping and walls, etc.), and other techniques. 10. The project shall comply with all existing Off - Street Parking requirements including but not limited to, shading of parking lot areas and bicycle parking spaces. 1 L Perimeter landscaping planters shall be provided at maximum widths possible adjacent to property lines and planted with landscaping. 12. The project shall comply with all applicable Art in Public Places Ordinances. A public art piece shall be installed on the property at a location agreeable to the Art in Public Places Committee (e.g., at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street). A public easement shall be offered, to the City for the site that any art piece may occupy which has been established by the Art, in Public Places Committee. 13. * The developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist and pay all associated costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior to CONAPRVL.037 N Conditions of'Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information, shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. The Planning and Development Director shall approve the firm to be used in the study prior to any on -site activities. The plan. shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society (CVAS) for a two -week review and comment period. At a minimum, the plan shall: 1) identify the means for digging test pits; 2) allow sharing the information with the CVAS; and 3) provide for further testing if the preliminary result show significant materials 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 divert, 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 areas 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 analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this use, the applicant shall obtain permits or clearances from the following agencies: • City Fire Marshal • City of La Quinta Public Works Department • City of La Quinta Planning and Development Department • Coachella Valley Water District CONAPRVL.037 10- Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 • Desert Sands Unified School District • Imperial Irrigation District • Caltrans (District 11) Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of application for a building permit for the proposed project. 15. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City adopted infrastructure fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 16. Final landscaping plans shall include approval stamps and signatures from the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioners office and the Coachella Valley Water District. 17. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit to the Engineering Department an interim landscape program for the entire site which shall be for the purpose of wind and erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blow sand and dust control measures during grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a) use of irrigation during construction and grading activities; b) areas not constructed on during first phase shall be planted in temporary ground cover or wildflowers and provided with temporary irrigation system; and c) provisions of wind breaks or wind rolls, fencing and /or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The landowner shall comply with requirements. of the Directors of Public Works and Planning and Development Departments. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent emission of dust and blow sand. 18. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit as determined by the Building Official. 19. 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 which must be satisfied prior to issuance of a building permit. Prior to a final building inspection approval, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection of other monitoring to assure such compliance. 20. A parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, and parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of a building permit. CONAPRVL.037 11 ILI Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision). - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 21. All roof equipment shall be screened from view by parapet walls of building or other architecturally matching materials. 22. All compact spaces shall be clearly marked "compact cars only" 23. + That all conditions of the Planning Commission shall be complied with as follows: A. The landscape plan shall include. an eight foot .wide meandering pedestrian/bike trail. The plans should be reviewed by the Design Review Board Planning Director prior to submission of the final landscape plan by the applicant/developer. B. The landscape program for Washington Street shall include a variation of planting materials, i.e., palm trees, accent shade trees, lawn, shrubs, and groundcover. The use of mature California Pepper, Australian Willow, Mesquite, Crape Myrtle, Bottle trees, and Washington Robusta Palms shall be encouraged. Varieties of flowering shrubs such as Texas Ranger, Cassia, Crepe Myrtle, and Dwarf Oleander shall be utilized. Native (low water use) plants shall be used, and the landscape architect should consult the Coachella Valley Water District's plant- material list prior to designing their proposal. Uplighted trees or palms shall be used along Washington Street and Highway 111. Incandescent light fixtures will be required (less than 160 watt). Landscaping plan shall conform to Ordinance 220 regarding water conservation. C. + Any proposed parking lot lighting plan shall be reviewed by the Design Re Board Planning Director prior to building plan check. A photometric study shall be developed which analyzes the lighting pattern on the project and meets the City's Lighting Ordinance provisions as explained in Chapter 9.210 and 9.160 (Off -Street Parking). The height of the light poles shall not exceed 18 feet in height, and the lighting contractor should reduce this height if physically possible during review of the project. D. A maximum building height of 28 feet shall be maintained along Washington Street and Highway 111 within 150 feet of the ultimate property line (after street dedication has been included) excluding minor architectural appendages (e.g., chimneys, towers, building columns, etc.). E. + Decorative concrete entryways shall be provided for all two -way driveways into CONAPRVL.037 12 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 the project site. The concrete shall be stamped and colored to accentuate the proposed development. The color, design, and location of the concrete should be reviewed by the Planning Director during a final plan check review. F. + The revised concept design plan shall be reviewed by the Desigit Review Board Planning Director prior to the submission of the plans to the Building and Safety Department for final plan check consideration. The plans should include but "are not limited to landscaping and irrigation, building elevations, signs, and any other major exterior design features of the project as noted at the Design Review Board meeting of May 5, 1993. G. Bike racks shall be provided at convenient areas within the site for usage by bicycle riders. One space for every 50.parking spaces shall be provided as noted in the Off - Street Parking Code. H. The landscape setback on Washington Street shall be a minimum of 20 feet from the new property line. I. All open parking stalls shall be screened by berm walls, landscape hedges, or a combination thereof to a minimum height of 42 inches. J. The maximum floor area ration (F.A.R.) for this project shall be 0.35 per the Policy Standards of the General Plan (LU Table #4). K. + The roof design for the 3 -story medical office building shall be either 4:12 or higher to give the building balance and proper scale to its mass. M. + The parking structures tile roof facade shall be. eliminated because it is not compatible with the design motif of the four three story medical office building. The applicant should evaluate another design style which incorporates a cornice design feature (similar to the upper portion of. the four story building) and other . articulated features which will soften the elevation and not enhance its presence. N. * The parking structure ramp on the south side of the project shall be stuccoed to match the building. The structure shall be landscaped along its westerly side to CONAPRVL.037 13 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 conceal its presence. O. + The applicant shall include the following features into the three story medical office building: L. Pre-east window 2. * Individual pane windows or grid molded windows can be used. 3 . * + Additional building column connections should be used where agreed upon with the Design Review Board Planning Commission. 4. Accented building roof heights. 5. Revision to the elevator shaft design and its relationship to Highway 111. 6.... Energy eanservation measures shall be revi 7.... 44ie two story elemera an the west side of the four story building sha4� Ledesigned so dmt the roof eenneee into the bttiiding (delete the existing 24. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 3500 gpm for a three hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. Fire flow is based upon all buildings being equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. 25. A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6" X 4" X 2'/2" X 21/2 "), will 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. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 26. Prior to issuance of any building permit, 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 and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed /approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company 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." The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to start of construction. 27. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13. The post indicator valve and Fire Department connection shall be located to the front within 50 feet. of a hydrant, and a CONAPRVL.037 14 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). System plans must be submitted with a plan check/inspection fee to the Fire Department for review. A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans. 28. Install a supervised waterflow fire alarm system as required by the Uniform Building Code. 29. Install a Hood Duct automatic fire extinguishing system. System plans must be permitted, along with a plan check/inspection fee, to the Fire Department for review. 30. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 31. Occupancy separation will be required as per the Uniform Building Code, #503. 32. Install Panic Hardware and "Exit" signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. 33. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes 34. Install a Class I Standpipe System. 35. 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 these Conditions of Approval noted as follows: A. Washington Street - Provide right -of -way as required by the Washington Street Specific Plan. B. Washington Street/Highway 111 Intersection - Provide right -of -way cut back as needed to accommodate a 55 -foot curb return (45 -feet right -of -way). C. *+ haH dedieate the reqttir� right-of-way within thir�p (50) days afte Property owner(s) shall dedicate the required right -of -way prior to the issuance of a building permit. 36. Applicant shall provide a fully improved landscaped setback area of noted minimum width adjacent to the following street right -of -way: CONAPRVL..037 15 .- Conditions of Approval P1ot.Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 A. Washington Street - 20 -feet wide; B. Highway 111, 50 feet wide; C. Simon Drive, 10 feet wide 37. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to all streets from the project site except for three locations as proposed by the applicant as shown on the site plan drawing. 38'. + Applicant shall fund and install all street improvements located east of Washington Street Specific Plan centerline and contiguous to the project site. The new improvements include street widening, curb and gutter, asphalt concrete overlay, 8 -foot wide sidewalk, traffic striping and signing and signing along with all appurtenant incidentals and improvements needed to properly integrate and join together the new and existing improvements in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. Applicant shall retain registered professionals as needed to prepare plans for the improvements required by these Conditions of Approval. • . -- i w i i • i • • i rii - w • - - - 1! oil 11 NO W IN 0110,111,111 NO •' - : • • :rr1• - i • : • r:• 40. + Applicant shall modify the traffic signal and intersection improvements at the Washington Street/Highway 111 intersection as requied by Caltrans to accommodate the Washington Street widening improvements. 41-* Applicant shall reimburse City for 24* 12.5 % of the cost to design and install traffic signal at the Simon Drive /Highway 111 intersection. 42. + Applicant shall install a bus stop "pullout" and bus shelter on Highway 111 in compliance with Caltrans, Sunline Transit, and City requirements. 43. + Applicant shall pay for half of the cost to design and install raised median improvements and landscaping on Highway 111 and Washington Street in the portion contiguous, to the project site. 44. + Applicant shall enter into a secured agreement with the City to ensure installation of improvements required by these Conditions of Approval before the grading permit is issued. 45. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological, and soils engineering investigation shall 16 CONAPRVL.037 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 be conducted with a report submitted for review along with grading plan. The report recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and/or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. 46. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 47. The site shall be designed and graded in a manner so the elevation difference between the building pad elevations on site and the adjacent street curb do not exceed three (3.0) feet. 48.+ Applicant shall provide storm drain facilities with sufficient capacity to evacuate all water .that falls on -site and off -site to the centerline of the streets adjoining the site during the, 1 -hour duration, 25 -year storm event. The storm drain facility shall convey the storm water from the site to the Whitewater Channel. The applicant may purchase capacity on a fair share basis in a storm drain designed and constructed in Washington Street by the City, if the City proceeds with said storm drain facility within time constraints which suit the applicant. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of Washington Street, Highway 111, and Simon Drive. 49. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped setback areas. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of the Planning Director, ,City. Engineer, and Coachella Valley Water District and the plans shall be signed these officials prior to construction. 50. 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. 51. Applicant shall landscape and maintain the landscaped setback area and right -of -way between all street curbing and property lines. 52. Applicant shall construct an eight -foot wide meandering bike path in the combined easterly parkway, of Washington Street and southerly parkway of Highway 111 in lieu of the standard six-foot wide sidewalk. A six foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed on Simon Drive. 53. All existing and proposed telecommunication, television cable, and electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, that are. adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 17 CONAPRVL.037 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 54. Underground utilities that lie directly under street improvements or portions thereof. shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to installation of that portion of the street improvement. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. 55. Applicant shall pay all fees charged by the city as required for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the city. 56. Applicant shall retain a California registered civil engineer, or designate one who is on applicant's staff, 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 retained or designated by the applicant to implement this responsibility shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. The engineer shall sign and seal a statement placed on the "as built" plans that says "all (grading and grades) (improvements) on these plans were properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision during construction for compliance with the plans and specifications and the work shown hereon was constructed as approved, except where otherwise noted hereon and specifically acknowledged by the City Engineer ". B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the engineer shall provide a separate document, signed and sealed, to the City Engineer that documents the building pad elevations. The document shall, for each pad, state the pad elevation approved on the grading. plan, the as built elevation, and 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. C. Provide to the City Engineer a signed set of "as built" reproducible drawings of the site grading and all improvements installed by the applicant. 57. The parking stalls on the north side of the office complex as determined by Staff, shall be restricted to either handicapped parking or reserved parking to help eliminate queuing at the Highway 111 access driveway. 58. The driveways on Washington Street and on Highway 111 shall be restricted to right turn movements only. 59. Turning movements at the intersection of Washington Street and Simon Drive shall be restricted to right turns only in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. CQNAPRVL.037 18 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 60. All required improvements shall be completed prior to first site occupancy of the proposed development.. 61. The parking structure shall not exceed 15 feet in overall height as measured from finished grade pad elevation within 100 feet of Highway 111. Exterior lighting on top level of parking structure shall not exceed six feet and not be within ten feet of outside wall. 62. All mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 91 -211. shall be met. 63. The parcels shall be legally merged prior to building permit issuance. 64. - 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, so adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. 65. + - The north side of the parking structure shall include perimeter grade planting as deemed appropriate by the Design Review Battrd Planning Director. 66. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, a parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department to verify compliance with the Off -Street Parking requirements. Prior to each subsequent phase beginning construction a new parking study based on existing usage and potential demand shall be submitted. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. 67. Appropriate and adequate service delivering areas (loading facilities) and trash facilities shall be provided as required by the Off -Street Parking Code. The facilities shall include areas for recycling bins and be approved by Staff during the final review process. The standards and requirements of AB 939 (recycling) shall be met. This shall include provisions for on -site recycling of recyclable materials by the tenants in conjunction with the City's franchise hauler contract provisions. 68. An on -site elevator(s) shall service the site and provide accessibility from the parking garage to each respective building floor level. The design and installation of the elevator shall meet both Uniform Building Code standards and any other California State requirements. CONAPRVL.037 19 - -1 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 69. The existing six foot high soundwall along the Washington Street frontage road shall be extended between the frontage road and Washington Street northerly of its present location to the northeasterly corner of Lot 27 of Tract 2043 (Singing Palms Drive and Washington Street) to mitigate traffic noise impacts on the existing R -1 single family. neighborhood. 70. A Transportation Demand Management Plan shall be submitted (Ordinance 217) if the project or the ultimate development of the site employs 100 or more persons. The plan can be prepared by either the property owner or the tenant(s) within the development. The plan shall be submitted and approved by the Director of Planning and Development. 71. The provisions of the City's newly adopted Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance ( #220) shall be met. 72.** The applicant shall provide a theme plaza at the. intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street as required by the General Plan which shall include landscaping, public furniture and a public art piece. The art piece can contain the developers main identification sign (Sign #1), if it is an integral part of the theme plaza and /or the public art piece. The design shall be approved by the Art in Public Places Committee and the City Council as required by Chapter 2.65 of the Municipal Code. The developer shall retain an artist to help design the theme plaza. The theme plaza size shall not be less than 2,000 square feet and the overall design.should be similar to the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center theme plaza at the northeast comer of Highway 111 and Washington Street.' 73. +•* The medical office building shall not exceed three stories with a maximum 40 -foot height. The height of the building shall be measured from the existing grade (top of curb) on Highway 111. The developer can reallocate the fourth floor square footage into the project (e.g., over the parking structure) provided the new site plan does include adding two story elements into the 150 -foot setback requirement on either arterial street. The revised design shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to preparation of final working drawings. CONAPRVL.037 20 f - ATTACHMENT 3 MINUTES L PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California May 24, 1994 i • •M.: U. A. The meeting Commissioner 7 :00 P.M. elp to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairwoman Barrows. led the flag salute. A. Chairwoman Barrows ed the roll call. Present: Commissioners Adolph, Ellson, Abels, and oman Barrows. B. Commission Abels/Ellson moved and second motion -to excuse Commis* er Marrs. Unanimously approved. C. S Present: Planning Director Jerry Her , City Attorney Dawn Honeywel enior Engineer Steve Speer, Princi fanner Stan Sawa, Associate P er Greg Trousdell, and Department S etary Betty Sawyer. ommissioners Ellson /Abel oved to amend the agenda to pla ublic Hearing 3 (Plot Plan 93-495- ' on Plaza) as it NI and anize the agenda accordingly. Unani ly approved. M. PUBLIC HEARINGS - A. PLOT PLAN 93 -495; a request of Simon Plaza for a one year extension of time -for a commercial project at the southeast corner of Washington Street and Highway 111. lr Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in Me staff report. a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Commissioner Adolph asked staff what the status of the street dedication was. Staff stated the dedication had not taken place as of yet but the street dedication would have to take . place prior to any building permits being issued. a. DRAFT �, Punning {4WWffl%% n, mirowb Mar. N. 1"A 3. Commissioner Adolph asked if the restaurant planned for the corner was still required to have the two copulas on the top of the building and if the signage would remain the same. Staff stated all the conditions originally approved would remain. 4. Commissioner Ellson asked if the project could be built in phases. Staff stated it could as long as it met all the conditions. S. Commissioner Ellson asked if the upper lever patio would have a trellis cover. Staff stated the original approval did not require a trellis patio cover. 6. There being no further questions of staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the public hearing.. Mr. Mark Moran, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission regarding the project and the concerns they had with the modified conditions. In particular was an objection to Condition 138, in place of Condition 39. 7. Mr. Paul Seltzer, co -owner in the project, elaborated on the objections to Conditions #38, 140, 142, 143, and 144. Air. Seltzer stated the project did not cause the problem for the widening of the street. They had paid to put the street in once and they should not be required to do it again. S. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained the conditions were added to the project as this was a new development that came after a circulation specific plan was adopted by the City. She further stated that only the City Council can waive any costs by entering into a Development Agreement or Owner Participation Agreement with the Redevelopment Agency. 9. , Mr. Seltzer reiterated that the Planning Commission and City Council approved Condition 139 last year and he can't understand why it cannot be done again with this request.. Discussion followed as to why the street is being widened and who is responsible for that widening. 10. Mr. Fred Simon, co- owner, addressed the condition regarding the funding of the street improvements as required by Condition 138. He stated that if the additional costs of the street improvements are placed on the project he will be unable to fund the project and it will not be built. 11. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated that since the City had not been able to widen Washington Street for two years and since Simon Plea had been unable to get their project started, staff went to the City Council to discuss the widening of Washington Street in two phases. The City would fund the first phase and Simon Plaza would incur the cost of the second >lase- 2Z PlamunI: c4Mneu+ won Mw"da May 24. 1"4 12. Commissioners Ellson and Abels asked staff to clarify what the difference was between Conditions #38 and #39. Staff stated the difference was in regard to how much of the street Simon Plaza would be required to improve. Whether it would be all of the right -of -way east of the centerline for Washington Street or, east of the curb and gutter improvements and contiguous to the project site. Discussion followed relative to those improvements. 13. There being no further public comment, Chairwoman Barrows closed the public hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion. 14. Following the discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners _.. _ Ellson /Barrows to adopt Minute Motion 94 -015 to recommend a one year extension of time for Plot Plan 93 -495 as conditioned. Unanimously approved. Commissioner Abels withdrew from the Chambers due to a possible future conflict of interest on the following item. M -i4 B. PLOT PLAN 94 -522; 30tiest of DoDco Construction ices for approval to develop a two story 11 /office_ building in the C -V- one on a 0.37 acre site. 1. Associ Planner Greg Trousdell prose the information contained in the ff report, a copy of whic s on file in the Planning and elopmenf Department. 2.,•` Commissioner Adolph ask what. the sign program was for the p ect. J/ Staff explained the sign s to be painted on the southeast co of the " upper floor of the bu* ing. Discussion followed regardin a lettering !f and size of the si 3. There being further comments of staff, Chairw Barrows opened the public ring: Mr. Dan Featheringill a the Commission mgardin he project and stated they were ab o modify the sign if the Com sion so desired. He further . stat his concern regarding the ion to require French doors in the of the building as this would a security problem. Mr. ringill went on to explain hi; evelopment request. Mr. Greg Butler, drafts for the project, stated hisons to requiring decorative c mic file around the door frarnesivand _ display windows on the no elevation. The Pueblo style archi(eOcture does not 23 / ATTACHMENT 4 78495 CALLE TAMPICO — LA GUINTA. CALIFORNIA 922S2 - (619) 777.7000 FAX (519) 777.7101 APPLICATION FOR APPEAL OF FINDINGS OR CONDITIONS Appellant's Name SIMON PLAZA, INC. Date 5 -27 -94 Mailing Address 78 -611 Hwy. 111 Box La Quinta, CA. 92253 Phone: (619j346 -2345 RE: Case No. Plot Plan 93 -495 Type of Appeal: Conditional Use Permit .Variance Change of,Zone Public Use Permit Surface Mining i Reclamation Permit W Outdoor Advertising iConsistency with General Plar Environmental Assessment iSetback Adjustments _Temporary Use Permit - (_Plot Plan Please state basis for appeal and include any supportive evidence. If applicable, indicate the number of the specific condition which is being protested. Please see attached. Use additional sheets if necessary. Q �i A. igna re Fre J. Simon, Sr.. President 24 mmuNO ADDRESS - P.O. Wx 1504 - U1 CXANTA, CALFORNIA 9= Case No. Plot Plan 93 -495 Simon Plaza, Inc. This appeal from the Planning Commission action extending Plot Plan 93 -495 for one year deals with several of the conditions which were modified from the conditions previously approved by the City Council in 1993. Condition 38s This condition has been modified to require the applicant to improve Washington Street from the centerline to the property line. The previous Condition 39, which has been deleted, required that the applicant reimburse the City for the cost of all improvements from the current curbline to the east. Condition 39: This condition represented a compromise between the City and the applicant and should not be modified. The current owners of the property have already dedicated right -of -way and installed the street improvements on Washington Street at the time the property was originally developed. The City may not now legally require us to tear those improvements out, dedicate additional property and then reinstall the street and other improvements. It is our position that if the City wants to widen Washington, it must, buy the right -of -way and pay for the improvements. . kowever, last year we agreed to compromise our position and accepted Condition 39. We cannot accept Condition 38 because it, along with several of the other conditions, makes the project financially infeasible. Condition 40s This condition has been modified to require that this project pay the entire cost of modifying the Washington/ Highway 111 intersection and traffic signals. Previously, this condition provided that we would reimburse-the City 5% of the cost. our position with respect to this condition. is the same as our position with respect to Condition 38. 'We already paid for the intersection and the traffic signal when we subdivided the property in 1982. The City may not. legally require us to do it again. Finally, this- condition will make the project financially infeasible. Condition 43: This condition has been modified to require us to pay 508 of the cost of medians on Washington and Highway Ill. Previously, the condition was that we. pay 50t of the cost of the Highway 111 median only. We may not legally be required to pay for this improvement as indicated above. Condition 44: This condition has been modified to require that we post security with the City to guarantee that we install the improvements listed above. The previous condition provided that we would post security to reimburse the City for our share of the costs. It is our understanding that the City will be doing the work. we have no objection to posting the security, but it should be for the cost of reimbursing the City, and then, only for the costs of the improvements we have agreed to. FTWAIU:APPM Plot Ptm 93 -4" 25 _� Condition 46t 'When we agreed to this condition last year, we were told that the City intended to build a storm drain from the intersection to the Whitewater Channel, and that we could contribute a fair share toward it. We have previously submitted a hydrology report to the City which indicates that our property, after development, would contribute. only 4% of the water which causes the problem. Accumulation of water at the intersection is a problem which currently exists, and we are not responsible for it. Furthermore, we are not responsible for water that falls offsite to the center of Highway, ill and Washington Street. We will provide for onsite retention, or will pay a fair share of the cost, but we cannot pay for it all. Finally, we would respectfully request that the City Council consider modifying Condition 2 and give us two (2) years to use the plot plan. This project is complicated and expensive. For the past two years we have worked long and hard to find financing in a most difficult financial market. Last year, we finally put our financing in place, just as our plot plan approval needed to be extended. As you know, you reduced the size of the project by over 40,000 square feet, and we lost our financing. This year, again, we have finally found a financing source, but again face the prospect of the conditions changing which would result in losing our commitment. In view of the foregoing, we would like to have you consider giving us two years to put this project together. Thank you for your consideration of our request. SIMON PJAZA, INC. . Simon, sr., Presiaent 26 saIMAPKa Plot Plan 93 -495 � _ ATTACHMENT 5 March 20, 199 y- ul� Honorable John Pena, Mayor TA City of La Quinta pU11NNIN60EPARTMENI 78 -495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mayor Pena: This letter is to inform you that if the City Council decides to continue consideration of our Simon Plaza project to a later date, we would have no objection to that continuance. We are working diligently to -acquire the land in order to be able to dedicate to the City which will make everyone happy. Sincerely yours, SIM?,IJ, PLAZA NC. Fred J.on, Sr. of the Board 27 P.O. BOX 461, 78 -611 HWY. 111, LA QUINTA, CA 92253 • PH.: 619/773 -2345 • FAX: 619/5684567 )1' — % K ATTACHMENT 6 Pomona first Federal Savings and Loan Association since 1892 City of La Quinta Mr. TERRY HERMAN 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mr. Herman: September 23 _ r r 1 n `•r is SEP 26 L ...:..111.1..,... C; ill sir _;, [A Subject: Parcel 6 of Parcel Map 18418; Hwy 111 and Washington; PP 93495 It was a pleasure meeting with you yesterday to discuss Pomona First FederaPs concerns regarding proposed dedications of the subject parcel to the City. As we discussed, Pomona First Federal had an agreement to sell the parcel until the additional 10' dedication came to fight. I still find it difficult to understand how the City can propose to require this additional dedication when the landowner whose property will be taken has not been notified. In any event, we expect to proceed with the proposd&Buyer to seek a variance from the 20' setback requirement in an effort to ameliorate the adverse effect of the additional taking. If successfiA this effort should eliminate the need for pursuing other avenues of redress. This will confirm for you Pomona First Federars position with regard to the.Simon Plaza project. We do not object to any extensions granted. on their application for Plot Plan Approval, nor to the Plot Plan itself. However, this non-objection should not be taken as any type of authorization for the Simon applicant(s) to speak on behalf of Pomona First Federal. Pomona First Federal h2s no tit with Simon regarding the property and Simon-has absolutely no rights to the property. As reflected by our listing the property for sale, we are proceeding independently to dispose of our parcel. We would appreciate any efforts you take to notify Pomona First Federal of any matters relating to our parcel, even it they are not matters to which we are entitled to notice as a matter of law. Any such notice can be directed to me at the address indicated below. Thank you again for taking the time to discus this situation with us. We appreciate your cooperation and assistance. Very truly yours, 44-*'Vf/-;a-ZX- Robert L. Golish Vice President Senior Counsel 28 cc: Shannon, Rinehart, Baxley, Selzer Ar&AWaU" oM@m 350 Savo G" Avmw • P.O. 90 I= • .Omen.. ca WWA bt 798 • (7141 423-nn -(1131425-7098- 42161 "& - ?Sao • (7141 172-0621 ATTACHMENT 7 CASE No. CASE MAP Vicinity Map Simon Plaza, Inc. 29 NORTH SCALE : nts ` 3' CASE NO APPROVE LA Quito PIAONING COM MISSION Wr —� Highway 111 pt w wA puNNlNO & RTMENT 0 Approved as a 3 st. Complex in 1993/94 rLOJr cf •�.�.. /���Y i wrw.w� r i v a � n / � m r �n I Ti , - - --m .. mw-mwm� NINNYW IINIn0 VI 10 AIII "T" Avw Xx --r— 11111 'lfll I X11!! s a 8 r4 ., P, ^ , .. wl�� I�'!1I® pm! C. zz lEl 10:: M' i 14 PM n -•rTr t �QQ 6 06 8 r3 --- r= � I � i I - a v rara 1 34 f Approved as a 3 story in The 4th moved. W N Vwdlkw 0 MAY - 5 1993 G11Y yr ALA LIJIN plANf1�N� DEPARTMENT II ©_ G3 i i �i m, a C#3 M Approved as a 3 story building complex in 1993 and 1994. The fourth floor will be removed based on the attached Conditions. N cM i i u..RTU -av f sw1 GMG-5�3 • GF to LUINTA CcPrF��IIENT�•.� _.... I� V 1 1 MAY - 5 1993 4 1,11V 1,r LA CllIA:fA Ql�HNINS D--p4 1AtNT,s� 0 V F �c! =Fill s O A is i I, � 0 I PI �. iW . i 38 1 Tot! t 4 4 QuIR& ITEM NO: AGENDA ITEM PROCESSING FORM IIMEETING DATE: I RDA I OTHER: ITEM TITLE: Continuad Public Haaring on Plot Plan 93-495 (Pevisad) , a raq%=-st by Sire. Plaza, Inc. to anal the Planning C rmission° s approval of a one year extensior) for a previously approved project on ±5.6 acres an Highway 111, east of Washingf . DEPARTMENT HEAD: Jay man STAFF CONTACT: Greg Trousdell iG) DATE: Vbvanber 29, 1994 CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: �f ✓/ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: i i any, -che applicant ° s appeal and request for a one year tits extension for Plot Plan 93 -495 1st EKt e nsion of Time) based on the attached Findings. BOARD /COMMISSION/RECOMMENDATION (If Applicable): T'ne Planning Cession voted to approve the rest, on May 24, 1994, as request by the Applieog L. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION: APPROVAL REQUIRED: fl Of tim )n St. I 11 1 YES I NO I APPROVAL 1 1 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE LEGAL FINANCE DIRECTOR OTHER (LIST): PRESENTATIONS YES NO ORDINANCE STUDY SESSION MAYOR & COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS RESOLUTION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS X PUBLIC HEARINGS AGREEMENT CLOSED SESSION SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT COMMISSION REPORT CITY ATTORNEY OPINION BID PACKAGE OTHER APPROVAL REQUIRED: fl Of tim )n St. I 11 1 YES I NO I APPROVAL 1 1 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE LEGAL FINANCE DIRECTOR OTHER (LIST): PRESENTATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR DEPARTMENT REPORTS WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE STUDY SESSION MAYOR & COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS BUSINESS SESSION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS X PUBLIC HEARINGS CLOSED SESSION COPIES OF THIS ITEM SHOULD BE SENT TO: X PRIOR TO MEETING AFTER MEETING NAM�+E. STREET ADDRESS CITY /STATE /ZIP CODE 9 /� P1 0. 461 La a )USddta, CA 92253 b�iCish t 2�,. Golish, V. Po . POTM na 1St F� ?�c71 �r3� iz►clE F. L�E1x1 ; �n .� C P Vx?v_ t��r??ivvP, PnMn H- 9:i1,69 4194 ORIGINAL: STAFF REPORT YELLOW: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PINK: DEPARTMENT 1 CA Ii. i 4 Zi�'Qumz AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: October 18, 1994 CONSENT CALENDAR: ITEM TITLE: STUDY SESSION: Continued Public Hearing on Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revised), a request by Simon Plaza, Inc. to appeal the Planning Commission's PUBLIC I- TEARING: approval of a one year extension of time for a previously approved project on ±5.6 acres on Highway 111, east of Washington Street RECOMMENDATION: Deny the applicant's appeal and request for a one year time extension for Plot Plan 93 -495 (1st Extension of Time) based on the attached Findings. I:ISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Case History This plot plan request was originally approved by the Planning Commission on.May 11, 1993, and accepted by the City Council on May 18, 1993. The approved plans allow a three story medical office building, additional retail /office buildings, and a multi -level parking structure. Planning Commission Approval On May 24, 1994, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing oil the request for a one year extension of time (Attachment 1). Modifications to the original Conditions of Approval were made. The changes were necessary because the Washington Street dedication had not been made by the applicant(s). The Planning Commission determined that the one year extension should be allowed based on the State's current economic environment. The Planning Commission voted 3 -1 (Commissioner Adolph voted no) to approve the applicant's Submittal pursuant to amended Conditions of Approval (Attachment 2). The Planning Commission minutes from the meeting are attached (Attachment 3). Appeal Request The applicant is not appealing the one year time extension approval, but is requesting that the City Council reconsider seven of the Planning Commission's amended Conditions (Conditions 2, 38, 39, 40, 43, 44, & 48). Six of the conditions address off -site improvements with the last requesting a two year extension period instead of the standard one year extension (Attachment 4). CCSTFCT.003 A ;Ile attached Planning Commission report explains the reasons for the proposed changes to the original :onditions. The Planning Commission retained conditions which are pertinent to the development of the site. The Planning Commission's original reduction of the applicant's off -site improvement costs was also based on ;ile property owner(s) conveying Washington Street right -of -way to the City so that improvements could be iiiade. The street dedication paperwork has not been signed nor conveyed to the City as required by original Condition 35. The applicant has requested the City Council permit a two year approval for the project versus a one year period as noted in Condition 2. Chapter 9.182.090 (Approval Period) states "a time extension of up to one year may be considered." Therefore, only a one year period is permissible based on the City's current Municipal Zoning Code provision. Staff is considering an amendment to this provision this year during the City's update of the Zoning Code. Previous Appeal Hearings The case was scheduled for review by the City Council on June 7, 1994, as a report of action by the Planning Commission. However, on May 31, 1994, the applicant filed an appeal with the Planning Department requesting a public hearing before the City Council. The initial City Council public hearing was held on June 21, 1994; however, at the meeting, the applicant requested and received a continuance to August 2, 1994 (Attachment 5). On August 2, 1994, the Council continued the request to September 20th as requested by the applicant. On September 8, 1994, the applicant again requested a continuance of the September 20th public hearing to October 18, 1994, to permit additional time to review their on -site storm water requirements. On October 18, 1994, the Council continued the project to December 6, 1994, at the request of the applicant. The most recent continuance request letter is attached (Attachment 6). Letter from Mr. Robert L. Golish On September 26, 1994, staff received a letter from Mr. Robert L. Golish, Senior Counsel for Pomona. First Federal Savings & Loan, indicating legal ownership to one of the parcels in the Simon project site, and their position on future and current legal issues regarding their parcel at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street (Attachment 7). The letter was submitted by Mr. Golish on behalf of an applicant who had submitted conceptual plans for a car wash on their ± 1.01 acre site.` The Planning Commission reviewed the conceptual plans on September 13th, as a study session item. On November 4, 1994, staff received a request by Mr. J.L. Jaragin to develop a car wash on this site (CUP 94 -015). The public hearing for this project is scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting of December 13, 1994. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: Staff Comments No major changes have occurred in the last six months to warrant further review and consideration of the i)roject. Staff supports denial of the appeal and would further move to deny the time extension request based cm the following findings: The street dedication requirements which were imposed on the applicant(s) in 1993 were not completed in a timely fashion pursuant to Condition 35(c). CCSTFGT.003 2 4 The approved project, if allowed to remain for another year, could be inconsistent with the proposed revisions to the Municipal Zoning Code which are scheduled for review by the City Council in the next few months. ?. The applicants have not submitted to staff their proposal for the formation of a development agreement with the City as discussed at the City Council meeting of September 20th and through correspondence from the Planning Department on September 1, 1994. ;. The entire ownership of the parcels affected by the Plot Plan are not committed to the project given the fact that Pomona Federal Bank is no longer under contract to sell their parcel to the applicant. Thus the requirement that all ownership interests are represented in the application is no longer present. I'Iie options available to Council are as follows: I . Deny the appeal and time extension request; `'. Continue the public hearing to January 17, 1994; .I Accept the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission on May 24, 1994; 4. Consider revising the approved Conditions of Approval. -fir q�4 Jerry .Herman Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Planning Commission report of May 24, 1994 Conditions of Approval 3. Planning Commission minutes for meeting of May 24, 1994 4. Appeal filed by Mr. Fred Simon, Sr. i. Letter from Mr. Fred Simon, Sr., received July 12, 1994 6. Letter from Mr. Fred Simon, Sr., received October 14, 1994 7. Letter from Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan 8. Location "map o. Large Plan (City Council only) CCSTFGT.003 3 ATTACHA4ENTS ATTACHMENT 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT FROM: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: MAY 24, 1994 CASE NO: PLOT PLAN 93 -495 (REVISED) APPLICANT: SIMON PLAZA, INC. (PHILIP PEAD) OWNERS: 3S PARTNERSHIP AND POMONA FIRST FEDERAL BANK LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND WASHINGTON STREET. THE DEVELOPMENT, ON +5.6 ACRES OF LAND, IS LOCATED TO THE WEST OF THE EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOTIVE DEALERSHIP ON HIGHWAY I11. ARCHITECT: MERLIN J. BARTH EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: MIXED /REGIONAL COMMERCIAL WITH NON- RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS: NORTH: 111 LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER . SOUTH: WASHINGTON SQUARE SPECIFIC PLAN PROPERTY (VACANT) EAST: EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP WEST: EXISTING PLAZA LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER BACKGROUND: Project History A one year extension of time has been requested in order to retain the applicant's 1993 approval of an 82,013 square foot commercial project on approximately 5.6 acres zoned C -P -S Commercial. The project includes a three story office building, a restaurant or bank, an eye institute or office, a two level parking structure, and related at -grade parking. This case is a resubmittal of Plot Plan 91 -466 (Revised) which was approved in 1992 and expired in 1993. This project is approximately 44,000 square feet smaller than the previous plan in order to conform with the newly adopted General Plan Floor Area Ratio Policy. The applicant originally proposed a four story medical office building, a restaurant or bank, an office, and two level parking garage on a +5.6 acres site. (See attached Minutes from the meeting) The Planning Commission did not approve the four story medical building, but they did approve a three story building and allowed the developer to reallocate the fourth floor building square footage to other locations within the project. The Planning Commission approved this case at their meeting of May 11, 1993. mmwa. 049 4 r Description of Site The proposed ±5.6 acre site is comprised of six parcels . The flat and undeveloped parcels were created by the division of land under Parcel Map 18418 in 1982. The property has frontage on three streets with 650 feet along Washington Street, 700 feet along Highway 111, and 180 feet along Simon Drive. The site elevation along Washington Street is approximately 60 feet above sea level. The site is improved with street improvements. However, additional widening is necessary on Washington street to conform with the city's adopted Specific Plan Alignment Program and General Plan. A future raised median island is proposed for both.Washington Street and Highway 111. The property was subdivided in the early 1980's for the development of Simon Motors automobile Dealership as well as to establish commercial lots which could be sold or developed with commercial land uses. Previous PlanninIZ Commission Review On April 13, 1993, the Planning Commission continued discussion of this project to May 11, 1993, to allow the applicant additional time to revise the project pursuant to the newly adopted provisions of the General Plan. The applicant did modify the proposal by reducing the overall size of the project from ±126,411 square feet to +82,013 square feet. On May 11, 1993, the Planning Commission examined the revised application of Simon Plaza to develop their project at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. The Planning Commission reviewed the comments of the Design Review Board and they concurred that further refinements to the project were warranted. The Planning Commission felt the, downscaled proposal was more fitting to this corner parcel, but were opposed to the proposed four story medical office building because it was too massive for this small site. The majority of Commission members stated they would prefer a three story project because it would be more consistent with the existing uses in the area. They noted that the tallest projects approved at this time are the three story El Mirador Medical Center (Desert Hospital) at 47th Avenue and Washington Street and the three story Eisenhower Medical facility at Washington Street and 48th Avenue. The Commission recognized that the applicant could apply for a four story building, but also felt the. site could not accommodate such a large structure and retain a pedestrian character (see Condition #73) . Mr. Philip Pead, the applicant, present at the meeting spoke concerning his project. He went through some of the Conditions of Approval he wished to see modified and the Planning Commission discussed each item at length. The applicant also brought additional Highway 111 renderings which were modified after the May 5th Design Review Board meeting. Mr. Pead stated that his architect addressed most of the items identified in the report. However, there were a few items he felt were not necessary as they would add. additional costs to the project either in future maintenance or construction. Many of the items requested by the Design Review Board were either modified by the Planning Commission or deleted at the applicant's request. 5 The Planning Commission amended a few of the recommendations of the Engineering Department at the meeting. Two of these items were the amount of improvements required by the applicant on Washington street and the percentage amount the applicant needed to contribute to the existing traffic signal at Simon Drive and Highway 111. The Planning Commission felt the developer should not be required to reimburse the City for the future raised median nor perform street improvements westerly of the existing curb 'and gutter facilities on Washington Street. The Commission however thought the developer should be required to install new street improvements per the provisions of the Washington .Street Specific Plan Alignment Schedule (Condition #39) . The Commission thought the site was too small to justify all the requirements of the Engineering Department. The applicant also requested that the Planning Commission reduce his traffic signal fair -share contribution from 25% to something less than this because they felt their project did not justify this fee based on the size of their project. Mr. Pead thought the larger projects in the area should pay for this existing signal. The Planning Director stated that the other projects in the area were contributing, but 25% was the remaining amount since the One Eleven La Quinta Center contributed 50% and Washington Square will contribute 25 %. Staff stated • that if Simon Motors was not built, the City would ask this property owner to contribute to the signal during the development process. But since it is a currently existing business, the City cannot request the traffic signal money from their business. The Commission felt the project did benefit from the existing traffic signal but they thought 12.5% was a more reasonable fee (Condition 01). The final vote of the Planning Commission was 4 -1 to approve the project provided the project does not exceed three stories in overall height. The City Council accepted the Planning Commission approval of the project at their May 18, 1993, meeting. Public Hearing In 1993, staff began requiring that all time extensions be a public hearing in order to inform the general public and surrounding property owners of the time extension request. This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 3, 1994, and notices were mailed to the abutting property owners within 300 -feet of the project. Prior to the meeting, staff received no letters in support or in opposition to the one year extension request. Illegal Dumping In 1993, staff informed an individual contractor that no fill dirt could be imported to the site until the on -site archaeological study had been completed. However, some dumping was done on the southeast corner of the site before a stop work order could be issued. No additional on -site work shall be done until proper clearances are secured from the Engineering and Planning Departments. Proposed Condition Changes (1) Condition 2 - The new expiration date would be May 24, 1995 provided the Planning Commission approves the applicant's request. (2) Condition 35 - The applicant is requesting that Condition 35 be amended to require the land dedication for street widening be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Staff has modified the condition as requested by the applicant. HEMOOT. 049 ro (3) Condition 39 - This condition was imposed by . the Planning Commission on May 11, 1994, in order to reduce the applicant's off -site improvement costs. The City Attorney has requested that the original condition be reimposed (Condition 38). The City Attorney is of the opinion that the applicant should negotiate with the City Council or Redevelopment Agency for any reduction in their on or off -site improvements through a formal request. Because the reduction in improvement obligations of the developer is a fiscal matter which should be handled in an independent process separate from the review of the project. (4) The conditions which identified the Design Review Board have been modified to state that the Planning Director will finalize the project during plan check (Conditions 23, 65 & 73). % (5) The conditions which referred to the four story building have been changed to state three story ( Conditions 23 & 73) . STAFF CONCLUSION:. Staff supports the time extension request because it meets the provisions of the City's Zoning Code, the adopted General Plan, and the provisions of the Washington Street/Highway 111 Specific Plans as conditioned. RECOMMENDATION: By Minute Motion 94 -_, approve a one year extension of time for Plot Plan 93 -495 ( Revised) pursuant to the attached Finding and revised Conditions. MSW=.049 7 'J ATTACHMENT 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED PLOT PLAN 93-495 (REVISED) MAY 24, 1994 SIMON PLAZA * Modified by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 "* Added by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 ' ** Deleted by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 + Modified by Planning Commission on 5 -24 -94 41MEMI 1. The revised project and time extension request are consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 2. The project will not have an adverse environmental impact on the surrounding properties based on the proposed Conditions of Approval. 3. The project is a logical progression of development for this community zoned area. 4. The proposed project is consistent with the intent and purpose of the General Plan. GENERAL 1. The development of the property shall be generally in conformance with the exhibits contained in the file for PP 93-495 (Revision), unless amended otherwise by the following conditions. +2. The approved plot plan shall be used by May 24, 1995; otherwise it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Be used" means the beginning of substantial construction which is contemplated by this approval, not including grading which is begun within the one year period and is thereafter diligently pursued until completion. A one year time extension may be requested as permitted by Municipal Code provided an extension request is filed by April 24, 1995. 3. There shall be no outdoor storage or sales displays without specific approval of the Planning Commission. 4. All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed so as not to shine directly on surrounding adjoining properties or public rights -of -way. Light standard type with recessed light source shall also be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Exterior lighting shall comply with Outdoor Light Control Ordinance and Off - Street Parking requirements. _ CONAPRVL.037 8 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 5. Adequate masonry trash enclosures shall be provided for all structures and provided with opaque metal doors. Plans for trash enclosures to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall contact the local waste management company to insure that the number of enclosures and size of the enclosures are adequate. 6. Decorative enclosures may be required by the City around any retention basins depending on site grading requirements. The color, location, and placement of said fence(s) shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. 7. Phased improvement plans shall be subject to Planning Commission review. 8. Handicap parking spaces and facilities shall be provided per Municipal Code, State, and Federal requirements. 9. A- noise study shall be. prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to submission of building plans for plan check or issuance of grading permit, whichever comes first. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on building interior areas from perimeter streets, and impacts on the proposed abutting and provide mitigation of noise as alternative mitigation measures for incorporation into the project design such as building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (berming, landscaping and walls, etc.), and other techniques. 10. The project shall comply with all existing Off - Street Parking requirements including but not limited to, shading of parking lot area and bicycle parking spaces. 11. Perimeter landscaping planters shall be provided at maximum widths possible adjacent to property lines and planted with landscaping. 12. The project shall comply with all applicable Art in Public Places Ordinances. A public art piece shall be installed on the property at a location agreeable to the Art in Public Places Committee (e.g., at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street). A public easement shall be offered to the City for the site that any art piece may occupy which has been established by the Art in Public Places Committee. 13. * The developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist and pay all associated costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior to archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information, shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. The Planning and Development Director shall approve the firm to be used in the study prior to any on -site activities. CONAPRVL.037 M Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 The plan shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society (CVAS) for a two-week review and comment period. At a minimum, the plan shall: 1) identify the means for digging test pits; 2) allow sharing the information with the CVAS; and 3) provide for further testing if the preliminary result show significant materials 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 assistants) /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 divert, 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 areas 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 analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this use, the applicant shall obtain, permits or clearances from the following agencies: • City Fire Marshal • City of La Quinta Public Works Department • City of La Quinta Planning and Development Department • Coachella Valley Water District • Desert Sands Unified School District • Imperial Irrigation District • ' Caltrans (District 11) CONAPRVL.037 10: Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of application for a building permit for the proposed project. 15. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City adopted infrastructure fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 16. Final landscaping plans shall include approval stamps and signatures from the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioners office and the Coachella Valley Water District. 17. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit to the Engineering Department an interim landscape program for the entire site which shall be for the purpose of wind and erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blow sand and dust control measures during grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a) use of irrigation during construction and grading activities; b) areas not constructed on during first phase shall be planted in temporary ground cover or wildflowers and provided with temporary irrigation system; and c) provisions of wind breaks or wind rolls, fencing and/or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The landowner shall comply with requirements of the Directors of Public Works and Planning and Development Departments. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent emission of dust and blow sand. 18. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit as determined by the Building Official. 19. 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 which must be satisfied prior to issuance of a building permit. Prior to a final building inspection approval, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection of other monitoring to assure such compliance. 20. A parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, and parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. All roof equipment shall be screened from view by parapet walls of building or other architecturally matching materials. 22. All compact spaces shall be clearly marked "compact cars only ". CONAPRVL.037 11 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza - May 24, 1994 23. + That all conditions of the Planning Commission shall be complied with as follows: A. The landscape plan shall include an eight foot wide meandering pedestrian /bike trail. The plans should be reviewed by the Planning Director prior to submission of the final landscape plan by the applicant/developer. B. The landscape program for Washington Street shall include a variation of planting materials, i.e., palm trees, accent shade trees, lawn, shrubs, and groundcover. The use of mature California Pepper, Australian Willow, Mesquite, Crape Myrtle, Bottle trees, and Washington Robusta Palms shall be encouraged. Varieties of flowering shrubs such as Texas Ranger, Cassia, Crepe Myrtle,. and Dwarf Oleander shall be utilized. Native (low water use) plants shall be used, and the landscape architect should consult the Coachella Valley Water District's plant material list prior to designing their proposal. Uplighted trees or palms shall be used along Washington Street and Highway 111. Incandescent light fixtures will be required (less than 160 watt). Landscaping plan shall conform to Ordinance 220 regarding water conservation. C. + Any proposed parking lot lighting plan shall be reviewed by the Design Review $e&d Planning Director prior to building plan check. A photometric study shall be developed which analyzes the lighting pattern on the project and meets the City's Lighting Ordinance provisions as explained in Chapter 9.210 and 9.160 (Off -Street Parking). The height of the light poles shall not exceed 18 feet in height, and the lighting contractor should reduce this height if physically possible during review of the project. D. A maximum building height of 28 feet shall be maintained along Washington Street and Highway 111 within 150 feet of the ultimate property line (after street dedication has been included) excluding minor architectural appendages (e.g., chimneys, towers, building columns, etc.). E. + Decorative concrete entryways shall be provided for all two-way driveways into the project site. The concrete shall be stamped and colored to accentuate the proposed development. The color, design, and location of the concrete should be reviewed by the Design Reyiew Beafd Planning Director during a. final plan check review. CONAPRVL.037 12 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 F. + The revised concept design plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Director prior to the submission of the plans to the Building and Safety Department for final plan check consideration. The plans should include but are not limited to landscaping and irrigation, building elevations, signs, and any other major exterior design features of the project as noted at the Design Review Board meeting of May 5, 1993. G. Bike racks shall be provided at convenient areas within the site for usage by bicycle riders. One space for every 50 parking spaces shall be provided as noted in the Off - Street Parking Code. H. The landscape setback on Washington Street shall be a minimum of 20 feet from the new property line. I. All open parking stalls shall be screened by berm walls, landscape hedges, or a combination thereof to a minimum height of 42 inches. J. The maximum floor area ration (F.A.R.) for this project shall be 0.35 per the Policy Standards of the General Plan (LU Table N4). K. + The roof design for the 3 -story medical office building shall be either 4 :12 or higher to give the building balance and proper scale to its mass. M. + The parking structures tile roof facade shall be eliminated because it is not compatible with the design motif of the few three story medical office building.. The applicant should evaluate another design style which incorporates a cornice design feature (similar to the upper portion of the four story building) and other articulated features which will soften the elevation and not enhance its presence. N. * The parking structure ramp on the south side of the project shall be stuccoed to match the building. The structure shall be landscaped along its westerly side to conceal its presence. O. + The applicant shall include the following features into the three story medical office building: CONAPRVL.037 L... . 2.* Individual pane windows or grid molded windows can be used. 13 — Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 3.'+ Additional building column connections should be used where agreed upon with the Design Review -Be&d Planning Commission. 4. Accented building roof heights. 5. Revision to the elevator shaft design and its relationship to Highway 111. 6..» . 7..» :Me two sterf elements oft the west side of the f-eef stery building 9heA4 exisEiRg Wi" dews). CITY FIRE MARSHAL 24. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 3500 gpm for a three hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure. which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. Fire flow is based upon all buildings being equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. 25. A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6" X 4" X 21h" X 21/2"), will 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. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 26. Prior to issuance of any building permit, 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 and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company 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." The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to start of construction. 27. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13. The post indicator valve and Fire Department connection shall be located to the front within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). System plans must be submitted with a plan check/inspection fee to the Fire Department for review. A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans. 28. Install a supervised waterflow fire alarm system as required by the Uniform Building Code. CONAPRVL.037 14_ Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 29. Install a Hood Duct automatic fire extinguishing system. System plans must be permitted, along with a plan check/ inspection fee, to the Fire Department for review. 30. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2Al0BC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 31. Occupancy separation will be required as per the Uniform Building Code, #503. 32. Install Panic Hardware and "Exit" signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. 33. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. 34. Install a Class I Standpipe System. ENGENEERING DEPARTMENT: 35. 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 these Conditions of Approval noted as follows: A. Washington Street - Provide right -of -way as required by the Washington Street Specific Plan. B. Washington Street/Highway 111 Intersection.- Provide right -of -way cut back as needed to accommodate a 55 -foot curb return (45 -feet right -of -way). C.'+ Applieaflt shall dedieate the fequiFed right ef way within thifty (30) days afte . Property owner(s) shall dedicate the required right -of -way prior to the issuance of a building permit. 36. _ Applicant shall provide a fully improved landscaped setback area of noted minimum width adjacent to the following street right -of -way: A. Washington Street - 20 -feet wide; B. Highway 11.1, 50 feet wide; C. Simon Drive, 10 feet wide 37. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to all streets from the project site except for three locations as proposed by the applicant as shown on the site plan drawing. CONAPRVL.037 15 — Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 38.+ Applicant shall fund and install all street improvements located east of Washington Street Specific Plan centerline and contiguous to the project site. The new improvements include street widening, curb and gutter, asphalt concrete overlay, 8 -foot wide sidewalk, traffic striping and signing and signing along with all appurtenant incidentals and improvements needed to properly integrate and join together the new and existing improvements in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. Applicant shall retain registered professionals as needed to prepare plans for the improvements required by these Conditions of Approval. 40. + Applicant shall modify the traffic signal and intersection improvements at the Washington Street/Highway 111 intersection as requied by Caltrans to accommodate the Washington Street widening improvements. 41.* Applicant shall reimburse City for 25* 12.5% of the cost to design and install traffic signal at the Simon Drive/Highway 111 intersection. 42. + Applicant shall install a bus stop "pullout" and bus shelter on Highway 111 in compliance with Caltrans, Sunline Transit, and City requirements. 43. + Applicant shall pay for half of the cost to design and install raised median improvements and landscaping on Highway 111 and Washington Street in the portion contiguous to the project site. 44. + Applicant shall enter into a secured agreement with the City to ensure installation of improvements required by these Conditions of Approval before the grading permit is issued. 45. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological, and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted with a report submitted for review along with grading plan. The report recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and/or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. 46. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 16 maavavr. n» -* IN 40. + Applicant shall modify the traffic signal and intersection improvements at the Washington Street/Highway 111 intersection as requied by Caltrans to accommodate the Washington Street widening improvements. 41.* Applicant shall reimburse City for 25* 12.5% of the cost to design and install traffic signal at the Simon Drive/Highway 111 intersection. 42. + Applicant shall install a bus stop "pullout" and bus shelter on Highway 111 in compliance with Caltrans, Sunline Transit, and City requirements. 43. + Applicant shall pay for half of the cost to design and install raised median improvements and landscaping on Highway 111 and Washington Street in the portion contiguous to the project site. 44. + Applicant shall enter into a secured agreement with the City to ensure installation of improvements required by these Conditions of Approval before the grading permit is issued. 45. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological, and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted with a report submitted for review along with grading plan. The report recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and/or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. 46. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 16 maavavr. n» Conditions of Approval. Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 47. The site shall be designed and graded in a manner so the elevation difference between the building pad elevations on site and the adjacent street curb do not exceed three (3.0) feet. 48.+ Applicant shall provide storm drain facilities with sufficient capacity to evacuate all water that falls on -site and off -site to the centerline of the streets adjoining the site during the, 1 -hour duration, 25 -year storm event. The storm drain facility shall convey the storm water from the site to the Whitewater Channel. The applicant may purchase capacity on a fair.share basis in a storm drain designed and constructed in Washington Street by the City, if the City proceeds with said storm drain facility within time constraints which suit the applicant. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of Washington Street, Highway 111, and Simon Drive. 49. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped setback areas. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of the Planning Director, City Engineer, and Coachella Valley Water District and the plans shall be signed these officials prior to construction. 50. 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. 51. Applicant shall landscape and maintain the landscaped setback area and right -of -way between all street curbing and property lines. 52. Applicant shall construct an eight -foot wide meandering bike path in the combined easterly parkway of Washington Street and southerly parkway of Highway 111 in lieu of the standard six -foot wide sidewalk. A six foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed on Simon Drive. 53. All existing and proposed telecommunication, television cable, and electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, that are adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 54. Underground utilities that lie directly under street improvements or portions thereof shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to installation of that portion of the street improvement. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction, tests for review by the City Engineer. 55. Applicant shall pay all fees charged by the city as required for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the city. 17_- CONAPRVL.037 Conditions-of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 56. Applicant shall retain a California registered civil engineer, or designate one who is on applicant's staff, 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 retained or designated by the applicant to implement this responsibility shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. The engineer shall sign and seal a statement placed on the "as built" plans that says "all (grading and grades) (improvements) on these. plans were properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision during construction for compliance with the plans and specifications and the work shown hereon was constructed as approved, except where otherwise noted hereon and specifically acknowledged by the City Engineer ". B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the engineer shall provide a separate document, signed and sealed, to the City Engineer that documents the building pad elevations. The document shall, for each pad, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as built elevation, and 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. C. Provide to the City Engineer a signed set of "as built" reproducible drawings of the site grading and all improvements installed by the applicant. 57.. The parking stalls on the north side of the office complex as determined by Staff, shall be restricted to either handicapped parking or reserved parking to help eliminate queuing at the Highway 111 access driveway. 58. The driveways on Washington Street and on Highway 111 shall be restricted to right turn movements only. 59. Turning movements at the intersection of Washington. Street and Simon Drive shall be restricted to right turns only in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. IA 60. All required improvements shall be completed prior to first site occupancy of the proposed development. 61. The parking structure shall not exceed 15 feet in overall height as measured from finished grade pad elevation within 100 feet of Highway 111. Exterior lighting on top level of parking structure shall not exceed sic feet and not be within ten feet of outside wall. 0ONAPRVL.037 18 - J Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 62. All mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 91 -211 shall be met. 63. The parcels shall be legally merged prior to building permit issuance. 64. 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, so adopted by the City, in the amount of S600 per acre of disturbed land. 65. +- The north side of the parking structure shall include perimeter grade planting as deemed appropriate by the Design Rey Beafd Planning Director. 66. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, a parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department to verify compliance with the Off - Street Parking requirements. Prior to each subsequent phase beginning construction a new parking study based on existing usage and potential demand shall be submitted. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. 67. Appropriate and adequate service delivering areas (loading facilities) and trash facilities shall be provided as required by the Off - Street Parking Code. The facilities shall include areas for recycling bins and be approved by Staff during the final review process. The standards and requirements of AB 939 (recycling) shall be met. This shall include pro-visions for on -site recycling of recyclable materials by the tenants in conjunction with the City's franchise hauler contract provisions. 68. An on -site elevator(s) shall service the site and provide accessibility from the parking garage to each respective building floor level. The design and installation of the elevator shall meet, both Uniform Building Code standards and any other California State . requirements. 69. The existing six foot high soundwall along the Washington Street frontage road shall be extended between the frontage road and Washington Street northerly of its present location to the northeasterly corner of Lot 27 of Tract 2043 (Singing Palms Drive and Washington Street) to mitigate traffic noise impacts on the existing R -1 single family neighborhood. 70. A Transportation Demand Management Plan shall be submitted (Ordinance 217) if the project or the ultimate development of the site employs 100 or more persons. The plan can be prepared by either the property owner or the tenant(s) within the development. The plan shall be submitted and approved by the Director of Planning and Development. CONAPRVL.037 19 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 71. The provisions of the City's newly adopted Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance (#220) shall be met. 72.** The applicant shall provide a theme plaza at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street as required by the General Plan which shall .include landscaping, public furniture and a public art piece. The art piece can contain the developers main identification sign (Sign #1), if it is an integral part of the theme plaza and /or the public art piece. The design shall, be approved by the Art in Public Places Committee and the City Council as required by Chapter 2.65 of the Municipal, Code. The developer shall retain an artist to help design the theme plaza. - The theme plaza size shall not be less than 2,000 square feet and the overall design should be similar to the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center theme plaza at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. 73. +•- The medical office building shall not exceed three stories with a maximum 40 -foot height. The height of the building shall be measured from the existing grade (top of curb) on Highway 111. The developer can reallocate the fourth floor square footage into the project (e.g., over the parking structure) provided the new site plan does include adding two story elements into the 150 -foot setback requirement on either arterial street. The revised design shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Reyiew Beafd st4 Planning Commission prior to preparation of final working drawings. CONAPRVL.037 20 ATTACHMENT 3 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78 -495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California May 24, 1994 7 :00 P.M. V I. CALL TO ORDER A. The meeting NAd?h le to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairwoman Barrows. Commissioner led the flag salute. H. ROLL CALL J A. Chairwoman Barrows re e the roll call.. Present: Commissioners Adolph, Ellson, Abels, and C woman Barrows. B. Commission Abels/Ellson moved and seconde motion to excuse Commis ' er Marrs. Unanimously approved. C. S Present: Planning Director Jerry Her n, City Attorney Dawn Honeywel enior Engineer Steve Speer, Princip lanner Stan Sawa, Associate P er Greg Trousdell, and Department S etary Betty Sawyer. D. Commissioners Ellson /Abel oved to amend the agenda to pla ublic Hearing #3 (Plot Plan 93 -495- ' on Plaza) as Item #1 and r anize the agenda accordingly. Unani sly approved. M. PUBLIC HEARINGS - A. PLOT PLAN 93 -495; a request of Simon Plaza for a one year extension of time for a commercial project at the southeast corner of Washington Street and Highway 111. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a. copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Commissioner Adolph asked staff what the status of the street dedication was. Staff stated the dedication had not taken place as of yet but the street dedication would have to take place prior to any building permits being issued. DRAF-1-1 Planning Commis ion Minul.► May 24. 1994 3. Commissioner Adolph asked if the restaurant planned for the corner was still required to have the two copulas on the top of the building and if the signage would remain the same. Staff stated all the conditions originally approved would remain. 4. Commissioner Ellson asked if the project could be built in phases. Staff stated it could as long as it met all the conditions. S. Commissioner Ellson asked if the upper level patio would have a trellis cover. Staff stated the original approval did not require a trellis patio cover. 6. There being no further questions of staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the public hearing: Mr. Mark. Moran, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission regarding the project and the concerns they had with the modified conditions. In particular was an objection to Condition a38, in place of Condition 39. 7. Mr. Paul Seltzer, co -owner in the project, elaborated on the objections to Conditions #38, #40, #42, #43, and #44. Mr. Seltzer stated the project . did not cause the problem for the widening of the street. They had paid to put the street in once and they should not be required to do it again. 8. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained the conditions were added to the project as this was a new development that came after a circulation specific plan was adopted by the City. She further stated that only the City Council can waive any costs by entering into a Development Agreement or Owner Participation Agreement with the Redevelopment Agency. 9. Mr. Seltzer reiterated that the Planning Commission and City Council approved Condition #39 last year and he can't understand why it cannot be done again with this request. Discussion followed as to why the street is being widened and who is responsible for that widening. 10. Mr. Fred Simon, co- owner, addressed the condition regarding the funding of the street improvements as required by Condition #38. He stated that if the additional costs of the street improvements are placed on the project he will be unable to fund the project and it will not be built. 11. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated that since the City had not been able to widen Washington Street for two years and since Simon Plaza had been unable to get their project started, staff went to the City Council to discuss the widening of Washington Street in two phases. The City would fund the first phase and Simon Plaza would incur the cost of the second phase. 1 22 Manning Cwmnu.wn Minutes MAY 24, 1944 12. Commissioners Ellson and Abels asked staff to clarify what the difference was between Conditions #38 and #39. Staff stated the difference was in regard to how much of the street Simon Plaza would be required to improve. Whether it would be all of the right -of -way east of the centerline for Washington Street or, east of the curb and gutter improvements and contiguous to the project site. Discussion followed relative to those improvements. 13. There being no further public comment, Chairwoman Barrows closed the public hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion. 14. Following the discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Ellson /Barrows to adopt Minute Motion 94 -015 to recommend a one year extension of time for Plot Plan 93 -495 as conditioned. Unanimously approved. Commissioner Abels withdrew from the Chambers due to a possible future conflict of interest on the following item. PCS -24 B. PLOT PLAN 94- 522: loguest of DoDco Construction S ices for approval to develop a two story_ 11 /office building in the C -V- one on a 0.37 acre site. 1. AssocPlanner Greg Trousdell prese d the information contained in the, ff report, . a copy of whic s on file in the Planning and De6elopment Department. 2.,•` Commissioner Adolph ask what the sign program was for the p ect. Staff explained the sign s to be painted on the southeast co of the upper floor of the bu' in-. Discussion followed regarding a lettering f and size of the si 3. There being further comments of staff, Chairwo n. Barrows opened the public ring. Mr. Dan Featheringill ad ssed the Commission regardin he project and stated they were ab to modify the sign if the Com lion so desired. He further scat his concern regarding the co tion to require French doors in the r of the building as this would a security problem. Mr. F eringill went. on to explain hi evelopment request. Mr. Greg Butler, draftsrV6 for the project, stated his o ttons to requiring decorative SpOffinic tile around the door fram: and display windows on the nor (cct elevation. The Pueblo style archiure does not 9W ATTACHMENT 4 a&rcv 79495 CALLE TAMPICO — LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253. • (619) 777.7000 FAX (619) 777.7101 APPLICATION FOR APPEAL OF FINDINGS OR CONDITIONS Appellant's Name SIMON PLAZA, INC. Date 5 -27 -94 Mailing Address 78 -611 Hwy. 111 Box La Quinta, CA 92253 Phone: (619)346 -2345 RE: Case No. Plot Plan 93 -495 Type of Appeal: Conditional Use Permit Variance Change of Zone Public Use Permit Surface Mining 6 Reclamation Permit Please state applicable, protested. Outdoor Advertising Consistency with General Plan Environmental Assessment Setback Adjustments Temporary Use Permit X Plot Plan basis for appeal and include any supportive evidence. if indicate the number of the specific condition which is being Please see attached. Use additional sheets if necessary. Q 44. igna re Fr.e J. Simon, Sr., President 24 *RAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 Case No. Plot Plan 93 -495 Simon Plaza, Inc. This appeal from the Planning Commission action extending Plot Plan 93 -495 for one year deals with several of the conditions which were modified from the conditions previously approved by the City Council in 1993. Condition 38: This condition has been modified to require the applicant to improve Washington Street from the centerline to the property line. The previous Condition 39, which has been deleted, required that the applicant reimburse the City for the cost of all improvements from the current curbline to-the east. Condition 39: This condition represented a compromise between the City and the applicant and should not be modified. The current owners of the property have already dedicated right -of -way and installed the street improvements on Washington Street at the time the property .was originally developed. The City may not now legally require us to tear those improvements out, dedicate additional property and then reinstall the street and other improvements. It is our position that if the City wants to widen Washington, it must buy the right -of -way and pay for the improvements. . However, last year we agreed to compromise our position and accepted Condition 39. We cannot accept Condition 38 because it, along with several of the other conditions, makes the project financially infeasible. Condition 40: This condition has been modified to require that this project pay the entire cost of modifying the Washington/ Highway 111 intersection and traffic signals. Previously, this condition provided that we would reimburse the City 5% of the cost. Our position with respect to this condition is the same as our position with respect to Condition 38. We already paid for the intersection and.the traffic signal when we subdivided the property in 1982. The City may not legally require us to do it again. Finally, this condition will make the project financially infeasible. J. Condition 43: This condition has been modified to require us to pay 50% of the cost of medians on Washington and Highway 111. Previously, the condition was that we pay SO of the cost of the Highway 111 median only. We may not legally be required to pay for this improvement as indicated above. Condition 44: This condition has been modified to require that we post security with the City to guarantee that we install the improvements listed above. The previous condition provided that we would post security to reimburse the City for our share of the costs. It is our understanding that the City will be doing the work. We have no objection to posting the security, but it should be for the cost of reimbursing the City, and then, only for the costs of the improvements we have agreed to. PYVAI 8sAPPEAI not Plan 93 -495 25 - Condition 48: When we agreed to this condition last year, we were told that the City intended to build a storm drain from the intersection to the Whitewater Channel, and that we could contribute a fair share toward it. We have previously submitted a hydrology report to the City which indicates that our property, after development,. would contribute only 4% of the water which causes the problem. Accumulation of water at the intersection is a problem which currently exists, and we are not responsible for it. Furthermore, we are not responsible for water that falls offsite to the center of Highway 111 and Washington Street. We will provide for onsite retention, or will pay a fair share of the cost, but we cannot pay for it all. Finally, we would respectfully request that the City Council consider modifying Condition 2 and give.us two (2) years to use the plot plan. This project is complicated and expensive. For the past two.years we have worked long and hard to find financing in a most difficult financial market. Last year, we finally put our financing in place, just as our plot plan approval needed to be extended. As you know, you reduced the size of the project by over 40,000 square feet, and we lost our financing. This year, again, we have finally found a financing source, but again face the prospect of the conditions changing which would result in losing our commitment. In view of the foregoing, we would like to have you consider giving us two years to put this project together. Thank you for your consideration of our request. SIMON PJ AZA, INC. . Fre J. Simon, Sr., President 26 S48128:APPEAI Plot Plan 93.495 July 12, 1994 Mr. Jerry Herman, Director Planning Department City of La Quinta La Quinta, Ca. 92253 RE: Plot Plan 93 -495 Mr. Herman: ATTACHMENT 5 r fJUL 1 Z X94 CITY Cr- to L. ;'.NTA PWO;SS CEPARTMENT As per your telephone conversation with Mark Moran on this date, we are requesting that our scheduled appearence before the City Council on August 2 be moved to the September 20 meeting of the City Council. This delay in our appeal will give Mark Moran and myself time to meet with City Staff and prepare the information that the City and Simon Plaza will need related to the issues that were brought by our appeal. I appreciate your kind consideration and I look forward to meeting with you regarding our project in the near future. Sincerely, SIMON PLAZAU INC. i h dirma of the Board a 27 P.O. BOX 461, 78.611 HWY. 111, LA OUINTA, CA-92253 • PH.: 619/773 -2345 • FAX: 619/568 -4567 �Gtrtoic Mr. Jerry Herman Planning Director City of La Quinta 78 -495 Calle Tampico ° La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Plot Plan 93 -495 Dear Mr . . Herman : October 12, 1994 ATTACHMENT 6-� tL DD -.. _v 0 C T 14 1994 CITY OF LA CwNiA PLANNING OCPARTMENT We hereby respectfully request a continuance for consideration of our Plot Plan until the December 6, 1994 meeting. The reason for this request is that we are having some difficulty negotiating an agreement with Pomona First Federal who has been a co- applicant in this matter. The continuance will give us sufficient time to 'resolve these difficulties so we can proceed with the project. Your consideration of this request is greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, SIMON PLAZA, INC. r re n;�S ec - . ' Ch an of the Board P.O. BOX 461, 78 -611 HWY. 111, LA QUINTA, CA 92253 • PH.: 619/773 -2345 • FAX: 619/568 -4567 28 IV Yt ATTACHMENT 7 Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan Association Since 1892 City of La Quinta Mr. JERRY HERMAN 78 -495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mr. Herman: September 23 .j994 SEP 2 6 1994 Ci )`Y tj�• tr. �.� .ra ff Subject: Parcel 6 of Parcel Map 18418; Hwy 111 and Washington; PP 93495 It was a pleasure meeting with you yesterday to discuss Pomona First Federal's concerns regarding proposed dedications of the subject parcel to the City. As we discussed, Pomona First Federal had an agreement to sell the parcel until the additional 10' dedication came to light. I still find it difficult to understand how the City can propose to require this additional dedication when the landowner whose property will be taken has not been notified. In any event, we expect to proceed with the proposed Buyer to seek a variance from the 20' setback requirement in an effort to ameliorate the adverse effect of the additional taking. If successful, this effort should eliminate the need for pursuing other avenues of redress. This will confirm for you Pomona First Federal's position with. regard to the Simon Plaza project. We do not object to any extensions granted on their application for Plot Plan Approval, nor to the Plot Plan itself. However, this non - objection should not be taken as any type of authorization for the Simon applicant(s) to speak on behalf of Pomona First Federal. Pomona First Federal has no agreement with Simon regarding the property and Simon has absolutely no rights to the property. As reflected by our listing the property for sale, we are proceeding independently to dispose of our parcel. We would appreciate any efforts you take to notify Pomona First Federal of any matters relating to our parcel, even it they are not matters to which we are entitled to notice as a matter of law. Any such notice can be directed to me at the address indicated below. Thank you again for taking the time to discuss this.situation with us. We appreciate your cooperation and assistance. cc: Shannon, Rinehart, Baxley, Selzer 29 Very truly yours, 44-,ttl�eZx- Robert L. Golish Vice President Senior Counsel Adadn)atrattve O171:ea: 350 South Garay Avenue -P.O. Box 1520 - Pomona, CatilomA 91769 - (71 t) 623.2323 - (213) 625 -7668 - (1310( 964.7600 - (714) 972.0521 ATTACHMENT 8 North La Ouinta PRCJECT SIM City of Indian Wells. Laguna De La Paz CASE MAP CASE Na Vicinity Map Simon Plaza, Inc. 30 P E. T4ht 4 4Q" COUNCIL%RDA MEETING DATE: September 20, 1994 ITEM TITLE: Continued Public Hearing on Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revised), a request by Simon Plaza, Inc. to appeal the Planning Commission's approval of a one year extension of time for a previously approved project on ±5.6 acres on Highway 111, east of Washington Street RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: - BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: e2 Continue the Public Hearing to October 18, 1994, as requested by the applicant. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Case History This plot plan request was originally approved by the Planning Commission on May 11, 1993, and accepted by the City Council on May 18, 1993. The approved plans allow a three story medical office building, additional retail /office buildings, and a multi -level parking structure. Planning Commission Approval On May 24, 1994, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the request for a one year extension of time. Modifications to the original Conditions of Approval were made. The changes were necessary because the Washington Street dedication had not been made by the applicant. The Planning Commission determined that the one year extension should be allowed based on the State's current economic environment. The Planning Commission voted 3 -1 (Commissioner Adolph voted no) to approve the applicant's submittal pursuant to the attached amended Conditions of Approval. Appeal Hearing The case was scheduled for review by the City Council on June 7, 1994, as a report of action. However, on May 31, 1994, the applicant filed an appeal with the Planning Department requesting a public hearing before the City Council. The initial City Council public hearing was held on June 21, 1994; however, at the meeting, the applicant requested and received a continuance to August 2, 1994 (Attachment 1). On August 2, 1994, the Council continued the request to September 20th as requested by the applicant. On September 8, 1994, the applicant again requested a continuance of the public hearing to October 18, 1994, to permit additional time to review their on -site storm water requirements. The letter is attached (Attachment 2). ccsTFcT.W2 J FINDINGS AND, ALTERNATIVES: The options available to Council are as follows: 1. Continue the public hearing to October 18, 1994; 2. Accept the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission-on May 24, 1994; 3. Consider revising the approved Conditions of Approval; 4. Deny the time extension request. e ry Herman Panning Development Director Attachments: 1. Letter from Mr. Fred Simon, Sr., received July 12, 1994 2. Letter from Mr. Fred Simon, Sr., received September 8, 1994 I.Y I 161MIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PLOT PLAN 93 -495 (REVISED) MAY 24, 1994 SIMON PLAZA * Modified by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 ** Added by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 ** Deleted by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 + Modified by Planning Commission on 5 -24 -94 FINDINGS 1. The revised project and time extension request are consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 2. The project will not have an adverse environmental impact on the surrounding properties based on the proposed Conditions of Approval. 3. The project is a logical progression of development for this community zoned area. 4. The proposed project is consistent with the intent and purpose of the General Plan. GENERAL 1. The development of the property shall be generally in conformance with the exhibits contained in the file for PP 93495 (Revision), unless amended otherwise by the Wowing conditions. +2. The approved plot plan shall be used by May 24, 1995; otherwise it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Be used" means the beginning of substantial construction which is contemplated by this approval, not including grading which is begun within the one year period and is thereafter diligently pursued until completion. A one year time extension may be requested as permitted by Municipal Code provided an extension request is filed by April 24, 1995. 3. There shall be no outdoor storage or sales displays without specific approval of the Planning Commission. 4. All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed so as not to shine directly on surrounding adjoining properties or public rights -of -way. Light standard type with recessed light source shall also be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Exterior lighting shall comply with Outdoor Light Control Ordinance and Off - Street Parldng requirements. _ CONAPRVL.037 4 Conditions of Approval ` Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 . 5. Adequate masonry trash enclosures-shall be provided for all structures and provided with opaque metal doors. Plans for trash enclosures to be reviewed rand approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall contact the local waste management company to insure that the number of enclosures and size of the enclosures are adequate. 6. Decorative enclosures may be required by the City around any retention basins depending on site grading requirements. The color, location, and placement of said fence(s) shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. 7. Phased improvement plans shall be subject to Planning Commission review. 8. Handicap parking spaces and facilities shall be provided per Municipal Code, State, and Federal requirements. 9. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to submission of. building plans for plan check or issuance of grading permit, whichever comes first. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on building interior areas from perimeter streets, and impacts on the proposed abutting and provide mitigation of noise as alternative mitigation measures for incorporation into the project design such as building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (berming, landscaping and walls, etc.), and other techniques. 10. The project shall comply with all existing Off- Street Parking requirements including but not limited to, shading of parking lot areas and bicycle parking spaces. 11. Perimeter landscaping planters shall be provided at maximum widths possible adjacent to property lines and planted with landscaping. 12. The project shall comply with all applicable Art in Public Places Ordinances. A public art piece shall be installed on the property at a location agreeable to the Art in Public Places Committee (e.g., at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street). A public easement shall be offered to the City for the site that any art piece may occupy which has been established by the Art in Public Places Committee. 13. * The developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist and pay all associated costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact ,location and recovery. Prior to archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information, shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. The Planning and Development Director shall approve the firm to be used in the study prior to any on -site activities. CONAPRVL.037 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -095 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 The plan shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society (CVAS) for a two -week review and comment period. At a minimum, the plan- shall: 1) identify the means fora- digging test pits; 2) allow sharing the information with the CVAS; and .3) provide for further testing if the preliminary result show significant materials 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 assistants) /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 divert, 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 areas 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 analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this use, the applicant shall obtain permits or clearances from the following agencies: • City Fire Marshal • City of La Quinta Public Works Department • City of La Quinta Planning and Development Department • Coachella Valley Water District • Desert Sands Unified School District • Imperial Irrigation District • Caltrans (District 11) CONAPRVL.037 6 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of application for a building permit for the proposed project. 15. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City adopted infrastructure fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 16. Final landscaping plans shall include approval stamps and signatures from the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioners office and the Coachella Valley Water District. 17. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit to the Engineering Department an interim landscape program for the entire site which shall be for the purpose of wind and erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blow sand and dust control measures during grading and site development. These shall include, but not be limited to: a) use of irrigation during construction and grading activities; b) areas not constructed on during first phase shall be planted in temporary ground cover or wildflowers and provided, with temporary irrigation system; and c) provisions of wind breaks or wind rolls, fencing and /or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The landowner shall comply with requirements of the Directors of Public Works and Planning and Development Departments. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent emission of dust and blow sand. 18. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit as determined by the Building Official. 19. 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 which must be satisfied prior to issuance of a building permit. Prior to a final building inspection approval, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection of other monitoring to assure such compliance. 20. A parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, and parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. All roof equipment shall be screened from view by parapet walls of building or other architecturally matching materials. 22. All compact spaces shall be clearly marked 'compact .cars only ". CONAPRVL.037 7 i Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 =495 (Revision) - Sicaon Plaza May 24, 1994 23. + That all conditions of the Design Reyiew Beafd Planning Commission shall be complied with as follows: A. The landscape plan shall include an eight foot wide meandering pedestrian /bike trail. The plans should be reviewed by the Design Reyiew gaud Planning Director prior to submission of the final landscape plan by the applicant/developer. B. The landscape program for Washington'Street shall include a variation of planting materials, i.e., palm trees, accent shade trees, lawn, shrubs, and groundcover. The use of mature California Pepper, Australian Willow, Mesquite, Crape Myrtle, Bottle trees, and Washington Robusta Palms shall -be encouraged. Varieties of flowering shrubs such as Texas Ranger, Cassia, Crepe Myrtle, and Dwarf Oleander shall be utilized. Native (low water use) plants shall be used, and the landscape architect should consult the Coachella Valley Water District's plant material list prior to designing their proposal. Uplighted trees or palms shall be used along Washington Street and Highway 111. Incandescent light futures will be required (less than 160 watt). Landscaping plan shall conform to Ordinance 220 regarding water conservation. C. + Any proposed parking lot lighting plan shall be reviewed by the Design - Rey'ew Beafd Planning Director prior to building plan check. A photometric study shall be developed which analyzes the lighting pattern on the project and meets the City's Lighting Ordinance provisions as explained in Chapter 9.210 and 9.160 (Off - Street Parking). The height of the light poles shall not exceed 18 feet in height, and the lighting contractor should reduce this height if physically possible. during review of the project. D. A maximum building height of 28 feet shall be maintained along Washington Street and Highway 111 within 150 feet of the ultimate property line (after street dedication has been included) excluding minor architectural appendages (e.g., chimneys, towers, building columns, etc.). E. + Decorative concrete entryways shall be provided for all two-way driveways into the project site. The concrete shall be stamped and colored to accentuate the proposed development. The color, design, and location of the concrete should be reviewed by the Design Reyiew Beefd Planning Director during a final plan check review. CONAPRVL.037 a Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 F. + The revised concept design plan shall be reviewed by the Design Review-BeW Planning Director prior to the submission of the plans to the Building and Safety Department for final plan check consideration. The plans should include but are not limited.to landscaping and irrigation, building elevations, signs, and any other major.exterior design features of the project as noted at the Design Review Board meeting of May S, 1993. G. Bike racks shall be provided at convenient areas within the site for usage by bicycle riders. One space for every 50 parking spaces shall be provided as noted in the Off - Street Parking Code. H. The landscape setback on Washington Street shall be a minimum of 20 feet from the new property line. I. All open parking stalls shall be screened by berm walls, landscape hedges, or a combination thereof to a minimum height of 42 inches. J. The maximum floor area ration (F.A.R.) for this project shall be 0.35 per the Policy Standards of the General Plan (LU Table N4). K. + The roof design for the 3 -story medical office building shall be either 4:12 or higher to give the building balance and proper scale to its mass. L... The feef design fef the efte steFy efflee building shall be similu fe the ene stei-y M. + The parking structures tile roof facade shall be eliminated because it is not compatible with the design motif of the few three story medical office building. The applicant should evaluate another design style which incorporates a cornice design feature (similar to the upper portion of the four story building) and other articulated features which will soften the elevation and not enhance its presence. N. * The parking structure ramp on the south side of the project shall be stuccoed to match the building. The structure shall be landscaped along its westerly side to conceal its presence. O. + The applicant shall include the following features into the three story medical office building: L. Pre east stefte windew 2. * Individual pane windows or grid molded windows can be used. CONAPRVL.037 9 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision),- Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 3.'+ Additional building column connections should be used where agreed upon with the Desigfl- Reyiew geafd Planning Commission. 4. Accented building roof heights. 5. Revision to the elevator shaft design and its relationship to Highway 111. 6.... . 7. N. The two n the west side of the fouf 9" buiWiffg-A&H 1Ide"). CITY .FIRE MARSHAL 24. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 3500 gpm for a three hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. Fire flow is based upon all buildings being equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. 25. A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6" X 4" X 21h" X 21/2"), will 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. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 26. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the applicant/developer shall furnish" one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for reviewlapproval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements.' Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company 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." The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to start of construction. 27. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13. The post indicator valve and Fire Department connection shall be located to the front .within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). System plans must be submitted with a plan check/inspection fee to the Fire Department for review. A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans. 28. Install a supervised waterflow fire alarm system as required by the Uniform Building Code. CONAPRVL.037 10 r Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plata May 24, 1994 29. Install a Hood Duct automatic fire extinguishing system. System plans must be permitted, along with a plan check/ inspection fee, to the Fire Department for review. 30. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet a10, but not less than 2AIOBC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 31. Occupancy separation will be required as per-the Uniform Building Code, #503. 32. Install Panic Hardware and *Exit" signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. 33. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. 34. Install a Class I Standpipe System. ENGVgEERLNG DEPARTMENT: 35. 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 these Conditions of Approval noted as follows: A. Washington Street - Provide right -of -way as required by the Washington Street Specific Plan. B. Washington Street/Highway 111 Intersection - Provide right -of -way cut back as needed to accommodate a 55 -foot curb return (45 -feet right -of -way). C. *+ Applieaflt shall dedieate the F6quiFed right of way withift thifly (30) days Aef Property owner(s) shall dedicate the required right -of -way prior to the issuance of a building permit. 36. Applicant shall provide a• fully improved landscaped setback area of noted minimum width adjacent to the following street right -of -way: A. Washington Street - 20 -feet wide; B. Highway 111, 50 feet wide; C. Simon Drive, 10 feet -wide 37. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to all streets from the project site except for three locations as proposed by the applicant as shown on the site plan drawing. CONAPRVL.037 11 I Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 38.+ Applicant shall fund and install all street improvements located east of Washington Street Specific Plan centerline and contiguous to ,the project site. The new improvements include street widening, curb and gutter, asphalt concrete overlay, 8 -foot wide sidewalk, traffic striping and signing and signing along with all appurtenant incidentals and improvements needed to properly integrate and join together the new and existing improvements in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. Applicant shall retain registered professionals as needed to prepare plans for the improvements required by these Conditions of Approval. • - ........ oil 40. + Applicant shall modify the traffic signal and intersection improvements at the Washington StreetfHighway 111 intersection as requied by Caltrans to accommodate the Washington Street widening improvements. 41. • Applicant shall reimburse City for 23-% 12.5 °Y of the cost to design and install traffic signal at the Simon Drive /Highway 111 intersection. - 42. + Applicant shall install a bus stop "pullout" and bus shelter on Highway 111 in compliance with Caltrans, Sunline Transit, and City requirements. 43. + Applicant shall pay for half of the cost to design and install raised median improvements and landscaping on Highway 111 and Washington Street in the portion contiguous to the project site. 44. + Applicant shall enter into a secured agreement with the City to ensure installation of improvements required by these Conditions of Approval before the grading permit is issued. 45. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological, and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted with a report submitted for review along with grading plan. The report recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and/or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. 46. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - slmon Plaza May 24, 1994 47. The site shall be designed and graded in a manner so the elevation difference between the building pad elevations on site and the adjacent street curb &not exceed three (3.0) feet. - 48.+ Applicant shall provide storm drain facilities with sufficient rapacity to evacuate all water that falls on -site and off -site to the centerline of the streets adjoining the site during the, 1 -hour duration, 25 -year storm event. The storm drain facility shall convey the storm water from the site to the Whitewater Channel. The applicant may purchase capacity on a fair share basis in a storm drain designed and constructed in Washington Street by the City, if the City proceeds with said storm drain facility within time constraints which suit the applicant. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of Washington Street, Highway 111, and Simon Drive. 49. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped setback areas. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of the Planning Director, City Engineer, and Coachella Valley Water District and the plans shall be signed these officials prior to construction. 50. 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. 51. Applicant shall landscape and maintain the landscaped setback area and right -of -way between all street curbing and property lines. 52. Applicant shall construct an eight -foot wide meandering bike path in the combined easterly parkway of Washington Street and southerly parkway of Highway 111 in lieu of the standard six -foot wide sidewalk. A six foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed on Simon Drive. 53. All existing and proposed telecommunication, television cable, and electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, that are adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 54. Underground utilities that lie directly under street improvements or portions thereof shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to installation of that portion of the street improvement. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. 55. Applicant shall pay all fees charged by the city as required for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the city. Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 56. Applicant shall retain a California registered civil engineer, or designate one who is on applicant's staff, to exercise sufficient supervision -and quality contiol during construction of the,-tract grading and improvements to certify compliance with the plans, specifications, applicable codes, and ordinances. The engineer retained or designated by the applicant to implement this responsibility shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. The engineer shall sign and seal a statement placed on the "as built" plans that says "all (grading and grades) (improvements) on these plans were properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision during construction for compliance with the plans and specifications and the work shown hereon was constructed as approved,. except where otherwise noted hereon and specifically acknowledged by the City Engineer ". B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the engineer shall provide a separate document, signed and sealed, to the City Engineer that documents the building pad elevations. The document shall, for each pad, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as built elevation, and 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. C. ' Provide to the City Engineer a signed set of "as built" reproducible drawings of the site grading and all improvements installed by the applicant. . 57. The parking stalls on the north side of the office complex as determined by Staff, shall be restricted to either handicapped parking or reserved parking to help eliminate queuing at the Highway 111 access driveway. 58. The driveways on Washington Street and on Highway 111 shall be restricted to right turn movements only. 59. Turning movements at the intersection of Washington Street and Simon Drive shall be restricted to right turns only in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. PECIA 60. All required improvements shall be completed prior to first site occupancy of the proposed development. 61. The parking structure shall not exceed 15 feet in overall height as measured from finished grade pad elevation within 100 feet of Highway 111. Exterior lighting on top level of parking structure shall not exceed six feet and not be within ten feet of outside wall. CONAPRVL.037 14 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 62. All mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 91 -211 shall be met. 63. The parcels shall be legally merged prior to building permit issuance. 64. 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, so adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. 65. +- The north side of the parking structure shall include perimeter grade planting as deemed appropriate by the Planning Director. 66. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, a parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department to verify compliance with the Off- Street Parking requirements. Prior to each subsequent phase beginning construction a new parking study based on existing usage and potential demand shall be submitted. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. 67. Appropriate and adequate service delivering areas (loading facilities) and trash facilities shall be provided as required by the Off - Street Parking Code. The facilities shall include areas for recycling bins and be approved by Staff during the final review process. The standards. and requirements of AB 939 (recycling) shall be met. This shall include provisions for on -site recycling of recyclable materials by the tenants in conjunction with the City's franchise hauler contract provisions. 68. An on -site elevator(s) shall service the site and provide accessibility from the parking garage to each respective building floor level. The design and installation of the elevator shall meet both Uniform Building Code standards and any other California State requirements. 69. The existing six foot high soundwall along the Washington Street frontage road shall be extended between the frontage road and Washington Street northerly of its present location to the northeasterly corner of Lot 27 of Tract 2043 (Singing Palms Drive and Washington Street) to mitigate traffic noise impacts on the existing R -1 single family neighborhood. 70. A Transportation Demand Management Plan shall be submitted (Ordinance 217) if the project or the ultimate development of the site employs 100 or more persons. The plan can be prepared by either the property owner or the tenant(s) within the development. The plan shall be submitted and approved by,the Director of Planning and Development. CONAPRVL.037 is Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon.Plaza May 24, 1994 71. The provisions of the City's newly adopted Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance V220) shall be met. - l 72.** The applicant shall provide a. theme plaza at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street as required by the General Plan which shall include landscaping, public furniture and a public art piece. The art piece can contain the developers main identification sign (Sign N1), if it is an integral part of the theme plaza and/or the public art piece. The design shall be approved by the Art in Public Places Committee and the City Council as required by Chapter 2.65 of the Municipal Code. The developer shall retain an artist to help design the theme plaza. The theme plaza size shall not be less than 2,000 square feet and the overall design should be similar to the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center theme plaza at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. 73.+-- The medical office building shall not exceed three stories with, a maximum 40 -foot height. The height of the building shall be measured from the existing grade (top of curb) on Highway 111. The developer can reallocate the fourth floor square footage into the project (e.g., over the parking structure) provided the new site plan does include adding two story elements .into the 150 -foot setback requirement on either arterial street. The revised design shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Reyiew Beafd and Planning Commission prior to preparation of final working drawings. CONAPRVL.037 16 r ATTACHMENTS �Ghtwc �2 (J� July 12, 1994 Mr. Jerry Herman, Director Planning Department City of La Quinta La Quinta, Ca. 92253 RE: Plot Plan 93 -495 Mr. Herman: ATTACHMENT 1 1�j ' JUL 12 1994 CITY OF LA L"UITA PLANNAG DEPARTMENT As per your telephone conversation with Mark Moran on this date, we are requesting that our scheduled appearence before the City Council on August 2 be moved to the September. 20 meeting of the City Council. This delay in our appeal will give Mark Moran and myself time to meet with City Staff and prepare the information that the City and Simon Plaza will need related to the issues that.were brought by our appeal. I appreciate your kind consideration and I look forward to meeting with you regarding our project in the near future.. Sincerely, SIMON PLAZA,(/ INC. '— ed J. imon, Sr. airma of the Board P.O. BOX 461. 78 -611 HWY. 111, LA QUINTA, CA 92253 • PH.: 619/773 -2345 • FAX: 619/568 -4567 City of La Quinta 78 -495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 ATTACHMENT 2 September 8, 1994 SEP 08 1994 r .V�,n:. 0:1F.: j1';4hNT ATTN: Mr. Jerry Herman, Director of Planning & Development RE: Plot Plan 93 -495 Dear Mr. Herman: . We respectfully request a continuance of our Public Hearing Item, related to Simon Plaza, to October 18, 1994. This continuance is due to information that is presently forthcoming from the City Engineering Department to Simon Plaza's engineers, Sanborn and Webb. The time requested will allow our engineers to adequately deal with new issues that have been raised related to storm -water evacuation at the southside of Highway 111 and Washington Street. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Very truly yours, SIMON PLAZA, INC. AVrej. imon, Sr. Chairm of the Board P.O. BOX 461,78-61 1 HWY. 111, LA QUINTA, CA 92253 • PH.: 619/773 -2345 • FAX: 619/568 -4567 S COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: August 2, 1994 ITEM TITLE: Continued Public Hearing on Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revised), a request by Simon Plaza, Inc. to appeal the Planning Commission's approval of a one year extension of time for a previously approved project on ±5.6 acres on Highway 111, east of Washington Street. RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Continue the Public Hearing to September 20, 1994, as requested by the applicant. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Case History This plot plan request was originally approved by the Planning Commission on May 11, 1993, and accepted by the City Council on May 18, 1993. The approved plans allow a three story medical office building, additional retail /office buildings, and a multi -level parking structure. Planning Commission Review On May 24, 1994, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the request for a one year extension of time. Staff recommended modifications to the Conditions of Approval regarding Washington Street dedication and improvements. The applicant felt that nothing has changed at the project site to justify the proposed new revisions. Staff explained that the changes were necessary because the Washington Street dedication has not been made and the City needs to begin street widening to improve the Washington Street and Highway 111 intersection. The Planning Commission felt the one year extension should be allowed based on the State's current economic environment. The Planning Commission voted 3 -1 -0 (Commissioner Adolph voted no) to approve the applicant's one year extension pursuant to the attached amended Conditions of Approval. Appeal Hearing The case would have been reviewed by the City Council on June 7, 1994, as a report of action. However, on May 31, 1994, the applicant filed an appeal with the Planning Department requesting a public hearing before the City Council. The initial City Council public hearing was held on June 21, 1994; however, at the meeting, the applicant requested and received a continuance to August 2, 1994. CCSTFGT.002 P. P On July 12, 1994, staff received a letter from Mr. Fred J. Simon, Sr., requesting another continuance in order to have additional time to negotiate an Owner Participation Agreement with the City prior to further discussion on their appeal hearing. A copy of the letter is attached (Attachment✓ 1). FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The options available to Council are as follows: 1. Continue the public hearing to September 20, 1994; 2. Accept the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission on May 24, 1994; 3. Consider revising the approved Conditions of Approval as requested by the applicant. 4. Deny the time extension request. G�ZA-I -�� Jerry Herman Planning & Development Director Attachments: 1. Letter from Mr. Fred Simon, Sr., received July 12, 1994 CCSTFGT,002 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PLOT PLAN 93 -495 (REVISED) MAY 24, 1994 - SIMON PLAZA * Modified by the Planning Commission on 5 -I1 -93 ** Added by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 * ** Deleted by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 + Modified by Planning Commission on 5 -24 -94 FINDINGS 1. The revised project and time extension request are consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 2. The project will not have an adverse environmental impact on the surrounding properties based on the proposed Conditions of Approval. 3. The project is a logical progression of development for this community zoned area. 4. The proposed project is consistent with the intent and purpose of the General Plan. GENERAL 1. The development of the property shall be generally in conformance with the exhibits contained in the file for PP 93 -495 (Revision), unless amended otherwise by the following conditions. +2. The approved plot plan shall be used by May 24, 1995; otherwise it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Be used " - means the beginning of substantial construction which is contemplated by this approval, not including grading which is begun within the one year period and is thereafter diligently pursued until completion. A one year time extension may be requested as permitted by Municipal Code provided an extension request is filed by April 24, 1995. 3. There shall be no outdoor storage or sales displays without specific approval of the Planning Commission. 4. All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed so as not to shine directly on surrounding adjoining properties or public rights -of -way. Light standard type with recessed light source shall also be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Exterior lighting shall comply with Outdoor Light Control Ordinance and Off - Street Parking requirements. CONAPRVL.037 4 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) -. Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 5. Adequate masonry trash enclosures shall be provided for all structures and provided with opaque metal doors. Plans for trash enclosures to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall contact the local waste management company to insure that the number of enclosures and size of the enclosures are adequate. 6. Decorative enclosures may be required by the City around any retention basins depending on site grading requirements. The color, location, and placement of said fence(s) shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. 7. Phased improvement plans shall be subject to Planning Commission review. 8. Handicap parking spaces and facilities shall be provided per Municipal Code, State, and Federal requirements. 9. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to submission of building plans for plan check or issuance of grading permit, whichever comes first. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on building interior areas from perimeter streets, and impacts on the proposed abutting and provide mitigation of noise as alternative mitigation measures for incorporation into the project design such as building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (berming, landscaping and walls, etc.), and other techniques. 10. The project shall comply with all existing Off - Street Parking requirements including but not limited to, shading of parking lot areas and bicycle parking spaces. 11. Perimeter landscaping planters shall be provided at maximum widths possible adjacent to property lines and planted with landscaping. 12. The project shall comply with all applicable Art in Public Places Ordinances. A public art piece shall be installed on the property at a location agreeable to the Art in Public Places Committee (e.g., at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street). A public easement shall be offered to the City for the site that any art piece may occupy which has been established by the Art in Public Places Committee. 13. * The developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist and pay all associated costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior to archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information, shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. The Planning and Development Director shall approve the firm to be used in the study prior to any on -site activities. CONAPRVL.037 5 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 The plan shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society (CVAS) for a two -week review and comment period. At a minimum, the plan shall: 1) identify the means for digging test pits; 2) allow sharing the information with the CVAS; and 3) provide for further testing if the preliminary result show significant materials 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 divert, 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 areas 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 analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this use, the applicant shall obtain permits or clearances from the following agencies: • City Fire Marshal • City of La Quinta Public Works Department • City of La Quinta Planning and Development Department • Coachella Valley Water District • Desert Sands Unified School District • Imperial Irrigation District • Caltrans (District 11) CONAPRVL.037 6 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of application for a building permit for the proposed project. 15. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City adopted infrastructure fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 16. Final landscaping plans shall include approval stamps and signatures from the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioners office and the Coachella Valley Water District. 17. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit to the Engineering Department an interim landscape program for the entire site which shall be for the purpose of wind and erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blow sand and dust control measures during grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a) use of irrigation during construction and grading activities; b) areas not constructed on during first phase shall be planted in temporary ground cover or wildflowers and provided with temporary irrigation system; and c) provisions of wind breaks or wind rolls, fencing and /or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The landowner shall comply with requirements of the Directors of Public Works and Planning and Development Departments. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent emission of dust and blow sand. 18. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit as determined by the Building Official. 19. 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 which must be satisfied prior to issuance of a building permit. Prior to a final building inspection approval, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection of other monitoring to assure such compliance. 20. A parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, and parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. All roof equipment shall be screened from view by parapet walls of building or other architecturally matching materials. 22. All compact spaces shall be clearly marked "compact cars only" CONAPRVL.037 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 23. + That all conditions of the Design Reyiew Beafd Planning Commission shall be complied with as follows: A. The landscape plan shall include an eight foot wide meandering pedestrian /bike trail. The plans should be reviewed by the Design Reyiew Beafd Planning Director prior to submission of the final landscape plan by the applicant/developer. B. The landscape program for Washington Street shall include a variation of planting materials, i.e., palm trees, accent shade trees, lawn, shrubs, and groundcover. The use of mature California Pepper, Australian Willow, Mesquite, Crape Myrtle, Bottle trees, and Washington Robusta Palms shall be encouraged. Varieties of flowering shrubs such as Texas Ranger, Cassia, Crepe Myrtle, and Dwarf Oleander shall be utilized. Native (low water use) plants shall be used, and the landscape architect should consult the Coachella Valley Water District's plant material list prior to designing their proposal. Uplighted trees or palms shall be used along Washington Street and Highway 111. Incandescent light fixtures will be required (less than 160 watt). Landscaping plan shall conform to Ordinance 220 regarding water conservation. C. + Any proposed parking lot lighting plan shall be reviewed by the Design Revi Beafd Planning Director prior to building plan check. A photometric study shall be developed which analyzes the lighting pattern on the project and meets the City's Lighting Ordinance provisions as explained in Chapter 9.210 and 9.160 (Off - Street Parking). The height of the light poles shall not exceed 18 feet in height, and the lighting contractor should reduce this height if physically possible during review of the project. D. A maximum building height of 28 feet shall be maintained along Washington Street and Highway 111 within 150 feet of the ultimate property line (after street dedication has been included) excluding minor architectural appendages (e.g., chimneys, towers, building columns, etc.). E. + Decorative concrete entryways shall be provided for all two -way driveways into the project site. The concrete shall be stamped and colored to accentuate the proposed development. The color, design, and location of the concrete should be reviewed by the Design Reyiew Beefd Planning Director during a final plan check review. CONAPRVL.037 8 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 F+ The revised concept design plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Director prior to the submission of the plans to the Building and Safety Department for final plan check consideration. The plans should include but are not limited to landscaping and irrigation, building elevations, signs, and any other major exterior design features of the project as noted at the Design Review Board meeting of May 5, 1993. G. Bike racks shall be provided at convenient areas within the site for usage by bicycle riders. One space for every 50 parking spaces shall be provided as noted in the Off - Street Parking Code. H. The landscape setback on Washington Street shall be a minimum of 20 feet from the new property line. I. All open parking stalls shall be screened by berm walls, landscape hedges, or a combination thereof to a minimum height of 42 inches. J. The maximum floor area ration (F.A.R.) for this project shall be 0.35 per the Policy Standards of the General Plan (LU Table #f4). K. + The roof design for the 3 -story medical office building shall be either 4:12 or higher to give the building balance and proper scale to its mass. L.... The roof design fer- the one stery efflee building shall be similef to the one story restaufmt building at the interseetien ef Highway 111 and Wftshifigten Street. M. + The parking structures tile roof facade shall be eliminated because it is not compatible with the design motif of the €etf three story medical office building. The applicant should evaluate another design style which incorporates a cornice design feature (similar to the upper portion of the four story building) and other articulated features which will soften the elevation and not enhance its presence. N. * The parking structure ramp on the south side of the project shall be stuccoed to match the building. The structure shall be landscaped along its westerly side to conceal its presence. O. + The applicant shall include the following features into the three story medical office building: L... . 2.* Individual pane windows or grid molded windows can be used. CONAPRVL.037 9 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 3. *+ Additional building column connections should be used where agreed upon with the Design Reyiew Beefd Planning Commission. 4. Accented building roof heights. 5. Revision to the elevator shaft design and its relationship to Highway 111. 6.... Energy eensefyatien measures shed! be reyie 7.... The two stery elements oft the west side of the four story building ahaI4 be Fedesigned so that the Feef eefineets into the building (delete th existing windews). CITY FIRE MARSHAL 24. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 3500 gpm for a three hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. Fire flow is based upon all buildings being equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. 25. A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6" X 4" X 2' /2" X 21/2"), will 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. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 26. Prior to issuance of any building permit, 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 and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed /approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company 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." The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to start of construction. 27. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13. The post indicator valve and Fire Department connection shall be located to the front within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). System plans must be submitted with a plan check/inspection fee to the Fire Department for review. A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans. 28. Install a supervised waterflow fire alarm system as required by the Uniform Building Code. CONAPRVL.037 10 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 29. Install a Hood Duct automatic fire extinguishing system. System plans must be permitted, along with a plan check/ inspection. fee, to the Fire Department for review. 30. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2AIOBC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 31. Occupancy separation will be required as per the Uniform Building Code, 11503. 32. Install Panic Hardware and "Exit" signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. 33. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. 34. Install a Class I Standpipe System. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 35. 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 these Conditions of Approval noted as follows: A. Washington Street - Provide right -of -way as required by the Washington Street Specific Plan. B. Washington Street/Highway 111 Intersection - Provide right -of -way cut back as needed to accommodate a 55 -foot curb return (45 -feet right -of -way). C. *+ Applieaflt sha4l dedieate the required right of way within thif4y (30) days afte Property owner(s) shall dedicate the required right -of -way prior to the issuance of a building permit. 36. Applicant shall provide a fully improved landscaped setback area of noted minimum width adjacent to the following street right -of -way: A. Washington Street - 20 -feet wide; B. Highway 111, 50 feet wide; C. Simon Drive, 10 feet wide 37. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to all streets from the project site except for three locations as proposed by the applicant as shown on the site plan drawing. CONAPRVL.037 11 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 38.+ Applicant shall fund and install all street improvements located east of Washington Street Specific Plan centerline and contiguous to the project site. The new improvements include street widening, curb and gutter, asphalt concrete overlay, 8 -foot wide sidewalk, traffic striping and signing and signing along with all appurtenant incidentals and improvements needed to properly integrate and join together the new and existing improvements in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. Applicant shall retain registered professionals as needed to prepare plans for the improvements required by these Conditions of Approval. otqr :. 40. + Applicant shall modify the traffic signal and intersection improvements at the Washington Street/Highway 111 intersection as requied by Caltrans to accommodate the Washington Street widening improvements. 41.* Applicant shall reimburse City for 2-54 12.5% of the cost to design and install traffic signal at the Simon Drive /Highway 111 intersection. 42. + Applicant shall install a bus stop "pullout" and bus shelter on Highway 111 in compliance with Caltrans, Sunline Transit, and City requirements. 43.+ Applicant shall pay for half of the cost to design and install raised median improvements and landscaping on Highway 111 and Washington Street in the portion contiguous to the project site. 44.+ Applicant shall enter into a secured agreement with the City to ensure installation of improvements required by these Conditions of Approval before the grading permit is issued. 45. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological, and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted with a report submitted for review along with grading plan. The report recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and /or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. 46. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. CONAPRVL.037 12 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 47. The site shall be designed and graded in a manner so the elevation difference between the building pad elevations on site and the adjacent street curb do not exceed three (3.0) feet. 48.+ Applicant shall provide storm drain facilities with sufficient capacity to evacuate all water that falls on -site and off -site to the centerline of the streets adjoining the site during the, 1 -hour duration, 25 -year storm event. The storm drain facility shall convey the storm water from the site to the Whitewater Channel. The applicant may purchase capacity on a fair share basis in a storm drain designed and constructed in Washington Street by the City, if the City proceeds with said storm drain facility within time constraints which suit the applicant. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of Washington Street, Highway 111, and Simon Drive. 49. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped setback areas. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of the Planning Director, City Engineer, and Coachella Valley Water District and the plans shall be signed these officials prior to construction. 50. 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. 51. Applicant shall landscape and maintain the landscaped setback area and right -of -way between all street curbing and property lines. 52. Applicant shall construct an eight -foot wide meandering bike path in the combined easterly parkway of Washington Street and southerly parkway of Highway 111 in lieu of the standard six -foot wide sidewalk. A six foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed on Simon Drive. 53. All existing and proposed telecommunication, television cable, and electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, that are adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 54. Underground utilities that lie directly under street improvements or portions thereof shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to installation of that portion of the street improvement. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. 55. Applicant shall pay all fees charged by the city as required for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the city. CONAPRVL.037 13 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 56. Applicant shall retain a California registered civil engineer, or designate one who is on applicant's staff, 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 retained or designated by the applicant to implement this responsibility shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. The engineer shall sign and seal a statement placed on the "as built" plans that says "all (grading and grades) (improvements) on these plans were properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision during construction for compliance with the plans and specifications and the work shown hereon was constructed as approved, except where otherwise noted hereon and specifically acknowledged by the City Engineer". B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the engineer shall provide a separate document, signed and sealed, to the City Engineer that documents the building pad elevations. The document shall, for each pad, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as built elevation, and 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. C. Provide to the City Engineer a signed set of "as built" reproducible drawings of the site grading and all improvements installed by the applicant. 57. The parking stalls on the north side of the office complex as determined by Staff, shall be restricted to either handicapped parking or reserved parking to help eliminate queuing at the Highway 111 access driveway. 58. The driveways on Washington Street and on Highway 111 shall be restricted to right turn movements only. 59. Turning movements at the intersection of Washington Street and Simon Drive shall be restricted to right turns only in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. SPECIAL 60. All required improvements shall be completed prior to first site occupancy of the proposed development. 61. The parking structure shall not exceed 15 feet in overall height as measured from finished grade pad elevation within 100 feet of Highway 111. Exterior lighting on top level of parking structure shall not exceed six feet and not be within ten feet of outside wall. CONAPRVL.037 14 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 62. All mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 91 -211 shall be met. 63. The parcels shall be legally merged prior to building permit issuance. 64. 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, so adopted by the City, in the amount, of $600 per acre of disturbed land. 65. +• The north side of the parking structure shall include perimeter grade planting as deemed appropriate by the Planning Director. 66. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, a parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department to verify compliance with the Off - Street Parking requirements. Prior to each subsequent phase beginning construction a new parking study based on existing usage and potential demand shall be submitted. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. 67. Appropriate and adequate service delivering areas (loading facilities) and trash facilities shall be provided as required by the Off - Street Parking Code. The facilities shall include areas for recycling bins and be approved by Staff during the final review process. The standards and requirements of AB 939 (recycling) shall be met. This shall include provisions for on -site recycling of recyclable materials by the tenants in conjunction with the City's franchise hauler contract provisions. 68. An on -site elevator(s) shall service the site and provide accessibility from the parking garage to each respective building floor level. The design and installation of the elevator shall meet both Uniform Building Code standards and any other California State requirements. 69. The existing six foot high soundwall along the Washington Street frontage road shall be extended between the frontage road and Washington Street northerly of its present location to the northeasterly corner of Lot 27 of Tract 2043 (Singing Palms Drive and Washington Street) to mitigate traffic noise impacts on the existing R -1 single family neighborhood. 70. A Transportation Demand Management Plan shall be submitted (Ordinance 217) if the project or the ultimate development of the site employs 100 or more persons. The plan can be prepared by either the property owner or the tenant(s) within the development. The plan shall be submitted and approved by the Director of Planning and Development. CONAPRVL.037 15 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 71. The provisions of the City's newly adopted Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance (#220) shall be met. 72. ** The applicant shall provide a theme plaza at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street as required by the General Plan which shall include landscaping, public furniture and a public art piece. The art piece can contain the developers main identification sign (Sign #1), if it is an integral part of the theme plaza and /or the public art piece. The design shall be approved by the Art in Public Places Committee and the City Council as required by Chapter 2.65 of the Municipal Code. The developer shall retain an artist to help design the theme plaza. The theme plaza size shall not be less than 2,000 square feet and the overall design should be similar to the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center theme plaza at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. 73. +•- The medical office building shall not exceed three stories with a maximum 40 -foot height. The height of the building shall be measured from the existing grade (top of curb) on Highway 111. The developer can reallocate the fourth floor square footage into the project (e.g., over the parking structure) provided the new site plan does include adding two story elements into the 150 -foot setback requirement on either arterial street. The revised design shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Res,iew Beard and Planning Commission prior to preparation of final working drawings. CONAPRVL.037 16 ATTACHMENTS O�inc* July 12, 1994 Mr. Jerry Herman, Director Planning Department City of La Quinta La Quinta, Ca. 92253 RE: Plot Plan 93 -495 Mr. Herman: ATTACHMENT 1 JUL 12 194 CITY CF W CUINTA PLANNiNS DEPARTMENT As per your telephone conversation with Mark Moran on this date, we are requesting that our scheduled appearence before the City Council on August 2 be moved to the September 20 meeting of the City Council. This delay in our appeal will give Mark Moran and myself time to meet with City Staff and prepare the information that the City and Simon Plaza will need related to the issues that were brought by our appeal. I appreciate your kind consideration and I look forward to meeting with you regarding our project in the near future. Sincerely, SIMON PLAZA V INC. d J. imon, Sr. irma of the Board P.O. BOX 461, 78 -611 HWY. 111, LA QUINTA, CA 92253 • PH.: 619/773 -2345 • FAX: 619/568 -4567 P22, T% }T ITEM NO: AGENDA ITEM PROCESSING FORM MEETING DATE: Auqust 2, 1994 CITY I RDA I OTHER: ITEM TITLE: Continued public hearing on Plot Plan 93 -495 - a rest by siton Plaza regarding the Planning Commission review and approval of a one year extension of time for a previously approved project on 506 acres on the south side of Highway 1 DEPARTMENT HEAD: Jerry Hezman STAFF CONTACT: (egg Trousdell DATE: July 21, 1994 CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ) kbv© to continue the matter to S—,tptaDbsr 20, 1994, as requested by the applicant, BOARD /COMMISSION /RECOMMENDATION (If Applicable): The Rlazining ocmdssion tested to approve the request on Vay 24, 1994, on a 3 -1 ClXduasion Adolph absent. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION: APPROVAL REQUIRED: .1, YES NO APPROVAL CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE �g LEGAL FINANCE DIRECTOR OTHER (LIST): PRESENTATIONS YES NO ORDINANCE STUDY SESSION MAYOR & COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS RESOLUTION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS PUBLIC HEARINGS AGREEMENT rst re6eral. S ,,350 Sb Garvey Ave,,, CLOSED SESSION SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT Po 0. B = 2710, Palm Sprims, CA 92263 COMMISSION REPORT CITY ATTORNEY OPINION BID PACKAGE OTHER L-3tCex X APPROVAL REQUIRED: .1, YES NO APPROVAL CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE �g LEGAL FINANCE DIRECTOR OTHER (LIST): PRESENTATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR DEPARTMENT REPORTS WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE STUDY SESSION MAYOR & COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS BUSINESS SESSION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS PUBLIC HEARINGS Gilbert Saaith, Sen. VP, Pam PI rst re6eral. S ,,350 Sb Garvey Ave,,, CLOSED SESSION COPIES OF THIS ITEM SHOULD BE SENT TO: XCPRIOR TO MEETING AFTER MEETING NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY /STATE /ZIP CODE Fred S]TCiIJn, Sr. P, Oo Box 461 Tzi Quinta., CA 92253 . Philip late Pead, Simon Plaza Pe On '.8mI; Ar�1 Le Qiin A, rA 9;1 Gilbert Saaith, Sen. VP, Pam PI rst re6eral. S ,,350 Sb Garvey Ave,,, 6 Pamna e CA 91766 Paul Selzer, Rest, Hest 6 Kr:iegex, Po 0. B = 2710, Palm Sprims, CA 92263 4/94 ORIGINAL: STAFF REPORT YELLOW: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PINK: DEPARTMENT cf� ITEM NO: AGENDA ITEM PROCESSING FORM MEETING DATE: Augu.�t 2, 199 CITY I RDA I OTHER: ITEM TITLE: Continued public hearing on Plot Plan 93 -495 - a rest by S1son Plea regarding the Planning Candasion review and approval of a one year extcnsa on of tu- for a previaaasly approved pro jwt on 5.6 ass on the south side of Highway 1; ;5.: s xa — DEPARTMENT HEAD: Jay Hermn STAFF CONTACT: Greg ` k-ou -� l i DATE: Jul, 21 p 1994 CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ? STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 4rNMm e Abve to continue the ratter to Septedxer 20, 1994, as requested by the applicant. BOARD /COMMISSION/RECOMMENDATION (If Applicable): The Planning Ck mission mted to approve the request on May 24, 1994, on a 3-1 CmAWsion Adolph absent. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION: APPROVAL REQUIRED: 1, i YES NO APPROVAL A CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE x LEGAL FINANCE DIRECTOR OTHER (LIST): PRESENTATIONS YES NO ORDINANCE STUDY SESSION MAYOR & COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS RESOLUTION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS XX PUBLIC HEARINGS AGREEMENT xst Fedexal. S /L, 350 So Gamy CLOSED SESSION SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT Pa 0. Box 2710, Palm Springs, CA 92263 COMMISSION REPORT CITY ATTORNEY OPINION BID PACKAGE OTHER latter x APPROVAL REQUIRED: 1, i YES NO APPROVAL A CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE x LEGAL FINANCE DIRECTOR OTHER (LIST): PRESENTATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR DEPARTMENT. REPORTS WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE STUDY SESSION MAYOR & COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS BUSINESS SESSION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS XX PUBLIC HEARINGS Ca la i ss. aC -th, Sen. VP, PcTiDna F xst Fedexal. S /L, 350 So Gamy CLOSED SESSION COPIES OF THIS ITEM SHOULD BE SENT TO: XXPRIOR TO MEETING AFTER MEETING NAME STREET ADDRESS .CITY /STATE /ZIP CODE k�--ed Ste, sx, Po 00 Box 461 La Dainta, CA 92253 ?Uiip mo Pte, simon Plaza P, 00 Box 461 %a Ckiinta, C; 92253 Ca la i ss. aC -th, Sen. VP, PcTiDna F xst Fedexal. S /L, 350 So Gamy veo, Perna, CA 91766 ?aul Best, Est & kcieger, Pa 0. Box 2710, Palm Springs, CA 92263 4194 ORIGINAL: STAFF REPORT YELLOW: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PINK: DEPARTMENT 4 T4'1t 4 4 Q" AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: June 21, 1994 CONSENT CALENDAR: ITEM TITLE: STUDY SESSION: Appeal Simon Plaza, Inc. regarding the Planning Commission's approval of a one year extension of time for PUBLIC HEARING: a previously approved project on +5.6 acres on Highway 111, east of Washington Street Move to accept the action of the Planning Commission to approve a one year extension of time for Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revised) , for the development of a +82,013 square foot commercial center, subject to the attached findings and amended conditions. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Case History This plot plan request was originally approved by the Planning Commission on May 11, 1993, and accepted by the City Council on May 18, 1993. The approved plans allow a three story medical office building, additional retail /office buildings, and a multi -level parking structure. In 1993, the Planning Commission amended a few of the recommendations of the Engineering Department at the meeting. Two of these items were the amount of improvements required by the applicant on Washington Street and the percentage amount the applicant needed to contribute to the existing traffic signal at Simon Drive and Highway 111. The Planning Commission felt the developer should not be required to reimburse the City for the future raised median nor perform street improvements westerly of the existing curb and gutter facilities on Washington Street. The Commission however thought the developer should be required to install new street improvements per the provisions of the Washington Street Specific Plan Alignment Schedule ( Condition #39) . The developer stated he is in agreement with their proposal. The Commission thought the site was too small to justify all the requirements of the Engineering Department. The applicant also requested that the Planning Commission reduce his traffic signal fair -share contribution from 25% to something less than this because they felt their project did not justify this fee based on the size of their project. Mr. Pead thought the larger projects in the area should pay for this existing signal. The Planning Director stated that the other projects in the area were contributing, but 25% was the remaining amount since the One Eleven La Quinta Center contributed 50% and Washington Square will contribute 25%. Staff stated that if the existing Simon Motors had not been constructed, the City would ask this property owner to contribute to the signal during the development process. But since it is currently an existing business, the City cannot request the traffic signal money from their businesses. The Commission felt the project did benefit from the existing traffic signal but they thought 12.5% was a more reasonable fee ( Condition 41) . The final vote of the Planning Commission was 4 -0 to approve the project provided the project does not exceed three stories in overall height. The Planning Commission's modifications to Conditions #39 and #41 modifies the applicant's off -site costs by shifting approximately $150,000 from the applicant to the City. ccsTFcr. ooz Planning Commission Approval On May 24, 1994, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing (Attachment 1) on the request for a one year extension of time. Modifications to the original Conditions of Approval were made. The changes were necessary because the Washington Street dedication had not been made and the City needs to begin partial street widening soon to improve the Washington Street and Highway 111 intersection. The Planning Commission determined that the one year extension should be allowed based on the State's current economic environment. The Planning Commission voted 3 -1 -0 (Commissioner Adolph voted no and Commissioner Marrs was absent) to approve the applicant's submittal pursuant to the attached amended Conditions of Approval. The draft Planning Commission minutes are attached (Attachment 2) . Appeal Hearing The case would have been reviewed by the City Council on June 7, 1994, as a report of action. However, on May 31, 1994, the applicant filed an appeal with the Planning Department requesting a public hearing. A copy of the appeal is attached (Attachment 3) . The applicant is not appealing the one year time extension approval, however they are requesting that the City Council reconsider seven of the Planning Commission's recommended Conditions (Conditions 2, 38, 39, 40, 43, 44, & 48). Six of the conditions address off -site improvements and the last requests a two year approval period instead of the standard one year approval. The attached Planning Commission report explained the reasons for the proposed changes to the original conditions. The Planning Commission retained conditions which are pertinent to the development of the site. The Planning Commission's original reduction of the applicant's off -site improvement costs was also based on the property owner(s) conveying Washington Street right -of -way to the City so that improvements could be made. The street dedication paperwork has not been signed nor conveyed to the City as required by original Condition 35. The appliant has requested the City Council permit a two year approval for the project versus a one year period as noted in Condition 2. Chapter 9.182.090 (Approval Period) states "a time extension of up to one year may be considered." Therefore, only a one year period is permissible based on the City's current Municipal Zoning Code provision. Staff is considering a amendment to this provision this year during the City's update of the Zoning Code. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The options available to Council are as follows: 1. Accept the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission on May 24, 1994; 2. Consider revising the approved Conditions of Approval as requested by the applicant. H Development Director 2 CCSTFGr.00z Attachments: 1. Planning Commission Report of May 24, 1994 (Excerpt) 2. Draft Planning Commission minutes 3. Simon Plaza Appeal 4. Location Map 5. Large Exhibits (City Council only) CCSTFGT.002 3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED PLOT PLAN 93 -495 (REVISED) MAY 24, 1994 SIMON PLAZA * Modified by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 ** Added by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 * ** Deleted by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 + Modified by Planning Commission on 5 -24 -94 FINDINGS 1. The revised project and time extension request are consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 2. The project will not have an adverse environmental impact on the surrounding properties based on the proposed Conditions of Approval. 3. The project is a logical progression of development for this community zoned area. 4. The proposed project is consistent with the intent and purpose of the General Plan. GENERAL 1. The development of the property shall be generally in conformance with the exhibits contained in the file for PP 93 -495 (Revision), unless amended otherwise by the following conditions. +2. The approved plot plan shall be used by May 24, 1995; otherwise it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Be used" means the beginning of substantial construction which is contemplated by this approval, not including grading which is begun within the one year period and is thereafter diligently pursued until completion. A one year time extension may be requested as permitted by Municipal Code provided an extension request is filed by April 24, 1995. 3. There shall be no outdoor storage or sales displays without specific approval of the Planning Commission. 4. All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed so as not to shine directly on surrounding adjoining properties or public rights -of -way. Light standard type with recessed light source shall also be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Exterior lighting shall comply with Outdoor Light Control Ordinance and Off - Street Parking requirements. CONAPRVL.037 4 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 5. Adequate masonry trash enclosures shall be provided for all structures and provided with opaque metal doors. Plans for trash enclosures to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall contact the local waste management company to insure that the number of enclosures and size of the enclosures are adequate. 6. Decorative enclosures may be required by the City around any retention basins depending on site grading requirements. The color, location, and placement of said fence(s) shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. 7. Phased improvement plans shall be subject to Planning Commission review. 8. Handicap parking spaces and facilities shall be provided per Municipal Code, State, and Federal requirements. 9. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to submission of building plans for plan check or issuance of grading permit, whichever comes first. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on building interior areas from perimeter streets, and impacts on the proposed abutting and provide mitigation of noise as alternative mitigation measures for incorporation into the project design such as building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (terming, landscaping and walls, etc.), and other techniques. 10. The project shall comply with all existing Off - Street Parking requirements including but not limited to, shading of parking lot areas and bicycle parking spaces. 11. Perimeter landscaping planters shall be provided at maximum widths possible adjacent to property lines and planted with landscaping. 12. The project shall comply with all applicable Art in Public Places Ordinances. A public art piece shall be installed on the property at a location agreeable to the Art in Public Places Committee (e.g., at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street). A public easement shall be offered to the City for the site that any art piece may occupy which has been established by the Art in Public Places Committee. 13. * The developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist and pay all associated costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior to archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information, shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. The Planning and Development Director shall approve the firm to be used in the study prior to any on -site activities. CONAPRVL.037 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 The plan shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society (CVAS) for a two -week review and comment period. At a minimum, the plan shall: 1) identify the means for digging test pits; 2) allow sharing the information with the CVAS; and 3) provide for further testing if the preliminary result show significant materials 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 divert, 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 areas 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 analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this use, the applicant shall obtain permits or clearances from the following agencies: • City Fire Marshal • City of La Quinta Public Works Department • City of La Quinta Planning and Development Department • Coachella Valley Water District • Desert Sands Unified School District • Imperial Irrigation District • Caltrans (District 11) CONAPRVL.037 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of application for a building permit for the proposed project. 15. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City adopted infrastructure fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 16. Final landscaping plans shall include approval stamps and signatures from the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioners office and the Coachella Valley Water District. 17. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit to the Engineering Department an interim landscape program for the entire site which shall be for the purpose of wind and erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blow sand and dust control measures during grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a) use of irrigation during construction and grading activities; b) areas not constructed on during first phase shall be planted in temporary ground cover or wildflowers and provided with temporary irrigation system; and c) provisions of wind breaks or wind rolls, fencing and /or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The landowner shall comply with requirements of the Directors of Public Works and Planning and Development Departments. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent emission of dust and blow sand. 18. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit as determined by the Building Official. 19. 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 which must be satisfied prior to issuance of a building permit. Prior to a final building inspection approval, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection of other monitoring to assure such compliance. 20. A parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, and parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. All roof equipment shall be screened from view by parapet walls of building or other architecturally matching materials. 22. All compact spaces shall be clearly marked "compact cars only ". CONAPRVL.037 7 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 23. + That all conditions of the Design Rev,iew Beffd Planning Commission shall be complied with as follows: A. The landscape plan shall include an eight foot wide meandering pedestrian/bike trail. The plans should be reviewed by the Design Review Beafd Planning Director prior to submission of the final landscape plan by the applicant/developer. B. The landscape program for Washington Street shall include a variation of planting materials, i.e., palm trees, accent shade trees, lawn, shrubs, and groundcover. The use of mature California Pepper, Australian Willow, Mesquite, Crape Myrtle, Bottle trees, and Washington Robusta Palms shall be encouraged. Varieties of flowering shrubs such as Texas Ranger, Cassia, Crepe Myrtle, and Dwarf Oleander shall be utilized. Native (low water use) plants shall be used, and the landscape architect should consult the Coachella Valley Water District's plant material list prior to designing their proposal. Uplighted trees or palms shall be used along Washington Street and Highway 111. Incandescent light fixtures will be required (less than 160 watt). Landscaping plan shall conform to Ordinance 220 regarding water conservation. C. + Any proposed parking lot lighting plan shall be reviewed by the Design Revi Board Planning Director prior to building plan check. A photometric study shall be developed which analyzes the lighting pattern on the project and meets the City's Lighting Ordinance provisions as explained in Chapter 9.210 and 9.160 (Off - Street Parking). The height of the light poles shall not exceed 18 feet in height, and the lighting contractor should reduce this height if physically possible during review of the project. D. A maximum building height of 28 feet shall be maintained along Washington Street and Highway 111 within 150 feet of the ultimate property line (after street dedication has been included) excluding minor architectural appendages (e.g., chimneys, towers, building columns, etc.). E. + Decorative concrete entryways shall be provided for all two -way driveways into the project site. The concrete shall be stamped and colored to accentuate the proposed development. The color, design, and location of the concrete should be reviewed by the Design Reyiew Beffd Planning Director during a final plan check review. CONAPRVL.037 s Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 F. + The revised concept design plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Director prior to the submission of the plans to the Building and Safety Department for final plan check consideration. The plans should include but are not limited to landscaping and irrigation, building elevations, signs, and any other major exterior design features of the project as noted at the Design Review Board meeting of May 5, 1993. G. Bike racks shall be provided at convenient areas within the site for usage by bicycle riders. One space for every 50 parking spaces shall be provided as noted in the Off -Street Parking Code. H. The landscape setback on Washington Street shall be a minimum' of 20 feet from the new property line. I. All open parking stalls shall be screened by berm walls, landscape hedges, or a combination thereof to a minimum height of 42 inches. J. The maximum floor area ration (F.A.R.) for this project shall be 0.35 per the Policy Standards of the General Plan (LU Table #4). K. + The roof design for the 3 -story medical office building shall be either 4:12 or higher to give the building balance and proper scale to its mass. M. + The parking structures tile roof facade shall be eliminated because it is not compatible with the design motif of the €etf three story medical office building. The applicant should evaluate another design style which incorporates. a cornice design feature (similar to the upper portion of the four story building) and other articulated features which will soften the elevation and not enhance its presence. N. * The parking structure ramp on the south side of the project shall be stuccoed to match the building. The structure shall be landscaped along its westerly side to conceal its presence. O. + The applicant shall include the following features into the three story medical office building: 2. * Individual pane windows or grid molded windows can be used. CONAPRVL.037 9 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 3. *+ Additional building column connections should be used where agreed upon with the Design Reyiew BeEffd Planning Commission. 4. Accented building roof heights. 5. Revision to the elevator shaft design and its relationship to Highway 111. 6.... . 7.... The two ste I on the west side of the fattf s" building she4l be r-edesigne� se that. the r-eef eenneets inte the building (delete the existing windows). CITY FIRE MARSHAL 24. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 3500 gpm for a three hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. Fire flow is based upon all buildings being equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. 25. A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6" X 4" X 2' /2" X 2' /2"), will 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. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 26. Prior to issuance of any building permit, 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 and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed /approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company 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." The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to start of construction. 27. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13. The post indicator valve and Fire Department connection shall be located to the front within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). System plans must be submitted with a plan check/inspection fee to the Fire Department for review. A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans. 28. Install a supervised waterflow fire alarm system as required by the Uniform Building Code. CONAPRVL:037 10 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 29. Install a Hood Duct automatic fire extinguishing system. System plans must be permitted, along with a plan check/inspection fee, to the Fire Department for review. 30. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 31. Occupancy separation will be required as per the Uniform Building Code, #503. 32. Install Panic Hardware and "Exit" signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. 33. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. 34. Install a Class I Standpipe System. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 35. 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 these Conditions of Approval noted as follows: A. Washington Street - Provide right -of -way as required by the Washington Street Specific Plan. B. Washington Street/Highway 111 Intersection - Provide right -of -way cut back as needed to accommodate a 55 -foot curb return (45 -feet right -of -way). C. *+ Applieant shall dedieate the r-equifed right of way within thii4y (30) days afte Property owner(s) shall dedicate the required right -of -way prior to the issuance of a building permit. 36. Applicant shall provide a fully improved landscaped setback area of noted minimum width adjacent to the following street right -of -way: A. Washington Street - 20 -feet wide; B. Highway 111, 50 feet wide; C. Simon Drive, 10 feet wide 37. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to all streets from the project site except for three locations as proposed by the applicant as shown on the site plan drawing. CONAPRVL.037 11 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 38.+ Applicant shall fund and install all street improvements located east of Washington Street Specific Plan centerline and contiguous to the project site. The new improvements include street widening, curb and gutter, asphalt concrete overlay, 8 -foot wide sidewalk, traffic striping and signing and signing along with all appurtenant incidentals and improvements needed to properly integrate and join together the new and existing improvements in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. Applicant shall retain registered professionals as needed to prepare plans for the improvements required by these Conditions of Approval. .Trrry. JEW 40. + Applicant shall modify the traffic signal and intersection improvements at the Washington Street/Highway 111 intersection as requied by Caltrans to accommodate the Washington Street widening improvements. 41.* Applicant shall reimburse City for 25* 12.5% of the cost to design and install traffic signal at the Simon Drive /Highway 111 intersection. 42. + Applicant shall install a bus stop "pullout" and bus shelter on Highway 111 in compliance with Caltrans, Sunline Transit, and City requirements. 43. + Applicant shall pay for half of the cost to design and install raised median improvements and landscaping on Highway 111 and Washington Street in the portion contiguous to the project site. 44. + Applicant shall enter into a secured agreement with the City to ensure installation of improvements required by these Conditions of Approval before the grading permit is issued. 45. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological, and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted with a report submitted for review along with grading plan. The report recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and /or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. 46. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. CONAPRVL.037 12 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 47. The site shall be designed and graded in a manner so the elevation difference between the building pad elevations on site and the adjacent street curb do not exceed three (3.0) feet. 48.+ Applicant shall provide storm drain facilities with sufficient capacity to evacuate all water that falls on -site and off -site to the centerline of the streets adjoining the site during the, 1 -hour duration, 25 -year storm event. The storm drain facility shall convey the storm water from the site to the Whitewater Channel. The applicant may purchase capacity on a fair share basis in a storm drain designed and constructed in Washington Street by the City, if the City proceeds with said storm drain facility within time constraints which suit the applicant. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of Washington Street, Highway 111, and Simon Drive. 49. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped setback areas. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of the Planning Director, City Engineer, and Coachella Valley Water District and the plans shall be signed these officials prior to construction. 50. 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. 51. Applicant shall landscape and maintain the landscaped setback area and right -of -way between all street curbing and property lines. 52. Applicant shall construct an eight -foot wide meandering bike path in the combined easterly parkway of Washington Street and southerly parkway of Highway 111 in lieu of the standard six -foot wide sidewalk. A six foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed on Simon Drive. 53. All existing and proposed telecommunication, television cable, and electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, that are adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 54. Underground utilities that lie directly under street improvements or portions thereof shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to installation of that portion of the street improvement. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. 55. Applicant shall pay all fees charged by the city as required for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the city. CONAPRVL.037 13 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 56. Applicant shall retain a California registered civil engineer, or designate one who is on applicant's staff, 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 retained or designated by the applicant to implement this responsibility shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. The engineer shall sign and seal a statement placed on the "as built" plans that says "all (grading and grades) (improvements) on these plans were properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision during construction for compliance with the plans and specifications and the work shown hereon was constructed as approved, except where otherwise noted hereon and specifically acknowledged by the City Engineer". B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the engineer shall provide a separate document, signed and sealed, to the City Engineer that documents the building pad elevations. The document shall, for each pad, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as built elevation, and 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. C. Provide to the City Engineer a signed set of "as built" reproducible drawings of the site grading and all improvements installed by the applicant. 57. The parking stalls on the north side of the office complex as determined by Staff, shall be restricted to either handicapped parking or reserved parking to help eliminate queuing at the Highway 111 access driveway. 58. The driveways on Washington Street and on Highway 111 shall be restricted to right turn movements only. 59. Turning movements at the intersection of Washington Street and Simon Drive shall be restricted to right turns only in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. SPECIAL 60. All required improvements shall be completed prior to first site occupancy of the proposed development. 61. The parking structure shall not exceed 15 feet in overall height as measured from finished grade pad elevation within 100 feet of Highway 111. Exterior lighting on top level of parking structure shall not exceed six feet and not be within ten feet of outside wall. CONAPRVL.037 14 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 62. All mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 91 -211 shall be met. 63. The parcels shall be legally merged prior to building permit issuance. 64. 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, so adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. 65. +• The north side of the parking structure shall include perimeter grade planting as deemed appropriate by the Design Reyiew Beffd Planning Director. 66. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, a parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department to verify compliance with the Off - Street Parking requirements. Prior to each subsequent phase beginning construction a new parking study based on existing usage and potential demand shall be submitted. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. 67. Appropriate and adequate service delivering areas (loading facilities) and trash facilities shall be provided as required by the Off - Street Parking Code. The facilities shall include areas for recycling bins and be approved by Staff during the final review process. The standards and requirements of AB 939 (recycling) shall be met. This shall include provisions for on -site recycling of recyclable materials by the tenants in conjunction with the City's franchise hauler contract provisions. 68. An on -site elevator(s) shall service the site and provide accessibility from the parking garage to each respective building floor level. The design and installation of the elevator shall meet both Uniform Building Code standards and any other California State requirements. 69. The existing six foot high soundwall along the Washington Street frontage road shall be extended between the frontage road and Washington Street northerly of its present location to the northeasterly corner of Lot 27 of Tract 2043 (Singing Palms Drive and Washington Street) to mitigate traffic noise impacts on the existing R -1 single family neighborhood. 70. A Transportation Demand Management Plan shall be submitted (Ordinance 217) if the project or the ultimate development of the site employs 100 or more persons. The plan can be prepared by either the property owner or the tenant(s) within the development. The plan shall be submitted and approved by the Director of Planning and Development. CONAPRVL.037 15 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 71. The provisions of the City's newly adopted Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance ( #220) shall be met. 72. ** The applicant shall provide a theme plaza at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street as required by the General Plan which shall include landscaping, public furniture and a public art piece. The art piece can contain the developers main identification sign (Sign #1), if it is an integral part of the theme plaza and /or the public art piece. The design shall be approved by the Art in Public Places Committee and the City Council as required by Chapter 2.65 of the Municipal Code. The developer shall retain an artist to help design the theme plaza. The theme plaza size shall not be less than 2,000 square feet and the overall design should be similar to the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center theme plaza at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. 73. +•• The medical office building shall not exceed three stories with a maximum 40 -foot height. The height of the building shall be measured from the existing grade (top of curb) on Highway 111. The developer can reallocate the fourth floor square footage into the project (e.g., over the parking structure) provided the new site plan does include adding two story elements into the 150 -foot setback requirement on either arterial street. The revised design shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Beefd an Planning Commission prior to preparation of final working drawings. CONAPRVL.037 16 ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT FROM: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE:, MAY 24, 1994 CASE NO: PLOT PLAN 93 -495 (REVISED) APPLICANT: SIMON PLAZA, INC. (PHILIP PEAD) OWNERS: 3S PARTNERSHIP AND POMONA FIRST FEDERAL BANK LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND WASHINGTON STREET. THE DEVELOPMENT, ON +5.6 ACRES OF LAND, IS LOCATED TO THE WEST OF THE EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOTIVE DEALERSHIP ON HIGHWAY 111. ARCHITECT: MERLIN J. BARTH EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: MIXED /REGIONAL COMMERCIAL WITH NON - RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS: NORTH: 111 LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER SOUTH: WASHINGTON SQUARE SPECIFIC PLAN PROPERTY (VACANT) EAST: EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP WEST: EXISTING PLAZA LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER BACKGROUND: Project History A one year extension of time has been requested in order to retain the applicant's 1993 approval of an 82,013 square foot commercial project on approximately 5.6 acres zoned C -P -S Commercial. The project includes a three story office building, a restaurant or bank, an eye institute or office, a two level parking structure, and related at -grade parking. This case is a resubmittal of Plot Plan 91 -466 (Revised) which was approved in 1992 and expired in 1993. This project is approximately 44,000 square feet smaller than the previous plan in order to conform with the newly adopted General Plan Floor Area Ratio Policy. The applicant originally proposed a four story medical office building, a restaurant or bank, an office, and two level parking garage on a +5.6 acres site. (See attached Minutes from the meeting) . The Planning Commission did not approve the four story medical building, but they did approve a three story building and allowed the developer to reallocate the fourth floor building square footage to other locations within the project. The Planning Commission approved this case at their meeting of May 11, 1993. MEMOGT.049 17 Description of Site The proposed +5.6 acre site is comprised of six parcels. The flat and undeveloped parcels were created by the division of land under Parcel Map 18418 in 1982. The property has frontage on three streets with 650 feet along Washington Street, 700 feet along Highway 111, and 180 feet along Simon Drive. The site elevation along Washington Street is approximately 60 feet above sea level. The site is improved with street improvements. However, additional widening is necessary on Washington street to conform with the city's adopted Specific Plan Alignment Program and General Plan. A future raised median island is proposed for both Washington Street and Highway 111. The property was subdivided in the early 1980's for the development of Simon Motors automobile Dealership .as well as to establish commercial lots which could be sold or developed with commercial land uses. Previous Planning Commission Review On April 13, 1993, the Planning Commission continued discussion of this project to May 11, 1993, to allow the applicant additional time to revise the project pursuant to the newly adopted provisions of the General Plan. The applicant did modify the proposal by reducing the overall size of the project from +126,411 square feet to +82,013 square feet. On May 11, 1993, the Planning Commission examined the revised application of Simon Plaza to develop their project at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. The Planning Commission reviewed the comments of the Design Review Board and they concurred that further refinements to the project were warranted. The Planning Commission felt the downscaled proposal was more fitting to this corner parcel, but were opposed to the proposed four story medical office building because it was too massive for this small site. The majority of Commission members stated they would prefer a three story project because it would be more consistent with the existing uses in the area. They noted that the tallest projects approved at this time are the three story El Mirador Medical Center (Desert Hospital) at 47th Avenue and Washington Street and the three story Eisenhower Medical facility at Washington Street and 48th Avenue. The Commission recognized that the applicant could apply for a four story building, but also felt the site could not accommodate such a large structure and retain a pedestrian character (see Condition #73) . Mr. Philip Pead, the applicant, present at the meeting spoke concerning his project. He went through some of the Conditions of Approval he wished to see modified and the Planning Commission discussed each item at length. The applicant also brought additional Highway 111 renderings which were modified after the May 5th Design Review Board meeting. Mr. Pead stated that his architect addressed most of the items identified in the report. However, there were a few items he felt were not necessary as they would add additional costs to the project either in future maintenance or construction. Many of the items requested by the Design Review Board were either modified by the Planning Commission or deleted at the applicant's request. MEMOGT.049 18 The Planning Commission amended a few of the recommendations of the Engineering Department at the meeting. Two of these items were the amount of improvements required by the applicant on Washington street and the percentage amount the applicant needed to contribute to the existing traffic signal at Simon Drive and Highway 111. The Planning Commission felt the developer should not be required to reimburse the City for the future raised median nor perform street improvements westerly of the existing curb and gutter facilities on Washington Street. The Commission however thought the developer should be required to install new street improvements per the provisions of the Washington Street Specific Plan Alignment Schedule (Condition #39) . The Commission thought the site was too small to justify all the requirements of the Engineering Department. The applicant also requested that the Planning Commission reduce his traffic signal fair -share contribution from 25% to something less than this because they felt their project did not justify this fee based on the size of their project. Mr. Pead thought the larger projects in the area should pay for this existing signal. The Planning Director stated that the other projects in the area were contributing, but 25% was the remaining amount since the One Eleven La Quinta Center contributed 50% and Washington Square will contribute 25 %. Staff stated that if Simon Motors was not built, the City would ask this property owner to contribute to the signal during the development process. But since it is a currently existing business, the City cannot request the traffic signal money from their business. The Commission felt the project did benefit from the existing traffic signal but they thought 12.5% was a more reasonable fee (Condition #41) . The final vote of the Planning Commission was 4 -1 to approve the project provided the project does not exceed three stories in overall height. The City Council accepted the Planning Commission approval of the project at their May 18, 1993, meeting. Public Hearing In 1993, staff began requiring that all time extensions be a public hearing in order to inform the general public and surrounding property owners of the time extension request. This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 3, 1994, and notices were mailed to the abutting property owners within 300 -feet of the project. Prior to the meeting, staff received no letters in support or in opposition to the one year extension request. Illegal Dumping In 1993, staff informed an individual contractor that no fill dirt could be imported to the site until the on -site archaeological study had been completed. However, some dumping was done on the southeast corner of the site before a stop work order could be issued. No additional on -site work shall be done until proper clearances are secured from the Engineering and Planning Departments. Proposed Condition Changes (1) Condition 2 - The new expiration date would be May 24, 1995 provided the Planning Commission approves the applicant's request. (2) Condition 35 - The applicant is requesting that Condition 35 be amended to require the land dedication for street widening be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Staff has modified the condition as requested by the applicant. MEMOGT.049 19 (3) Condition 39 - This condition was imposed by the Planning Commission on May 11, 1994, in order to reduce the applicant's off -site improvement costs. The City Attorney has requested that the original condition be reimposed ( Condition 38) . The City Attorney is of the opinion that the applicant should negotiate with the City Council or Redevelopment Agency for any reduction in their on or off -site improvements through a formal request. Because the reduction in improvement obligations of the developer is a fiscal matter which should be handled in an independent process separate from the review of the project. (4) The conditions which identified the Design Review Board have been modified to state that the Planning Director will finalize the project during plan check ( Conditions 23, 65 & 73) . (5) The conditions which referred to the four story building have been changed to state three story (Conditions 23 & 73). STAFF CONCLUSION: Staff supports the time extension request because it meets the provisions of the City's Zoning Code, the adopted General Plan, and the provisions of the Washington Street /Highway 111 Specific Plans as conditioned. RECOMMENDATION: By Minute Motion 94 -,, approve a one year extension of time for Plot Plan 93 -495 ( Revised) pursuant to the attached Finding and revised Conditions. MEMOGT.049 20 ATTACHMENT 2 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78 -495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California May 24, 1994 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDERw, A. The meeting w le to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairwoman Barrows. Commissioner Ad ph led the flag salute. H. ROLL CALL A. Chairwoman Barrows re ed the roll call. Present: Commissioners Adolph, Ellson, Zand woman Barrows. B. Commis llson moved and seconded motion to excuse Commis nanimously approved. C. S Present: Planning Director Jerry Her n, City Attorney Dawn Honeywel enior Engineer Steve Speer, Princip tanner Stan Sawa, Associate P er Greg Trousdell, and Department SSOeetary Betty Sawyer. D. Commissioners Ellson /Abel oved to amend the agenda to pla ublic Hearing 1#3 (Plot Plan 93 -495- on Plaza) as Item 1# 1 and re anize the agenda accordingly. Unani sly approved. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS - A. PLOT PLAN 93 -495; a request of Simon Plaza for a one year extension of time for a commercial project at the southeast corner of Washington Street and Highway 111. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Commissioner Adolph asked staff what the status of the street dedication was. Staff stated the dedication had not taken place as of yet but the street dedication would have to take place prior to any building permits being issued. 21 PCS -24 Planning Commission Minutcs May 24. 1994 3. Commissioner Adolph asked if the restaurant planned for the corner was still required to have the two copulas on the top of the building and if the signage would remain the same. Staff stated all the conditions originally approved would remain. 4. Commissioner Ellson asked if the project could be built in phases. Staff stated it could as long as it met all the conditions. 5. Commissioner Ellson asked if the upper level patio would have a trellis cover. Staff stated the original approval did not require a trellis patio cover. 6. There being no further questions of staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the public hearing. Mr. Mark Moran, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission regarding the project and the concerns they had with the modified conditions. In particular was an objection to Condition #38, in place of Condition 39. 7. Mr. Paul Seltzer, co -owner in the project, elaborated on the objections to Conditions #38, #40, #42, #43, and #44. Mr. Seltzer stated the project did not cause the problem for the widening of the street. They had paid to put the street in once and they should not be required to do it again. 8. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained the conditions were added to the project as this was a new development that came after a circulation specific plan was adopted by the City. She further stated that only the City Council can waive ' any costs by entering into a Development Agreement or Owner Participation Agreement with the Redevelopment Agency. 9. Mr. Seltzer reiterated that the Planning Commission and City Council approved Condition #39 last year and he can't understand why it cannot be done again with this request. Discussion followed as to why the street is being widened and who is responsible for that widening. 10. Mr. Fred Simon, co- owner, addressed the condition regarding the funding of the street improvements as required by Condition #38. He stated that if the additional costs of the street improvements are placed on the project he will be unable to fund the project and it will not be built. 11. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated that since the City had not been able to widen Washington Street for two years and since Simon Plaza had been unable to get their project started, staff went to the City Council to discuss the widening of Washington Street in two phases. The City would fiend the first phase and Simon Plaza would incur the cost of the second phase. PC5-24 . 22 Planning Commission Minutes May 24, 1994 12. Commissioners Ellson and Abels asked staff to clarify what the difference was between Conditions #38 and #39. Staff stated the difference was in regard to how much of the street Simon Plaza would be required to improve. Whether it would be all of the right -of -way east of the centerline for Washington Street or, east of the curb and gutter improvements and contiguous to the project site. Discussion followed relative to those improvements. 13. There being no further public comment, Chairwoman Barrows closed the public hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion. 14. Following the discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Ellson /Barrows to adopt Minute Motion 94 -015 to recommend a one year extension of time for Plot Plan 93 -495 as conditioned. Unanimously approved. Commissioner Abeis withdrew from the Chambers due to a possible future conflict of interest on the following item. PCS -24 B. PLOT PLAN 94 -522; nest of DoDco Construction S ices for approval to develop a two story it /office building Xison one on a 0.37 acre site. 1. Assoc iaj Planner Greg Troiisdelnformation contained in the S ff report, a copy of w in the Planning and Development Department. 2. `' Commissioner Adolph ask what the sign program was for the p ect. /ehfe plained the sign s to be painted on the southeast co of the yf <" oor of the bu* ing. Discussion followed regarding e lettering of the sig . 3. eing further comments of staff, Chairwo an Barrows opened lic ring. Mr. Dan Featheringill ad ssed the Commission he project and stated they were ab to modify the sign if the Sion so desired. He further stat his concern regarding the n to require French doors in the ar of the building as this would ecurity problem. Mr. F eringill went on to explain himent request. Mr. Greg Butler, drafts for the project, stated his o lions to requiring decorative c mic the around the door frame and display windows on the nor elevation. The Pueblo style architecture does not 23 Lr�G, 4 ATTACHMENT 3 78 -495 CALLE TAMPICO — LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 APPLICATION FOR APPEAL OF FINDINGS OR CONDITIONS Appellant's Name SIMON PLAZA, INC. Date 5 -27 -94 Mailing Address 78 -611 Hwy. 111 P.O. ox La Quinta, CA 92253 Phone: ( 619) 346 -2345 RE: Case No. Plot Plan 93 -495 Type of Appeal: Conditional Use Permit Variance Change of Zone Public Use Permit Surface Mining & Reclamation Permit Outdoor Advertising Consistency with General Plan Environmental Assessment Setback Adjustments Temporary Use Permit X Plot Plan Please state basis for appeal and include any supportive evidence. If applicable, indicate the number of the specific condition which is being protested. Please see attached. em fl X131 Use additional sheets if necessary. FrMgna re e J. Simon, Sr., President 24 -MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 FORM-003/CS Case No. Plot Plan 93 -495 Simon Plaza, Inc. This appeal from the Planning Commission action extending Plot Plan 93 -495 for one year deals with several of the conditions which were modified from the conditions previously approved by the City Council in 1993. Condition 38: This condition has been modified to require the applicant to improve Washington Street from the centerline to the property line. The previous Condition 39, which has been deleted, required that the applicant reimburse the City for the cost of all improvements from the current curbline to the east. Condition 39: This condition represented a compromise between the City and the applicant and should not be modified. The current owners of the property have already dedicated right -of -way and installed the street improvements on Washington Street at the time the property was originally developed. The City may not now legally require us to tear those improvements out, dedicate additional property and then reinstall the street and other improvements. It is our position that if the City wants to widen Washington, it must buy the right -of -way and pay for the improvements. However, last year we agreed to compromise our position and accepted Condition 39. We cannot accept Condition 38 because it, along with several of the other conditions, makes the project financially infeasible. Condition 40: This condition has been modified to require that this project pay the entire cost of modifying the Washington/ Highway 111 intersection and traffic signals. Previously, this condition provided that we would reimburse the City 5% of the cost. Our position with respect to this condition is the same as our position with respect to Condition 38. We already paid for the intersection and the traffic signal when we subdivided the property in 1982. The City may not legally require us to do it again. Finally, this condition will make the project financially infeasible. Condition 43: This condition has been modified to require us to pay 5016 of the cost of medians on Washington and Highway 111. Previously, the condition was that we pay 501i of the cost of the Highway 111 median only. We may not legally be required to pay for this improvement as indicated above. Condition 44: This condition has been modified to require that we post security with the City to guarantee that we install the improvements listed above. The previous condition provided that we would post security to reimburse the City for our share of the costs. It is our understanding that the City will be doing the work. We have no objection to posting the security, but it should be for the cost of reimbursing the City, and then, only for the costs of the improvements we have agreed to. 25 PTS48128:APPEAL Plot Plan 93 -495 Condition 48: When we agreed to this condition last year, we were told that the City intended to build a storm drain from the intersection to the Whitewater Channel, and that we could contribute a fair share toward it. We have previously submitted a hydrology report to the City which indicates that our property, after development, would contribute only 4% of the water which causes the problem. Accumulation of water at the intersection is a problem which currently exists, and we are not responsible for it. Furthermore, we are not responsible for water that falls offsite to the center of Highway 111 and Washington Street. We will provide for onsite retention, or will pay a fair share of the cost, but we cannot pay for it all. Finally, we would respectfully request that the City Council consider modifying Condition 2 and give us two (2) years to use the plot plan. This project is complicated and expensive. For the past two years we have worked long and hard to find financing in a most difficult financial market. Last year, we finally put our financing in place, just as our plot plan approval needed to be extended. As you know, you reduced the size of the project by over 40,000 square feet, and we lost our financing. This year, again, we have finally found a financing source, but again face the prospect of the conditions changing which would result in losing our commitment. In view of the foregoing, we would like to have you consider giving us two years to put this project together. Thank you for your consideration of our request. SIMON P,�AZA, INC. Fred' /J. Simon, Sr., President 26 PTS48128:APPEAL Not Plan 93 -495 MAY -25 -1994 16:77 =P91 SPJ4BOPH WFEE. TO X6434,99 P.O.:-� /v9 a U F", SAN 90RX, WF.86 CNC . C,w Ew ^c . • t . �ro•t September 27, 1991 91-224 Mr. Fred Simon Simon Motors P.O. Boa 1461 La Qwi nta, Ca, 92253 -1461 Dear Fred: Attached is a copy of the hydrology study prepared for the Simon Plaza site. We have submitted two copies of the report to Jerry Herman at the City. The Simon Plaza is a small part (5± Ac.) of the total drainage area (150 ±,A.c). There currently exists a sump condition along Washington Street from Highway 111 southerly from the Simon Plaza site apprwd=tely 1500± feet. This condition should be viewed as a regional drainage concern since it is a result run. -off from the development and mountains wbicb lie to the west as well as the undeveloped land southerly and easterly of the Simon site. None of the developed parcels were designed to retain any runoff. A, conservative estimate of the water shed tributary to the Washington Street sunup is 150± acres, Based upon the amount of runoff generated try, the Simon Plaza site as it relates to the over all area we estimate that the Simon Plaza site will contribute 21Y0 of the total runoff. We would recommend that Simon Plaza make a commitment to participate in the amount of 23'o for the cost of the installation of a regional storm drain. With the pending development in the areas and the ongoing sump problem we feel the City should commence with the design and construction of a suitable storm drain system If you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, 7 S RN B, INC. bin L. Sanborn JLS1m Encl. F: \DATA \"DATA \91- W0\WXEYr•SM 255 N. E1 Cialo Road • Suitc 315 • Palm Springs, California 9 ?_262 • {619) 325-11245 • (619) 325 -9426 • FAX (619) 225.5130 27 ".T.. ..�' .•f. a /.. .y.. .. , T4'yi a ^ ITEM NO: AGENDA ITEM D PROCESSING FORM MEETING DATE: Ame 21, 1994 CITY xx I RDA I OTHER: ITEM TITLE: n X3 t, "?s 3"'` r�7 dal COi�^II� Ss10Y1 �ciY4a� �?y ,?�^4'f�,'1631Gy3GaPfl3Y1Lg project as cis on Riy'kww ll1 v, cam as 6j4wimcGm: "meet o DEPARTMENT HEAD: �r iti�'� e_ 1L.�.�"�•7�`v� 'i_'1 �%r ,� �''".i 4 :t.7"At^ STAFF CONTACT: 1 DATE: g CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: 1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION:' x Hw3 co a_ the ,.Los of t:� p it • 4;' -'47wa a o 'v'--%s, : . of tkn �cw 93 495 VN, v: md.) 0.' ciblctt to m_o + ^: :Ejsw ! Otto _PlV' CITY ATTORNEY OPINION BOARD /COMMISSION/RECOMMENDATION (If Applicable): BID PACKAGE QCoa" uil; ' ��� e abum k �- Used ntA SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION: i APPROVAL REQUIRED: CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE LEGAL FINANCE DIRECTOR OTHER (LIST): n PRESENTATIONS YES NO ORDINANCE WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE STUDY SESSION RESOLUTION iti�'� e_ 1L.�.�"�•7�`v� 'i_'1 �%r ,� �''".i 4 :t.7"At^ k�.`�s'q'S" a�9' H�. i ;t'�i r cnrvrsv �9'C� AGREEMENT BUSINESS SESSION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS, SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT COMMISSION REPORT CITY ATTORNEY OPINION BID PACKAGE OTHER i APPROVAL REQUIRED: CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE LEGAL FINANCE DIRECTOR OTHER (LIST): n PRESENTATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR -- -DEPARTMENT REPORTS WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE STUDY SESSION MAYOR & COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS iti�'� e_ 1L.�.�"�•7�`v� 'i_'1 �%r ,� �''".i 4 :t.7"At^ k�.`�s'q'S" a�9' H�. i ;t'�i r cnrvrsv �9'C� I?Sl'i7'f :) BUSINESS SESSION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS, h _PUBLIC HEARINGS CLOSED SESSION COPIES OF THIS ITEM SHOULD BE SENT T(j:' 4 PRIOR TO MEETING _AFTER MEETING NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY /STATE/ZIP CODE Tr,�'o ?= �.�e. QM'.$5�:7i? ����.,` ,. � �- �h �i'�q - �•�^. �`!�'�1',l�ir. a,�,w �.`.?.�,�; iti�'� e_ 1L.�.�"�•7�`v� 'i_'1 �%r ,� �''".i 4 :t.7"At^ k�.`�s'q'S" a�9' H�. i ;t'�i r cnrvrsv �9'C� I?Sl'i7'f :) mr. Pam ��.�. ^��� . ���� � ll)a& sat 1"Z PA, 0 7 0 pal °iy1gs, CA q!Uc_3 4/94 ORIGINAL: STAFF REPORT YELLOW: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PINK: DEPARTMENT f44� AGENDA ITEM PROCESSING FO ITEM TITLE: Appeal �%Q'� ?,avv�t r by Simpn Plaza regarding the Plan gg 003Ym3.ssion ra t approval of a one year extension of t3nm for a previously approved pzcject on t5.6 acres on Highway 111, east of T ashingta-n Street. DEPARTMENT HEAD: Jorr y klp Y STAFF CONTACT: )Greg T ousdell DATE:% 1U 1994 CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Yove to accept the act-ion of the Planning Comda n to approve a one yeeir extensil Of Ulm for Plot Plan 93-495 (Rsvieed) , subject to the attached findings hnd BOARD /COMMISSION /RECOMMENDATION (If Applicable): Playing Ca mdesion voted to approve the rest on May 24, 1994, on a ,Wmrilissioner ma=s absent) k { X01-- SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION: J APPROVAL REQUIRED: YES I NO ri CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE LEGAL x I FINANCE DIRECTOR OTHER (LIST): PRESENTATIONS YES NO ORDINANCE STUDY SESSION MAYOR & COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS RESOLUTION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS PUBLIC HEARINGS AGREEMENT sgrer Po - Co. 2710 CLOSED SESSION SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT COMMISSION REPORT CITY ATTORNEY OPINION BID PACKAGE OTHER J APPROVAL REQUIRED: YES I NO ri CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE LEGAL x I FINANCE DIRECTOR OTHER (LIST): PRESENTATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR DEPARTMENT REPORTS WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE STUDY SESSION MAYOR & COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS BUSINESS SESSION REPORTS & INFORMATIONAL PLANS PUBLIC HEARINGS . , tam Sel�.ex, fit, Est sgrer Po - Co. 2710 CLOSED SESSION COPIES OF THIS ITEM SHOULD BE SENT TO: X PRIOR TO MEETING AFTER MEETING NAME STREET ADDRESS CITY /STATE /ZIP CODE :;. Phil Pte, s:Ln= Plaza P, 0, Bon 961 la Quintal M 92253 Gilbart Raith P=na Fil,rs�Qsdp_ra1 Sll, 3-90 IS. G, _y n� Q9 74r . , tam Sel�.ex, fit, Est sgrer Po - Co. 2710 Palm Springs, CA 92263 4/94 ORIGINAL: STAFF REPORT YELLOW: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PINK: DEPARTMENT 1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PLOT PLAN 93 -495 (REVISED) MAY 24, 1994 SIMON PLAZA * Modified by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 ** Added by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 * ** Deleted by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 + Modified by Planning Commission on 5 -24 -94 FINDINGS 1. The revised project and time extension request are consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 2. The project will not have an adverse environmental impact on the surrounding properties based on the proposed Conditions of Approval. 3. The project is a logical progression of development for this community zoned area. 4. The proposed project is consistent with the intent and purpose of the General Plan. GENERAL 1. The development of the property shall be generally in conformance with the exhibits contained in the file for PP 93 -495 (Revision), unless amended otherwise by the following conditions. +2. The approved plot plan shall be used by May 24, 1995; otherwise it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Be used" means the beginning of substantial construction which is contemplated by this approval, not including grading which., is begun within the one year period and is thereafter diligently pursued until completion. A one year time extension may be requested as permitted by Municipal Code provided an extension request is filed by April 24, 1995. 3. There shall be no outdoor storage or sales displays without specific approval of the Planning Commission. 4. All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed so as not to shine directly on surrounding adjoining properties or public rights -of -way. Light standard type with recessed light source shall also be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Exterior lighting shall comply with Outdoor Light Control Ordinance and Off - Street Parking requirements. _ CONAPRVL.037 4 %I Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 5. Adequate masonry trash enclosures shall be provided for all structures and provided with opaque metal doors. Plans for trash enclosures to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall contact the local waste management company to insure that the number of enclosures and size of the enclosures are adequate. 6. Decorative enclosures may be required by the City around any retention basins depending on site grading requirements. The color, location, and placement of said fence(s) shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. 7. Phased improvement plans shall be subject to Planning Commission review. 8. Handicap parking spaces and facilities shall be provided per Municipal Code, State, and Federal requirements. 9. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to submission of building plans for plan check or issuance of grading permit, whichever comes first. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on building interior areas from perimeter streets, and impacts on the proposed abutting and provide mitigation of noise as alternative mitigation measures for incorporation into the project design such as building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (berming, landscaping and walls, etc.), and other techniques. 10. The project shall comply with all existing Off - Street Parking requirements including but not limited to, shading of parking lot areas and bicycle parking spaces. 11. Perimeter landscaping planters shall be provided at maximum widths possible adjacent to property lines and planted with landscaping. 12. The project shall comply with all applicable Art in Public Places Ordinances. A public art piece shall be installed on the property at a location agreeable to the Art in Public Places Committee (e.g., at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street). A public easement shall be offered to the City for the site that any art piece may occupy which has been established by the Art in Public Places Committee. 13. * The developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist and pay all associated costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior to archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information, shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. The Planning and Development Director shall approve the firm to be used in the study prior to any on -site activities. CONAPRVL.037 5 Ob Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 The plan shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society (CVAS) for a two -week review and comment period. At a minimum, the plan shall: 1) identify the means for digging test pits; 2) allow sharing the information with the CVAS; and 3) provide for further testing if the preliminary result show significant materials 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 divert, 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 areas 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 analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this use, the applicant shall obtain permits or clearances from the following agencies: • City Fire Marshal • City of La Quinta Public Works Department • City of La Quinta Planning and Development Department • Coachella Valley Water District • Desert Sands Unified School District • Imperial Irrigation District • Caltrans (District 11) CONAPRVL.037 6 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of application for a building permit for the proposed project. 15. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City adopted infrastructure fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 16. Final landscaping plans shall include approval stamps and signatures from the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioners office and the Coachella Valley Water District. 17. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit to the Engineering Department an interim landscape program for the entire site which shall be for the purpose of wind and erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blow sand and dust control measures during grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a) use of irrigation during construction and grading activities; b) areas not constructed on during first phase shall be planted in temporary ground cover or wildflowers and provided with temporary irrigation system; and c) provisions of wind breaks or wind rolls, fencing and /or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The landowner shall comply with requirements of the Directors of Public Works and Planning and Development Departments. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent emission of dust and blow sand. 18. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit as determined by the Building Official. 19. 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 which must be satisfied prior to issuance of a building permit. Prior to a final building inspection approval, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection of other monitoring to assure such compliance. 20. A parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, and parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. All roof equipment shall be screened from view by parapet walls of building or other architecturally matching materials. 22. All compact spaces shall be clearly marked "compact cars only ". CONAPRVL.037 7 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 23. + That all conditions of the Design Reyiew Beex4 Planning Commission shall be complied with as follows: A. The landscape plan shall include an eight foot wide meandering pedestrian/bike trail. The plans should be reviewed by the Design Reyiew Befifd Planning Director prior to submission of the final landscape plan by the applicant/developer. B. The landscape program for Washington Street shall include a variation of planting materials, i.e., palm trees, accent shade trees, lawn, shrubs, and groundcover. The use of mature California Pepper, Australian Willow, Mesquite, Crape Myrtle, Bottle trees, and Washington Robusta Palms shall be encouraged. Varieties of flowering shrubs such as Texas Ranger, Cassia, Crepe Myrtle, and Dwarf Oleander shall be utilized. Native (low water use) plants shall be used, and the landscape architect should consult the Coachella Valley Water District's plant material list prior to designing their proposal. Uplighted trees or palms shall be used along Washington Street and Highway 111. Incandescent light fixtures will be required (less than 160 watt). Landscaping plan shall conform to Ordinance 220 regarding water conservation. C. + Any proposed parking lot lighting plan shall be reviewed by the Design Beefd Planning Director prior to building plan check. A photometric study shall be developed which analyzes the lighting pattern on the project and meets the City's Lighting Ordinance provisions as explained in Chapter 9.210 and 9.160 (Off - Street Parking). The height of the light poles shall not exceed 18 feet in height, and the lighting contractor should reduce this height if physically possible during review of the project. D. A maximum building height of 28 feet shall be maintained along Washington Street and Highway 111 within 150 feet of the ultimate property line (after street dedication has been included) excluding minor architectural appendages (e.g., chimneys, towers, building columns, etc.). E. + Decorative concrete entryways shall be provided for all two -way driveways into the project site. The concrete shall be stamped and colored to accentuate the proposed development. The color, design, and location of the concrete should be reviewed by the Design Reyiew Beafd Planning Director during a final plan check review. CONAPRVL.037 s Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 F+ The revised concept design plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Director prior to the submission of the plans to the Building and Safety Department for final plan check consideration. The plans should include but are not limited to landscaping and irrigation, building elevations, signs, and any other major exterior design features of the project as noted at the Design Review Board meeting of May 5, 1993. G. Bike racks shall be provided at convenient areas within the site for usage by bicycle riders. One space for every 50 parking spaces shall be provided as noted_ in the Off - Street Parking Code. H. The landscape setback on Washington Street shall be a minimum of 20 feet from the new property line. I. All open parking stalls shall be screened by berm walls, landscape hedges, or a combination thereof to a minimum height of 42 inches. J. The maximum floor area ration (F.A.R.) for this project shall be 0.35 per the Policy Standards of the General Plan (LU Table #4). K. + The roof design for the 3 -story medical office building shall be either 4:12 or higher to give the building balance and proper scale to its mass. L.... M. + The parking structures tile roof facade shall be eliminated because it is not compatible with the design motif of the €ettf three story medical office building. The applicant should evaluate another design style which incorporates a cornice design feature (similar to the upper portion of the four story building) and other articulated features which will soften the elevation and not enhance its presence. N. * The parking structure ramp on the south side of the project shall be stuccoed to match the building. The structure shall be landscaped along its westerly side to conceal its presence. O. + The applicant shall include the following features into the three story medical office building: L... Pre east stone windew tfifn. 2. * Individual pane windows or grid molded windows can be used. CONAPRVL.037 9 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 3. *+ Additional building column connections should be used where agreed upon with the Design Reyiew Beafd Planning Commission. 4. Accented building roof heights. 5. Revision to the elevator shaft design and its relationship to Highway 111. 6.... 7.... T-be two stefy elements en the west side of the feuf stery U... be r-edesigned se that the r-eef eenneets inte the building (delete the existing CITY FIRE MARSHAL 24. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 3500 gpm for a three hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. Fire flow is based upon all buildings being equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. 25. A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6" X 4" X 21/2" X 21h "), will 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. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 26. Prior to issuance of any building permit, 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 and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed /approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company 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." The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to start of construction. 27. Install a complete fire sprinkler system .per NFPA 13. The post indicator valve and Fire Department connection shall be located to the front within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). System plans must be submitted with a plan check/inspection fee to the Fire Department for review. A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans. 28. Install a supervised waterflow fire alarm system as required by the Uniform Building Code. CONAPRVL.037 10 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 29. Install a Hood Duct automatic fire extinguishing system. System plans must be permitted, along with a plan check/ inspection fee, to the Fire Department for review. 30. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2AIOBC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 31. Occupancy separation will be required as per the Uniform Building Code, #503. 32. Install Panic Hardware and "Exit" signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. 33. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. 34. Install a Class I Standpipe System. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 35. 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 these Conditions of Approval noted as follows: A. Washington Street - Provide right -of -way as required by the Washington Street Specific Plan. B. Washington Street/Highway 111 Intersection - Provide right -of -way cut back as needed to accommodate a 55 -foot curb return (45 -feet right -of -way). C. *+ Applieimt shall dedieate the FequiFed right ef way within thiFty (30) days afte Property owner(s) shall dedicate the required right -of -way prior to the issuance of a building permit. 36. Applicant shall provide a fully improved landscaped setback area of noted minimum width adjacent to the following street right -of -way: A. Washington Street - 20 -feet wide; B. Highway 111, 50 feet wide; C. Simon Drive, 10 feet wide 37. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to all streets from the project site except for three locations as proposed by the applicant as shown on the site plan drawing. CONAPRVL.037 11 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 38.+ Applicant shall fund and install all street improvements located east of Washington Street Specific Plan centerline and contiguous to the project site. The new improvements include street widening, curb and gutter, asphalt concrete overlay, 8 -foot wide sidewalk, traffic striping and signing and signing along with all appurtenant incidentals and improvements needed to properly integrate and join together the new and existing improvements in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. Applicant shall retain registered professionals as needed to prepare plans for the improvements required by these Conditions of Approval. - Y. WN"RFM W. . i • - i • i 40.+ Applicant shall modify the traffic signal and intersection improvements at the Washington Street/Highway 111 intersection as requied by Caltrans to accommodate the Washington Street widening improvements. 41.* Applicant shall reimburse City for 2-54 12.5% of the cost to design and install traffic signal at the Simon Drive /Highway 111 intersection. 42. + Applicant shall install a bus stop "pullout" and bus shelter on Highway 111 in compliance with Caltrans, Sunline Transit, and City requirements. 43. + Applicant shall pay for half of the cost to design and install raised median improvements and landscaping on Highway 111 and Washington Street in the portion contiguous to the project site. 44. + Applicant shall enter into a secured agreement with the City to ensure installation of improvements required by these Conditions of Approval before the grading permit is issued. 45. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological, and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted with a report submitted for review along with grading plan. The report recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and /or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. 46. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. CONAPRVL.037 12 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994' 47. The site shall be designed and graded in a manner so the elevation difference between the building pad elevations on site and the adjacent street curb do not exceed three (3.0) feet. 48.+ Applicant shall provide storm drain facilities with sufficient capacity to evacuate all water that falls on -site and off -site to the centerline of the streets adjoining the site during the, 1 -hour duration, 25 -year storm event. The storm drain facility shall convey the storm water from the site to the Whitewater Channel. The applicant may purchase capacity on a fair share basis in a storm drain designed and constructed in Washington Street by the City, if the City proceeds with said storm drain facility within time constraints which suit the applicant. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of Washington Street, Highway 111, and Simon Drive. 49. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped setback areas. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of the Planning Director, City Engineer, and Coachella Valley Water District and the plans shall be signed these officials prior to construction. 50. 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. 51. Applicant shall landscape and maintain the landscaped setback area and right -of -way between all street curbing and property lines. 52. Applicant shall construct an eight -foot wide meandering bike path in the combined easterly parkway of Washington Street and southerly parkway of Highway 111 in lieu of the standard six -foot wide sidewalk. A six foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed on Simon Drive. 53. All existing and proposed telecommunication, television cable, and electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, that are adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 54. Underground utilities that lie directly under street improvements or portions thereof shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to installation of that portion of the street improvement. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. 55. Applicant shall pay all fees charged by the city as required for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the city. CONAPRVL.037 13 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 56. Applicant shall retain a California registered civil engineer, or designate one who is on applicant's staff, 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 retained or designated by the applicant to implement this responsibility shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. The engineer shall sign and seal a statement placed on the "as built" plans that says "all (grading and grades) (improvements) on these plans were properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision during construction for compliance with the plans and specifications and the work shown hereon was constructed as approved, except where otherwise noted hereon and specifically acknowledged by the City Engineer ". B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the engineer shall provide a separate document, signed and sealed, to the City Engineer that documents the building pad elevations. The document shall, for each pad, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as built elevation, and 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. C. Provide to the City Engineer a signed set of "as built" reproducible drawings of the site grading and all improvements installed by the applicant. 57. The parking stalls on the north side of the office complex as determined by Staff, shall be restricted to either handicapped parking or reserved parking to help eliminate queuing at the Highway 111 access driveway. 58. The driveways on Washington Street and on Highway 111 shall be restricted to right turn movements only. 59. Turning movements at the intersection of Washington Street and Simon Drive shall be restricted to right turns only in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. SPECIAL 60. All required improvements shall be completed prior to first site occupancy of the proposed development. 61. The parking structure shall not exceed 15 feet in overall height as measured from finished grade pad elevation within 100 feet of Highway 111. Exterior lighting on top level of parking structure shall not exceed six feet and not be within ten feet of outside wall. CONAPRVL.037 14 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 62. All mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 91 -211 shall be met. 63. The parcels shall be legally merged prior to building permit issuance. 64. 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, so adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. 65. +• The north side of the parking structure shall include perimeter grade planting as deemed appropriate by the Design Reyiew Beafd Planning Director. 66. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, a parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department to verify compliance with the Off - Street Parking requirements. Prior to each subsequent phase beginning construction a new parking study based on existing usage and potential demand shall be submitted. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. 67. Appropriate and adequate service delivering areas (loading facilities) and trash facilities shall be provided as required by the Off - Street Parking Code. The facilities shall include areas for recycling bins and be approved by Staff during the final review process. The standards and requirements of AB 939 (recycling) shall be met. This shall include provisions for on -site recycling of recyclable materials by the tenants in conjunction with the City's franchise hauler contract provisions. 68. An on -site elevator(s) shall service the site and provide accessibility from the parking garage to each respective building floor level. The design and installation of the elevator shall meet both Uniform Building Code standards and any other California State requirements. 69. The existing six foot high soundwall along the Washington Street frontage road shall be extended between the frontage road and Washington Street northerly of its present location to the northeasterly corner of Lot 27 of Tract 2043 (Singing Palms Drive and Washington Street) to mitigate traffic noise impacts on the existing R -1 single family neighborhood. 70. A Transportation Demand Management Plan shall be submitted (Ordinance 217) if the project or the ultimate development of the site employs 100 or more persons. The plan can be prepared by either the property owner or the tenant(s) within the development. The plan shall be submitted and approved by the Director of Planning and Development. CONAPRVL . 0 3 7 15 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 24, 1994 71. The provisions of the City's newly adopted Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance ( #220) shall be met. 72.** The applicant shall provide a theme plaza at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street as required by the General Plan which shall include landscaping, public furniture and a public art piece. The art piece can contain the developers main identification sign (Sign #1), if it is an integral part of the theme plaza and /or the public art piece. The design shall be approved by the Art in Public Places Committee and the City Council as required by Chapter 2.65 of the Municipal Code. The developer shall retain an artist to help design the theme plaza. The theme plaza size shall not be less than 2,000 square feet and the overall design should be similar to the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center theme plaza at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. 73. +•• The medical office building shall not exceed three stories with a maximum 40 -foot height. The height of the building shall be measured from the existing grade (top of curb) on Highway 111. The developer can reallocate the fourth floor square footage into the project (e.g., over the parking structure) provided the new site plan does include adding two story elements into the 150 -foot setback requirement on either arterial street. The revised design shall be reviewed and approved by the an4 Planning Commission prior to preparation of final working drawings. CONAPRVL.037 16 TO: FROM: DATE: CASE NO: MEMORANDUM HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MAY 18, 1993 PLOT PLAN 93 -495 (REVISION) MASTER SIGN PROGRAM 93 -210 APPLICANT: SIMON PLAZA, INC. (PHILIP PEAD) PREVIOUS CASE: PLOT PLAN 91 -466 (REVISED) (EXPIRED) OWNERS: 3S PARTNERSHIP AND POMONA FIRST FEDERAL BANK LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND WASHINGTON STREET, BOTH MAJOR ARTERIALS. THE DEVELOPMENT, ON ±5.6 ACRES OF LAND, IS LOCATED TO THE WEST OF THE EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOTIVE DEALERSHIP ON HIGHWAY, I11. ARCHITECT: - MERLIN J. BARTH EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: MIXED /REGIONAL COMMERCIAL WITH NON - RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENTS: NORTH: 111 LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER SOUTH: WASHINGTON SQUARE SPECIFIC PLAN PROPERTY (VACANT) EAST: EXISTING SIMON MOTORS AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP WEST: EXISTING PLAZA LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER MEMOGT.046 1 / G J•-; ► 2 :Off� FL. COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MAY 18, 1993 ITEM TITLE: REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ON PLOT PLAN 93495 (REVISION) TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED USE COMMERCIAL PROJECT (±82,013 SQ. FT.) ON ±5.6 ACRES AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND WASHINGTON ST. IN C -P -S ZONE (COMMERCIAL). APPLICANT: SIMON PLAZA INC., MR. PHILIP PEAD SUMMARY: AGENDA CATEGORY: PUBLIC HEARING BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: This case is a resubmittal of Plot Plan 91-466 (Revised) which was approved in 1992 and expired in 1993. The new submittal is approximately 44,000 square feet smaller than the previous plan in order to conform with the newly adopted General Plan. The Applicant proposes to develop a four story medical office building, a restaurant or bank, an office, and two level parking garage on a ±5.6 acres site. The site is presently vacant but improved with off -site infrastructure improvements. The Planning Commission approved this case at their meeting of May 11, 1993. The final vote was 4 -1. The modified Conditions of Approval are attached. The Planning Commission did not approve the four story medical building, but they did approve a three story building and allowed the developer to reallocate the fourth floor building square footage to other locations within the project. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The Planning Commission modified the Applicant's off -site improvement costs by shifting approximately $150,000 from the Applicant to the City by changing Conditions k39 & 41. If the conditions as modified by the Commission become final, the cost for these improvements need to be considered during the 1993/94 budget hearings. APPROVED BY: RECOMMEISMATION: By Minute Motion 93- , move to accept for file this report of action taken by the Planning Commission on May 11, 1993. Submitted by: gnatur CC ,f 23 Approved for submission to City Council: ROBERT L. HUNT, CITY MANAGER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FINAL PLOT PLAN 93-495 (REVISION) MAY 11, 1993 SIMON PLAZA * Modified by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 ** Added by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 * ** Deleted by the Planning Commission on 5 -11 -93 GENERAL 1. The development of the property shall be generally in conformance with the exhibits contained in the file for PP 93 -495, unless amended otherwise by the following conditions. 2. The approved plot plan shall be used by May 11, 1994; otherwise it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Be used" means the beginning of substantial construction which is contemplated by this approval, not including grading which is begun within the one year period and is thereafter diligently pursued until completion. A one year time extension may be requested as permitted by Municipal Code provided an extension request is filed by April 11, 1994. 3. There shall be no outdoor storage or sales displays without specific approval of the Planning Commission. 4. All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed so as not to shine directly on surrounding adjoining properties or public rights -of -way. Light standard type with recessed light source shall also be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Exterior lighting shall comply with Outdoor Light lControl Ordinance and Off - Street Parldng requirements. 5. Adequate masonry trash enclosures shall be provided for all structures and provided with opaque metal doors. Plans for trash enclosures to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall contact the local waste management company to insure that the number of enclosures and size of the enclosures are adequate. 6. Decorative enclosures may be required by the City around any retention basins depending on site grading requirements. The color, location, and placement of said fence(s) shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. 7. Phased improvement plans shall be subject to Planning Commission review. CONAPRVL.037 1 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 11, 1993 8. Handicap parking spaces and facilities shall be provided per Municipal Code, State, and Federal requirements. 9. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to submission of building plans for plan check or issuance of grading permit, whichever comes first. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on building interior areas from perimeter streets, and impacts on the proposed abutting and provide mitigation of noise as alternative mitigation measures for incorporation into the project design such as building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers' (berming, landscaping and walls, etc.), and other techniques. 10. The project shall comply with all existing Off -Street Parking requirements including but not limited to, shading of parking lot areas and bicycle parking spaces. 11. Perimeter landscaping planters shall be provided at maximum widths possible adjacent to property lines and planted with landscaping. 12. The project shall comply with all applicable Art in Public Places Ordinances. A public art piece shall be installed on the property at a location agreeable to the Art in Public Places Committee (e.g., at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street). A public easement shall be offered to the City for the site that any art piece may occupy which has been established by the Art in Public Places Committee. 13. * The developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist and pay all associated costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior to archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information, shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. The Planning and Development Director shall approve the firm to be used in the study prior to any on -site activities. The plan shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society (CVAS) for a two-week review and comment period. At a minimum, the plan shall: 1) identify the means for digging test pits; 2) allow sharing the information with the CVAS; and 3) provide for further testing if the preliminary result show significant materials 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. CONAPRVL.037 2 k Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 11, 1993 A list of the qualified archaeological monitor(s), cultural resources management firm employees, and any assistant(s) /representadve(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 divert, 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 areas 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 analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this use, the applicant shall obtain permits or clearances from the following agencies: • City Fire Marshal • City of La Quinta Public Works Department • City of La Quinta Planning and Development Department • Coachella Valley Water District • Desert Sands Unified School District • Imperial Irrigation District • Caltrans (District 11) Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of application for a building permit for the proposed project. 15. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City adopted infrastructure fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 16. Final landscaping plans shall include approval stamps and signatures from the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioners office and the Coachella Valley Water District. 17. A bus waiting shelter and bus turnout shall be provided as requested by Sunline Transit on Highway 111 when said street improvements are re- installed or unless other site locations are permitted by the transit authority (e.g., Simon Drive) and the City Engineering Department. CONAPRVL.037 K Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 11, 1993 18. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit to the Engineering Department an interim landscape program for the entire site which shall be for the purpose of wind and erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blow sand and dust control measures during grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a) use of irrigation during construction and grading activities; b) areas not constructed on during first phase shall be planted in temporary ground cover or wildflowers and provided with temporary irrigation system; and c) provisions of wind breaks or wind rolls, fencing and /or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The landowner shall comply with requirements of the Directors of Public Works and Planning and Development Departments. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent emission of dust and blow sand. 19. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit as determined by the Building Official. 20. 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 which must be satisfied prior to issuance of a building permit. Prior to a final building inspection approval, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection of other monitoring to assure such compliance. 21. A parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, and parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of a building permit. 22. All roof equipment shall be screened from view by parapet walls of building or other architecturally matching materials. 23. All compact spaces shall be clearly marked "compact cars only ". 24. That all conditions of the Design Review Board shall be complied with as follows: A. The landscape plan shall include an eight foot wide meandering pedestrian/bike trail. The plans should be reviewed by the Design Review Board prior to submission of the final landscape plan by the applicant/developer. CONAPRVL.037 4 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 11, 1993 B. The landscape program for Washington Street shall include a variation of planting materials, i.e., palm trees, accent shade. trees, lawn, shrubs, and groundcover. The use of mature California Pepper, Australian Willow, Mesquite, Crape Myrtle, Bottle trees, and Washington Robusta Palms shall be encouraged. Varieties of flowering shrubs such as Texas Ranger, Cassia, Crepe Myrtle, and Dwarf Oleander shall be utilized. Native (low water use) plants shall be used, and the landscape architect should consult the Coachella Valley Water District's plant material list prior to designing their proposal. Uplighted trees or palms shall be used along Washington Street and Highway 111. Incandescent light fixtures will be required (less than 160 watt). Landscaping plan shall conform to Ordinance 220 regarding water conservation. C. Any proposed parking lot lighting plan shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board prior to building plan check. A photometric study shall be developed which analyzes the lighting pattern on the project and meets the City's Lighting Ordinance provisions as explained in Chapter 9.210 and 9.160 (Off- Street Parking). The height of the light poles shall not exceed 18 feet in height, and the lighting contractor should reduce this height if physically possible during review of the project. D. A maximum building height of 28 feet shall be maintained along Washington Street and Highway 111 within 150 feet of the ultimate property line (after street dedication has been included) excluding minor architectural appendages (e.g., chimneys, towers, building columns, etc.). E. Decorative concrete entryways shall be provided for all two-way driveways into the project site. The concrete shall be stamped and colored to accentuate the proposed development. The color, design, and location of the concrete should be reviewed by the Design Review Board during a final plan check review. F. The revised concept design plan shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board prior to the submission of the plans to the Building and Safety Department for final plan check consideration. The plans should include but are not limited to landscaping and irrigation, building elevations, signs, and any other major exterior design features of the project as noted at the Design Review Board meeting of May 5, 1993. G. Bike racks shall be provided at convenient areas within the site for usage by bicycle riders. One space for every 50 parking spaces shall be provided as noted in the Off -Street Parking Code. CONAPRVL.037 5 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 11, 1993 H. The landscape setback on Washington Street shall be a minimum of 20 feet from the new property line. I. All open parking stalls shall be screened by berm walls, landscape hedges, or a combination thereof to a minimum height of 42 inches. J. The maximum floor area ration (F.A.R.) for this project shall be 0.35 per the Policy Standards of the General Plan (LU Table X14). K. The roof design for the 4 -story medical office building shall be either 4 :12 or higher to give the building balance and proper scale to its mass. ............ ■ i i ��RM:.i� MIA M. The parking structures tile roof facade shall be eliminated because it is not compatible with the design motif of the four story medical office building. The applicant should evaluate another design style which incorporates a cornice design feature (similar to the upper portion of the four story building) and other articulated features which will soften the elevation and not enhance its presence. N. * The parking structure ramp on the south side of the project shall be stuccoed to match the building. The structure shall be landscaped along its westerly side to conceal its presence. O. The applicant shall include the following features into the four story medical office building: L... . 2. * Individual pane windows or grid molded windows can be used. 3. * Additional building column connections should be used where agreed upon with the Design Review Board. 4. Accented building roof heights. 5. Revision to the elevator shaft design and its relationship to Highway 111. 6.... . 7.... Re two stei-f elefnents on the west side of the fatif stefy bui4ding existing wifidews). CONAPRVL.037 6 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 11, 1993 CITY FIRE MARSHAL 25. Provide or show there exists' a water system capable of delivering 3500 gpm for a three hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. Fire flow is based upon all buildings being equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. 26. A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6" X 4" X 21f2" X Th "), will 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. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 27. Prior to issuance of any building permit, 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 and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company 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." The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to start of construction. 28. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13. The post indicator valve and Fire Department connection shall be located to the front within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). System plans must be submitted with a plan check/inspection fee to the Fire Department for review. A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans. 29. Install a supervised waterflow fire alarm system as required by the Uniform' Building Code. 30. Install a Hood Duct automatic fire extinguishing system. System plans must be permitted, along with a plan check/inspection fee, to the Fire Department for review. 31. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2AIOBC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 32. Occupancy separation will be required as per the Uniform Building Code, #503. CONAPRVL.037 7 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 11, 1993 33. Install Panic Hardware and "Exit" signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. 34. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes.. 35. Install a Class I Standpipe System. _ ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 36. 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 these Conditions of Approval noted as follows: A. Washington Street - Provide right -of -way as required by the Washington Street Specific Plan. B. Washington Street/Highway 111 Intersection - Provide right -of -way cut back as needed to accommodate a 55 -foot curb return (45 -feet right -of -way). *C. Applicant shall dedicate the required right -of -way within thirty (30) days after receipt of land conveyance documents from the City. 37. Applicant shall provide a fully improved landscaped setback area of noted minimum width adjacent to the following street right -of -way: A. Washington Street - 20 -feet wide; B. Highway 111, 50 feet wide; C. Simon Plaza, 10 feet wide 38. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to all streets from the project site except for three locations as proposed by the applicant as shown on the site plan drawing. CONAPRVL.037 8 i NQ •. : CONAPRVL.037 8 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 11, 1993 39. * Applicant shall reimburse City for design and construction cost for all street improvements to be installed by the City located east of the existing Washington Street curb and uttg er improvements and contiguous to the prgiect site. The new improvements include street widening, curb and gutter. asphalt concrete overlay. landscaping and hardscape. 8 -foot wide meandering sidewalk, traffic striping and signing, along with all appurtenant incidentals and improvements needed to proWrly integrate and join together the new and existing improvements. 40. Applicant shall reimburse City for 5% of the cost to design and install a new traffic signal at the Washington Street/Highway 111 intersection. 41.* Applicant shall reimburse City for 12.5% of the cost to design and install traffic signal at the Simon Drive/Highway 111 intersection. 42. Applicant shall reimburse City for cost to design and install bus stop "pullout" on Highway 111. 43. Applicant shall reimburse City for half of the cost to design and install raised median improvements and landscaping on Highway 111 in the portion contiguous to the project site. 44. Applicant shall enter into a secured agreement with the City to pay for the City installed improvements required by these Conditions of Approval before the grading permit is issued. 45. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological, and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted with a report submitted for review along with grading plan. The report recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and /or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. 46. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 47. The site shall be designed and graded in a manner so the elevation difference between the building pad elevations on site and the adjacent street curb do not exceed three (3.0) feet. CONAPRVL.037 9 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 11, 1993 48. Applicant shall provide storm drain facilities with sufficient capacity to evacuate all water that falls on -site and off -site to the centerline of the streets adjoining the site during the, 1 -hour duration, 25 -year storm event. The storm drain facility shall convey the storm water from the site to the Whitewater Channel: The applicant may purchase capacity on a fair share basis in a storm drain to be designed and constructed in Washington Street by the City, if the City proceeds with said storm drain facility within time constraints which suit the applicant. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of Washington Street, Highway 111, and Simon Drive. 49. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped setback areas. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with. requirements of the Planning Director, City Engineer, and Coachella Valley Water District and the plans shall be signed these officials prior to construction. 50. 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. 51. Applicant shall landscape and maintain the landscaped setback area and right -of -way between all street curbing and property lines. 52. Applicant shall construct an eight -foot wide meandering bike path in the combined easterly parkway of Washington Street and southerly parkway of Highway 111 in lieu of the standard six -foot wide sidewalk. A six foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed on Simon Drive. 53. All existing and proposed telecommunication, television cable, and electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, that are adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 54. Underground utilities that lie directly under street improvements or portions thereof shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to installation of that portion of the street improvement. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. 55. Applicant shall pay all fees charged by the city as required for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the city. CONAPRVL.037 10 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 11, 1993 56. Applicant shall retain a California registered civil engineer, or designate one who is on applicant's staff, 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 retained or designated by the applicant to implement this responsibility shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: A. The engineer shall sign and seal a statement placed on the "as built" plans that says "all (grading and grades) (improvements) on these plans were properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision during construction for compliance with the plans and specifications and the work shown hereon was constructed as approved, except where otherwise noted hereon and specifically acknowledged by the City Engineer ". B. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the engineer shall provide a separate document, signed and sealed, to the City Engineer that documents the building pad elevations. The document shall, for each pad, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as built elevation, and 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. C. Provide to the City Engineer a signed set of "as built" reproducible drawings of the site grading and all improvements installed by the applicant. 57. The parking stalls on the north side of the office complex as determined by Staff, shall be restricted to either handicapped parking or reserved parking to help eliminate queuing at the Highway 111 access driveway. 58. The driveways on Washington Street and on Highway 111 shall be restricted to right turn movements only. 59. Turning movements at the intersection of Washington Street and Simon Drive shall be restricted to right turns only in accordance with the Washington Street Specific Plan. SPECIAL 60. All required improvements shall be completed prior to first site occupancy of the proposed development. CONAPRVL.037 11 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 11, 1993 61. The parking structure shall not exceed 15 feet in overall height as measured from finished grade pad elevation within 100 feet of Highway 111. Exterior lighting on top level of parking structure shall not exceed six feet and not be within ten feet of outside wall. 62. All mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 91 -211 shall be met. 63. The parcels shall be legally merged prior to building permit issuance. 64. 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, so adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. 65.* The north side of the parking structure shall include perimeter grade planting as deemed appropriate by the Design Review Board. 66. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, a parking analysis shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department to verify compliance with the Off -Street Parking requirements. Prior to each subsequent phase beginning construction a new parking study based on existing usage and potential demand shall be submitted. In each study, building size adjustments shall be made if it is determined that a parking deficiency exists. 67. Appropriate and adequate service delivering areas (loading facilities) and trash facilities shall be provided as required by the Off -Street Parking Code. The facilities shall include areas for recycling bins and be approved by Staff during the final review process. The standards and requirements of AB 939 (recycling) shall be met. This shall include provisions for on -site recycling of recyclable materials by the tenants in conjunction with the City's franchise hauler contract provisions. 68. An on -site elevator(s) shall service the site and provide accessibility from the parking garage to each respective building floor level. The design and installation of the elevator shall meet both Uniform Building Code standards and any other California State requirements. 69. The existing six foot high soundwall along the Washington Street frontage road shall be extended between the frontage road and Washington Street northerly of its present location to the northeasterly corner of Lot 27 of Tract 2043 (Singing Palms Drive and Washington Street) to mitigate traffic noise impacts on the existing R -1 single family neighborhood. CONAPRVL.037 12 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revision) - Simon Plaza May 11, 1993 70. A Transportation Demand Management Plan shall be submitted (Ordinance 217) if the project or the ultimate development of the site employs 100 or more persons. The plan can be prepared by either the property owner or the tenant(s) within the development. The plan shall be submitted and approved by the Director of Planning and Development. 71 The provisions of the City's newly adopted Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance ( #220) shall be met. 72. ** The applicant shall provide a theme plaza at the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street as required by the General Plan which shall include landscaping, public furniture and a public art piece. The art piece can contain the developers main identification sign (Sign #1), if it is an integral part of the theme plaza and /or the public art piece. - The design shall be approved by the Art in Public Places Committee and the City Council as required by Chapter 2.65 of the Municipal Code. The developer shall retain an artist to help design the theme plaza. The theme plaza size shall not be less than 2,000 square feet and the overall design should be similar to the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center theme plaza at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. 73. ** The medical office building shall not exceed three stories with a maximum 40 -foot height. The height of the building shall be measured from the existing grade (top of curb) on Highway 111. The developer can reallocate the fourth floor square footage into the project (e.g., over the parking structure) provided the new site plan does include adding two story elements into the 150 -foot setback requirement on either arterial street. The revised design shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to preparation of final working drawings. CONAPRVL.037 13 �/ Oil 4r , °z 1W OF CITY OF LA QULS iA ,f,��, UPI PLANNING COMMIS S10N NOTICE OF PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of La Quinta Planning Commission will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on May 24, 1994, at 7:00 p.m. in the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber, 78 -495 Calle Tampico, on the following item: ITEM: PLOT PLAN 93 -495 (REVISED) 1ST EXTENSION OF TIME APPLICANT: PHILIP M. PEAD SIMON PLAZA, INC. LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND WASHINGTON STREET AND NORTH OF SIMON DRIVE REQUEST: A ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED COMMERCIAL PROJECT ON APPROXIMATELY 5.6 ACRES ZONED C- PS COMMERCIAL. THE PROJECT INCLUDES A THREE STORY OFFICE BUILDING, ONE STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, A PARKING STRUCTURE AND RELATED AT -GRADE PARKING. PROJECT Sn r I Cr O 0 C E L A fa a 3 Case: NoR� l� PP93 -495 LEGAL: PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 19, T5S, R7E & THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 30, T5S, R7E APN: 617 - 020 -020 THROUGH 025 A Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was approved in 1992 for this site in conjunction with the development of the commercial mixed use project. No changes are proposed that would increase those impacts which were addressed in 1992. Therefore, no additional Environmental Review is necessary. 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 extension at the time of the Hearing. If you challenge the decision of this case 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 file(s) may be viewed by the public Monday through Friday 8: 00 a. m. until 5:00 p. m. at the Planning and Development Department, La Quinta City Hall, 78 -495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California. In the City's efforts to comply with the requirements of Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, the Planning and Development Department requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or accommodations) in order to communicate at a City public meeting, must inform the Planning and Development Department a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PUBLISH ONCE ON MAY 3, 1994 3 May 18, 1995 roo r rraia47 (fit�t 4 Cv " .. 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 Mr. Fred Simon, Sr. Simon Plaza, Inc. P. O. Box 461 La Quinta, CA 92253 SUBJECT: FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME (PLOT PLAN 93 -495) - APPEAL HEARING Dear Mr. Simon: On May 16, 1995, the City Council denied your appeal request of May 31, 1994. Please be advised that your development approval is set to expire this month based on the Planning Commission's action of May 24, 1994. To retain your past approvals, another one year extension of time request shall be filed with our Department, based on our previous correspondence to you dated April 11, 1995 and May 8, 1995. If you have any questions; please contact our office at (619- 777 -7067. Very truly yours, Y HERMAN MUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ........................ rOUSDELL Planner GT:bjs LTRGT.189 -� -� MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 "®�_; Y� �' � � 'a� � f � i ✓ J � (J Honorable John Pena, Mayor City of La Quinta 78 -495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mayor Pena: May 15, 1995 '95 MY 15 PMl 2� 5 CITY OF LA UINTA GI T Y MANAGER'S OF 1 U MAY. � -5, 1995 IT, OF By way of a copy of this letter, we are notifying Mr. Jerry Herman, Planning and Development Director, that we are unable to meet his deadline of May 15th to submit the documents which he outlined in his letter of April 11, 1995. We, therefore, understand that our Development Approval will expire on May 24, 1995. We have taken the position that we will reapply to the Planning Commission within a short period of time. We are preparing an escrow agreement to be submitted to Pomona First Federal, but we are unable to complete this transaction by May 16-th which is our last opportunity to submit to you that we have control of the property. We would hope that the last four years have not been wasted. Immediately upon getting the agreement signed by Pomona First Federal, we will be able to maneuver through the process of approval without obstructions. Very truly yours, SIMON PLAZA, INC. red Ynof on, S . Chair the Board cc: Ms. Glenda Bangerter, Mayor Pro Tem Mr. Stanley Sniff, Councilmember Mr. Ron Perkins, Councilmember Mr. Jim Cathcart, Councilmember Mr. Jerry Herman, Planning & Development Director Mr. Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner P.O. BOX 461, 78 -611 HWY. 111, LA QUINTA, CA 92253 • PH.: 619/773 -2345 • FAX: 619/568 -4567 May 8, 1995 cei,,, 4 4a Q" F�LE ca". 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 Mr. Fred Simon, Sr. Simon Plaza, Inc. P.O. Box 461 La Quinta, CA 92253 SUBJECT: FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME (PLOT PLAN 93 -495) - APPEAL HEARING Dear Mr. Simon: On May 2, 1995, the City Council continued discussion of your case to their meeting of May 16, 1995. The staff report for this meeting will be mailed to your attention on or before May 12. Please be advised that your development approval is set to expire this month based on the Planning Commission's action of May 24, 1994. To retain your past approvals, another one year extension of time request shall be filed with our department, based on our previous correspondence to you dated April 11, 1995. If you have any questions, please contact our office at 619 - 777 -7067. Very truly yours, Y, DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR GREG'TROUSDELL Associate Planner GT:kaf LTRGT.401 MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 �� t� i TO: FROM: DATE: TRANSMITTAL MEMO � CITY MANAGER 'PARKS DEPARTMEMT 'BUILDING & SAFETY --'CODE ENFORCEMENT -4IRE MARSHAL "'PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR _ JERRY HERMAN STAN SAWA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 25 s' APR 2 61994 S UB jECr. PROJECT REVIEW CASE: `33-�7s= PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENTS YOU MAY ATTACHED ITEM BY COMMENTS: NO COM FIRE DEF:', PROVIDE ANY 3 VE ON THE 41 qs' ;v �i� �'- FC � tY •n APR 2 9 1994 CITY cl� LA $AAkm ` ft SAFM SPEOIAiI I_� y/.2- r117 -, - ...� P. is ��' { r" { tyt ii� .... � � �..,. r' � Y'�C_l.! k� � itiai� .L {{ ' �'i l _ ATTACHMENT 1 CASE Na CASE MAP Vicinity Map Simon Plaza, Inc.. SCALE: nts 'w 1995 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 Mr. Fred Simon, Sr. Simon Plaza, Inc. P.O. Box 461 La Quinta, CA 92253 SUBJECT: FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME (PLOT PLAN 93 -495) - APPEAL HEARING Dear Mr. Simon: On April 4, 1995, the City Council continued discussion of your case to their meeting of May 2, 1995. The staff report for this meeting will be mailed to your attention on or before April 28. Please be advised that your development approval is set to expire next month based on the Planning Commission's action of May 24, 1994. To retain your past approvals, another one year extension of time request shall be filed with our department in the next two weeks. If you wish to begin this process, we will need the following information or materials to process your second time extension request: 1. Twenty -five (25) copies of your development plan folded down to 81/2 x 11 ". One set shall be colored for presentation purposes. 2. One copy of the development plan reduced to 81/2' x 11 ". This reduced plan can be given to the public if they ask for copies of your proposal. 3. If the original plan is processed, our department will need a letter from Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan stating they support your application request. If Parcel 6 is not involved in the application request, please revise your development plans to exclude this parcel from your request. 4. All property owners within 300 -feet of the request shall be notified of your request. Therefore, please submit self- adhesive labels (i.e., three sets) prepared by a title company along with your request. LTRGT.391 MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253( A' " I f ti 5. The filing fee is $500 for this application request. In addition to the filing fee, please provide a letter of explanation describing your accomplishments since May, 1994, and your goals for 1995/1996. If you have any questions, please contact our office at 619- 777 -7067. Very truly yours, A DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR G ZEqifOUSDELL Associate Planner GT:kaf LTRGT.391 �. t �r 9�no* Ie-.*- A " March 20, 199 Honorable John Pena, Mayor City of La Quinta 78 -495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mayor Pena: a l l ii. wvi" • PLANNING This letter is to inform you that if the City Council decides to continue consideration of our Simon Plaza project to a later date, we would have no objection to that continuance. We are working diligently to acquire the land in order to be able to dedicate to the City which will make everyone happy. Sincerely yours, SIM?'�, PLAZA,fINC. Pred J. mon, Sr. Chairma of the Board P.O. BOX 461, 78 -611 HWY. 111, LA QUINTA, CA 92253 • PH.: 6191773 -2345 • FAX: 619/568 -4567 F _ � ; �� � Gii !c � 1 t / I V ,, ��,.a��• .. „� �' ���. �� . .�, � ��`���s`� v C ��� ;.a,. .. ., 78 -495 CALLE TAMPICO — LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 February 24, 1995 Mr. Fred Simon, Sr. Simon Plaza, Inc. P. 0. Box 461 La Quinta, CA 92253 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLOT PLAN 93-495 Dear Mr. Simon: This letter is to confirm our phone conversation this week As you indicated, it is our understanding that you will be purchasing Parcel 6 of Parcel Map 19419 from Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan within the immediate future. Therefore, you will not be submitting any revised plans to this Department by March 1, 1995, for Planning Commission review as you anticipate the project remaining as it was designed. Further, I informed you that the appeal for your project will be before the City Council at their meeting of the April 4, 1995, for their consideration. In order for the Council to consider your appeal request, this Department must receive a letter from Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan, stating that you are purchasing this property along with a copy of the escrow papers or, a copy of your ownership deed for Lot 6. This information is required to be in our office by March 24, 1995, in order to be included with the Council staff report. Without your ownership of Lot 6 or a letter from Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan stating that you have control of this property, your project, as currently designed, can not be approved. Should you have any questions concerning the above information, please feel free to contact this Department. Very truly Y Development Director JB:bjs c: City Council City Manager City Attorney MAILING ADDRESS P.O. BOX 1504 - LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 LTRJH.430 MARK S. MORAN & associates December 13, 1994 Mr. Donald Adolph, Chairman Planning Commission City of La Quinta 78 -495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: CUP 94- 015 -J.L. Jarnagin (La Quinta Car Wash) Dear Mr. Adolph: First, I want to apologize for not having this long letter to you earlier, so you could look at the issues I've brought to your attention. Unfortunately the staff report was not available until late Friday afternoon and I had considerable research to do. As you are all aware, I was on the Planning Commission for over 5 years. During that time I was involved with the adoption of the Washington Street Specific Plan. The Planning Commission worked long, hard hours on this plan for over 3 years, with Public Hearings and input from the Community and landowners. I have listed below several areas that are not consistent with the Washington Street Specific Plan, the La Quinta Municipal Code Title 9- Planning and Zoning, Recorded CC &R's (which the Simon Plaza Partnership and Pomona First Federal formulated and signed) and the Findings required by law to allow a Variance, just to name a few. Conditional Use Permit: The reason certain types of uses are not allowed in specific zones is because they have the potential of having a negative impact. Those negative impacts must be looked at on a individual basis with the location, configuration of the parcel and impacts on surrounding landowners. These negative impacts and any issues raised during the. Public Hearing process must bee negated before approval can be given. - &4r2lry /P, &ay l WashinLyton Street Specific Plan: The purpose of the Washington Street Specific Plan was to look at traffic, infrastructure and make recommendations on the ultimate development of the corridor. In the Findings it states, "Washington Street serves as a "gateway" into the central core of the City of La Quinta". It goes on the state, "The intersection of Washington Street and Highway 111 is projected to be most severely and immediately impacted by increases in traffic'. Based on the recommendations of the study, the City adopted a new alignment for 1 P.O. Box 1305, La Quinta, CA 92253 • (619) 564 -3761 Washington Street, which effected this parcel of land, as well as almost every other parcel along Washington. When any project along Washington Street came before the Planning Commission, we looked at this street as one of our "Image Corridors" and requested that special treatment be given along Washington. An example is Pare La Quinta, where no two story unit could be located within 200' of Washington. The developer kicked and screamed about this condition, but because we were adamant on the condition, we have a housing project that looks very nice. Will you be able to say the same thing in five years about this Car Wash? Based on the Washington Street Specific Plan, I feel that this development request is inconsistent with our original intent to keep Washington Street as a "Image corridor ". - La Quin a Municipal Code Title 9- Planning and Zoning; There are so many violation of the Zone text, it's hard to figure on where to start. Section 9.172.050 states, "A conditional use permit shall not be granted unless the applicant demonstrates that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community. Any permit that is granted shall be subject to such conditions as shall be necessary to protect the health, safety or general welfare of the community." I think that the safety of our citizens will be at risk because of the traffic problems it will cause, like stacking and possible idle traffic on Washington. Section 9.188.060 states, "No request for a setback adjustment shall be anted unless it is determine a e a us ment is consis en with the intent an purposes o t s title; that her ums ances aupPca6le �o the proper v, including such factors as size. shape, tonoerauhv. requiremen ue Not only will this project be detrimental to the Simon Plaza project with the noise and aesthetics, but they want to utilize a old easement that zig -zags across Mr. Simon's land for their circulation. Variance: In order to give a variance you must show a hardship. I don't feel that this project qualifies with this requirement because if they located on a parcel that was a adequate size, there would be no hardship. Recorded`CC &R's: They do not allow for the car wash, based on noise, "the obstruction of visibility of improvements on any other parcel" and "Use Restrictions" that lists approved uses (which a car wash is not a approved use) and states, "It is the intent of this Declaration to allow any commercial 2 ti or business use or purpose which is common to a first -class shopping center ". A car wash is not common to a first class shopping center or it would be listed as a approved use in the CPS Zone and would not require a Conditional Use Permit. American's With Disability Act Compliance: I spoke with Mr. Jim Collins who consults with developers on ADA compliance. I asked him what the requirements were on sidewalks and he stated that, "Cross Slope cannot exceed 2% and ramps at the end of sidewalk cannot exceed 1 in 12. I question weather the sidewalk along Washington complies with these requirements. In conclusion, I feel that this project does not meet the requirements of a Conditional Use Permit, the intent of the Washington Street Specific Plan, the requirements for a Variance, or the General Plan. set back requirements of our two most important roadways in the City. I also question weather you can justify adopting the findings listed for the Plot Plan. I'm not opposed to a car wash. I would love to have one in our City, so I wouldn't have to go to Palm Desert or Indio. I am opposed to one at this location and on a parcel of this size. Based on these conclusions, I am asking that the Planning Commission deny this project, or at the very least, require further Environmental review to assess the traffic and other impacts this project will have. Since ly, L is Moran cc: Jacques Ables, Vice Chairman Paul Anderson, Commissioner Katie Barrows, Commissioner Richard Butler, Commissioner Wayne Garnder, Commissioner Al Newkirk, Commissioner 3 */. n. December 13, 1994 City of La Quinta Planning Commission 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, Ca. 92253 Re: CUP 94-015 Dear Commission Members: ®=111 O SANBORN/WEBB INC. Civil Engineers - Land Surveyors Architects - Land Planners 91 -224 ,tits rr:t DEC 13 1994 PLANr;lt T After reviewing the :Conditions of Approval and staff recommendations for approval, I have several concerns. Based upon these concerns, I feel that you have no other alternative than to deny the permit for the car wash. I have outlined my concerns, and they are: 1. The total disregard for the Washington Street Specific Plan The applicant is requesting a variance for setback from 20 feet to 10 feet and 18 feet - the 10 foot portion being closest to Highway 111. In fact, the car wash structure is in the 20 foot setback area. That is why the request is for a 10 foot set back. (See Page 3 of Staff Report.) 2. The reduction from 50 feet to 35 feet landscape setback on Highway 111. The requested 35 foot setback is along the Highway 111 frontage, and at the comer of Washington. This reduction is required to accommodate parking. (See Page 4 of Staff Report.) 3. The Vnvironmental Impact Statement is flawed in at least two areas. I believe a focus E.I.R. should be required for each. Item 3.1(a) (Land Use and Planning Page II E.I.R.). There is a definite conflict with the Washington Street Specific Plan, and therefore to the City's General Plan. 255 N El Cielo Road • Sutte 315 • Palm Springs, Califomia 92262 • (619) 325 -2245 • (619) 325-9426 • Fax (619) 325-5130 Page 2 - Continued Planning Commission December 13, 1994 Re: CUP 94 -015 3. Cont. Item 3.6 (Transportation /Circulation) Page II E.I.R.(a), (b) and (d). Item (a) Due to the high number of vehicle movements generated by a car wash, and with only one entrance, it is very apparent that there will be a substantial increase in traffic congestion. Item (b) Due to the high volume of vehicle movement, there is a safety hazard. Item (d) There is a total lack of on -site parking for employees and customers _L only ten (10) spaces are provided. I have yeflee a successful car wash where, on a regular basis, there were less than ten to twelve people working, and several cars waiting for work to be done in the detail shop. Again, in the Conditions of Approval, there are several items that appear to be in- consistent with the City's standards or policies - Page 1, Condition 3 (Approval of Variance), and Page 5, Condition 38a (Staff is recommending a deference of the improvements for Washington Street). These improvements should be constructed at this time. Also, Page 7, Condition 44 (On -site retention not shown on site plan) indicates an inconsistency. There does not appear to be any location for said retention. The last issue I would like to address is the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Lots 2 through 7 of Parcel Map 18418. Said CC & R's were recorded with the County Recorder on March 17, 1983 as Instrument No. 50361. These CC & R's were prepared with the input of Pomona Federal Savings, and in fact, they were signed by Robert Nichols, Senior Vice President of Pomona Federal Savings. Item B-1 of said CC & R's states the following: Neither the project nor any part thereof; nor any parcel contained therein shall be used nor shall any building or other improvement be constructed, maintained or used for any purpose other than the following: retail, office and service . establishments, including without limitation, financial institutions, brokerage offices, restaurants, travel and similar .n Page 3 - Continued Planning Commission December 13, 1994 Re: CUP 94 -015 agencies, motion picture theaters, clothing and appliance stores, specialty retail shops, supermarkets, drug stores and related or similar establishments. It is the intent of this Declaration to allow any commercial or business use or purpose which is common to a first -class shopping center an which is not prohibited by law; provided, however, that automobile service stations and fast food restaurants shall not be considered permitted uses. It is clear that a car wash (similar to an automobile service station) . is not an approved use for the subject site. Again, I would like to point out that Pomona is a signatory to this recorded document. In closing, it is apparent that the Commission must deny CUP 94 -015. The project does not meet setback or landscaping requirements, the E.I.R. has major problems as it relates to traffic, street improvements are being deferred, the proposed development is clearly in conflict with the recorded CC & R's, and most important, the .proposed project does not meet the. Washington Street Specific Plan and, therefore, the City's General Plan. If you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, SANB / WEB , INC. Jo L Sanborn :lm c.c. Fred Simon - Simon Motors P. \DATA \94DATA \91- WO \n4CUP.CLQ FROM tPFF SECURITY TO Pomona' Since 1892 Mr. Fred J. Simon, Jr. Simon Plaza, Inc. P. d. Box 1461 La Quinta, CA 92253 7733013 1994,12-09 16109 #294 P.02/02 : 01.. r Cj� QUNTA 0;iY OLERK Subject: Parcel 6 of Parcel Map 1841 Dear Mr. Simon: Savings and Loan Association December 9, 1994 To Be Presented in Person By Mx. Dick Baxley Responding to the December 5, 1994, letter of Mark Moran to the Mayor and City Council of La.Quinta, Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan Association is willing to give you the opportunity to honor Mr. Moran' s claim that you " ... will buy the subject property and will pay Pomona First Federal a fair price...." We require a purchase price of $737,500, which you will recall, is less than the amount you previously agreed to pay. This sum will enable 'us to receive the same amount that we will receive on our sale to our current buyer, Mr. Jarnagin, pay the broker, and also provide the funds to obtain Mr. Jarnagin's consent to walk away from his transaction. A non - refundable deposit of $loo,on must be made, and a mutually acceptable purchase agreement executed, by 5:00 p.m. on Monday, December 12, 1994. The purchase agreement must provide for escrow to close on or before March 31, 1995, the same date on which our escrow with Mr. Jar-nagi.n must close. Based upon the statements made in the December 2, 1994, letter of CGI Financial Chairman €c CEO Stephen C. Miller to you, which also was forwarded to the City of La Quinta, "All contracts and commitments have been signed and funds will be flowing within a few days of this writing," so these terms should not present any problems for you. We believe this offer is more than reasonable under the circumstances and hope it meets with your approval. if it does not, we intend to proceed with Mr. Jarnagin to obtain all necessary approvals from the City of La Quinta to complete the development of this site. Ve truly yours, / "/'O� Robert L. Golish Senior Vice President Senior Counsel CC: City Council and Planning Commission, City of La Quinta Rinehart, Shannon Paul Selzer Clara mnn4 r1f41ro� 90O N1 Lnn.` W u .,. r,�.- „_n�.n n n . . r, PFF HDM OFFC TEi No . 714 -62 - 292 D L.,e r 5 , 94 1 : 41 P I o . 010 F � ` f Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan Association Since 1892 December 6, 1994 Dawn Honeywell, City Attorney City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico P. O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Ms. Honeywell: Subject: Plot Plan 93 -495; CUP 94.015; Extension of Time Confirming our discussion, Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan Association, as owner of Parcel 6 of Parcel Map 1841, hereby objects to the subject Plot Plan/CL7P time extension and requests that it be denied. It is our understanding that this objection is required in order for the City to be free to consider on its merits &.e conflicting use proposed by our buyer, Mr. Jarnagin, that will be before the Planning Commission next week. cc: Baxley (via fax: 619- 777 -7101) Rinehart Shannon Selzer Very truly yours, Robert L. Golish Senior Vice President Senior Counsel Admtr*atrative Mon: 350 &xth G" Avenue 6,76E-1t22 • P.O. 0= 164 9 Pomona, C*Utov,la 91708.1620 • (WO) 623�2M • (W% 3LU.4M Based upon new information submitted today from Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan Association regarding their development intent for Parcel 6, the Council has the following two options: 1. Deny the time extension 'for Simon Plaza based upon: a. The property depicted on the approved site plan is not entirely controlled by Simon Plaza; b. The information requested by Council at the first continuance has never been presented. 2. Continue consideration of the time extension, for the approved project for four months with the exception of Parcel 6 and redesign the site plan excluding Parcel 6 and resubmit to the Planning Commission fbr review and approval within three months. s ,- r rr t 3 M 1 MARK S. MORAN & associates R E D` -' V E T December 5, 1994 u 6 rT) U Jill � I Hon. John Peiia, Mayor HAND DELIVERED & Honorable City Council ` ' ' ' Ur LA Q U i I' -A 78-495 Calle Tampico Y 0 L E R K La Quinta, Ca. 92253 RE: Continued Public Hearing on Plot Plan 93495 (Revised) I have been asked to respond to various issues related to Simon Plaza at the request of Simon Plaza Partnership of which I act as the Development Consultant. After reading the Staff Report and the attached letters from Fred Simon and Stephen Miller of CGI Financial, Ltd., it becomes apparent that this project has not been a simple, straight- forward development. Over the past few years this project has changed dramatically and each time a change has occurred, the financing has had to be renegoiated. Ultimately, the purpose of our project is to construct an approximately 85,000 + /- sq. ft "state -of -the -art" medical office and retail complex. As this project shrunk in size due to City imposed conditions, the financing has had to be renegoiated. This renegoiation has taken years due to the fact that it is "off shore" and subject to final conditions of approval by the City. One condition was the dedication of the "right -of -way" on Washington and State Highway 111. The property to be dedicated was owned by Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan. Simon Plaza had arranged to buy the land which Pomona FFS &L thought they might use for a branch of their S &L. Those plans evaporated in the early 1980s. Simon Plaza became its only buyer and a fair per square foot price was agreed upon. In early 1994, as a direct result of the Northridge Earthquake and the structural failure of multi -story parking structures, Simon Plaza requested it's Structural Engineer to re- examine the multi -story parking structure. This further delayed our process, placing any financing issues on hold until we felt secure that the parking structure would not need major redesign. Finally, the Planning Commission voted and passed Simon Plaza on May 24, 1994, with modified conditions and granting the development plan a 1 year extension. Simon Plaza appealed the modifications to the original conditions of approval disagreeing with the City Engineer on the amount of "off- site" storm water that would be produced by our project. In addition, we objected to a requirement that forces Simon Plaza to remove improvements which the City had previously required and then reinstall those same improvements, thus making us pay twice for the same improvements. In late June Simon Plaza was asked to respond to guidelines for an Owners Participation Agreement. Since the project had changed over time due to its reduction in size it was necessary to revisit all of the original development issues. As we began to gather the information requested by the City, summer vacations by all parties and the Cities' summer schedule necessitated a number of continuances bringing us to September. In September we asked the City Council to allow Simon Plaza the opportunity to begin negotiations with Pomona First Federal, to allow us to purchase the property that we intended to dedicate to the City for right -of -ways. As Simon Plaza awaited its first infusion of cash from our "off- shore" investors we began to complete our development plans that included the Pomona First Federal property. It was at this time that we discovered that Pomona First Federal had allowed another developer to explore the use of the property. The proposed Car Wash violates the CC &R's which Pomona First Federal helped to formulate. This use is obstructive to our intended project and devaluates the entire corner. P.O. Box 1305, La Quinta, CA 92253 • (619) 564 -3761 7-Deyk- L90 OW Page 2. MSM & Assoc./Hon. J. Pefia, Mayor Continued Public Hearing on Plot Plan 93 -495 (Revised) Although we can't speak for the City Council, we feel that this new use violates the Washington Specific Plan for the entry to the City. No matter how many bushes or trees try to hide this shabby use of our Cities view corridor, a Car Wash is still a Car Wash. It will detract from our project and set a poor precedent for future development in La Quinta. We submit that Simon Plazas intended display of a major art work at that corner, according to our conditions, is superior to heavy vegetation crowded onto a small 1.01 acre commercial Car Washing facility. Finally, Pomona First Federal has alluded to possible inverse condemnation if the City doesn't allow this new intended use. I wish to make it very clear that Simon Plaza will buy the subject property and will pay Pomona First Federal a fair price for their land, assuming we are given the opportunity to do so. Toward that end, we would hope that the City would allow Simon Plaza an opportunity to continue its development process, when the Car Wash is adjudicated. Sincerely, M rk an cc: Fred Simon Simon Plaza Inc. Paul Selzer Esq. Best, Best & Krieger . Attachments: Letter from Fred Simon, Simon Plaza Inc. Letter from Stephen Miller CGI Financial, Ltd. 12 -02 -1994 06 :14PM FROM ION MOTORS, INC. TO oft VIA FAX: 619- 564-5321 Mark S. Moran & Associates P. 0. Box 1.305 La Quintal CA 92253 Dear Mark, December 2, 1994 5645321 P.02 After reading the letter from PFF dated November 30, 1994, over the signature of Mr. Robert L. Golich. I have a hard time containing myself over its contents and inferences. As you are aware, I asked our agent to give us a written summary of his financial search on behalf of Simon Plaza which he did and I faxed it on to you. I feel certain information needs to be clarified and transmitted in regards' to statements which were made that are not necessarily correct. 1. His quote, "The rather significant taking of property for the desired widening of Washington Street have made the site unsuitable for a branch office." unquote. Originally, the sale of that parcel was with Mr. Robert Nichols who ultimately became president of PFF and they made the decision early in 1980 not to proceed with a branch office in Rancho Mirage and /or La Quinta long before the Washington Street corridor was planned. 2. PFF does have an alternate source for the sale of 'their parcel and that is the Simon Plaza partnership which they had in escrow for some time and which then decided not to extend and took the deposit which was required to open the escrow. As you can tell from the letter from stephen Miller, Simon Plaza. was unable to complete the escrow dae to financial changes outlined. The comment that nearly 40% of the land has been taken by the City is an inappropriate calculation. There has always been a Highway 111 set back and a Washington Street set back. The only difference today in the parcel as far as set backs is that the set back on Washington Street was increased to 20' from 10' from the time of purchase and the dedication requirement for the single lane is only 20' on Washington Street for the right -of -way. In regards to the CC &Rs, PFF participated in the formulation of the CC &Rs and it was their desire at that time specifically to limit the types of establishments which would be permitted to be constructed on the project. At that time, it was c].;early and explicitly noted that the type of facility being proposed by them today was to be prohibited. I find his statement, "we are confident that we can overcome the .CG &Rs" improper and a personal opinion. It should_ also by noted that '-Simon Plaza would take strong. ligitation action against :such a violation which PFF helped draft. P.O. BOX 461, 7 &611 HWY. 111, LA QUINTA, CA 92253 • PH.: 619/773 -2345 • FAX: 6191568 -4567 r. 12 -02 -1994 06 :15PM FROM ON MOTORS, INC. TO 5645321 P.03 Mark S. Moran & Associates December 2, 1994 Page 2 it should also be noted that a significant part of the delay in or financing is due to the fact : that PFF. refused to adjust their -,price downward when the project was reduced in density thus forcing Simon Plaza to wait and negotiate for .a period of time. Had we been able to reduce the price of the land immedf.ately,- we could have saved one of the original finance packages and dedicated the land to the City. I personally regret the delays we have had in the Project considerably more than any other individual or PFF especially after having worked 42 years to put the Project together, investing approximately $500,000.00 and an untold number of hours,' days and months. PFF has never lifted a finger to offer the Project any assistance. If there is any intent—of any sort, it behooves me to bring forth the lack of cooperation and patience on the part of PFF in working with the City 'in finalizing an acceptable financial package once the City has approved all the necessary changes. I think that we at Simon Plaza have been more than cooperative in beautifying the project to the desire of the City without violating the City's Beautification Program. I'm confident. that with due diligence, the City and Simon Plaza can finally construct the Project which they (City)_ have spent a great deal of time and money in assisting with the design and lay -out that we now have. Very try-1y yours, SIMON PLAZA„ INC d J. imon, Sr. irm of the Board 12 -02 -1994 02:23PM FROM " YION MOTORS INC. TO 5645321 P.02 I ` tiancial, Ltd December 2, 1994 Mr. Fred J. Simon, Sr. Simon Plaza, Inc. P. O. Box 1461 La Quanta, CA 92253 Dear Fred, in 'reply to your request fo Pacific Corpora,tion.financial the-'following to you and your r a chronological history of Kanan a. ^.tivit p-s and proposals, I submit officers. In July 1991, you and your fellow officers submitted to.Kanan Pacific Corporation a financing request for what is now known a.s Simon Plaza. The original project called for a combined medical and commercial center in excesz of 161,000 square footage. of rentable area. Kanan pacific then explored several financing sources, both from foreign and domestic institutions aeeki4g both a loan and /or equity financing or a combination thereof in the range of approximately eighteen million dollars ($1810001000.00'). You will recall the proposal was not acceptable because of the limited term of five years. As' we were negotiating this point and abcuit the time we reached 4n agreement with the Lender, the City of La Quinta rquired •yvu to make a reduction in square footage down to approximately 130,000 square feet plus the parking garage. Shortly thereafter,. as a matter of fact on January 25, 1953, we were able to obtain a firm commitment from a British Off - Shore Trust for a net amount of seventeen million five hundred thousand dollars ($17,500,000.00). While this offer was acceptable, contracts were drawn up and both parties agreed to the .amount. Since there was a requirement for a substantial equity ownership we were attempting to negotiate a' reduction in the equity ownership. We were then informed that the City of La Quinta had further reduced the square. footage of the Simon Plaza rentable space to approximately 82,000 square feet.. Consequently, the agreement on the seventeen million five hundred thousand dollars ($17,500,000.00) was no longer valid and clearly disqualified us with the British Trust. • �aas�, xaae�eec�cs�r�r.�9o�co, ta�ato }m -��as F.x�i�m�n ' tandoe�Sos,�2'lol�dSmnat Londd,,'�etYrzt¢. Totofi3�2a2 +9�la:rm�0?`�- �v3�oois Z4 42 -02 -1994 e2 :24PM FROM 3N MOTORS, INC. TO 5645321 P.03 Mr. Fred J. Simon, Sr. December 2, 1994 Page 2' As I recall, you then submitted a four story building too the City and I approached another European Off -Shore Trust for the reduced•amount of fourteen million seven hundred thousand dollars ($14,7001000.00) and submitted all the plans which were evidently approved by the City. I was then advised that the four story building must be reduced to a three story building with -one story over the parking garage. The increased cost of this change required a net funding of sixteen million two hundred thousand dollars ($16,200,000.00) up from the $14,700,000.00. Finally, just in the past six months, we have been able to confirm an acceptable offer from a third off -shore trust :which will produce the net funding of sixteen million two hundred thousand dollars ($161200,000.00) which is required. Documentation and contracts for the initial funding were :drawn up for .another equity partnership proposal by your attorneys and theirs. Since the contracts are completed and signed,' this source agrees and will make available to Simon Plaza the :first payment against the fourth and final proposition the week of December 4, 1994. All contracts and commitments lave -peen signed and funds! will be flowing within a few days of tl�is writing. Accordingly, you are' now close to a position of making a cash offer to the land owners for the entire corner parcel and make' your dedications to the City of La Quinta as the programs now .calls tor. Once you have confirmed the position of control of the entire parcel, .we will inform the lender to commence with the balance of the. funding until the entire balance has been.paid into your account at Great Western Bank in Indio, California as we-have previously arranged. Best regards, CGI FMANCT%AL, LTD. S Ken Miller airman & CEO 4:, ev- i a t Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan Association Since 1892 City of La Quinta November 30, 1994 Planning Commission 78-495 Calle Tampico P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Subject: CUP 94 -015; Selzer /3 S Partnership Letter of November 18, 1994 Dear Commission Members: We have no choice but to respond to the subject letter, because we feel it paints an inaccurate picture of the situation facing development of Pomona First Federal's Parcel 6 of Parcel Man 1841. It was not only market conditions that forced Pomona First Federal to reassess its intended use of our parcel. The rather significant takings of our property for the desired. widening of Washington Street. have made the site unsuitable for a branch office. Taking that in stride, we agreed to sell the property to the 3S Partnership so it could proceed with its development plans. However, both we and the City seem to have been hearing representations for years now about how the Simon Plaza was going to come together soon. We agreed to several extensions of our sale escrow, until finally the 3S Partnership and Pomona First Federal were no longer able to stay in agreement as to a proposed sale. Taking that in stride also, we looked for and have found another willing buyer for our parcel, even though the parcel is becoming subject to even further takings so that the other side of Washington Blvd. can be widened to create a left -turn lane for the shopping center to the northwest. If our current buyer is prevented from proceeding with his proposed development, we will have to reevaluate whether any reasonable use remains for our site in light of the nearly 40% being taken by the City. We wish to strongly encourage the City to approve the proposed car wash use. We and our buyer are confident that the CC &R's permit this use and we can litigate the issue if need be. More importantly, we believe that our buyer's plans for this site provide a fitting entrance to the City. They include extensive beautification at the northerly corner of the site that will be done at the expense of the developer. Mr. Selzer is accurate in predicting that we would characterize his protest as an attempt to hold our parcel hostage, for we believe that is exactly the source of his motivation. The fact that the proposed use is "incompatible" with the plans of the 3S Partnership is unfortunate. However, they had their Administrative Offices: 350 South Garay Avenue • P.O. Box 1520 • Pomona, California 91769 • (714) 623 -2323 • (213) 625 -7666 • (818) 964 -7800 • (714) 972 -0521 CAI N i City of La Quinta Planning Commission November 30, 1994 Page 2 opportunity to control the destiny of our Parcel 6, and the time has now come for Pomona First Federal and the City to move forward with a realistic plan for this site that can be attained. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, D Robert L. Golish Senior Vice President ,Sr. Counsel cc: L. Rinehart, PFFSL F. Shannon, PFFSL Dick Baxley, Broker Jim Jarnagan, Buyer John J.Pena, Mayor Paul T. Selzer Glenda Bangerter, Mayor Pro Tem Stan Sniff, Council Member Ron Perkins, Council Member G. Michael McCartney, Council Member Donald Adolph, Chairman Planning Commission Jacques Abels, Vice Chairman Paul Anderson, Commissioner Katie Barrows, Commissioner Richard Butler, Commissioner ,//Wayne Gardner, Commissioner Elwin "Al" Newkirk, Commissioner Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan Association ,JL. ) I 1.1 I L11 ... , , 111 .` 1 l': I`, 11_' 11 J\ .. .. () .: 1 1 BEST, BEST & KRIEGER • rAA1"`ti. I1I KLM).A MM3...AKAt <OwrOyAI.C�I APTHUM L. LITT I, C WK.ATI/I OLL7/ L. 51 LYML -6- *OCUAM P.C. M 0.1( C. :MTOM C. UAW' PAIIL r. KI loll DALII.[ IWKL X 11 C MMIOIOYIWJ.A t.. —rYit" ♦ICMAAD 1. AMC[Ar,1M' 1 COM D. WAJOLN WCMAEI. D. MA ..D• W. CUM L."Y• JohII L. 0"OI.M r MICKA C L T. MIP40. it W"IWTM A. JVr. . MC&CACL IIW AM r PRAMPi J. "A,— AMMO I. / MOKA V D. MARTO( MCTxA V. *=INK It. aE"It r LLIAA W. nDY4 J0. PRtOAAY L. MAAOrcC L[MDALL K M.—Vy CLML A K ALIIUA LuAVO J. CAVI Ve MC.KACL .1, A KGt l SO V I APrrC AA'TOM:A DA WWLX?- esrnaar K. w+LArf rn./ . Opt- PTi52071 IAWYCR3 W TMrk } n.r w DEW rAAA•,A PAPA. J. C3.APNAV T-01• y M. CO—op VII:" L, MIJLI DAIAC\ I.OLI.4A My W w w •. oa 0 0 FT r. P. 4". P. DC 1 V<" VAr4c E, "Pty JOIN N, -Of T%C-kA lrA MARTIN A. LKA:t l( J, W C MA I L <V u 6C3-11JA YICTo*A M_ AIM+ �COT1 C M,TM JAL;ri 1. CL VA Jt. "RI l.(W M AM . t %N"O CT C. LICWCLD AMAR rL WALCrX ►ATCA k ►AIWAL4 K ANIL I IC A. Pr, I CA Spur W LLIAA D. DAIC MO. A. MATT K PO AMS J7. rFALT Y. OLIN OTLYCM D104 AV1I LMA: L. OAa.rr.A DENW5 Y. C EFTA A OaERT W.MAAOKCA'RO JA1Kt WM6 PArUWX KWI PCAPI;t k~ W, aWl" JAWK rLUARAAI,IMLR V. In C A. ONOW IIAAI A.(A311K NAY/ I. .IM. CY WC1117.11' 4Jf I.11 11L OAV r. rl�lI'N. rt. S11M4 4. MAIISA OCMiN: 1. TI¢ L OL fA�l Kl. VII. E. PAMl1041w JAOA{ MA A. %I,W L MWa4 �I KM A. ARCM• N. NT C M.KNM AMO MAaT C. OAAAi r d AMC C, OL A-DC DD RUTI+T 1, ANOCP 3.) II O. KTIAY HA"" IN" ['N 0AR to11AAP Ml "1C*4 AVAIL SA" at ,.ATW RD F. XA. t' rw WCA D. UVL M M AA A. *rM. C T M K.Lr1K P. CAM Y C K LMI P.m —Nr" .—,A KV0K1 CAKYALMV ,k]—O ►.M(MCT WJI MI.'OD f•,OI INi I-C1 OI M.✓ .L OMAN, D J.J,l AM4 A40X,A NW Jt;Lr Af.l ., II.OwVK L ul• r.. v•..wAM JAI A. Ww f f LMw Y AA < f A. 1 I �r I !, A 4L / Y D.1A 4 hl.t %A.YA 1A, oVTWOL JO,Ll --II,G O',. W/t QOL Jc ww r(A o4 ►C,11 liOLwH AATV CtMO ACDr IKSC 0 VM2'I JAW$O nAICOCA (IWId-1M7A1 ItALIAL D1.rt D6QA-WW1 November. 18, 1994 City of La Quinta Planning Commission 78 -495 Calle Tampico P,O. Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92 253 Re: CUP 94 -015 Dear Commission Members: C; 1 I) Il, l I.I II`,i') h .!, a goo CAIII7 tl M"O(Iryr t AAIYOM WAY P001 Ofr'ICC UOx 1!r4 PALM SPVA.Db, CAUI'IJrIMIA, V72n.j TCLEP"ONC (WO: 3ta•7264 79LLf;WKA LOlol ]SD'6)-d6 Of CVUWU'L JAA.Ca IL. e—row C. MICWACL CCMUCrr TRA,IC.(w �CACH AwL(ra Awwitl, n rrr. wl IAVt R'" (f•OII; aAR•ItE4 RA4rtnD wIAACC M1OT R„I A•IM ga7Aa.p taost •AO•rnTl• f AM OROr] W Ip1 Rtl A• 113 3 cn. C-) o � rn C-3 O F--A 'Il W r D �D CO D O r The undersigned represents the 3S Partnership which is the owner of parcels 2, 3, 4, 5 and '7 of Parcel Map 18418 and Simc;n. Motors, inc., which iu the, owner of parcel 1 of Parcel Map 18416, all of which parcels are adja.rentt to ::he proposed La Quinta Car wash which is proposed for parcel 1 of Parcel Map 18418, For over three and a half years, the 38 . Partnership, Simon Plaza, Inc, dud Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan (11PPPST, ") , which is the owner of parcel 6 of Parcel Map 18418 have been working with the City and its planners to develop a f irrt claw; office/restaurant complex at the corner of Highway 111 and Waohington street. under our origi.nal plan, the 3S parlrrie- t-ohip had arranged to purchase the 1'1VFSL1 parc(�I. However, because of changing city Zoning standards and r.egulationa and the adveree market conditions of the last € everal years, we have not yet been aucccssful in completing the financial arrangements necessary for u6 to proceed with this complex which we continue to believe will be a very appropriate, and fitting entrance to the City. Assuming no further modification of city requirements, we have good reason to believe that we will have our financing in place before year's end, and would he happy tci di.gcuns those arrar.gemento with your staff. Sb*NI til':LS1S'1',lit:_)I KKIL( II1 I'3 I2 it ;)1 15 ;) t, 'c! :11.)4 010, J; .� ��w OFFICCM1 OV PEsT, BEST b KRIEGEI, City c,t La Quinta Planning Commission November 18, 1994 Page 2 Because we have riot yet been abie to finalize our fivactc.i.ng and piircha ©e the PSaFL, parcel, PFPS1, hari* intorined uO and the City that while they are not opposed to our development which they originally supported, they now wish to pursue development of their parcel independently from the remai.nder of our parcels. While we can tiejt object to the right of PFFSL to develop their parcel on their own, we can and do object vehemently to their current proposal to place a car wash on'-he most vznible corner in the City. , when we first sold this parcel to PFFS.[.,, their intent: was to place a branch of their bank on the parcel, and we were to develop the balance of the property in a first class manner. Market conditions have apparently made them decide not to build a branch at this location. we have no alternative other than to respect their business decision. Nowever, while neither PFFSL nor ouruel.ves could predict exactly how the property would eventually be developed, we all, agreed that the entire parcel should be developed in a first class mariner and that neither faer- food restaurants nor automobile serv:i.c&t stat:ionF; or the like would be allowed on any of the parcels, seen though both parties knew that probably the highe:it market value might be found in developing in that manner. Neither PFFSL rtor ourselves wanted that sort of use as a neighbor. imagine what their response would have linen had they built: a beautiful branch office on their site and we now were propoeing a car wash immediately adjacent to them; What hart been prOpOsed to you for the PFFSL parcel is exactly what both they and we attelrpted• to prevent -- a facility whose sole ,ptzz.-pose of Existence is the servicing of aut:cxi�obiles . While their application prominently point s out that they do not prIopose to yell gasoline and that they intend to disgAline .i.t, the fact remains that the proposed development i.s still. an automotive service station without gas pumps -- a large traffic generator; a quick in, quick out facility with i.ts atUelidant. lines of care waiting to be serviced; noisy vacuum, washing acid drying machinery; and attc ndarzl a woz'king out in the 7 of drying care; and f iniulLing the process. In many zeopect,s, this proposed use is more objectionable to us than a traditional qa:3 oLation. We believe that our Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC &R's) prohibit: this use, and we fully intend to pursue our remedies against PFFSL should ttlA City allow this use. liowever, we obviously prerar..that the matter be nipped in the bud without the necessity Uf litigation. PIS52971 .��..:�� « U:.,.'I11 .`1 ;!�i'•.I LIt i, .. .. 'J i I.1 I lil i! .1�,i1 ,I I(•�;1., li ) LAW oFFICLS Of BEST, BEST G KRIEG I ` City of La Quinta Planning Commission November- 18, 1994 Page. 3 Furthermore and. notwithstanding the CC &R'n, we believe Chat the proposed use is totally inappropriate for one of the mont prominently situar„cd parcels in the e»t.irP city. C)bv.i oi i f3l y, It this ube is allowed, our plans for the remaDider of the parcele will have to be dramatically modAfied. You can almoat be assured that the quality of development for the balance of the property will be adversely affected it you approve this car wash project. No doubt the argument will be made that we are attempting to hold PP'FSIj hostage. Nothing could be further from the truth. we acknowledge their right: t.o develop on their property. However, after they abandoned their intention t.o build their branch office, they participated and encouraged us to spend hurndreds of thousands of dollars to design, redesign and procc!3s our office complex through the city process. Now they come to you and ask for approval of a project and uoe which is entirely inappropriate for the site and incorapatible with our project. All of the time, money and effort expended by both ourselves and city r+taff wiJ."J. he tossed out the window if you approve this car wash. At the very least, the development of their par,rel should compl.irmc�nt and be compatible with. what has been proposed for the balance of the property, We appreciate the opportunity you have given us to comment on the proposal and formally requer,t that we be given specific written notice, of any and all mc:ltings or hearings dealing with the car wash project, Thank your for your consideration of our concerns. PTS /sk PISS2071 Yours very truly, BEST, BEST & .KRIEGER r � ' i Paul T. FROM :PFF SECURITY TO 6197777155 08 26 #225 P.01/01 Pomona First Federal Savings and loan Association sure 1892 November 9, 1994 ` FAX NO. (619) 777 -7155 Mr, Stan Sawa CITY OF LA QUINTA Dear Mr. Sawa: NOV 14 1994 D CITY OF !A QUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT This is to affirm that Pomona First Federal (PFF) has entered into a purchase agreement to sell property at the S.E. intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Aveune (Parcel No. 643020006 -7, City of La Quinta) to Jim Jarnagin and Duane Younker, They have PFF's permission to submit plans and requests for variances to the City in support of their proposed project. Sincerely, Fred S non Vice President Facilities Support Administrator FS: sc P Claromon; Office. 363 W, Foothill 61%,0.91711-2710 • P.O. 80z .90 • Claremont. Calitomia 91711-0190 • (90% 625 -8664 • (8M 3324733 • Fax(909)624-5271 +. :r t t��',�� zt G 4�.�ajf Tit 4 uw� nu COn 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO — LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 October 26, 1994 Mr. Fred J. Simon, Sr. Simon Plaza, Inc. P.O. Box 461 La Quinta, CA 92253 SUBJECT: FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME (PP 93 -495) - APPEAL HEARING Dear Mr. Simon: On October 18, 1994, the City Council continued discussion on your case to their meeting of December 6, 1994, based on your written request. The future meeting will be held in the City Hall Council Chamber at 7:00 p.m. A copy of the report will be mailed to your attention on or before December 2, 1994. To date, your project has been continued by the City "Council on four different occasions in the last six months. We no longer have any more copies of your development plan to give to the City Council for their December 6th meeting. In order for your project to be reviewed at the meeting, please submit ten (10) copies of the approved drawings to our office by November 18, 1994. The plans will. be given to each City Council member as part of their packet on December 2nd. Should you have any questions concerning the above information, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, JERRY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR W GAEq'TXOUSDELL Associate Planner GT: kaf c: Mr. Gilbert F. Smith, Pomona First Federal MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 October 12, 1994 Mr. Jerry Herman Planning Director City of La Quinta 78 -495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Plot Plan 93 -495 Dear Mr. Herman: 01 Ito POC 14 1994 CITY OF LA QUINTA- PLANNING OEPARTMENT We hereby respectfully request a continuance for consideration of our Plot Plan until the December 6, 1994 meeting. The. reason. for this request is that we are having some difficulty negotiating an agreeme t with Pomona Firs Federal who has been a co- applicant in this matter. T e continuance will give us sufficient time resolve ese difficulties so we can proceed with the project. Your consideration of this request is greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, SIMON PLAZA, INC. re n, S Ch an of the Board P.O. BOX 461, 78 -611 HWY. 111, LA QUINTA, CA 92253 • PH.: 619/773 -2345 • FAX: 619/568 -4567 MAY -25 -199-1 16: S.- =FOM EANBOR -1 WFFF• cr September 27, 1991 Mr. Fred Simon Simon Motors P.O. Box 1461 La Quinta, Ca, 92253 -1461 Dear Fred: TO 564`-389 P , 0, 91 -224 Attached is a copy of the hydrology study prepared for the Simon Plaza site. We have submitted two copies of the report to Jerry Herman at the City. The Simon Plaza is a small part (5± Ac.) of the total drainage area (154 ±A•c). Ibere currently exists a sump condition along Washington Street from Highway 111 southerly from the Simon Plaza site approximately 1500± feet. Thu condition should be viewed as a regional drainaage concern since it is a result run. -off fiam the development and mountains which lie to the west as well as the undeveloped land saitherly and easterly of the Simon site. None of the developed parcels were designed to retain any nlmofE A, conservative estimate of the water shed tributary to the Washiogton Street sump is 150± acres. Based upon the amount of runoff generated by the Shnon Plaza site as it relates to the over all area we estimate that the Simon Plaza site will contribute 2910 of the total runoff We would recommend that Simon Plaza make a commitment to participate in the amount of 2% for the cost of the installation of a regional storm drain. With the pending development in the areas and the ongoing sump problem we feel the City should commence with the design and construction of a suitable storm, drain system If you have any questions, please call- Sincerely, S RN B, INC. Sanborn JLS:Im End. 1a\DATA`"DATA\91- WO \=4itM -W 255 N. El Cie to Road - Suito 315 Palm Springs, California 99162 • {619} 325.2245 - (6:9) 325 -9Ln • PAx ;6191'25.5 tap 27 U SA1h0RN, WF88 r..N'� , 91 -224 Attached is a copy of the hydrology study prepared for the Simon Plaza site. We have submitted two copies of the report to Jerry Herman at the City. The Simon Plaza is a small part (5± Ac.) of the total drainage area (154 ±A•c). Ibere currently exists a sump condition along Washington Street from Highway 111 southerly from the Simon Plaza site approximately 1500± feet. Thu condition should be viewed as a regional drainaage concern since it is a result run. -off fiam the development and mountains which lie to the west as well as the undeveloped land saitherly and easterly of the Simon site. None of the developed parcels were designed to retain any nlmofE A, conservative estimate of the water shed tributary to the Washiogton Street sump is 150± acres. Based upon the amount of runoff generated by the Shnon Plaza site as it relates to the over all area we estimate that the Simon Plaza site will contribute 2910 of the total runoff We would recommend that Simon Plaza make a commitment to participate in the amount of 2% for the cost of the installation of a regional storm drain. With the pending development in the areas and the ongoing sump problem we feel the City should commence with the design and construction of a suitable storm, drain system If you have any questions, please call- Sincerely, S RN B, INC. Sanborn JLS:Im End. 1a\DATA`"DATA\91- WO \=4itM -W 255 N. El Cie to Road - Suito 315 Palm Springs, California 99162 • {619} 325.2245 - (6:9) 325 -9Ln • PAx ;6191'25.5 tap 27 _ 95P . " 414 Q�� � 11� 78 -095 CALLE TAMPICO — LA GIUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 September 23, 1994 Mr. Fred J. Simon, Sr. Simon Plaza, Inc. P.O. Box 461 La Quinta, CA 92253 SUBJECT: FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME (PP 93 -495) - APPEAL HEARING Dear Mr. Simon: On September 20, 1994, the City Council continued discussion on your case to their meeting of October. 18, 1994, based on your written request. The future meeting will be held in the City Hall Council Chamber at 7:00 p.m. A copy of the report will be mailed to your attention on or before October 14, 1994. Should you have any questions concerning the above information, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, Y L��IITMAN M Y DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR GREC'TROUSDELL Associate Planner GT: kaf c: Mr. Gilbert F. Smith, Pomona First Federal nmt.26a ODA MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 10 Pomona First Federal Savings and Loan Association Since 1892 City of La Quinta Mr. JERRY HERMAN 78 -495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mr. Herman: September 23 SEP 2 61994 D toil f r of LA GUfk P!�l""'NC DUAHTMENT Subject: Parcel 6 of Parcel Map 18418; Hwy 111 and Washington; PP 93 -495 It was a pleasure meeting with you yesterday to discuss Pomona First Federal's concerns regarding proposed dedications of the subject parcel to the City. As we discussed, Pomona First Federal had an agreement to sell the parcel until the additional 10' dedication came to light. I still find it difficult to understand how the City can propose to require this additional dedication when the landowner whose property will be taken has not been notified. In any event, we expect to proceed with the proposed Buyer to seek a variance from the 20' setback requirement in an effort to ameliorate the adverse effect of the additional taking. If successful, this effort should eliminate the need for pursuing other avenues of redress. This will confirm for you Pomona First Federal's position with regard to the Simon Plaza project. We do not object to any extensions granted on their application for Plot Plan Approval, nor to the Plot Plan itself. However, this non - objection should not be taken as any type of authorization for the Simon applicant(s) to speak on behalf of Pomona First Federal. Pomona First Federal has no agreement with Simon regarding the property and Simon has absolutely no rights to the property. As reflected by our listing the property for sale, we are proceeding independently to dispose of our parcel. We would appreciate any efforts you take to notify Pomona First Federal of any matters relating to our parcel, even it they are not matters to which we are entitled to notice as a matter of law. Any such notice can be directed to me at the address indicated below. Thank you again for taking the time to discuss this situation with us. We appreciate your cooperation and assistance. Post -It"' brand fax transmittal memo 7671 # of pages ► To ( lg C . i ' b'� //`� / ' From Q N �% Co. 1' Co. Dept. Phone # Fax # _ , r3 ^ , Fax # cc: Shannon, Rinehart, Baxley, Selzer Very truly yours, Robert L. Golish Vice President Senior Counsel Administrative Offices: 350 South Garay Avenue • P.O. Box 1520 - Pomona, California 91769 • (714) 623 -2323 • (213) 625 -7666 - (818) 964 -7800 • (714) 972 -0521 City of La Quinta 78 -495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 September 8, 1994 D S E P 0 iS94 ITV OF LA OUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT ATTN: Mr. Jerry Herman, Director of Planning & Development RE: Plot Plan 93 -495 Dear Mr. Herman: We respectfully request a continuance of our Public Hearing Item, related to Simon Plazaj to October 18, 1994. This continuance is due to information that is presently forthcoming from the City Engineering Department to Simon Plaza's engineers, Sanborn and Webb. The time requested will allow our engineers to adequately deal with new issues that have been raised related to storm -water evacuation at the southside of Highway 111 and Washington Street. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Very truly yours, SIMON PLAZA, INC. Fred JXlmon;, Sr. Chairm he Board P.O. BOX 461, 78 -611 HWY. 111, LA OUINTA, CA 92253 • PH.: 619/773 -2345 • FAX: 619/568 -4567 C] T4t�r . 4 4aQ" 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO — LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 September 1, 1994 Mr. Fred J. Simon Simon Plaza, Inc. P. O. Box 461 La Quinta, CA 92253 SUBJECT: PLOT PLAN 93 -495 Dear Mr. Simon: The City Council continued consideration of your appeal of Planning Commission conditions regarding your plot plan until September 20, 1994; this extension was granted in order to allow time for the City and Redevelopment Agency staff to analyze and possibly negotiate redevelopment assistance towards the cost of off -site improvements. On June 29, 1994, I transmitted correspondence requesting specific information to facilitate the evaluation of project assistance needs; to date, we have not received this or any other. information from you. City and Agency staff need at least ten days from the receipt of information in order to evaluate the data, discuss these items with your organization, and formulate a recommendation for City. Council consideration. If we do not receive the information requested in the June 29, 1994 correspondence by September 6th, we will be left in the unfortunate position of informing the City Council that the information has not been received. Therefore, the Council cannot consider your funding request for assistance relating to your project. The City Council may, at their discretion, take action on your appeal request on September 20, 1994. Please contact me at (619) 777 -7125 if you should have any questions regarding this item. Very truly yours, JRR 1�� HE Planning & Development Director JH:bjs c: City Manager City Attorney Mr. Mark Moran MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 a LTRJH.392 Tiht 4 4a Qam& 'It - E� 90PO 78-495 CALLS TAMPICO — LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 August 4, 1994 Mr. Fred J. Simon, Sr. Simon Plaza, Inc. P.O. Box 461 La Quinta, CA 92253 SUBJECT: FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME (PP 93 -495) - APPEAL HEARING Dear Mr. Simon: On August 2, 1994, the City Council continued discussion on your case to their meeting of September 20, 1994, based on your written request. The future meeting will be held in the City Hall Council Chamber at 7: 00 p. m. A copy of the report will be mailed to your attention on or before September 16, 1994. Should you have any questions concerning the above information, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Very 1ruly yours, l RMAN T DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR a USDELL Planner GT:kaf c: Mr. Gilbert F. Smith, Pomona First Federal MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 1tr9t.264 July 12, 1994 Mr. Jerry Herman, Director Planning Department City of La Quinta La Quinta, Ca. 92253 RE: Plot Plan 93 -495 Mr. Herman: As per your telephone conversation with Mark Moran on this date, we are requesting that our scheduled appearence before the City Council on August 2 be moved to the September 20 meeting of the City Council. This delay in our appeal will give Mark Moran and myself time to meet with City Staff and prepare the information that the City and Simon Plaza will need related to the issues that were brought by our appeal. I appreciate your kind consideration and I look forward to meeting with you regarding our project in the near future. Sincerely, SIMON PLAZA V INC. --4 ed J. imo=Board airma of P.O. BOX 461, 78 -611 HWY. 111, LA QUINTA, CA 92253 • PH.: 6191773 -2345 • FAX: 619/568 -4567 r r , ,0 9 T-&f 4 4a Q" June 29, 1994 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO - LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 Mr. Fred J. Simon, Sr. Simon Plaza, Inc. P. O. Box 461 La Quinta, CA 92253 SUBJECT: PLOT PLAN 93 -495 Dear Mr. Simon: The City Council has continued consideration of your request for an extension of your plot plan in order to allow time for the City and Redevelopment Agency staff to analyze and possibly negotiate a specific request to provide assistance towards the cost of the off -site public improvements for which your project is conditioned. The appropriate vehicle for consideration of such participation is either a Development Agreement with the City or an Owner Participation with the Agency. We recommend the Owner Participation Agreement approach for format purposes. In order to evaluate the project and potential Agency assistance needs, we request that you provide the following project information. 1. Development and operating pro formas which detail: a. Development costs including: 1). . Professional fees. (architecture, engineers, etc). 2). Development management fees 3). City and other permit fees 4). Insurance costs 5). Financing costs 6). Building construction costs 7). On -site and off -site infrastructure costs 8). Site improvement costs 9). Projected tenant improvement costs b. Projected construction and lease -up schedule, a listing of tenant commitment letters or letters of intent, and tenant mix. C. Operating costs. d. Projected pad sale and /or tenant lease revenue. e. Anticipated vacancy factor f. Projected operating and maintenance costs 2. Agency assistance needs and the reasons or need for the assistance. tTRrx.330 MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 3f..� if The requested information should be submitted by July 14, 1994. In order to permit Agency staff and our consultant to analyze your proposal and identify potential Agency assistance needs prior to the City Council meeting on August 2, 1994. In the interim, if you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (619) 777 -7125. Sincerely, JERRY HERMAN Planning & Development Director JH:bjs c: City Council City Manager Frank Spevacek LTRJH.330 `r �f r � . _. __... .... .� .. � ib. t f 1. 4 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO — LA GIUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 June 22, 1994 Mr. Fred J. Simon, Sr. Simon Plaza, Inc. P. O. Box 461 La Quinta, CA 92253 SUBJECT: FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME (PP 93 -495) Dear Mr. Simon: On June 21, 1994, the City Council continued discussion on your case to their meeting of August 2, 1994, based on your written request. The future meeting will be held in the City Hall Council Chamber at 7:00 P.M. A copy of the report will be mailed to your attention on or before July 29th. Should you have any questions concerning the above information, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, JERRY & DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR _�G ROUSDELL Associate Planner GT:bjs c: Mr. Gilbert F. Smith, Pomona First Federal MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 Tl� LTRGT.146 �' � .'� `p ~ ` , ,- �a June 21, 1 9 9 4 F., w I ITY OF LA �UIId1A PIAtdNI{�G DEPARTi�EidT Honorable John Pena, Mayor La Quinta City Council La Quinta, Calif. 92253 Honorable Mayor Pena: Re: Continuation of Appeal and Public Hearing °_ "on Plot Plan No. 93 -495. At the request of the City Manager and with our concurrence, I am asking that the Appeal of the Planning Commission on Plot Plan 93 -495 be granted. to allow the City and Simon Plaza to negotiate an Owner Participation Agreement. I am requesting that the Hearing date be moved to August 2,_ 1994 to allow sufficient time fot Staff and Simon Plaza to negotiate the issues raised in the appeal. I wish to thank the Mayor and City Council in advance for there kind consideration. Sincerely yours, v PedPLAZA, INC. Simon, S . n of the Board P.O. BOX 461, 78 -611 HWY. 111, LA OUINTA, CA 92253 • PH,: 619/773 -2345 • FAX: 619/5684567 1 9 ;I Pomona First Fe era Savings and loan Association Since 1892 May 19, 1994 Via Fax: (619) 777 -71 City of La Quinta Mr. Jerry Herman 78 -495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mr. Herman: 'U'�a`.tY�...r_ ?La::xc3li�c• @ E MAY 2 3 1994 4� 61 6T!� cC� {::xc��t7re�, i 11 1tl 61 {i�.t� L'.�a iyi� i6 y y r Subject: Planning Commission Hearing May 24, 1994 Regarding Plot Plan 93 -495 Pomona First Federal would like to go on record expressing its support for the one year extension requested by Simon Plaza, Inc. on Plot Plan 93 -495. Please call should you have any questions. Very truly yours, POMONA FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION Gilbert F. Smith Senior Vice President General Counsel GFS : dmn -.p .. . ; :: -... .. � cf:. .. .. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Jerry Herman, Planning Director Steve Speer, Senior Engineer April 29, 1994 Plot Plan 93 -495, Simon Plaza PuNNINO 4F,411-i'Sq. ------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- In response to your request for comments for a time extension for the subject project, please be advised of the following: The Engineering Department has prepared concept drawings for the widening of Washington Street in the vicinity of the Simon Plaza project. The new concept for this area will require a different right -of -way take from the Simon Plaza project. It will not be known whether the Council desires to go with the proposed new concept until it is presented at the May 17 Council meeting. If possible, it is recommended that the subject time extension not be considered until it is known whether the Council desires to modify the Washington Street Specific Plan in favor of the new street widening concept for that area. /ld c: Public Works Director .._ x .. i FCC::; =F�! � s. � .� � 'i t�' :.: -.��' Y is FCC::; =F�! � s. � .� � 'i t�' :.: -.��' 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO — LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 777 -7000 FAX (619) 777 -7101 April 28, 1994 Mr. Paul T. Selzer, Attorney Best, Best & Krieger P.O. Box 2710 Palm Springs, CA 92263 SUBJECT: 1ST TIME EXTENSION FOR PLOT PLAN 93 -495 - (REVISED) - SIMON PLAZA Dear Mr. Selzer: Your time extension request has been scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting of May 24, 1994. The meeting will be held in the City Council Chamber at 7:00 p.m. A copy of the Planning Commission report will be mailed to your attention on May 20, 1994. Your attendance at the meeting is recommended in case any questions arise concerning the merits of the project. In order to complete your time extension request application, please submit ten(10) copies of the approved drawings to our office by May 13, 1994. The plans will be given to each Planning Commission member as part of their packet on May 20th, and the extra plans will be given to the City Council for their future meeting in June. Should have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, RY RMAN NN AND DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR f4Wa'T-HOUSDELL Associate Planner c: Fred J. Simon, Sr. Gilbert F. Smith - Merlin J. Barth MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX' 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 LTRGT.220 BEST, BEST & KRIEGER A PARTN[ROMP INCLUDING PROF99SIONAL CORPORATIONS LAWYERS ARTHUR L. LITTLEWORTH' WYNNE 8 FURTH JANI CE L. WEIS GLEN E. STEPHENS' GENE TANAKA PATRICK H.W.F. PEARCE WILLIAM R. D[WOLFE' DA51L T. CHAPMAN KIRK W. SMITH BARTON C. GAUT' TIMOTHY M. CONNOR JASON D. DABAREINER PAUL T. SELZER- VICTOR L. WOLF KYLE A. SNOW DALLAS HOLMES. DANIEL E. OLIVIER MARK A. EASTER CHRISTOPHER L. CARPENTER' HOWARD B. GOLDS DIANE L. FINLEY RICHARD T. ANDERSON' STEPHEN P. DEITSCH MICHELLE OUELLETTE JOHN D. WAHLIN' MARC E. EMPEY DAVID P. PHIPPEN, SR. MICHAEL D. HARRIS' JOHN R. ROTTSCHAEFER SUSAN C. NAUSS W. CURT EALY' MARTIN A. MUELLER CHRISTOPHER T. DODSON JOHN E. BROWN' J. MICHAEL SUMMEROUR BERNIE L. WILLIAMSON MICHAEL T. RIDDELL- VICTORIA N. KING KEVIN K. RANDOLPH MEREDITH A. JURY' SCOTT C. SMITH JAMES B. GILPIN MICHAEL GRANT' JACK S. CLARKE. JR. MARSHALL S. RUDOLPH FRANCIS J. BAUM BRIAN M. LEWIS KIM A. BYRENS ANNE T. THOMAS' BRADLEY E. NEUFELO CYNTHIA M. GERMANO D. MARTIN NETHERY' SHARYL WALKER MARY E. GILSTRAP GEORGE M. REYES PETER M. BARMACK GLENN P. SABINE WILLIAM W. FLOYD. JR. JEANNETTE A. PETERSON PHILIP J. KOEHLER GREGORY L. HARDKE ELISE K. TRAYNUM DIANE C. BLASDEL KENDALL H. MACVEY WILLIAM O. DAHLING, JR. REBECCA MARES DURNEY CLARK H. ALSOP MATT H. MORRIS DOROTHY 1. ANDERSON DAVID J. ERWIN' JEFFREY V. DUNN O. HENRY WELLES MICHAEL J. ANOELSON' STEVEN C. D[BAUN JAMES R. HARPER DOUGLAS S. PHILLIPS' ERIC L. GARNER DINA O. HARRIS ANTONIA GRAPHOS DENNIS M. COTA BARBARA R. BARON GREGORY K. WIKLINSON ROBERT W. HARGREAVES RICHARD T. EGGER ' A PROF[IIIDIONAL CORPORATION Mr. Jerry Herman City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 PATRICK D. DOLAN DEAN R. DERLETH HELENE P. DREYER EMILY P. HEMPHILL SONIA RUBIO SHARMA JOHN O. PINKNEY DEARING D. ENGLISH THEODORE J. GRISWOLD JULIANN ANDERSON JEFFREY R. THORPE LORA H. WILSON PATRICIA BYARS CISNEROS JACOUELINE E. BAILEY MARK D. BECKER RAYMOND BEST (1868-1957) JAMES H. KRIEGER (1913.1975) EUGENE BEST (1893 -1981) April 18, 1994 Re: Plat Plan 93 -495 Simon Plaza, Inc. Dear Mr. Herman: BOO EAST TAHOUIT2 CANYON WAY POST OFFICE BOX 2710 PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 92283 TELEPHONE (819) 326-7264 TELECOPIER (619) 325 -0368 OF COUNSEL JAMES S. CORISON C. MICHAEL COWETT BRUCE W. BEACH ARLENE PRATER JOHN C. TOBIN OFFICES IN RIVERSIDE (909) 006-1450 RANCHO MIRAGE (819) 568 -2611 ONTARIO (909) 069-8584 SAN DIEGO (619) 595.1333 APR 19 9994 Pursuant to my letter of April 7, 1994 regarding the above subject matter, enclosed please find two sets of gummed labels addressed to property owners within 300 feet of the specific planned site. If any additional information is required in order to perfect our request for the one year extension, please contact me immediately. Again, thank you for your assistance in this matter. PTS /sk Enclosures CC: Fred J. Simon, Sr, PTS47178 Yours very truly, BEST, BEST & KRIEGER f--1 T. S r • A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION April ?, 1994 Mr. Jerry Herman City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Plat Plan 93 -495 Dear Mr. Herman: k 0 7 1994 LA QUINTA DEPARTMENT As you are aware, this office represents Simon Plaza, Inc., the developers of the 5.6 acre site located on the southeast corner of Hwy. 111 and Washington Street, which is the subject of the above mentioned plat plan. I have been authorized and directed by my client to respectfully request that pursuant to Condition No. 2 of the Conditions of Approval that the City consider a one year time extension of the plat plan until May 11, 1995. As you are aware, my client was prepared to proceed with the development of the project as previously approved. However, when the Conditions of Approval and site design and density changed last year, our financing source refused to proceed. Since that time, we have been unable to replace our financing source although we are diligently pursuing that matter and hope that within a reasonable period of time to proceed. In that connection, Condition No. 36 which has been amended on several occasions, requires the dedication of the Washington Street right -of -way. As we have previously explained, we cannot provide that dedication until we are able to complete our purchase of the Pomona First Federal Savings & Loan parcel. Without financing, that has proved impossible to do. It is our understanding that the matter of this Condition is currently scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting of April 12, 1994. PTS46931 BEST, BEST & KRIEGER A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS LAWYERS ARTHUR L. LITTLEWORTH• WYNNE S. FURTH JANICE L. WEIS PATRICK D. DOLAN 600 EAST TAHOUITZ CANYON WAY GLEN E. STEPHENS- GENE TANAKA PATRICK H.W.F. PEARCE DEAN R. DERLETH POST OFFICE BOX 2710 WILLIAM R. DEWOLFE• BARTON C. GAUT• BASIL T. CHAPMAN TIMOTHY M. CONNOR KIRK W. SMITH JASON D. DABAREINER HELENE P. DREYER EMILY P. HEMPHILL PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 92263 PAUL T. SELZER- VICTOR L. WOLF KYLE A. SNOW SONIA RUBIO SHARMA TELEPHONE (619) 326 -7264 DALLAS HOLMES- CHRISTOPHER L. CARPENTER- DANIEL E. OLIVIER HOWARD B. GOLDS MARK A. EASTER DIANE L. FINLEY JOHN O. PINKNEY DEARING D. ENGLISH TELEC OPIER (619) 328-0365 RICHARD T. ANDERSON- STEPHEN P. DEITSCH MICHELLE OUELLETTE THEODORE J. GRISWOLD JOHN D. WA HLIN• MARC E. EMPEY DAVID P. PHIPPEN, SR. JULIANN ANDERSON MICHAEL D. HARRIS- JOHN R. ROTTSCHAEFER SUSAN C. NAUSS JEFFREY R. THORPE W. CURT EALY• MARTIN A. MUELLER CHRISTOPHER T. DODSON LORA H. WILSON JOHN E. BROWN- J. MICHAEL SUMMEROUR BERNIE L. WILLIAMSON PATRICIA BYARS CISNEROS OF COUNSEL MICHAEL T. RIDDELL• VICTORIA N. KING KEVIN K. RANDOLPH JACOUELINE E. BAILEY JAMES B. CORISON MEREDITH A' JURY- SCOTT C. SMITH JAMES B. GILPIN MARK D. BECKER C. MICHAEL COWETT MICHAEL GRANT- JACK B. CLARKE. JR. MARSHALL S. RUDOLPH BRUCE W. BEACH FRANCIS J. BAUM. BRIAN M. LEWIS KIM A. BYRENS ARLENE PRATER ANNE T. THOMAS- BRADLEY E. NEUFELD CYNTHIA M. GERMANO JOHN C. TOBIN D. MARTIN NETHERY• SHARYL WALKER MARY E. GILSTRAP GEORGE M. REYES PETER M. BARMACK GLENN P. SABINE WILLIAM W. FLOYD, JR. JEANNETTE A. PETERSON PHILIP J. KOEHLER GREGORY L. HARDKE ELISE K. TRAYNUM DIANE C. BLASDEL KENDALL H. MACVEY WILLIAM D. DAHLING, JR. REBECCA MARES GURNEY OFFICES IN CLARK H. ALSOP DAVID J. ERWIN• MATT H. MORRIS JEFFREY V. DUNN DOROTHY I. ANDERSON G. HENRY WELLE3 RIVERSIDE (BOB) 666-1450 MICHAEL J. ANDELSON• STEVEN C. DEBAUN JAMES R. HARPER RANCHO MIRAGE (810) 588-2811 DOUGLAS S. PHILLIPS- ERIC L. GARNER DINA O. HARRIS RAYMOND BEST (1868.1957) ONTARIO (BOB) 989-8584 ANTONIA GRAPHOS GREGORY K. WIKLINSON DENNIS M. COTA ROBERT W. HARGREAVES BARBARA R. BARON RICHARD T. EGGER JAMES H. KRIEGER (1913-1975) EUGENE BEST (1893-1981) SAN DIEGO (BIB) 585-1333 • A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION April ?, 1994 Mr. Jerry Herman City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Plat Plan 93 -495 Dear Mr. Herman: k 0 7 1994 LA QUINTA DEPARTMENT As you are aware, this office represents Simon Plaza, Inc., the developers of the 5.6 acre site located on the southeast corner of Hwy. 111 and Washington Street, which is the subject of the above mentioned plat plan. I have been authorized and directed by my client to respectfully request that pursuant to Condition No. 2 of the Conditions of Approval that the City consider a one year time extension of the plat plan until May 11, 1995. As you are aware, my client was prepared to proceed with the development of the project as previously approved. However, when the Conditions of Approval and site design and density changed last year, our financing source refused to proceed. Since that time, we have been unable to replace our financing source although we are diligently pursuing that matter and hope that within a reasonable period of time to proceed. In that connection, Condition No. 36 which has been amended on several occasions, requires the dedication of the Washington Street right -of -way. As we have previously explained, we cannot provide that dedication until we are able to complete our purchase of the Pomona First Federal Savings & Loan parcel. Without financing, that has proved impossible to do. It is our understanding that the matter of this Condition is currently scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting of April 12, 1994. PTS46931 �. W ; . a.. ;. .�� � �, , LAW OFFICES OF BEST, BEST & KRIEGER Mr. Jerry Herman April 7, 1994 Page 2 In view of our request to extend the entire plat plan and each of its conditions, which we assume will require both Planning Commission and City Council public hearings, we would respectfully request that the Planning Commission defer action on our request until the hearing before it on our proposed one year extension. As required by the City Code, enclosed please find our check in the amount of $500.00. In addition, under separate cover, you will shortly received two sets of gummed labels addressed to property owners within 300 feet of the. specific planned site. Finally, you should receive a similar request for this extension from Pomona, directly from it. Thank you for your kind consideration in this matter. If anything further is required in order to perfect our request for the one year extension, please contact me immediately. PTS /sk Enclosures cc: Fred J. Simon, Sr. PTS46931 Yours very truly, BEST, BEST & KRIEGER Paul T. Se zer P, La���•c I .Z ~= ��• -� ` MEMORANDUM OF TNT TO: Bob Hunt, City Manager FROM: Steve Speer, Assistant City Engineer DATE: November 17, 1993 SUBJECT: Highway 111 Widening Project The Transpacific Development Company (Developer of One Eleven La Quinta Center) has reactivated its effort to prepare construction drawings for the Highway 111 widening between Point Happy and Adams Street. In a telephone conversation today, it was pointed out that there are two issues that impact the construction schedule for the Highway 111 widening project. The two issues are: 1) Acquisition of right -of -way from Dr. Tynberg at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. The real issue with this item is acquisition of the right -of -way in an expeditious and friendly manner. Caltrans' right -of -way acquisition rules are stringent and very time consuming. There may be an opportunity to negotiate acquisition of the right -of -way expeditiously and for no cost. This possibility, which involves the proposed traffic signal for Vons, should be discussed and strategized. 2) What type of widening project does the City intend to install on Washington Street? and, when? This issue is dependent on bringing the Simon Plaza right -of -way dedication issue to a conclusion. The Simon Plaza project was holding up the Washington Street project for quite some time. Now, however, it is also holding up the Highway 111 widening project and the delay will soon be into a critical path situation. Simon Plaza has applied for a condition modification regarding its right -of -way dedication deadline. The proposed modification is tentatively scheduled to go to the Planning Commission on December 14. It may be prudent for City staff to recommend a final deadline for the Simon Plaza project to dedicate right -of -way after which time a different set of conditions will apply to the Simon Plaza project. Id cc: Frank Reynolds Jerry- Heiman i i 14�-- EXHIBIT B SCALE 1 30• .�'� \ r a ' ��' ►� �.p Ci A = 02'06'02' �0. INST. NO. R = 2320' L = 85.05' 0,,� S'LY LINE k- 3 DESERT OUTDOOR C2o = 01'45'57' / o ADVERTISING LAND R = 2320.00' 123467 - 9 N ��Q' CAP Z� r��•� tn\ C D = 95'14'01" x� QJ 6 -8 -84 rn (,pq0 \ W R = 45.00' \ L = 74.80' �. P.O.B. N 00'19'36' W 35,86' SW COR. DESERT OUTDOOR 0 ADVERTISING LAND , o tD C3) w T • � iA O N �- ULTIMATE _ c I WASHINGTON STREET N 00"19'36" W 197.51' I f SECTION. LINE BSI Consultants, Inc. 69 --730 HWY. 111. SUM 203 RANCHO MIRACF, CA. 92270 (619) 324 -1111 V. •M�lf. M W1lYM.lT e.YM NOTE: ALL DATA SHOWN HEREON v) CITY OF IA QUINTA IS DERIVED FROM RECORD w 1.0 DENOTES AREA TO BE ACQUIRED ' WASHINGTON STREET RIGHT OF WAY ACQUIS AREA = 2.466 SO. FT-(0.06 ACRES)f DATE DRAWN BY: SHEET 1 OF 1 03/11/92 1 H.W.W. '46 -------------_._.-'- �-----_-_.-_. � .___:...__-- .-- ^-'--^--'--...�. -.. ... __.>_�_. -_�� gym. ----. - .--- �.-•- �r -.R- -- � -•�" -. .- ._-- +� -T -.. �-.-. �.... �•'..- �-- �...- o�--, t-. rt.--...-.-,.-- �-• �•-,.--------...--.-.,,... �,...- r. �r-. �-.-- ,....�.- ..._«..- ���.��-- -.s.,� -"�_- .-_. �-.>--------__. .,_- _.- __..�_�- .._�_,.__., -.--_ _��_�. ---- - ----- - ^+-- --- �.�. --r- -' >�_��.. - -"- -- --- .- .- .�..--�.- •--- t- ---- 4 -r-a -' - .• !W� F F � t`n x�Z n r- �� fir►? Jlfl SNOiSt/�9t� 3 CIO /.3 //V T14E CITY OF LA QVINT4 OF TAIE COUNTY OF )?1VEeS1Z7EO STATE Or CALIFOMM s a0c. TACGEO 1. 9. 4(/414P A'CrArI07AZO T7 '0 v I I O�PAA (2F,4L MAP 0/yo/ a, 94A19 /.go 40 04.0 ISION 0*4C*49W VC / 49*004004 f4WZ 40WOORP AWORAOS 47*4'W' oO91VJ69S1404F C4P41Wr.�O"' CKV le'rORN4q, SIMP94W 1W rMe 4�V..e. i4& 4014C Secrlalv aa, r. 'r s' �*41 F. 7. ej 4 • A& 40. 40 1pr. /Ily dbp -/O,,Y IWOIVVIW� IY7;;97 e.04 - 6'07 '9 r z -a. S7;0. "W.Vay Ael• 6011,f SOX 0/ / �Ys3TSOO 1 "V.O/ Off' �Ww - w ezz. N_ 4 %I HW.Y /Va. "t h yl , "Iw WAV 7w. VV - rT� W, 40 TAGGEO 4 • 47 49. 47 109C. z4mmawr 4amw4yr 14 re lcAeAv4fwlqy .3 IV%4 C0l4• SAC- 90, A40. 49 eeR /%r` V. R /ItF/v 4X4 w Izro,25/89 t 5.4,69 KIN J-W /'V•001 ACo. N v r4 A!2 w IN" A5,VQCAw1_ 7 L Z LD SUR YZ 3 0 "OR S Eve' 175 C.)z OW XFCr14?1V 30 /S ,0"140 'aY rWeCAU1,a"4qR.40V1.,Aq W LOT in /°IyOTO /y1�9i1°' s� /1E� S�" -• ?',�°' `- 3.C7 ` \ \r. oo I��' 3a MOW 00, 0 53w. 019 Rle'mylvx ev, Sw ."a ­,we* sw)', �9 'wo 1W401C.V7.*e%f AclelIVO M4?WVMdr1Vr4P--,oQS ooYO7.'drd7 J%.— /7A471 Vic' 7;96G_-0.Z. X. 414 G A&RAM AO/M As AMN4 Ac.wq. f'W 141 Ao ... ....... A149Nr 40W W.QY 401reAws 40.0 OeVOW s /.00Y 'Ar"VA-14917 'Pir 7;VFAoV1,r".Aroqr5Fr Apap Arm sa ocr jo, /s/i 11yale c, A• I.P44 a.Ar.AwovrrwRr SPEC' aAwle C40 -flVVo*Re, ZZO. AWAO .4r,9,60 X1.00W491Vl"140jr'lOvc'r4a 4 , ,OWAg• Z7 /070 #V S' INXr. #JA?7,fd9 0.A" oP• o?. loll�le .10, IV 6YAe 40 r iii r. 0 rri / CENTER s.Ee. _iw, N\ 7ew 'O/Y L Fi - - — --- i. L Fi - - — ---