1987 12 21 CCi^"?BOF
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
78-105 Calle Estado
La Quinta, California 92253
Adjourned Meeting
December 21, 1987 2:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER Beginning Res. No. 87-62
Ord. No. 120
a. Pledge of Allegiance
b. Roll Call
CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
PUBLIC COMMENT
COMMENT BY COUNCIL MEMBERS
PUBLIC HEARINGS
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
BUSINESS SESSION
1. Continued Consideration of General Plan Amendment No. 86-016
Meisterlin.
a) Report of Planning Director.
b) Resolution Action.
2. Acceptance of the Notice of Decision by the Planning Commission
Regarding Variance No. 87-005 Applicant: Rick Johnson!
Parkside Plaza.
a) Report of Planning Director.
b) Minute Order Action.
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?BIC
3. Report Regarding Application of Rocco & Colleen Balsamo for Home
Occupation Permit to Operate a Limousine Service.
a) Report of Planning Director.
b)
CONSENT CALENDAR
4. Acceptance of Report of Action by Planning Commission for Plot
Plan No. 87-375 Amendment No. 1 Applicant: La Quinta Arts
Foundation/Tom Thornburg.
5. Adoption of Resolution Establishing No Parking on Certain Streets
During the Bob Hope Desert Classic.
6. Award of Bid for Washington and Avenue 50 Traffic Signal to Low
Bidder Signal Maintenance Inc. in the Amount of $69,902.00.
7. Award of Bid for Washington and Avenue 50 Street Improvements to
Low Bidder Matich Corporation in the Amount of $94,383.00.
8. Rejection of Claim of Ray Greene.
9. Approval of Minutes of December 1, 1987 & December 15, 1987.
10. Approval of Demand Register.
11. Acceptance of Tree Trimming Project. Informational Only)
12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 119 re: Approval Procedures for
Multi-Family Residential Projects.
Roll Call)
COMMISSION/COMMITTEE REPORTS
a. Receipt of Planning Commission Minutes of 11/24/87
and 12/8/87.
b. Receipt of Community Service Commission Minutes of 11/30/87.
ADJOURNMENT
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTICE OF UPCOMING COUNCIL/COMMISSION MEETINGS
January 4, 1987 CC Study Session 3:00 P.M.
January 5, 1987 CC Regular Meeting 7:30 P.M.
January 7, 1987 Mayor's Breakfast 7:00 A.M.
January 11, 1987 PC Study Session 3:00 P.M.
January 12, 1987 PC Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M.
January 18, 1987 CC Study Session 3:00 P.M.
January 19, 1987 CC Regular Meeting 7:30 P.M.
January 25, 1987 PC Study Session 3:00 P.M.
January 25, 1987 CSC Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M.
January 26, 1987 PC Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M.
CC City Council
PC Planning Commission
CSC Community Services Commission
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, Saundra L. Juhola, City Clerk of the City of La Quinta do hereby
declare that the foregoing agenda for the City Council Meeting of
December 21, 1987 was posted on the outside entry to the Council
Chamber, 78-105 Calle Estado and on the bulletin board at the La
Quinta Post Office on Friday, December 18, 1987.
ifi: December 18, 1987.
SAUNDRA L. JUHOLA, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B MEMORANDUM
CITY OF LA QUINTA
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: DECEMBER 21, 1987
SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION ON VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN JOINT
STUDY SESSION WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION
BACKGROUND
On November 24, 1987, the City Planning Commission acted to
forward their recommendation to the City Council on a Specific
Plan for the area identified as Village Commercial" land use,
within the adopted General Plan. The Planning Commission
received an initial joint Council-Commission draft plan
presentation on October 27, 1987, followed by a Public Hearing
on November 10, 1987, and continued Public Hearing on November
24, 1987.
At the City Council's request, a joint Study Session is being
provided so that the Council may gain a more definitive insight
into the action of the Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The Planning Commission, in their discussion of the draft Plan,
identified items which they wished to highlight and underscore
as important concepts, areas that might be appropriate for
further evaluation, and particular changes or additions to the
draft which they concurred to recommend to the City Council.
These matters are summarized and forwarded to the City Council
for its deliberation:
The Commission underscored the need to retain existing
foliage, as presently noted in the draft text reference to
the eucalyptus along Calle Cadiz and Barcelona, and the
palm trees which ring the park site.
MR/MEMOMC.019 1
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B* Further study of Avenida Bermudas in terms of a more
specific design theme, incorporation of landscape median
islands, etc., was recommended to be included in the Plan.
Discussion concerned a treatment along Bermudas more
specific than has been delineated in the draft, addressing
median islands, change of paving materials in the
pedestrian crosswalks and perhaps in the intersections.
There was general concurrence that the right-of-way width
for Avenida Bermudas between Tampico and Avenue 52 could be
reduced from 88 feet to 64 feet, allowing for wider
intersection YIbulbsIt as necessary to accommodate turn
lanes. Additional precising and technical evaluation
should follow to determine feasibility vis-a-vis
anticipated traffic volumes and circulation patterns within
the village.)
* Additional attention to a design theme and design elements
was mentioned with regard to the other streets in the
village Plan. The Commission expressed its pleasure with
the detailing of Estado and La Fonda and looked to see
elements of that approach repeated elsewhere. The
particular areas the Commission pointed to for enhancement
were:
The parking lot on the south leg of Montezuma.
The rear street/alley parking areas on both sides of
the park site; specifically, the parking areas
adjacent to the residential district south of the
park recommended as a plan policy).
The entrance way to alleys i.e., behind Estado and
La Fonda), to be enhanced with special paving
texture, landscape features/design features).
The Commission concurred with the use of tree
planting themes within each of the district areas,
but information was communicated regarding local
availability of the prospsis gladiolus, with a
suggestion that it be eliminated from the listing.
Supplies of this tree species may improve over time,
therefore, it could be retained in the listing.)
The Commission recommended that Avenida Estado and La
Fonda be implemented 1*now", and build other
improvements around those streets.
The suggestion was advanced that key facilities or
areas in proximity to the village should be developed
in sympathy to the design objectives stated in the
plan. Specific reference was made to the Civic
Center site.
MR/MEMOMC. O'19 2
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?BReferring to the above noted items and discussion, the Planning
Commission recommended to the City Council approval of the
Specific Plan as revised), by a 4-1 vote.
In response to a letter dated November 25, 1987, from the La
Quinta Chamber of Commerce, village at La Quinta Specific Plan
Committee, the Commission asked the minutes to reflect a
consensus that the idea proposed to form a committee to examine
implementation of the adopted project is an excellent idea.
The letter had suggested that the Plan be sent to a committee
prior to adoption the Commission believed the committee
referral to be appropriate, but after there was an adopted
policy framework, to investigate implementation strategies and
costs.)
COUNCIL DELIBERATIONS
The first formal Public Hearing before the City Council will be
scheduled on January 19, 1988. Staff will be available to
provide any information the Council may require as a result of
the joint session, or in preparation for the formal hearing.
MR/MEMOMC.O19 3 j
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B I
MEMORANDUM D**7
CI*of la quinta A*** * D
*G:*- *
DATE****
AGENDA ITL-M *
To: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF C*+t* *
FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: DECEMBER 1, 1987
SUBJECT: GPA 86-016, STATUS REPORT
APPLICANT C. W. MEISTERLIN)
BACKGROUND
The City Council first considered the subject application at their
8/4/87 meeting, forwarded with a recommendation of denial from the
Planning Commission. It was the consensus of the Council that the
Applicant be allowed time to prepare a formal development application
with additional information which would be useful in determining the
viability of the concept now displayed. The Hearing was continued to
December 1, 1987, to allow this to occur.
CURRENT STATUS
As of 10/30/87, the Applicant has submitted the following
applications and information:
1. change of Zone Application *87-027; from R-1 and R-2-8000.
2. Specific Plan *87-010; consisting of a report with
conceptual exhibits and separate market analyses for the
apartment use and congregate care facilities.
3. A completed environmental information form.
The application has been determined incomplete at this time; a letter
dated November 25 has been directed to the applicant requesting the
following information:
Change of Zone:
ZONE CHANGE Providing of an 8 1/2 X 11 format exhibit, delineating
EXHIBIT nature of the request, existing and proposed zoning
designations on-site and surrounding the property in
question, and showing property dimensions, adjacent
streets and right-of-ways, and other pertinent
information.
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?BPROPERTY The submittal application form, signed by Mr. Carl
OWNER Meisterlin as both applicant and owner, refers to an
Authorization attached letter see attached application copy), but no
letter has been found in the submittal.
CORRECTED Application does not reflect ownership as shown in the
OWNERSHIP submitted title report dated December 6, 1984. A
INFORMATION current report or other reasonably acceptable data is
needed to show the appropriate legal vesting.
Specific Plan:
LEVEL OF The content of the Specific Plan is such that it locks
SPECIFICITY itself into a specific concept, yet remains undefined
in that it does not specify, or propose, building,
architecture or setback standards, street right of way
standards, etc. This implies to Staff that additional
development reviews, such as parcel maps, plot plans,
etc., will be necessary to implement the proposed
specific plan. The applicant should specify the intent
of the specific plan with regards to the level of
detail submitted. At this time the plan is viewed as
conceptual; this assessment needs to be verified and/or
supplemental descriptions provided by the applicant.
PRO-FORMA As identified in the letter of 10/30/87 to the
MISSING Applicant, a pro-forms11 analysis of the proposal
regarding it's projected economic performance was
requested by Council. This was immediately identified
as missing from their application; therefore, the
attached letter was sent. Prior to the completeness
determination to date, this item is still outstanding.
Upon verification of a completed application package, the Planning
and Development Department would proceed with processing.
COUNCIL ACTION ON GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
It is the option of the City Council as to whether an additional
continuance is granted, to perfect the application package, or
whether the Council is ready to take action on the General Plan
Amendment as proposed. Some further discussion with the Applicant
may be appropriate.
Obvious alternatives for Council action on the amendment would
include:
* Approval of the amendment as originally proposed by the
Applicant;
* Denial of the amendment as recommended by the Planning
Commission;
memown. 112
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B * Tabling the matter pending a Change of Zone and Specific
Plan application reaching the Council hearing level.
Zn any case, the confusion concerning the owner of the property
should be resolved, before an action is taken.
Attachments:
Copy of Change of Zone Application
Copy of 10/3/87 letter to Applicant
cc: GPA 86-016 File
CZ 87-027 File
SP 87-010 File
inemown. 112
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?
B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B DATE *G*IT*M#*
REPORT OF
APPRO\'ED D*N?ED
PLANNING COMMISSION Action Continued TO
DATE: DECEMBER 21, 1987
APPLICANT: RICK JOHNSON Construction-parkside PLAZA
PROJECT
LOCATION: 77-836 AVENIDA MONTEZUMA
PROJECT
PROPOSAL: VARIANCE *B7-005 REDUCE NUMBER OF ON-SITE
PARKING SPACES REQUIRED FOR PROPOSED ADDITION
CHAPTER 9.160 LQMC).
ZONING
DESIGNATION: SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL C-P-S ZONE)
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS: PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
BACKGROUND.
On October 13, 1987, the Applicant's request Plot Plan *87-383)
to enclose the existing covered walking area to be used as a
walkway/pedestrian corridor was approved subject to conditions
attached).
During discussion of the plot plan request, the Applicant
indicated that, should the area be used for office/retail space,
the parking requirements could then be addressed.
The Applicant appeared before the Commission on December 8,
1987, seeking a parking variance. The enclosure consists of 360
square feet for retail use, 208 square feet for office use, and
198 square feet for public corridor. This additional area
generated the need for three additional parking spaces, or a
total of 15 parking spaces for the existing building and
proposed addition. The site currently provides 12 parking
spaces.
ANALYSIS
1. Additional parking could be provided by 1) purchase of an
adjacent lot, 2) eliminate the existing garage and
construct additional parking along the building's west
MR/APPRSPNS 015
2
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B side, or 3) seek a parking variance. The Applicant
proposed not providing the three additional required
parking spaces and sought a variance.
2. Variances may be granted when special circumstances
applicable to a parcel of property, such as size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, exist and the strict
application of the regulation deprives the property of
development privileges enjoyed by other property in the
vicinity that is within the same zoning district.
Therefore, basically, a variance is used to cure ari
inequity.
3. The regulations regarding the granting of variances
further state that any variance granted shall be subject
to conditions so that the adjustment does not constitute a
granting of special privileges that is inconsistent with
the limitations upon other property in the vicinity and
zone.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The application was considered at a Public Hearing by the
Planning Commission on December 8, 1987. The Commission adopted
Resolution No. 87-018 attached), granting the request subject
to mitigating conditions.
MR/APPRSPNS.015
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"? B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?!B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?"B * MEMORANDUM1** *
*
CITY OF LA QUINTA *::`*c:* 7:.
OO**Y;'.*'j;D *
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
VIA CITY MANAGER
FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: HOME OCCUPATION APPLICATION jt1, LIMOUSINE SERVICE;
ROCCO AND COLLEEN BALSAMO, APPLICANTS
DATE: DECEMBER 21, 1987
HISTORY
Application for the subject home occupation was received by the
Planning and Development Department in September of this year.
On September 21, 1987, a letter was sent to the Applicants
advising that the permit had been denied, based on the criteria
contained in the Municipal Code see attachment). The subject
business had been stated to involve dispatching and a
commercially-licensed vehicle limousine). The denial letter
went on to advise regarding the appeal process and fee $175.00).
Subsequent correspondence was received from the Applicant on
September 30, 1987, further defining the proposed business see
attached). Staff offered to take the general subject to the
Planning Commission for interpretation of the relevant criteria
section. See Staff Report dated October 13, 1987.)
The Planning Commission, after conferring on the matter in Study
Session and regular meeting, was not disposed to initiate a
change in the Home Occupation Criteria which would allow
limousine services in general, nor was there a consensus on any
reinterpretation of the existing provisions. The commission
advised that if the Applicant filed an appeal to the staff
determination, they would be in a position to consider this
specific case on its merits. See Minutes of October 13, 1987;
Item 7.B.)
MR/MEMOMC.018 1 * * /
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?#BA follow-up letter was sent to the Applicants reviewing the
Commission discussion see letter dated October 20, 1987), and
advising that the appeal period was being extended to October
30, 1987.
No further contact was made by the Applicant with the Department
until recently, when an appeal application was obtained.
Administratively, it was determined that an appeal would be
accepted, notwithstanding the passage of the appeal period. The
fee for appeals remains at $175.00, as the Applicant had been
originally advised last September.
CURRENT COMMISSION ACTIVITIES
The Planning Commission continues to pursue definition of what
constitutes II**5p* dispatching, and has had Staff prepare research on
how other Coachella Valley cities treat vehicles and home
occupations. The last discussion before the Commission was at
their meeting of December 8, 1987.
COUNCIL RESPONSE
It was not clear what the Applicant was requesting of the City
Council on December 1, therefore, we are unable to advise
regarding specific action for the Council. There appeared to be
two subjects of interest, notification and reason for the
$175.00 fee. The record of action and notification has been
provided in the attachments; the fee, of course, is related to
filing an appeal.
MC/mr
attachments
MR/MEMOMC. 018 2 *
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?$B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?%B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?&B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?'B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?(B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?)B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?*B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?+B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?,B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?-B I
DATE AGE'\:*A ITEM #
REPORT OF *AFI*Th'J\ * *L*:D
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTI** * T*
DATE: DECEMBER 21, 1987
APPLICANT: LA QUINTA ARTS FOUNDATION
PROJECT
LOCATION: 78-080 AVENIDA LA FONDA
PROJECT: AMENDMENT TO PLOT PLAN NO. 87-375; REQUEST TO
Construct A COVERED UNENCLOSED PATIO AND ENTRY
FOR AN EXISTING BUILDING, TO BE USED BY THE LA
QUINTA ARTS FOUNDATION
ZONING
DESIGNATION: SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL C-P-S)
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT: CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, UNDER SECTION 15301,
CLASS 1 e)(i)
DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS: REQUIRED/PERMITTED PROVIDED
SETBACKS Front none required 13.5 feet
Side none required 0-
Rear none required 24.0 feet
BUILDING HEIGHT 35 feet 16.5 feet
BUILDING COVERAGE 100% 5.7
PARKING SPACES 3 3
LOT SIZE: NO MINIMUM 75' X 100' 7500 sq. ft.
COLOR/DESIGN: THE ADDITION WILL CONFORM WITH ThE EXISTING
BUILDING'S ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT AND COLOR
SCHEME.
ANALYSIS:
1. The existing project approval on January 27, 1987 provided
conditions to address the required on and off-site
improvements for the Engineering, Fire and Planning
Departments. These existing conditions, with some minor
modifications, will be applied to this amendment request
if it is approved.
MR/APPRSPNS. 016
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?.B2. The Applicant requested approval to construct a covered
patio and entry area with stuccoed columns, and retain the
previously approved restroom as the only enclosed addition
to the existing building as opposed to the originally
contemplated addition.
3. The Applicant proposed seven additional landscaping trees;
the species shall be consistent with the village Specific
Plan Area *2) and will be reviewed as part of a detailed
landscape plan.
FINDINGS
1. The proposed amendment to Plot Plan 87-375, as
conditioned, is consistent with the requirements of the
C.P.S. zone and goals and objectives of the General Plan.
2. The project is exempt for purposes of additional
environmental documentation.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
This application was considered by the Planning Commission at
their meeting of December 8, 1987, and approved subject to
conditions.
NR/APPRSPNS.O16
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?/B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?0B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?1B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?2B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?3B AGE*DAITEMW
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF LA QUINTA C*
To: Honorable Mayor & City Council
VIA: Ron Kiedrowski, City Manager
FROM: Roger Hirdler, Community Safety Department
DATE: January 5, 1987
SUBJECT: Temporary No-Parking Resolution
This is a special event Bob Hope Chrysler Classic) taking place at
P.G.A., and *a Quinta Country Club, January 2*, 1988, through
January 24, 1988.
This resolution is needed to enable the Sheriff's Department to
enforce temporary no-parking on certain streets during the special
event. It also allows Jefferson Street to be designated a one-way
street to facilitate the rapid movement of traffic.
Respectfully submitted,
Roger Hirdler
RH:es
J- /
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?4B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?5B *
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF LA OUINTA Q*
To: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
VIA: RON KIEDROWSKI, CITY MANAGER
FROM: FRANK REYNOLDS, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER*
DATE: DECEMBER 15, 1987
SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND
SAFETY LIGHTING AT THE INTERSECTION AT WASHINGTON
STREET AND 50TH AVENUE. BID NO. 87-011
The construction of subject improvements has been advertised for bids
as authorized. The bid opening was held on Wednesday, December 9,
1987.
The bid summary is as follows:
1. Signal Maintenance Inc., Anaheim $69,902.00
2. DBX, Inc., Temecula $74,943.00
3. Paul Gardner Corp., Ontario $75,973.00
4. Paxin Electric, Lancaster $79,547.00
5. Steiney & Company, Inc., Fullerton $89,000.00
Engineer's Estimate $85,000.00
The low bidder has been checked out and appears to be fully capable
of performing.
9.
memorww. 122
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?6B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?7B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?8B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?9B AGENDA Item*M#
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF LA OUINTA C*\
To: ThE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF ThE CITY COUNCIL
VIA: RON KIEDROWSKI, CITY MANAGER
FROM: FRANK REYNOLDS, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER*
DATE: DECEMBER 15, 1987
SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STREET IMPROVEMENTS
ON WASHINGTON STREET AT 50TH AVENUE. BID NO. 87-012
The construction of subject improvements has been advertised for bids
as authorized. The bid opening was held on Wednesday, December 9,
1987. The bid award will be for the standard bid, as the alternate
bid for grinding asphalt for rock base has been determined by Staff
to not be worth the extra inspection and quality control.
The bid summary is as follows:
1. Matich Corporation, San Bernardino $ 94,383.00
2. Massey Sand & Rock, Indio $110,815.00
3. Vance Corporation, Riverside $117,939.75
Engineer's Estiamte $ 95,000.00
RECOMMENDATION
1. That Council award Bid No. 87-012 to Matich Corporation of San
Bernardino, Ca. in the amount of $94,383.00 standard bid).
PREPARED BY:
Robert W. Weddle, P.E.
Project Manager
RWW:bja
End: Bid Summary
cc: R. Weddle, Project Manager
H. Harvey, Finance Director
Project File
memorww. 121
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?:B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?;B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?<B CARL WARREN & Co. OF*IC*S
Insurance Adjusters/CABim AdminisIrmI* G*ftda* In *rftirdilw
iHornr *i*cc, tanogi Pirk
225 Airpor Dr*ve $u'!e 203 * * Santa Mi In*sObiipo
San BernaTilno CA 92406 y Ventura s.k*raieet
714)5848669 * * San D*a *reinc
714*82A166O *Agenda item# Santa Barbara LongBeach
Covini
December 3* 1987 * &*L.\i o DENIED
City of La Q*inta CLAIMANT: Ray Greene
Finance Dept.
P.O. Box 1504 DATEOFINCIDENT: 8/22/87
La Quinta, CA 92253 date claim made: 11/19/87
Attn: Mr. Henry Harvey OURFILENO.: 7472 SG
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed the above claim which you have reported and request that you take the action
indicated below:
* CLAIM REJECTION: Reject claim in accordance with Government Code, section 913.
0 LATE CLAIM: Do NOT reject claim but RETURN it for failure to file within time limit prescribed in
Government Code, section 911.2. Transmittal NOT to contain WARNING" required by section 913
but should advise that the recourse is to file Application for Leave to File Late Claim" as provided
in Government Code, section 911.4. This must be returned within 45 days of the date claim mailed
or delivered.
o INSUFFICIENT CLAIM: Send notice of insufficiency for failure to comply with Government Code,
section 910 and/or 910.2 and/or 910.4 and cite the following specific insufficiencies:
This must be sent within 20 days of your receipt of claim.
o AMENDED CLAIM: Reject claim as set forth in first paragraph above, CLAIM REJECTION.
o APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE LATE CLAIM: Reject the Application under Government
Code, section 911.8.
o OPERATION OF LAW: Defer any written response pending our further advice.
Please provide us with a copy of any response requested above. If you have any questions, please
contact the undersigned.
Very truly yours,
CARL WARREN & COMPANY
**epenT.Gooh
je
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?=B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?>B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"??B NOTEXTPAGE
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?@B I*A;*7'P7 IL
DATE A3ENDA *1 LM #
MEMORANDUM APPROVED D**ED
CITY OF LA OUINTA o CONTINUED TO
TO: RON KIEDROWSKI, CITY MANAGER
FROM: FRANK REYNOLDS, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER**
DATE: DECEMBER 21, 1987
SUBJECT: PALM TREE MAINTENANCE
The City's annual program of palm tree maintenance has been
completed. There were 574 trees involved, and the City received a
favorable bid of $10.00 per tree from Accurate Maintenance Company.
The resulting final cost of $5,740 was $260 below the $6,000 budgeted
for this activity. The contractor proceeded with the work in a
diligent manner and a satisfactory project resulted.
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?AB D4r G*NDAr*EM*
DE*flED
ORDINANCE NO. 119 CONTINUED TO
AN ORDINANCE OF ThE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AS AN URGENCY
MEASURE, CERTAIN REGULATIONS CHANGING ThE
APPROVAL PROCEDURE FOR CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WHICH MAY BE IN CONFLICT
WITH A CONTEMPLATED ZONING PROPOSAL, SAID
REGULATIONS TO BE IN EFFECT ON AN INTERIM
STUDY BASIS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 65858.
The City Council of the City of La Quinta does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. From and after the effective date of this
ordinance, and for the period d"ring which this ordinance remains in
effect, and notwithstanding any other ordinance, resolution or
regulation of the City to the contrary, no officer, employee or
department admisistering City business shall accept or process any
application for a building permit for certain residential
development projects, as defined within this ordinance, regardless
of zoning district, unless and until the Planning Commission has
granted a plot plan approval for such residential development
project, utilizing in general the procedures and criteria set forth
in Chapter 9.180 of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. For the purposes of this ordinance,
the following words or phrases shall have the following definitions:
A. Certain Residential Development Projects" *eans any
development intended primarily for multiple-family
residential occupancy, including, but not limited to,
apartments, statutory and airspace condominium projects,
congregate care facilities, group living quarters, etc.,
in which the total number of proposed or projected units
exceeds twenty-five 25).
SECTION 3. EXCEPTIONS. Section 1 of this ordinance shall not
apply to:
a) Time extension requests for any previously approved
residential development project.
SECTION 4. URGENCY. This ordinance is adopted as an urgency
measure pursuant to the authority of Section 65858 of the Government
Code of the State of California, for the immediate preservation and
protection of the public safety, health and welfare, and shall take
effect immediately upon its adoption and passage by at least four-
fifths vote of the City Council. The City Co*ncil finds and
determines that there is a current threat to the public health,
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02
i^"?BBsafety and welfare in that the City of La Quinta has adopted a new
General Plan and because a number of residential development
proposals are expected in the immediate future, the public interest
now requires a systematic review and comprehensive analysis of
ordinances designed to implement that plan. It is contemplated that
from such studies, which are soon to be conducted by the City, there
will emerge new zoning regulations and development standards for
residential development projects, and during the interim period
while this can be accomplished, it is essential that controls
imposed by this ordinance be maintained, so that residential uses
which would otherwise be established and developed during the
interim period will not thereafter be in conflict with the
contemplated zoning regulations and development standards.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF ORDINA1*CE. This ordinance
shall remain in effect for a 45-day period, pursuant to Section
65858 of the Government Code of the State of California, unless
sooner repealed or otherwise modified, and subject to any extension
of the effective period duly enacted pursuant to and in accordance
with said Section 65858.
SECTION 6. POSTING. The City Clerk shall, within 15 day after
the passage of this ordinance, cause it to be posted in at least the
three public places designated by Resolution of the City Council;
shall certify as to the adopting and posting of this ordinance; and
shall cause this ordinance and its certification, together with
proof of posting, to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of this
City.
APPROVED and ADOPTED by the La Quinta City Council at a regular
meeting held this 1st day of December 1987, by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Me*bers Bohnenberger, Cox, Pena, Sniff, Mayor Hoyle
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MAYOR
APPROVED AS To FORM:
CITY A**TORNEY
4>4
BIB]
10-30-1998-U01
05:15:05PM-U01
BASIC-U01
CC-U02
12-U02
21-U02
1987-U02