The URL can be used to link to this page

1988 09 26 CCCITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 Regulat Meeti g September ,24, 1988 - 7:30 P.M. "4(. CALL TO ORDER a. Pledge of Allegiance b. Roll Call CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT COMMENT BY COUNCIL MEMBERS PUBLIC HEARINGS Beginning Res. No. 88-110 Ord. No. 129 1. Public Hearing on Amendment #1 to Specific Plan No. 83-002 - PGA West Hotel - To Increase the Number of Hotel Rooms from 650 to 1,000 and to Increase the Hotel Height from Four Stories to Six Stories - Applicant: Landmark Land Company, Inc. a) Report of Planning Director. b) Resolution Action (2). 2. Public Hearing on Specific Plan No. 121-E, Amendment #1; Change of Zone #88-031; Tentative Parcel Map No. 23749 and Plot Plan No. 88-393 - Property Located on West Side of Avenida Obregon, About 400 Feet North of Calle Mazatlan. Applicant: Landmark Land Co. Requests: To add approximately 2 acres to the existing Specific Plan for La Quinta Cove Golf Club (aka Santa Rosa Cove) and create a parcel to accommodate a proposed maintenance facility and employee parking to service the previously approved La Quinta Hotel Expansion. a) Report of Planning Director. b) Resolution and Introduction of Ordinance. 3. Public Hearing on Tentative Tract #23813 - Subdivision of 10.45 Acres Located Between Camino Quintana and Avenida Fernando Along Avenida Vista Bonita Extended into 40 single Family Lots - Applicant: La Quinta Joint Venture. a) Report of Planning Direwtor. b) Resolution Action. %Oor 4. Public Hearing on Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 88-005 - City -Wide Amendment to Title 9 of the City Code, to Include Zoning Regulations Specifically Designed for Implementation of the Village At La Quinta Specific Plan. a) Report of Planning Director. b) Ordinance Action. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS a. City Manager. b. Assistant City Manager c. 'Administrative Services Director. d. Community Safety Director. e. Planning Director. f. Public Works Director. BUSINESS SESSION 1. Report on Study of General Plan Medium/High Density City -Wide. a) Report of Planning Director. b) Minute Order Action. E 2. Consideration of Adoption of Negative Declaration on the following: 1. Amended Sphere of Influence Boundary and Annexation of 45.64 Acres Located North of Current Boundary - North of Fred Waring Drive and West of Adams Street (Starlight). 2. Annexation of 291.6 Acres Located within the Current Sphere of Influence south of Current Boundary - West of Madison; Along both Sides of Avenue 58, Along the East Side of Jefferson Street Extended from Avenue 58 Southward to Avenue 60; and West of Madison Street Along the North Side of Avenue 60 to Jefferson Street Extended. a) Report of Planning Director. b) Resolution Action (2). 3. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 128 - Amendment to PERS Contract CONSENT ITEMS 1. Approval of Demand Register. 2. Approval of Minutes of September 6, 1988. 3. Approval of Waiver of Fees for Two Temporary Outdoor Events: 5th Annual Coachella Valley Red Cross Triathalon and 1988 Desert Bicycle Classic. 4. Approval of Request of La Quinta Library for Temporary Closure of North Side of Calle Estado Between Desert Club Drive and Avenida Bermudas from 9:30 A.M. to 11:00 A.M. on September 22, 1988. 5. Approval of a Revocable Encroachment Agreement with Landmark Land Company for a Drainage Discharge Line in Eisenhower. COMMISSION/COMMITTEE REPORTS a. C. V. Recreation & Park District. b. Planning Commission - Minutes of August 23, 1988. C. Palmer CableVision Advisory Committee. �L�lil��Nu'I�I�Y 3 NOTE: The following items will be discussed during Council Study Session at 3:00 P.M. on Monday, September 19th. Action may be taken on any item during regular Council Meeting at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, September 20, 1988. STUDY SESSION ITEMS 1. Presentation of Study of General Plan Medium/High Density City -Wide. 2. Further Discussion of Lot Grading/Pad Heights in the Cove. 3. Discussion of Changing Meeting Dates with the Planning Commission for the Month of November. (Mayor Hoyle) 4. Discussion Regarding Enforcement of Political Sign Ordinance. 5. Discussion of Payment of Dues to Desert Resort Communities Convention and Visitors Bureau. NOTICE OF UPCOMING COUNCIL/COMMISSION MEETINGS September 19, 1988 CC Study Session 3:00 P.M. September 20, 1988 CC Regular Meeting 7:30 P.M. September 26, 1988 PC Study Session 4:00 P.M. September 26, 1988 CSC Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. September 27, 1988 PC Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. October 3, 1988 CC Study Session 3:00 P.M. October 4, 1988 CC Regular Meeting 7:30 P.M. October 10, 1988 PC Study Session 4:00 P.M. October 11, 1988 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 September 20, 1988 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, September 16, 1988. D ed: September 11, 1988. AUNDRA L. JU City Clerk City of La Quinta, California T4tyl44a" 78-105 CALLE ESTADO - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - i619) 564-2246 NOTICE OF ADJOURNMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL OF SEPTEMBER 20, 1988 WAS ADJOURNED TO AND UNTIL THE HOUR OF 7:30 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 26, 1988. ALL ITEMS ON THAT AGENDA WITH THE EXCEPTION OF PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 1 WILL BE CONSIDERED. SAUNDRA L. JUHOLA CITY CLERK MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 J r �r ' w OF Mt COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 9/20/88 AGENDA CATEGORY: ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIFIC PLAN #121-E, AMENDMENT #1 BUSINESS SESSION: CHANGE OF ZONE #88-031 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #23749 CONSENT CALENDAR: PLOT PLAN 488-393 STUDY SESSION: BACKGROUND: Specific Plan Amendment - The proposal is to incorporate an additional 2.1 acres of land into the original Specific Plan for the La Quinta Hotel/Santa Rosa Cove development. The area will be used for overflow parking and a maintenance building. Change of Zone - A zone change from R-1 to R-3 is necessary to permit the proposed overflow parking and maintenance building. Tentative Parcel Map - The proposal is to create a separate parcel for the hotel maintenance building. Plot Plan - The division creates overflow parking area and hotel maintenance building. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None APPROVED BY: Move to adopt Council Resolution No. approving the Specific Plan Amendment 41, subject to conditions; waive further reading and introduce Ordinance No. changing the zoning from R-1 to R-3; and accept the Planning Commission decision to approve Plot Plan #88-393, subject to conditions. Submitt d by: 11 Signature BJ/CC#9/20F.5 Approved for submission to C'ty Council: RON KIEDROWSKI, CITY MANAGER STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 1988 PROJECTS: SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 121-E, AMENDMENT NO. 1 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 88-031 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 23749 PLOT PLAN NO. 88-393 PROJECT LOCATION: SEE ATTACHMENT NO. 1, CASE MAP APPLICANT: LANDMARK LAND COMPANY, INC. PROPOSAL: TO ESTABLISH AN ANCILLARY MAINTENANCE FACILITY AND AN OVERFLOW PARKING AREA FOR THE LA QUINTA HOTEL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: EIR No. 41 WAS CERTIFIED IN APRIL, 1975, FOR THE ORIGINAL SPECIFIC PLAN APPROVAL. A SUBSEQUENT REVISION, INCREASING ACREAGE, HOTEL, AND DWELLING UNIT COUNTS, WAS APPROVED IN OCTOBER, 1982, FOR WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 15626 WAS ADOPTED. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 88-095 WAS PREPARED FOR THIS PROPOSAL AS REQUIRED BY CEQA; THE INITIAL STUDY CONCLUDED THAT IMPACTS OF THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED BY EIR NO. 41, EA NO. 15626 AND EA NO. 87-080, PREPARED AND ADOPTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE LA QUINTA HOTEL EXPANSION, ON DECEMBER 12, 1987. BACKGROUND: The original La Quinta Cove Golf Club Specific Plan (approved in April, 1975, by Riverside County) was composed of +619 acres, 637 dwelling units, and 496 hotel units. On October 5, 1982, the La Quinta City Council adopted Resolution No. 82-54, approving a revision to the Specific Plan which added 19.24 acres (adding the current La Quinta Tennis Club and Tennis Villas area), 279 dwelling units, and 146 hotel units (see Attachment No. 2). On December 22, 1987, Plot Plan No. 87-387 was approved by the Planning Commission, expanding the hotel by 336 rooms, for the current total of 609 units. This expansion of the hotel uses has created a need for additional maintenance operations, staffing, and overflow parking, thereby prompting the Applicant to file the subject applications. BJ/STAFFRPT.005 - 1 - I PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 1. Specific Plan No. 121-E, Amendment No. 1 - This application is necessary to incorporate the proposed overflow parking area site into the approved Specific Plan boundaries, and thereby qualify it as an ancillary hotel parking facility (see Attachment No. 3). A long narrow sliver of land bisects the subject area; this portion is not part of the request. The Amendment will add approximately 2.1 acres to the 638-acre Specific Plan. 2. Change of Zone No. 88-031 - A zone change from R-1 to R-3 is requested, which is also necessary allow the parking area to be established for hotel use as a part of the Specific Plan (see Attachment No. 4). Tentative Parcel Map No. 23749 - The area addressed by this map is within the current Specific Plan land area. The purpose of the map (see Attachment No. 5) is to create a separate parcel for the maintenance facility and its appurtenant parking (Parcel 1) for future acquisition by the La Quinta Hotel ownership. Adjacent to Parcel 1, to the south, is the long narrow sliver of land not owned by Landmark (not a part) and not included in this application. The two vacant parcels immediately south of this sliver have been administratively approved for a Lot Line Adjustment to create the parking area parcel (see Attachment No. 6). A 25-foot access easement is provided along the north boundary of the easterly parcel, to allow access to the westerly parcel from Obregon (a private street). Plot Plan No. 88-393 - This application pertains to Parcel 1 of the Parcel Map and the southeasterly parcel on Obregon (see Attachment No. 7). The maintenance facility and overflow parking will be developed around the long narrow sliver of land, which the Applicant does not own. The north parcel will accommodate the maintenance facility and its employee parking, while the southerly parcel will be developed with 162 spaces for hotel - related overflow parking which may occur during special events or peak season. ANALYSIS OF SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT: 1. The scope of the Amendment request is limited to expansion of the Specific Plan area only, in association with the recent expansion of the La Quinta Hotel. No changes to unit count, densities, or significant revisions of the Specific Plan are proposed. 2. Impacts of the proposal do not add a new dimension tothose previously addressed by Environmental Assessment No. 15626, prepared for the revision to Specific Plan No. BJ/STAFFRPT.005 - 2 - 121.E, and as identified by the Riverside County Planning Department Staff Report of April 14, 1982. 3. Environmental Assessment No. 88-095, prepared in conjunction with the proposed Amendment, verified that impacts resulting from development of the overall proposal will be substantially similar to those previously addressed by environmental documentation. 4. Development of the additional acreage will necessarily be consistent with the approval for revised Specific Plan No. 121-E. ANALYSIS OF CHANGE OF ZONE: 1. The requested zone change from R-1 to R-3 would permit development of the parking area to be classified as an ancillary use to the hotel. Surrounding zoning is R-3 to the north, R-3* to the east, R-l* to the south, and R-2-10,000 to the west. 2. As the proposed parking is intended to serve the hotel area to the east (zoned R-3*), the parking lot should also be zoned R-3*. This designation retains a 1,200-square-foot minimum unit size, which is compatible with the R-1* property (not part of the Specific Plan) to the south. 3. The west parcel, proposed for future tennis court development, is also proposed for R-3 zoning (see Attachment No. 8). It would be appropriate to also designate this parcel R-3*, as it would also assure unit size compatibility with the westerly Santa Rosa Cove development, adjacent to this parcel. ANALYSIS OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP: 1. Tentative Parcel Map No. 23749 proposes to create a .5-acre parcel for a maintenance facility and some employee parking from a remaining, unrecorded portion of the expired Tentative Tract No. 18765. The adjacent contiguously -owned property, which was part of Tract 18765 before it expired, has been shown as a remainder, and will later be re -subdivided to construct future Tennis Villas units. 2. Forty-eight units exist as part of recorded tracts 18765-1 and 18765-2 (refer to Attachment No. 5); revised Tentative Tract No. 18765 proposed 72 units in December, 1984. Subsequent extension requests were approved pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, with the final extension expiring on November 2, 1987. I HJ/STAFFRPT.005 - 3 - Original conditions for Tract No. 18765 required that improvements for Avenida Obregon be to City standards, subject to City Engineer approval, in conjunction with area drainage plans. Obregon is currently improved to a 24-foot travel way without curb, gutter, and sidewalk, and with minor variations in shoulder improvements. 4. Improvements for the contiguously -owned remainder area would be required upon application to subdivide or otherwise develop that area. ANALYSIS OF PLOT PLAN: The Plot Plan proposes a +2,000-square-foot maintenance building on a .5-net-acre parcel, and a 162-space overflow parking area to the south, on approximately 1.4 acres. 1. Site Design Compatibility a. The maintenance facility parcel is adjacent to planned tennis court areas on the north and west, with the proposed hotel overflow parking area to the south and auxiliary hotel uses to the east, across Obregon. The building's bay doors face north; visual screening is proposed with a six -foot -high chain link fence and landscaping. The proposed landscaping should be required to achieve the desired screening within one year of planting to offset both the view of the chain link and actually screen views into the facility from the north. The west property line will be screened with 10-foot-high tennis court fencing. b. Lighting and visual screening provisions, other than those previously noted, are adequate to address the impact to surrounding properties. C. Proposed rolling access gates and walls will be painted so as to be consistent with surrounding hotel uses. 2. Parking a. The overflow area parking plan provides 162 spaces, with a serpentine aisle circulation designed for two-way travel (24 feet wide), but the access lanes between aisles (south end of parking lot) provide only for one-way travel (11 feet wide). These access aisles need to be modified to allow for two-way circulation throughout the parking area. b. Shade tree locations are shown along each row of parking stalls. Although no standard has been established, it may be appropriate to require shade BJ/STAFFRPT.005 - 4 - tree planting in parking rows to be 25 to 30 feet on centers to maximize the canopy (and shade) achieved at maturity; a sufficient number of trees would need to be provided. C. Due to the increase in hotel -related pedestrian and vehicular traffic, it would be desirable to provide some type of walkway or path to the east side of obregon, generally to access the northerly and southerly points of and guest access to the hotel, as shown on Attachment No. 9. This should be in conjunction with a crosswalk over Obregon. It would also be appropriate to locate a central pedestrian access through an opening in the proposed east block wall, with a pathway to Obregon from the parking area. This would reduce pedestrian and vehicle conflicts at the vehicle entry to the parking area. 3. Building Design a. The proposed maintenance building features a shed roof. Exterior materials will consist of off-white stucco walls, with painted blue metal doors, while the roof will be a red clay tile. In the course of application processing, the proposal was changed from a flat -roof building with composition roof material. b. Height of the building will be 10.5 feet at its lowest point, and 19 feet at its highest point. C. Because the building is relatively low profile and will be located away from any existing uses, the overall design of the building is acceptable, and will not be inconsistent with the character of the general area. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Environmental Assessment No. 88-095 was prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA. Impacts of the overall proposal were found to be substantially related and similar to those addressed by Environmental Assessment No. 15626, adopted by the La Quinta City Council on October 5, 1982. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for adoption. FINDINGS: The recommended findings for Specific Plan No. 121-E, Amendment No. 1 are contained in the draft council resolution. BJ/STAFFRPT.005 - 5 - ' The Planning Commission adopted the following for change of Zone No. 88-031, Plot Plan No. 88-393 and Tentative Parcel Map No. 23749. Change of zone 88-031 1. The recommended Change of Zone to R-3* is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan and with revised Specific Plan No. 121-E. 2. Approval of this proposal will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment. Tentative Parcel Map No. 23749 1. That Tentative Parcel Map No. 23749, as conditionally approved, is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan, the standards of the Municipal Land Division Ordinance and revised Specific Plan No. 121-E 2. That the subject site, as conditioned, is physically suitable for the proposed land division. 3. That the design of Tentative Parcel Map No. 23749 will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat. 4. That the design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, is not likely to cause serious public health problems. Plot Plan No. 88-393: 1. The proposed maintenance facility and parking area is consistent with revised Specific Plan No. 121-E. 2. Impacts from the proposal are substantially the same as those identified and addressed in Environmental Assessment No. 15626, prepared in conjunction with revised Specific Plan No. 121-E, and adopted by the City Council on October 5, 1982. 3. The proposal is consistent with the standards of the R-3 Zone and Title 9 of the 'La Quinta Municipal Code, as conditioned. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: At their August 23rd regular meeting, the Planning Commission took the following actions: 1. Adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 88-018, recommending to the City Council approval of Specific HJ/STAFFRPT.005 - 6 - i�L Plan No. 121-E, Amendment No. 1, subject to certain conditions. Adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 88-019, recommending to the City Council approval of Change of Zone No. 88-031, Adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 88-020, approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 23749, subject to certain conditions. 4. By Minute Motion, approved Plot Plan No. 88-393, subject to the conditions attached to the Planning Commission Staff Report. There were some clarifications made by the Applicant's representative, Mr. Alejandro Martinez, relative to use of the parking lot area and vehicular access to it through the Santa Rosa gate at Avenue 50 and Eisenhower. Mr. Paul Rothchild, representing Santa Rosa Cove Homeowner's Association, spoke in support of the proposal. COUNCIL ACTION: Action by the City Council is limited to the Specific Plan Amendment, Change of Zone, and Plot Plan applications. The Tentative Parcel Map hearing is normally before the Planning Director; in this case it was referred to the Planning Commission due to its relationship with the other applications. Therefore, the Tentative Parcel Map was approved by the Planning Commission and no Council action is necessary. The City Council may either accept the Plot Plan approval, call it up to the Council level, or refer it back to the Planning Commission requesting further study, if desired. Action on the Specific Plan Amendment and Change of Zone are by adoption of resolution and ordinance, respectively. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council take the following action: 1. Adopt City Council Resolution No. approving Specific Plan #121-E Revised, Amendment #1, subject to the conditions of approval. 2. Waive further reading and introduce Ordinance No. for the change of zone. 3. Accept the Planning Commission decision to approve Plot Plan #88-393, in accordance with the approval conditions. BJ/STAFFRPT.005 - 7 - attachments: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Location Map City Council Resolution No. 82-54 with condition Area for Inclusion to SP #121-E Requested Zone Change Area Tentative Parcel Map Exhibit Approved Lot Line Adjustment No. 88-043 Exhibit Plot Plan Exhibit Existing and Future Surrounding Uses Hotel Employee Travel Routes BJ/STAFFRPT.005 - 8 - P N I j C2 04S ` i ♦� , .♦\ !•j I `�' FERNANb01---_— 1 I ` I ♦ y _ of LA 19.24ACt : i OUINTA ° HOTEL t ,► II sire AREA �� +�♦��'--- �- IfAIRWAYI-- ♦♦ MAZATLAN ��%,/ HOMES ♦♦ `\\ �zz j 1 . ._�, i GOLF COURSE \ r CASE MAP CASE No. Sftc zfca ALoVJ W/2!-+E,0-'/ Gtr oNat 000 Brr�E 0 88 - 021 7Yv1 P 4;aL , m*P -' ?37V 9 P40r P4.4,1V 41 `' 88 -3 93 I AVENIOA FERNANDO 1 1 I %% ;SF1R I r i s \% F SING VAC 36.SIAC 'RES S F R ORTH N/ SCALE: is NO SCA 1.A ATTACHMENT #1 RESOLUTION NO. 82-54 ATTACHMENT f2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE NO. 121-E, REVISED. WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 65450 at. seq., public hearings were held before the La Quinta City Council on September 21, 1982, in the City of La Quinta, California, on proposed Specific Plan of Land Use No. 121-E, Revised; and WHEREAS, all the procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Riverside County rules to implement the Act have been met and negative declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 15626 has been recommended for adoption by the Planning Director; and WHEREAS, the revised Specific Plan No. 121-E will allow an additional 279 condominiums and 146 hotel units, the following issues were identified and resolved: A. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY The units proposed in conjunction with the revised Specific Plan, when added to the original Specific Plan, will not exceed the overall density allowed by the Riverside County General Plan. B. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION As proposed, the revised Specific Plan would increase trip generation by about 30% over the levels anticipated with the original Specific Plan. This additional impact was mitigated through the requirement for additional road improvements and contributions to traffic signals at three intersections along Eisenhower Drive. C. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES As a vacation and retirement home development, many of the impacts on public services and facilities generated from the revised Specific Plan are minimized. These include impacts and demands on schools, air quality, water, sewer, police protection and fire protection. D. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Expanding on the existing resort hotel complex, the pro- posed project closely compliments the existing development in the immediate area. Significant open space areas are provided; including the maintenance of the mountainous areas and in many areas are adjacent open space acreage (golf course) at the foot of the mountains. The open space, natural mountain backdrop, and recreational facilities further enhance the existing resort atmosphere of the La Quinta Hotel and La Quinta Country Club area. I� WHEREAS, the matter was discussed fully with testimony and f documentation presented by the public, and various county, local t and state agencies. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, in regular session assembled on October 5, 1982, that it makes the following findings and conclusions: 1. The original' Specific Plan 121-E was approved and the associated Final Environmental Impact Report No. 41 was certified in April, 1975, by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors. The revised Specific Plan 121-E would result in a development similar in nature and scale to the original Specific Plan No. 121-E. 2. A large majority of the residents would utilize their dwellings as a second or retirement home, which would result in minimal impacts on the schools and the lack of a heavy concentration of "peak" hour traffic to and from work. 3. Revised Specific Plan No. 121-E represents an expansion of existing facilities and developments associated with the existing La Quinta Hotel. 4. Environmental impacts and urban service demands of this project would be minimized by the nature of the development (second and retirement homes). These impacts can be mitigated and services provided by incorporating the measures outlined by the Riverside County Planning staff in their report dated April 14, 1982, and in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 41. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the La Quints City Council, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and the Riverside County Rules to implement the Act, have reviewed and considered Environmental Assessment No. 15626 in its evaluation of the specific plan and find that no significant impacts to environment will result from the project, and therefore, adopts the negative declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 15626. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the Specific Plan on file with the City Clerk entitled Specific Plan of Land Use No. 121-E, Revised, including the final approved conditions and exhibits, is hereby adopted as the Specific Plan of Land Use for the real property shown in the Plan and said real property shall be developed substantially in accordance with the Specific Plan unless the Plan is repealed or amended by the La Quinta City Council. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED that copies of the Specific Plan of Land Use shall be filed in the Office of the Clerk of this Council, in the Office of the Planning Director and in the Office of the Director of Building and Safety, and that no applications for conditional use permits, or the like, shall be �-7 accepted for the real property shown on the Plan unless such application(s) are substantially in accordance with the adopted Revised Specific Plan of Land Use. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this Sth day of October , 2982. MAYOR ATTEST: jgg40 T ERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ITY ATTO/EY MAN GER = 1A di 1 iaaas- I 2-4 —'— T y8 uo+,r iI RLf�Vf.NTI�I io i I I IL -• r, I 7" LA QU{NN TA WOT&t- TtNIe Clop MI—)' 1%F1/—?1-2Z JI �s ur,nc ems.- No -airs J I)-.J [36/7 4-L/ I �EMA/NOE.! I TRACT 16494- 1 II 1 I MIARIA ro w INUIUMO /N SPEOFIC P,.av LOT-w ATTACHMENT f3 / 4e IEI > ?3 113 uNlrs LA QUINTik 140TU- Tftt~-b CUj& rrr� YID 2 22 Z4 am M 4 AREA ro ac R&rzolvEo: R S r •�) -)6/24-27 W, .4- LCT'A7 4v TRACT ATTACHMENT #4 Y Sul - _ _ T Ir -.. RlDiop NT�AL 9/OJ'l r D1- fro-oev .a,- �a -O. e r"- ,-1 /�ry !.� es Ili —UINTA WOTCL TCNNIb C.L z IJ w �a rD�- seo- ors u _ �t a i{•J Jj/2�i',I J .PBMA/NG7ER a o a •c rT ow I « - r {r• TIZACLT 14476-I I _ S INS QUI NTANA. V.rI.UNT VA4NT LOT'i' ATTACHMENT f5 0237t•/9 P- J awl , milli 9 N � � � f ! ; Q W o0 f 7 tt 7 Q V d ' c m �B/9L su im acres aia�wf � •ue� ao�aau.ve _ r a , ail J t e K I I G � ..M 0 Lam•;: U J Y� 7 i r� Yyv • • �. q { LIT CIO 7 _ �' = a ` t _• • '••____•-..._.f..--'.................77 .. 1 IJZ IF i r H Q d r U •a. UON • Z • c • • • • 0 • • W • • a C GENERXL UNDITIONS Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the'applicant shall first obtain clearance from the Riverside County Planning Department to verify that all pertinent conditions of approval have been satisfied in accordance with the specific plan. 1. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL REVISED SPECIFIC PLAN 1121-E PLANNING COMMISSION May 13. 1982 EXHIBIT 1 2. The specific plan approval shall consist of the following: a. Exhibit "A" Revised Specific Plan Text b. Exhibit "B" Specific Plan Conditions of Approval c. Revised specific plan of land use (development plan) d. Revised specific plan onsite circulation plan 3. if any of the following conditionsrfor approval differ from the commitment made by the developer in the specific plan text or map exhibits, the conditions enumerated herein shall take precedence unless otherwise approved by the Planning Director: Any changes pertaining to road improvements conditions shall be subject to the approval of the Riverside County Road Commissioner. 4. The development of the property shall be in accordance with the mandatory require- ments of all Riverside County ordinances and state laws and shall conform sub- stantially with the approved Specific Plan #121-E Revised as filed in the office of the Riverside County Planning Department, unless otherwise amended. 5. No portion of the specific plan which purports or proposes to change, waive or modify any ordinance cr other legal requirement for the development, or to set special time commitments for the development, shall be considered to be a part of the adopted specific plan. 6. Water and sewage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the requirements and specifications of the Riverside County Health Department. J. Road improvements shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of the implementing subdivision(s) for this project and/or as recommended by the Road Commissioner. 8. Drainage and flood control facilities and improvements shall be provided in accordance with the Coachella Valley Water District requirements. 9. An Environmental Assessment shall be conducted for each tract, change of zone, plot plan, or any other discretionary permit within the specific plan. 10. Prior to recordation of any final subdivision map for a phase of development requiring a homeowners association, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Department the following documents which shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the County that the homeowners association will be established and will operate in accordance with the intent and purpose of the specific plan. Pg. 1 -r specific Plan 0121-f me ;rd _ Conditions of Approval Pg. .2. a) The document to convey title. b) Covenants. Conditions and Restrictions to be recorded. The approved Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall be recorded at the sane time and listed on the final subdivision map when recorded. A homeowners association, with the unqualified right to assess the owners of the individual units for reasonable maintenance cost and management costs shall be established and continuously maintained. The association shall have the right to lien the property of any owners who default in the payment of this assessment. Such lien shall not be subordinate to any encumbrance other than a first deed of trust. provided such deed of trust is made in good faith and for value and is of record prior to the lien of the homeowners association. 11. All coyiditions listed herein apply only to those parcels changed or added since the original specific plan was approved. These parcels include the following: 1) A 19.23± acre parcel proposed for 200 condominiums, purchased since approval of the original specific plan. 2) A 3.526± acre parcel at the base of the mountains which is now proposed for 15 condominium units. 3) A 6.3+ acre parcel located east of Eisenhower Drive. which was ori- ginally proposed for use as a temporary sewage treatment plot and horse stables is now proposed as part of the condominium and golf course facilities. Conditions in the original Specific Plan 4121-E remain applicable to all portions of the subject project with the exception of the three parcels noted above. 12. Prior to recordation of final tract maps for the 19.23t, 6.3t and 3.5261- acre parcels, water. sewer. and circulation systems must be adequately provided. - LAND USE CONDITIONS 13. Lots created pursuant to this specific plan shall be in conformance with the development standards of the zone(s) ultimately applied to the property. 14. Each Planned Residential Development (PRD) shall comply with the requirements of Ordinance 34R and 460. 15. Prior to the issuance of building permits, common open space area improvement plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. 16. The total specific plan shall be developed with a maximum of 916 condominium and 642 hotel units. 1 t&eclfic Plan 1121-E Rev -d CollditioilS of Approval Pg. s 17. Al Planned Residential Developments (PRD's) shall incorporated a new or be annexed to an existing homeowners association for maintenance and management of comnon open space areas, private street systems. landscaped areas. signing and lighting or other defined responsibilities as necessary. 18. All conoun oxen space areas including developed landscaped areas snair lncluoe an aul(NildtiC irrigation system. Landscaping and irrigation plans shall be sub- mitted for Planning Department approval prior to on -site installation. CIRCULATION CONDITIONS 19. Dedication and improvement of rights -of -way for general plan and public roads and streets adjacent to the site will be required in accordance with the provi- sions of Ordinance 460 and 461. 20. The applicant shall provide all road improvements as specified in the letter dated April 8, 1982 by the Riverside County Road Commissioner. 21. The basic circulation system shall be developed substantially in accordance with the specific plan text. 22. Construction of the development permitted hereby may be done progressively in phases. provided adequate vehicular access is constructed for all dwelling units in each phase and further provided that such phase development conforms substantially with the intent and purposes of the specific plan. 23. Phasing shall be done in a manner which will not cause newly completed structures to be impacted by dust generated by grading from subsequent phases. 24. Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with all applicable requirements of Ordinance 460 and Ordinance 546. 25. The developer shall mitigate any public facilities and/or school district impacts in accordance with notices of impaction which may be applicable at the time of tentative map approval and/or requests for extensions of time. 26. The developer shall comply with the following specific plan development standards: a. Security Police Protection Walkway and parking areas will be adequately lighted. b. Circulation fates at entrances will be at least 8n feet from the public street to allow for stacking and turn around. c. Grading All grading will be completed under the direction of a soils engineer and in con- formance with applicable County ordinances. Grading permits will be obtained for all grading and shall be submitted to the County Planning Department for environ •� mental review where applicable. Specific Plan r121-E Revised Conditions of Approval Pg. 4. d. Landscaping Common areas, parks, entry gates and streets shall be landscaped with plant species compa— tible with the desert environment. e. Drainage Through coordination with the Coachella Valley Water District, all development shall be designed to protect all dwellings from storm flow. f N j� lei Ifl ll. . I>I i ,Dabs-! I-2-- /1$ f/wgrs -MJF3is5-i 725�*„s rr I r I ^ ^I -I YaL,FS n i I 13 Pnnrs r1�-.i0-O.O Y � LA QUINT& Wor&L. TCNNIft CRAM Z I �,vuis r�csrrs ! S 1S YnJ�►S iI - I� 3 J _ ' RCM&/A/OFiC TRACT 1445& - I AREA r0 ac /NC1.0060 /N SPKlFI, RAN 12 f —rE, pffviW LOT -A:' EXHIBIT "A" lY dS/- 000 - 0li7 R-3 r �:- J J 12 42 1 �' /- Sao-o Z.2 rRAC.T 144,DG - 1 2 /p QUINTANla �\ RESioENrlAA- T APPLICANVOWNER: 1 LANDMARK LAND .CO. 1 �\ I CZ I R- R-3 PA.RGEL 1: PARC61- I~ 233y9 031 R-3* R-1�J Rtsiocr.�T�o� (4j1 J OF ZONE *88-031 EXHIBIT "A" CALLE MAZATLA4W 106 LOT.. e�l . s w �t tyO► COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 9/20/88 ITEM TITLE• TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23813, A 40 LOT SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION BACKGROUND: AGENDA CATEGORY: PUBLIC HEARING: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: The proposal is to create 40 single family lots on 10.45 + acres. The subdivision is located in the Santa Rosa Cove development. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None APPROVED BY: Adopt Council Resolution No. granting approval to Tentative Tract Map No. 23813, subject to conditions. Submitt by - Sig a re BJ/CC#9/20F.7 Approved for submission to Xt'Council ON KIEDROWSKI, CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT PROJECT: PROJECT LOCATION: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Tay/ 4 4 a" MEMORANDUM THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SEPTEMBER 20, 1988 PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23813 LA QUINTA JOINT VENTURE, MR. TOM HILL TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23813: A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE + 10.45 ACRES INTO 30 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THE AREA BETWEEN CAMINO QUINTANA AND AVENIDA FERNANDO ALONG AVENIDA VISTA BONITA EXTENDED (SEE ATTACHMENT NO. 1 OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT). A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED TO SUBDIVIDE THE + 10.45 ACRE SITE INTO 40 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITH A SPECIFIC BUILDING PRODUCT TYPE. THE CIRCULATION SYSTEM CONSISTS OF A PRIVATE CUL-DE-SAC STREET (LOT B). A CENTRAL LANDSCAPED SWIMMING POOL AREA HAS BEEN DESIGNATED AS A FIRE ACCESS LANE. LOTS "C", "F", AND "G" COMPRISE SMALL PARKING AREAS, AND LOTS "D" AND "H" GENERAL LANDSCAPED AREA. (SEE ATTACHMENTS NOS. 2 AND 3 OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT.) PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATIONS The Planning Commission, at the request of the Applicant, continued the Public Hearing from August 23, 1988 to September 13, 1988. This request permitted the Applicant to adjust some of the lot lines. The adjusted Tract Map was then considered by the Planning Commission on September 13, 1988, at the continued Public Hearing. A letter was submitted by Jacklyn and Anthony Loverro regarding construction parking and construction trash (letter attached). -1- -33 BJ/MEMOJH.022 COMMISSIONACTION/RECOMMENDATION The Commission felt that current regulations requiring that a trash receptacle be placed on the job site, and indication from the Applicant, that a parking area for construction workers will be provided on the site, satisfied the concerns of the Loverros. A motion was made and seconded to recommend to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract No. 23813 subject to conditions. The motion was unanimously approved. COUNCIL ACTION Adopt City Council Resolution No. granting approval of Tentative Tract No. 23813, subject to the attached conditions. Attachments: Council Resolution Planning Commission Staff Report Letter from Jacklyn & Anthony Loverro BJ/MEMOJH.022 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 13, 1988 (Continued from B-23-88) PROJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23813; A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE +10.45 ACRES INTO 40 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS PROJECT LOCATION: THE AREA BETWEEN CAMINO QUINTANA AND AVENIDA FERNANDO ALONG AVENIDA VISTA BONITA EXTENDED (SEE ATTACHMENT NO. 1) APPLICANT: LA QUINTA JOINT VENTURE, MR. TOM HILL EXISTING ZONING: R-2-7000 (SINGLE-FAMILY, 7,000 SQUARE FEET REQUIRED FOR EACH DWELLING UNIT) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23813 IS WITHIN THE SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 121-E, FOR WHICH A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT WAS PREPARED AND CERTIFIED BY THE LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAS ALSO ADOPTED BY THE LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14496-4, WHICH WAS THE PREVIOUS TENTATIVE TRACT APPROVED FOR THIS SITE. THE PREVIOUS TRACT COMPRISED 52 ATTACHED UNITS AND THIS TENTATIVE TRACT APPLICATION IS 40 DETACHED UNITS. THE PROPOSED REDUCTION IN DENSITY, 52 ATTACHED UNITS TO 40 DETACHED UNITS WOULD BE CONSIDERED CONSISTENT WITH THE SANTA ROSA COVE SPECIFIC PLAN. A REDUCTION IN THE OVERALL SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT DENSITY MAY BE VIEWED AS POSITIVE IN TERMS OF LOWERING THE CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SANTA ROSA COVE DEVELOPMENT. THE ABOVE PRIOR APPROVAL CONTAINED ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES WHICH WILL APPLY TO THIS PROJECT. THEREFORE, NO ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS DEEMED NECESSARY. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED TO SUBDIVIDE THE +10.45-ACRE SITE INTO 40 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITH A SPECIFIC BUILDING PRODUCT TYPE. THE CIRCULATION BJ/STAFFRPT.006 - 1 - SYSTEM CONSISTS OF A PRIVATE CUL-DE-SAC STREET (LOT B). A CENTRAL LANDSCAPED SWIMMING POOL AREA HAS BEEN PROVIDED (LOT E), AND LOT "A" HAS BEEN DESIGNATED AS A FIRE ACCESS LANE. LOTS "C", "F", AND "G" COMPRISE SMALL PARKING AREAS, AND LOTS "D" AND "H" GENERAL LANDSCAPED AREA. (SEE ATTACHMENTS NOS. 2 AND 3.) NET DENSITY: 3.83 UNITS PER ACRE LOT SIZES: MINIMUM LOT SIZE _ +7,200 SQUARE FEET (7,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM REQUIRED - SEE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL) AVERAGE LOT SIZE _ + 8,000 SQUARE FEET MAXIMUM LOT SIZE _ +22,000 SQUARE FEET DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS: ON -SITE RETENTION OF 100-YEAR STORM FLOW REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED ON -SITE CIRCULATION: A PRIVATE CUL-DE-SAC STREET WITH TWO TURN -AROUND LOOPS ARE PROPOSED. THERE IS A FIRE ACCESS LANE AT THE END OF THE CUL-DE-SAC PROVIDING DIRECT EMERGENCY ACCESS FROM THE SUBDIVISION TO CAMINO QUINTANA TO THE SOUTH OFF -SITE CIRCULATION: THIS SUBDIVISION TAKES ACCESS OFF AVENIDA FERNANDO WHICH EVENTUALLY LINKS UP WITH EISENHOWER DRIVE PREVIOUS APPLICATIONS: SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 121-E WAS APPROVED BY THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON APRIL 15, 1975, WITH ASSOCIATED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 41 THE REVISED SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 121-E AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 15626 WERE APPROVED BY THE LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 5, 1982 TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14496, REVISION NO. 1, WAS APPROVED BY THE LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 18, 1983 TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14495, THE ORIGINAL APPROVED TRACT FOR THIS SITE, WAS RECORDED ON DECEMBER 16, 1981 BJ/STAFFRPT.006 - 2 - 3 bl'� ANALYSIS: 1. Access Chapter 13.12.020, Subsection "I", in the La Quinta Subdivision Regulations states the following: "Whenever lots of a proposed land division abut on a dead-end road or a cul-de-sac exceed one thousand three hundred twenty feet in length, or six hundred feet in a high fire hazard area, or whenever a proposed land division lies more than one thousand three hundred twenty feet from a public maintained road, or six hundred sixty feet from a high fire hazard area, alternate or secondary access shall be provided, unless waived as part of the tentative map review. Documentation and improvement for such access shall be determined as part of the tentative map review." This project proposes a cul-de-sac +1,320 feet long, which complies with the above regulation. The entrance to the subdivision is however, +600 feet from the corner of Avenida Fernando and Calle Mazatlan, where an alternative access route is provided out of this area. (See Attachment No. 1.) This 600 feet stretch could, therefore, also be considered part of the cul-de-sac maximum length area. In light of the above, the cul-de-sac in the proposed subdivision is considered acceptable for the following reasons: a. This development consists of a private street serving 40 single-family dwelling units, and will not experience any external traffic. b. An emergency fire access point has been provided at the southern end of the cul-de-sac. C. Two adequately -sized turn around loops are provided at the southern end of the tract. d. The configuration of the tract is linear due to the location of golf courses to the west and east. The linear nature of the site restricts the possible road configuration. 2. Comments from the Fire Department Please refer to Attachments Nos. 4 and 5; these are comments from the Fire Department and a letter from the Applicant responding to these comments. BJ/STAFFRPT.006 - 3 - -g7 The issue of the length of the cul-de-sac has been dealt with under "Access". All further concerns of the Fire Department will be addressed by a condition attached to the approval of this project requiring the Applicant to comply with the requirements of the Fire Marshal. Street Name A change in street name from Avenida Vista Bonita to Avenida Fernando is proposed. This is acceptable since, with the introduction of a cul-de-sac in this tract, the upper stretch of Avenida Vista Bonita no longer links up with the lower portion of Avenida Vista Bonita. This cul-de-sac can now be seen as a continuation of the existing Avenida Fernando northeast of this project. (See Attachment No. 1) 4. Zero Lot Lines The applicant originally applied for a zero lot line development. However, on August 23, 1988 the applicant requested the matter to be continued. The applicant subsequently submitted a revised tract map, if approved, it would, permit the development of 40 single family detached units with minimum side yards. Therefore the prior conditions dealing with zero lot lines is no longer applicable. The actual unit placement is subject to review and approval by the P&D Department through its various administrative review process. 5. Unit Materials The Applicant has indicated that the homeowners association will be responsible for the roofs and exterior maintenance of all units. 6. Entrance Area A condition is recommended to be attached to the approval of the tract stipulating that a plan of the entrance area must be submitted to and approved by the Planning and Development Department prior to the installation of gates. This is to ensure that provision is made for a turn -around area outside the gates for those vehicles not entering the subdivision. Raised Medians The Tentative Tract Map (see Attachments Nos. 2 and 3) depicts raised medians within the road's right-of-way. Care should be taken to ensure that: BJ/STAFFRPT.006 - 4 - 3� a. There is good visibility across these medians and only low landscaping is used; and, b. Driveways should line up with the breaks in the median to allow ease of access for vehicles in both directions. Conditions attached to the draft resolution addresses these issues. 8. House Designs and Elevations; Unit Colors and Materials The house designs, elevations, and unit color and texture examples submitted by the Applicant for this tract (see Attachment N. 6) are all compatible with the surrounding area and desert environment. A condition is suggested to be attached to this Tentative Tract approval stating that future house designs, elevations, and unit colors and materials must conform with the submitted exhibits. FINDINGS: Findings for Tentative Tract Map No. 23813 can be found in the attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 88-017. By adoption of the attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 88-017, recommend to the City Council concurrence with the environmental analysis and approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 23813, subject to the attached conditions. attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Tentative Tract Map No. 23813 3. Unit Siting Plan for TT 23813 4. Comments from Fire Department 5. Letter from Applicant Regarding Access 6. Examples of House Designs and Elevations 7. Resolution No. 88-017 BJ/STAFFRPT.006 - 5 - / I ATTACHMENT No.1 pil � e p F W 6 N3 a z CC) J V U 1 W J r N _> V NT -ATTACHMENT No.3 41 s z U ;u x A RNERSIDE COUNTY ATTACHMENT No.4 FIRE DEPARTMENT IN COOPERATION WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION planning & Engineering O16ce 46.209 Oasis StrW, Suite 405 Indio, CA 92201 (619)342-8886 To: City of La Quinta Planning Division Re: Tentative Tract Map No. 23813 RAY HEBRARD FIRE CHIEF July 28, 1988 Planning 6 Engineering OBia 4080 Lemon Street, Suite I IL Riverside, CA 92501 (714) 787.6606 The proposal to terminate Avenida Vista Bonita with a cul—de—sac is not acceptable to the Fire Department. Approval of the La Quinta Cove Specific Plan 121—E and Tract Maps No. 14496 and No. 21120 were based upon the construction of Avenida Vista Bonita as a through public road. Alteration of this approved plan will adversly affect the circulation pattern with regards to available means of public egress and emergency vehicle access. With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land division, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with La Quinta Municipal Code and/or recognized fire protection standards: Lot A shall be improved with a minimum 24 ft. width and constructed to the same standards as Lot B (Avenida Vista Bonita). Schedule A fire protection approved Super fire hydrants, (6" x 4" x 21" x 2}") shall be located one at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 gpm for 2 hours duration at 20 psi. Prior to recordation of the final map, applicant/developer shall furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review. 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." If public use type building(s) are to be constructed, additional fire protection may be required. The fire flows and hydrant locations will be stipulated when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Department. 1�3 City of La Quints Planning Division Re: Tentative Tract Map Ro. 23813 7128/88 Page 2. s controlled through use of gates, barriers, Whenever access into private property i n shalla guard houses or similar means, provisiothe FireDepartment. All controlled emergency vehicles in a manner approved by ide access devices that are power othe gateated whenshall have a activated byradspecialrtransmitterer-rlocated system capable of opening ed with backup power facilities to in emergency vehicles. Devices shall be equipped roved by the Fire Department. Minimum opening operate in the event of power failure. All controlled access devices that are not power operated shall also be app width shall be 12', with a minimum vertical clearance of should All questions regarding t6 meaning of these Engineering Staff.conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning Sincerely, RAY REGIS Chief Fire Department planner Ry 1J a im P. a&4� Dennis D. Dawson Deputy Fire Marshal to YY A 1 I A(;HMLN 1 NO. b 1 • La Quinta Joint Venture August 5, 1988 City of La Quinta 78105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 Attention: La Quinta City Council h City Planning Commission Dear Members: With respect to the Riverside County Fire Department's response to Tentative Tract 23813, we request an exemption to City of La Quinta Municipal Code 13.12.020I. We base our request on the following: 1- With the street name being changed to Avenida Fernando, a direct emergency access path exists between Eisenhower Drive and Tenta- tive Tract 23813. We feel that this will simplify rather than complicate emergency vehicle access. 2 - A turn around at the end of Avenida Fernande which meets Riverside County Fire Department standards. 3 - A paved emergency fire access road with a fire department approved gate at the south end of the project to make sure that, depending on the emergency and which Santa Rosa Cove entrance is used, access is always available to Tentative Tract 23813. In conclusion we would like to say that the safety of our future home- owners and their property is as much a concern of ours as it is the City of La Quinta and the Riverside County Fire Department. Our feeling is that we have not affected either ingress or egress for emergency vehicles and personnel. very truly yours, LA QUINTVENTURE Tom Hill Project Director TH:eh C11 Y 01- LA QUANTA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPT. P.O. Box 780, La Quinta, California 92253, Telephone 619 564-1315 ` , / ATTACHMENT No.. 6 EXAMPLES OF HOUSE DESIGNS AND ELEVATIONS W i��M 1 LO O YJ Z w Y ti, m yo LO tW e. U s d q � W J' LD \L W Sar J H Z c� s d H Z Is I/ L F��f.:tivclul ' SEP 9 la I Jacklyn Loverro a..4'�""7 [ITV AC r A nrur.KTw 77-175 Avenida Fernando Santa Rosa Cove La Quinta, CA 92253 �4Q . 6, /vT d N� arr. � � I 70' 2013 r jot row w.taN cfffh � Zzr JA-L� Alp vr a 4-aAl . �. ro �,..� yam.- � y y� 4 �, aA W-d �. kECEiVEL) SEP 9 IM CITY OF LA QUINTA PUNNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPT. ly V ) fyOF COUNCIL MEETING DATE: ITEM TITLE: VILLAGE ZONING TEXT BACKGROUND: Village Plan 2/2/88 Planning Commission Minutes 8/23/88 Staff Report attached FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None RECOMMENDATION• AGENDA CATEGORY: PUBLIC HEARING: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: APPROVED BY• I. Find no significant impact II. Adopt Ordinance amending Title 9 Municipal Code Submitte. by: r Signature Approved for submission to City Council: RON RIEDROWSKI, CITY MANAGER KH/ / r i MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 1988 SUBJECT: VILLAGE ZONING TEXT Background: The Village of La Quinta Specific Plan, adopted February 2, 1988, requires as a part of its implementation the amendment of the Zoning Ordinance (Title 9 of the Municipal Code) to provide text for the Village commercial and Village Residential zones and a Design Review chapter. On the 23rd of August, 1988, the Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on these text amendments. As a result of their hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 88-105 which confirmed the conclusion of Environmental Assessment No. 88-094 (a Negative Declaration) and recommended to the City Council the adoption of an ordinance amending Municipal Code Title 9. Staff Report: The Public Hearing for the City Council consideration of the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments has been duly advertised and noticed for this date. The Planning Commission has forwarded a unanimous positive recommendation for adoption and a Negative Declaration of significant adverse effect on the environment. Copies of the hearing draft of the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments have been available to the public since July 20th when a Newsletter was distributed announcing the availability of copies at the new Library, City Hall, Chamber of Commerce, La Quinta Pharmacy and many Village realty offices. What is being proposed for adoption the Village Zoning. The amendment the new zones will follow shortly, considered and adopted. today is only the text of of the Zoning Map to reflect after the text is fully KH/MEMOTB.001 -1- S�� The text of the Village Zones follows very closely both the General Plan and the Specific Plan, indeed, the Specific Plan is incorporated by reference into the Village Zones, in order to avoid repetition of the Plan. The parts of the Village Zoning Text are: the "CV" Commercial Village Zone; the "RV" Residential Village Zone; the Design Review chapter; and two minor amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Plot Plan Review chapters to incorporate references to the Design Review process. The most important part of the text is the CV Zone itself. This Zone tailors the mix of uses to each district of the Village described in the Specific Plan so that each area can be unique and compatible with its surroundings. The subzones for each area have different development standards. One significant difference is the percentage of parking which can be allowed "off -site." In the Core Subzone, up to 75% of the required parking can be provided in non -site locations; in the Park area, up to 25% can be off -site. In the South subzone, only corner properties may have 25% off -site. In the North subzone, 100% of the parking must be provided on site. Several questions have been raised about the mix of commercial uses permitted in the Park subzone. The Park subzone permits the following uses (see page 27-8 for the full text): - Residential as a secondary use; - Detached professional studios; - Service and limited sales within offices; - Food service; Classes; Art display; - Parking lots; Plus the following accessory uses: Outdoor display and sales of original art works; Plus the following conditional uses: Food service plus other attractions; - Exceeding the stated upper limit for a permitted use; KH/MEMOTB.001 -2- J-7 Special parking lots designs which do not meet development standards. This mix of uses has been criticized by some park property owners as being not broad enough. The limitation of these uses in the Park Subzone was described in the village Plan (page 48 ,and page 53). The Specific Plan states: "The land uses around the park should comprise commercial offices and eating establishments. Commercial retail uses should not be located here, for they would diffuse the concentration of retail that is intended for the Core." But an underlying principle for this limitation is that the Park area is surrounded on three sides by residential land uses. Only a limited selection of commercial uses are viewed to be compatible with the surrounding residential development. Another question has been posed concerning the selection of the boundary between the residential north of the park and the Core commercial subzone, (following the back property line between Navarro and Bermudas). This boundary was on the General Plan and the Specific Plan. To significantly alter the boundary would require an amendment of both Plans. The rationale for the boundary is a basic planning principle. The boundary between residential and commercial land uses is easier to accommodate in site planning along the rear of each use, rather than the front. Buffering walls and landscaping are much more effective on the rear. Moreover, placing residential on the each side of Navarro means residential faces residential. This is perceived to have less blighting influence than if it were commercial on the east side of the street, introducing commercial traffic onto Navarro. In its present, planned configuration, commercial traffic circulates on Tampico, Bermudas and Montezuma, but has less of an impact mid block on Navarro. Another question has been raised concerning the preservation of the residential land use on the south side of Tampico between Navarro and Eisenhower. This area is La Quintals only true high density residential area. It has already been developed as such, up to about half of the available land. Higher density residential, close in, on the south side of Tampico, may help to provide the critical market mass necessary to underwrite the growth of the Village Commercial. The pre -Specific Plan market studies suggested that the Village already had more commercial land than could be reasonably absorbed. (This is why it was necessary to divide, and specialize the subzones). Additional commercial land along Tampico would have four major consequences: a) require the revision of the General Plan and the Village Specific Plan; KH/MEMOTB.001 -3- 3-f b) jeopardize the infill of quality high density residential; c) create an even greater surplus of commercial land in the Village, lowering existing land prices and further retarding the potential for the Village area to build out; and d) further compound the traffic congestion to be expected along Tampico, resulting from multiple driveway access to shallow depth strip commercial development. The next most important section of this amendment is the Design Review Chapter. This Chapter is based on the discussion held with the Council in February, 1988 about the concept of a design review board. It was agreed at that time that the design review process should be a technical review to supplement the Planning Commission, and that it should take place in such a way that no delays occurred because of the technical review of design plans. The reviews of plans by the Design Review Board are all subject to confirmation and/or appeal to the Planning Commission. An objection letter received during the August 23rd Planning commissi.on hearing from a local realtor states that the board should have very little technical basis, and should rather be made up of "no more than one Architect. . ., no more than one Landscape Architect, Engineer or Designer. . . , one member of the Planning Commission, no less than one downtown property owner, and no less than one local businessman, and no less than one local resident." The difficulty here is that a major shift in the purpose and composition of the board does two things. First, it has a tendency to politicize purely technical design considerations; and second, it introduces a greater time delay and source of frustration for the design applicant. The design aspects of proposed projects are put together by design professionals. The review of designs by lay persons who are not articulate in their reactions to a design introduces a tendency for lowering expectations to a "lowest common denominator." Imitative design (rather than complying innovation) becomes the norm. what is needed is a professionally competent design review board to supplement existing technical staff, who can review all designs with an ability to precisely explain what needs to be done to the design to make it acceptable, not just react from an unsophisticated view of "does it look good, is it functional, does it blend well with its surroundings, yes or no?" KH/MEMOTB.001 -4- .S? 4 Another source of comments was the consultant associated with a major prospective Village developer. His comments were quite specific and will probably be introduced at the hearing. A number of his earlier comments formed the basis of changes in the early drafts of the zoning text. However, some comments are still unresolved. These have been discussed at some length. Their final resolution may not be possible until a firm project proposal design is available for concrete consideration. At their hypothetical level today, room for accommodation appears to be available. We wish to thank the planner for his thoughtful review and comments to us. The next section of the Village Text relates to the "R-V" Residential Village Zone. This Zone creates an unique residential zone surrounding the commercial subzones. The densities of the different portions of the Residential Village Zone are in keeping with their present densities, except for the area east of Desert Club, which has been proposed for a 10,000 square foot density to reflect its present lot sizes. (A number of property owners in this area appear to be in support of the change in density.) A draft Ordinance has been included in your packet which amends Title 9 of the Municipal Code to adopt the text of the Village Zoning. Recommendations: I. Concur with the findings of the Planning Commission in Resolution 88-015 that Environmental Assessment No. 88-094, which determines that no significant adverse effect on the environment would result from the amendment of the ordinance is an appropriate finding; and Ii. Adopt an ordinance amending the La Quinta Municipal Code, Title 9, Planning and Zoning, by inserting three new chapters and amending two chapters as described in Chapters 9.90 Commercial village Zone; 9.50 Residential Village Zone; 9.183 Design Review; 9.180 Plot Plans; and 9.182 Residential and Commercial Development Plot Plans. RH/MEMOTB.001 -5- 6`0 . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 J > p 1 1 �— LLI 1 IL Cl) 1 1U O 1 IF a 1 1t O 1 Il a 1 1 ♦ , � ♦ , w k t an •40 J � k ` 1 r♦ V• S w w 2 C. \ \ %1 % , w , • r tcectc:;cr 091 D6 "Tia'a© • . w 1 w � w ! ; q r ♦raw , w i: •, a., a w, w!: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 88-015 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 9, PLANNING AND ZONING, BY INSERTING THREE NEW CHAPTERS: CHAPTER 9.90 "C-V (COMMERCIAL VILLAGE) ZONE"; CHAPTER 9.50 "R-V (RESIDENTIAL VILLAGE) ZONE"; AND CHAPTER 9.183 "DESIGN REVIEW"; AND AMENDING TWO CHAPTERS: 9.180 "PLOT PLANS" AND 9.182 "RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PLOT PLANS" BY INSERTING REFERENCES TO DESIGN REVIEW. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 23rd day of August, 1988, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of the City of La Quinta to amend Title 9, PLANNING AND ZONING, of the Municipal Code as presented in Exhibit A (attached); and, WHEREAS, on February 2, 1988, the City of La Quinta adopted the Specific Plan for the Village at La Quinta, upon recommendation of the Planning Commission; and, WHEREAS, the implementation of the Specific Plan for the Village at La Quinta would be facilitated by the amendment of Title 9 of the Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, the Planning Commission did consider the texts of the proposed amendments, attached as Exhibits: Al Chapter 9.90 A2 Chapter 9.50 A3 Chapter 9.183 A4 Chapter 9.180 A5 Chapter 9.182 "C-V (Commercial "R-V (Residential "Design Review" "Plot Plans" "Residential and Development Plot Village) Zone" Village) Zone" Commercial Plans" WHEREAS, said Municipal Code Amendments comply with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (County of Riverside, Resolution No. 82-213, adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5), in that the Planning Director has determined, after reviewing the Amendments, the Environmental Assessment for the Specific Plan for the Village at La Quinta, MR/RESO88.015 -1- �5� and the General Plan Master Environmental Assessment, that the proposed Amendment of the Municipal Code will have no significant adverse environmental impact; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the approval of said Amendment of the Municipal Code: 1. The adopted General Plan calls for a "Village Commercial" land use designation for the Village area. 2. The adopted Specific Plan for the Village at La Quinta has determined specific uses, development standards, and other matters for the Village area. 3. Both the General Plan and the Specific Plan necessitate the Amendment of the Municipal Code to create appropriate zones, uses, standards, and procedures to carry out the intent of the Plans in order to enhance the consistency of the zoning with the Plans. The environmental review indicates the development which may occur pursuant to the Amendments has been addressed in the General Plan and the Master Environmental Analysis, and that adoption of these amendments is necessary for implementation and furtherance of said General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quints, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment No. 88-094, in that the Amendments to the Municipal Code will not result in any significant adverse effect on the environment; 3. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council adoption of an Ordinance amending the Municipal Code Title 9, PLANNING AND ZONING, by inserting three new chapters and amending two chapters, as presented in Exhibit Al through AS, attached hereto. MR/RES088.015 -2- PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quints Planning Commission, held on this 23rd day of August, 1988, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CHAIRMAN IRif f:iX*0)-1 MR/RESO88.015 -3- � y ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 9, PLANNING AND ZONING, BY INSERTING THREE NEW CHAPTERS: CHAPTER 9.90 -"C-V (COMMERCIAL VILLAGE) ZONE"; CHAPTER 9.50 "R-V (RESIDENTIAL VILLAGE) ZONE"; AND CHAPTER 9.183 "DESIGN REVIEW"; AND BY AMENDING TWO CHAPTERS: 9.180 "PLOT PLANS" AND 9.182 "RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PLOT PLANS" WITH THE INSERTION OF REFERENCES TO DESIGN REVIEW. The City Council of the City of La Quinta does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. ADOPTION OF CHAPTER 9.90, "C-V (COMMERCIAL VILLAGE) ZONE". The La Quinta Municipal Code, Title 9, PLANNING AND ZONING, is hereby amended by the insertion of a new Chapter 9.90, "C-V (Commercial Village) Zone", attached hereto as Exhibit Al, the content of which is presented in the following sections: 9.90.010 GENERALLY 9.90.015 PURPOSE 9.90.020 PERMITTED USES 9.90.030 ACCESSORY USES PERMITTED 9.90.040 COMMERCIAL PLOT PLAN REVIEW REQUIRED 9.90.050 DESIGN REVIEW REQUIRED 9.90.060 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 9.90.070 SUBZONES: PURPOSES, PERMITTED USES, AND SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 9.90.071 C-V-C "CORE" SUBZONE 9.90.072 C-V-P "PARK" SUBZONE 9.90.073 C-V-S "SOUTH" SUBZONE 9.90.074 C-V-N "NORTH" SUBZONE SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF CHAPTER 9.50, "R-V (RESIDENTIAL VILLAGE) ZONE". The La Quint& Municipal Code, Title 9, PLANNING AND ZONING, is hereby amended by the insertion of a new Chapter 9.50 "R-V (Residential Village, Single- and Multi -Family Dwellings and Supportive Uses) Zone", attached hereto as Exhibit A2, the content of which is presented in the following sections: 9.50.010 9.50.015 9.50.020 GENERALLY PURPOSE PERMITTED USES MR/0RDDRFT.022 y�S 9.50.022 CONDITIONAL USES 9.50.025 DENSITIES 9.50.030 BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITS 9.50.040 REQUIRED LOT AREA 9.50.050 YARD REQUIREMENTS 9.50.060 LOT COVERAGE PERMITTED 9.50.070 DISTANCE REQUIRED BETWEEN MAIN BUILDINGS 9.50.080 AUTOMOBILE STORAGE SPACE 9.50.085 PEDESTRIAN WAYS 9.50.090 DESIGN STANDARDS SECTION 3. ADOPTION OF CHAPTER 9.183 "DESIGN .REVIEW". The La Quinta Municipal Code, Title 9, PLANNING AND ZONING, is hereby amended by the insertion of a new Chapter 9.183 "Design Review", attached hereto as Exhibit A3, the content of which is presented in the following sections: 9.183.010 GENERALLY 9.183.020 PURPOSE 9.183.030 REFERENCE FILE OF DESIGN AND STANDARDS 9.183.040 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 9.183.050 DESIGN REVIEW PROCEDURES 9.183.060 DESIGN REVIEW STANDARDS 9.183.070 FILING FOR DESIGN REVIEW 9.183.080 FEES 9.183.090 COMPLIANCE REVIEW REQUIREMENTS SECTION 4. AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 9.180 "PLOT PLANS". The La Quinta Municipal Code, Title 9, PLANNING AND ZONING, is hereby amended by the insertion of the following addition to Section 9.180.030 Applications, Paragraph B., to read as follows: B. Design Review. Certain zones, areas within the City, and types of applications also require a design review. See Chapter 9.183 DESIGN REVIEW. C. Environmental Clearance.... <No change of text; re -letter paragraph only.> SECTION 5. AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 9.182 "RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PLOT PLANS". The La Quinta Municipal Code, Title 9, PLANNING AND ZONING, is hereby amended by the insertion of the following addition to Section 9.182.050 Requirements for Approval to read as follows: 4. The plot plan meets all design standards for the City and all design standards of adopted specific plans applicable to the location and/or type of construction or use proposed in the plot plan, pursuant to Chapter 9.183 DESIGN REVIEW, as signified by a design approval by the appropriate Design Review Procedure in Section 9.183.050. / MR/ORDDRFT.022 SECTION 6. VALIDITY. If any section, subsection, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance, or of any Code adopted thereby is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such a decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or of any Code adopted thereby. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section or subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase thereof, and of each Code adopted hereby irrespective of the clauses or phrases being declared invalid. SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. SECTION 8. POSTING. The City Clerk shall, within 15 days after passage of this Ordinance, cause it to be posted in at least three public places designated by resolution of the City Council; shall certify to the adoption and posting of this Ordinance; and, shall cause this Ordinance and its certification, together with proof of posting, to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of this City. The foregoing Ordinance was introduced after reading of the Title, before the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, at a regular meeting of the City Council, and thereafter, following the Public Hearing pursuant to California Government Code Section 50022.3, the foregoing Ordinance was PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of said City Council held on this day of 1988, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: WILLIAM R. HOYLE, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: SAUNDRA L. JUHOLA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: BARRY BRANDT, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California MR/ORDDRFT.022 eo VILLAGE ZONING ORDINANCE HEARING DRAFT ■ w I &/^I 1^T ww www CONTENTS NEW CHAPTERS: 9.183 DESIGN REVIEW 9.183.010 GENERALLY 9.183.020 PURPOSE 9.183.030 REFERENCE FILE OF DESIGN REVIEW REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS 9.183.040 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 9.183.050 DESIGN REVIEW PROCEDURES 9.183.060 DESIGN REVIEW STANDARDS 9.183.070 FILING FOR DESIGN REVIEW 9.183.080 FEES 9.183.090 COMPLIANCE 9.50 R-V ZONE 9.50.010 GENERALLY 9.50.015 PURPOSE 9.50.020 PERMITTED USES 9.50.022 CONDITIONAL USES 9.50.025 DENSITIES 9.50.030 BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITS 9.50.040 REQUIRED LOT AREA 9.50.050 YARD REQUIREMENTS 9.50.060 LOT COVERAGE PERMITTED 9.50.070 DISTANCE REQUIRED BETWEEN MAIN BUILDINGS 9.50.080 AUTOMOBILE STORAGE SPACE 9.50.085 PEDESTRIAN WAYS 9.50.090 DESIGN STANDARDS 9.90 C-V ZONE 9.90.010 9.90.015 9.90.020 9.90.030 9.90.040 9.90.050 9.90.060 9.90.070 9.90.071 9.90.072 9.90.073 9.90.074 AMENDED CHAPTERS: GENERALLY PURPOSE PERMITTED USES ACCESSORY USES PERMITTED COMMERCIAL PLOT PLAN REVIEW REQUIRED DESIGN REVIEW REQUIRED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SUBZONES: PURPOSES, PERMITTED USES, AND SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS C-V-C "CORE" SUBZONE C-V-P "PARK" SUBZONE C-V-S "SOUTH" SUBZONE C-V-N "NORTH" SUBZONE 9.180 PLOT PLANS 9.180.030 APPLICATIONS 9.182 RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PLOT PLANS 9.182.050 REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL 69 CHAPTER 9.183 DESIGN REVIEW SECTIONS: 9.183.010 GENERALLY 9.183.020 PURPOSE 9.183.030 REFERENCE FILE OF DESIGN REVIEW REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS 9.183.040 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 9.183.050 DESIGN REVIEW PROCEDURES 9.183.060 DESIGN REVIEW STANDARDS 9.183.070 FILING FOR DESIGN REVIEW 9.183.080 FEES 9.183.090 COMPLIANCE 9.183.010 GENERALLY. The requirements and procedures presented in this Chapter shall apply to all applications for plot plans, as described in Chapters 9.180 and 9.182, for which design standards have been adopted. Design standards may be adopted by specific plan, by special zoning, by specific use or type of construction, by location, or by type of application. 9.183.020 PURPOSE. Design Review is the pre -approval technical review of proposed development plans. Plans are compared to adopted standards and criteria. Standards relate to design concerns which have visual and functional impacts on the property and its users and visitors, on adjacent properties, on the neighborhood, on public use areas, and on the City as a whole. The purposes of Design Review are as follows: A. To foster attainment of those sections of the City's General Plan and Specific Plans which refer to the preservation and enhancement of the particular character and unique assets of MR/ORDDRFT.016 -1- 70 the city and its harmonious development, through encouraging private and public interests to assist in the implementation process; B. To assure that the public benefits derived from expenditures of public funds for improvement and beautification of streets and other public structures and spaces shall be supported by the exercise of reasonable controls over private property development wtih regard for the character and design of buildings, open spaces, street landscaping, etc. C. To encourage development of private property in harmony with the desired character of the community and in conformance with the guidelines herein provided with due regard to the public and private interests involved; D. To recognize the interdependence of community values and good design and to provide a method by which the City may implement this interdependence to its benefit. 9.183.030 REFERENCE FILE OF DESIGN REVIEW REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS A. The Planning Director shall compile and keep up-to-date a reference file of design review requirements and standards. B. The reference file shall be kept available for public inspection, and a copy of the file shall be provided to each member of the City Council, Planning Commission and the Design Review Board. C. The reference file shall contain, at a minimum, the following material: A list of all matters which require design review, such as specific plans, special zones, specific uses or types of construction, locations, types of applications, or other regulations; A list of all material which specifies the design content of the design review process, such as adopted design standards, manuals, criteria, codes, and other regulations; MR/ORDDRFT.016 -2- 3. A map illustrating the locations of any specific plans, special zones, or other areas requiring design review which have a locational aspect. 9.183.040 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD A. Design Review Board Established. Pursuant to this Chapter, there is created a Design Review Board. B. The Design Review Board shall serve in the capacity of an advisory body to the Planning Commission, following the Design Review procedures described in Section 9.183.050. C. Members of the Design Review Board shall be appointed, replaced, removed, or reappointed by the City Council. D. Membership of the Design Review Board shall consist of seven members having the following qualifications: 1. A minimum of two, up to a maximum of four, members shall be architects; 2. A minimum of two, up to a maximum of four, members shall be either landscape architects, engineers, or professionals in commercial art or graphic design; 3. One member shall be a member of the Planning Commission, assigned to serve on (but not Chair) the Design Review Board for a one-year period (rotating among the Planning Commission Members). The assigned Planning Commissioner may designate an alternate Commissioner to attend a particular meeting in the Commissioner's absence. E. Appointments for non -Planning -Commission members shall be for two-year periods, except that the initial appointments shall be staggered for one- and two-year periods. F. A quorum for the Design Review Board shall consist of the Planning Commissioner (or alternate) plus two other members present. Actions may be taken by a majority of those present, provided a quorum exists. MR/ORDDRFT.016 -3- �� G. The Design Review Board shall hold regular meetings as needed at least one week prior to the Planning Commission meeting date. Special meetings may be called as necessary. H. In order to facilitate compliance with the processing requirements of the Permit Streamlining Act, the deliberations of the Design Review Board shall have the following time limit for preparing its recommendation on any particular application: six days preceding the date upon which the application is advertised and agendized for the Planning Commission. For any applications upon which a recommendation has not been adopted, the Design Review Board may request from the Planning Commission a continuance and a referral. The Planning Commission may decline to continue and refer any item back to the Design Review Board. I. The Design Review Board shall establish rules of procedure, which may be amended from time to time. J. The Planning Director or his designee shall serve as staff support and recording secretary for the Design Review Board. 9.183.050 DESIGN REVIEW PROCEDURES A. Single-family detached residential structures: The design aspects of individual plot plan applications shall be reviewed and approved, approved with conditions, modified, or denied by the Planning Director, subject to the options for Staff referral or Applicant appeal to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission may refer design questions to the Design Review Board for an advisory finding and recommendation. B. Multi -family residential structures from duplexes up to 24 units: 1. The design aspects of plot plan applications shall be reviewed and approved, approved with conditions, modified, or denied by the Design Review Board, subject to adoption of the decision by the Planning Commission on their next Consent Agenda. The Applicant may appeal the decision of MR/ORDDRFT.016 -4- the Design Review Board to the Planning Commission by means of the following procedure. Before the Consent Agenda is adopted, the Applicant shall make known to the Planning Director his intention to appeal. The matter shall then be removed from the Consent Agenda and scheduled for the next agenda as a Business Item. At the next meeting, the appeal shall be presented by the Applicant, discussed by the Planning Commission, and the appeal upheld, modified, or denied. C. Multi -family residential structures of 25 or more units and all non-residential projects: The design aspects of plot plan applications shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board. The Board shall develop and adopt findings and a recommendation to the Planning Commission to approve, approve with conditions, modify, or deny the design of the project. The Planning Commission shall consider the recommendation of the Design Review Board at the regularly -scheduled meeting for which the plot plan has been agendized, and shall adopt, adopt with modifications, or decline to adopt the recommendation of the Design Review Board. D. Other Plans: The design aspects of other plans such as specific plans, specific plan amendments, tentative tracts, typical housing products, and other similar "pre -plot -plan" applications may be referred for review to the Design Review Board. Findings and recommendations shall be forwarded to the Planning Commission, along with all other technical review results. E. The Planning Commission may refer back to the Design Review Board any modifications of the design proposed by the Applicant or the Planning Commission for an amended recommendation. F. Design Details: After Planning Commission approval of a plan, the Commission may delegate to the Design Review Board the review and approval of minor design modifications or refinements of a project, subject to adoption of the decision by the MR/ORDDRFT.016 -5- / Planning Commission on their next Consent Agenda, and also subject to appeal by the Applicant to the Planning Commission (following the procedure in B.2., above). G. Appeal of Planing Commission Decisions: Any action of the Planning Commission with regard to design review may be appealed to the City Council pursuant to Section 9.182.080 APPEALS. 9.183.060 DESIGN REVIEW STANDARDS A. Design considerations adopted for, or referring to, a design review requirement may address any or all of the following: Site suitability, slopes, soils, grading, drainage, preservation of existing plant materials; site design, access, streets, drives, intersections, gates, security, walls, parking, pedestrian arrangements, bikeways, provisions for loading and servicing, structural orientation, placement, and configuration; 3. Structural design, scale, proportion,architecture, style, period, bulk, heights, shapes, masses, roof form, openings, features, details, ornamentation; 4. Construction design, external facade treatments, materials, methods, colors, maintenance considerations; 5. Landscaping, hardscapes, waterscapes, external furnishings, lighting, signage, external equipment, utilities, screening, fences, walls, buffering, vistas; and, 6. Adherence to thematic requirements of the area and/or general community acceptability of design. B. The review of the design of a proposed project plan shall be conducted in comparison to an adopted set of standards and criteria. Standards and criteria may be contained in one or a combination of the following: MR/ORDDRFT.016 -6- 1. A Specific Plan for the area. 2. A manual of design standards for the area. 3. A manual of landscape standards for the area. 4. A zone or subzone requirement for the area. 5. The Building or Fire Codes or any Municipal Codes. 6. Engineering standards. 7. The standards of another district or jurisdiction applying to the area. 8. Basic design standards applying to all development in the City, as described in Subsection 9.183.060 C., below. C. All development, construction, and use of land in the City shall exhibit superior quality design, complying with the following basic standards: 1. Provide a desirable environment conducive to the health, safety, and welfare of its occupants and visitors; 2. Be compatible in all major respects with the character of adjacent and surrounding developments, as well as the City as a whole; 3. Exhibit sensitivity to its location, site, vistas, terrain, and neighboring uses or open spaces; 4. Mitigate or internalize on -site impacts, and compensate for off -site impacts. 5. Embody a harmonious relationship with existing and proposed adjoining developments, and, in the context of the immediate neighborhood/community, avoiding both excessive variety and monotonous repetition, but allowing similarity of style, if warranted. MR/ORDDRFT.016 -7- �� 6. observe and enhance the context with regard to orientation, scale, maximum height, area, setbacks,and overall mass, as well as parts of any structure (buildings, walls, screens, towers, or signs). 7. Ensure that building design, materials, and colors are sympathetic with desert surroundings. 8. Exhibit a consistency of design, composition, and treatment, including a harmony of materials, colors, and composition, as well as consistent treatment, of those sides of a structure which are visible simultaneously. 9. Demonstrate design integrity, with no significant use of artifice, veneer, imitation, add -on, stick -on, pop -out, contrivance, false facade, or other unnecessary, non -genuine, or unauthentic embellishment. 10. Exhibit an honesty of presentation, with consistency between form and functions. 11. Choose and locate plantings, hardscapes, waterscapes, street furniture, and shade with regard for desert climate conditions; preserve specimen and landmark trees and topographic features upon a site; irrigate and maintain properly to ensure long term health and appearance of landscaping. 12. Place, orient, and separate access and circulation features (including emergency, auto traffic, parking, pedestrian, handicapped, bicycle, solid waste, service, and loading) so that each performs its function without interfering with each other and without creating a blighting influence. 13. Choose, place, orient, and scale the design and appropriateness of signs and lighting to suit the purposes, context, and the impact on adjacent users and passersby. MR/ORDDRFT.016 -8- 14. Employ, where appropriate, a proper use of graphics (as understood in architectural design). 9.183.070 FILING FOR DESIGN REVIEW A. Each Design Review requirement will specify the standards and criteria to be used. Forms and checklists of required information will be specified by the Planning and Development Department. Submissions for Design Review shall be filed on the appropriate forms and contain the required information and supportive material as specified for each Design Review requirement. 9.183.080 FEES. Each application submitted which involves Design Review or Appeal shall be accompanied by the fee for such review or appeal as specified in a schedule of fees adopted by City Council to recoup the costs of such reviews or appeals. 9.183.090 COMPLIANCE. A. Each plan reviewed and approved by the Design Review process (including Planning Director, Design Review Board, and Planning Commission) shall be constructed, installed, landscaped, and maintained as approved. B. Deviation from approved plans shall be submitted to the Planning Director for a determination as to whether the deviation is substantial. If not substantial, the deviation, if approved, will be noted and initialed on file plans. C. If the deviation is determined to be substantial, the plans shall be returned to the original design review procedure to re -review the deviation and its effect on the remainder of the design approval. Because of design interdependence, other design amendments may be required to compensate for the deviation. If the substantial deviation is approved, file plans will be amended by the Applicant to reflect the changes approved and/or required. MR/ORDDRFT.016 -9- CHAPTER 9.50 R-V ZONE SECTIONS: 9.50.010 GENERALLY 9.50.015 PURPOSE 9.50.020 PERMITTED USES 9.50.022 CONDITIONAL USES 9.50.025 DENSITIES 9.50.030 BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITS 9.50.040 REQUIRED LOT AREA 9.50.050 YARD REQUIREMENTS 9.50.060 LOT COVERAGE PERMITTED 9.50.070 DISTANCE REQUIRED BETWEEN MAIN BUILDINGS 9.50.080 AUTOMOBILE STORAGE SPACE 9.50.085 PEDESTRIAN WAYS 9.50.090 DESIGN STANDARDS 9.50.010 GENERALLY. The requirements set out in this Chapter shall apply to all uses and structures in the R-V Zone. 9.50.015 PURPOSE. The Residential -Village (R-V) Zone has as its purpose the implementation of relevant portions of the Village Specific Plan. The R-V Zone is designed to provide single-family and multi -family residential land uses adjacent to Village Commercial Zones, to provide special arrangements to foster housing and associated uses MR/ORDDRFT.013 -1- which contribute to the arts theme of the Village, and to provide special opportunities for off -site parking and pedestrian ways which support the pedestrian -oriented nature of the Village. 9.50.020 PERMITTED USES. Permitted uses in the R-V Zone shall be as follows: A. Single-family detached dwellings, which shall comply with requirements and standards of the Special Residential (SR) Zone (Chapter 9.42). B. All other residential uses at densities designated pursuant to Section 9.50.025 (including a variety of housing types, single-family attached, duplexes, triplexes, quadraplexes, townhouses, and other multi -unit dwelling groups), which shall comply with requirements and standards of this Chapter. C. Uses accessory to residential primary uses: 1. Artist's studios for personal artistic production (but not including commercial presentation or sale to the public on -site), with no employees other than family members or artistic models. Studios may .be attached to dwelling units or detached. 2. Studios or galleries on the ground floor wherein are shown and offered for sale to the public the artistic products of residents of the building in which the studio or gallery is contained. (Signs for such studios or galleries, not exceeding two square feet, one per studio or gallery, affixed to the building or door, may be permitted.) 3. Off-street on -site parking for residential uses and customers of studios/galleries. 4. On -site signs, affixed to building walls, stating the name of the residential structure, complying with Section 9.212.120 SIGN REGULATIONS. 9.50.022 CONDITIONAL USES. Parking lots for non-residential uses off -site within a reasonable walking distance, meeting specified design standards, granted by Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Chapter 9.172 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS. MR/ORDDRFT.013 -2- 9.50.025 DENSITIES. The dwelling -units -per -acre densities for residential uses may range from Low Density (2-4 du/ac) to High Density Residential (8-16 du/ac), as may be designated in the General Plan, and shall be indicated (in terms of minimum average square footage per unit) for each zoning district on the adopted Zoning Map. 9.50.030 BUILDING HEIGHT LIMIT. For all uses other than single -family -detached residential, the building height limit in the R-V Zone shall be two stories, up to 30 feet. Single -family -detached residential on individual lots in a High Density Residential area may also extend to two stories, up to 30 feet in height. 9.50.040 REQUIRED LOT AREA. The required minimum lot area in the R-V Zone shall be 7,200 square feet, or as otherwise provided by planned development approvals, pursuant to Section 9.148 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS. 9.50.050 YARD REQUIREMENTS. Yard requirements for the R-V Zone shall be as follows: A. Front yard: twenty feet. B. Internal side yard: five feet. C. External side yard: ten feet. D. Rear yard: ten feet. 9.50.060 LOT COVERAGE PERMITTED. In no case shall more than 65 percent of any lot be covered by buildings. 9.50.070 DISTANCE REQUIRED BETWEEN MAIN BUILDINGS. No two-story main building shall be closer than 15 feet to any other main building on the same lot and no one-story building shall be closer than 10 feet to any other one-story main building on the same lot. 9.50.080 AUTOMOBILE STORAGE SPACE. Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Chapter 9.160 of this title, and shall comply with design standards of the Village as described in the Village Specific Plan and Chapter 9.183 DESIGN REVIEW. Parking lots shall provide pedestrian ways, landscaping, lighting, and screening arrangements meeting design standards. 9.50.085 PEDESTRIAN WAYS. All development (other than single-family detached residential units on individual lots) in this Zone shall provide a paved MR/ORDDRFT.013 -3- X / pedestrian walkway along the front and side rights -of -way. Where space is available within the right-of-way between the edge of the ultimate pavement width and the right-of-way line, the pedestrian walkway shall be placed within the right-of-way; otherwise, a pedestrian walkway easement shall be provided by the development. walkways shall be in such locations, at such widths, and paved with such materials as are determined for public safety by the City Engineer. 9.50.090 DESIGN STANDARDS. A. All structures and uses in the R-V Zone (other than single-family detached residential on individual lots) are subject to the Village design review standards and procedures, pursuant to Section 9.183 DESIGN REVIEW. B. Single-family detached residential structures on individual lots shall conform to S-R (Special Residential) Zone standards (Chapter 9.42), except those occuring in a High Density (8-16 du/ac) area, in which case, heights may be two stories, up to 30 feet. MR/ORDDRFT.013 -4- CHAPTER 9.90 C - V ZONE (COMMERCIAL VILLAGE) SECTIONS: 9.90.010 GENERALLY 9.90.015 PURPOSE 9.90.020 PERMITTED USES 9.90.030 ACCESSORY USES PERMITTED 9.90.040 COMMERCIAL PLOT PLAN REVIEW REQUIRED 9.90.050 DESIGN REVIEW REQUIRED 9.90.060 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 9.90.070 SUBZONES: PURPOSES, PERMITTED USES, AND SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 9.90.071 C-V-C "CORE" SUBZONE 9.90-072 C-V-P "PARK" SUBZONE 9.90.073 C-V-S "SOUTH" SUBZONE 9.90.074 C-V-N "NORTH" SUBZONE 9.90.010 GENERALLY. A. The C-V (Commercial Village) Zone is a plan -specific Zone. The adopted Village Specific Plan (VSP)*, together with the following sections of this C-V Zone (and all other chapters and sections cited herein), must be considered and used as if the VSP were itself included in the text of the C-V Zone. To avoid repetition and re -adoption of the provisions of the VSP, the following chapters of the Village Specific Plan should be considered to be incorporated by reference in the C-V Zone: Chapter 4 "The Specific Plan" MR/ORDDRFT.014 -1- v y Chapter 5 "Development Guidelines Preamble" Chapter 6 "Development Guidelines" A, adopted February 2, 1985, to by the abbreviation "VSP".. B. All development proposed to be conducted in the C-V Zone shall be designed and evaluated according to the Village Specific Plan. The c-V Zone provides the administrative framework within which this Plan is to be implemented. The regulations set out in this Chapter shall apply generally throughout the C-V Zone. In the respective Subzones, regulations providing further development guidance shall apply in each of the'Subzone areas of C-V as set forth. 9.90.015 PURPOSE. A. The Village is the "downtown" of La Quinta. The Specific Plan for the Village at La Quinta helps create the focused "sense of place" for the continued evolution and development of this downtown. The purpose of the C-V Zone is to guide the development of the downtown in keeping with the Village Specific Plan by providing a structured variety for commercial (and limited residential) land uses and specific development standards. To capitalize on the locational trends already established, these land uses are arranged in particular patterns, mixes, and configurations in separate Subzones. To guide and support each pattern of land uses, particular development standards are also presented for each Subzone. In a complementary fashion, the four Subzones work together to establish an identifiable "place" for the provision of goods, services and housing. As a Commercial Zone, the village is designed to serve four particular market segments: (1) residents of housing within, adjacent to, and within a reasonable distance of the Village; (2) residents and guests of the larger La Quinta community; (3) other commercial entities located within the Village commercial area; and (4) tourists and visitors to La Quinta. B. In providing the goods, services, and housing, the land uses and structures must support the thematic emphasis of the Village: (1) a desert MR/oRDDRFT.014 -2- 9.90.020 oasis... (2) consistent with La Quinta's local historic architectural vernacular... (3) at a pedestrian scale... (4) with an arts theme. PERMITTED USES. A. Uses which may be permitted in the C-V Zone are listed below, grouped into classes of similar uses, with examples. In each Subzone, the groups of uses specifically permitted in that Subzone are cited, together with any special expansions, exclusions, or qualifications of uses which are necessary to tailor the cited use group to the needs of that particular Subzone. Only uses specifically cited and/or modified for each Subzone are permitted in that Subzone. B. Examples are given for each group of uses to indicate the intent of each group. Lists of examples are not indented to be exhaustive. Other uses essentially similar to the examples should be considered permissible. However, a proposed use (even if listed in the examples), may be atypical in that it has a feature which has an impact out of character with the other uses listed, making the use also akin to another use group. Such atypical (or hybrid) uses shall be interpreted by the procedure described in C., below. The standard to be applied to such interpretations shall be as follows: a preponderance of similarities notwithstanding, one major difference, causing an impact not in keeping with the rest of the uses in the group, shall be sufficient to cause a proposed use to be classified with another use group having similar impacts. C. Interpretations shall be made by the Planning Director, in Administrative Hearing, subject to appeal to the Planning Commission. D. MR/ORDDRFT.014 Village Commercial. Uses by group: Group 1. Single-family detached residential as the primary use; a. Uses and structures shall conform to SR (Special Residential) Zone requirements (Chapter 9.42). b. May include an artist's studio for personal artistic production (but not including commercial 1 -3- J presentation or sale to the public on -site), with no employees other than family members or artistic models. Studios may be attached or detached. If detached, the studio square footage is not included in the required minimum dwelling unit square footage. (See 9.90.060 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, paragraph P.) Group 2. Multi -family as the primary use: single-family attached, duplexes, triplexes, quadraplexes, townhouses, garden apartments, and multi -family dwellings (including rooming, boarding, group home, and congregate nursing facilities) as the primary use; a. Uses shall conform to R-V (Residential - Village) Zone requirements (Chapter 9.50). b. May include an artist's studio for personal artistic production (but not including commercial presentation or sale to the public on -site, except as provided in the R-V Zone -- Chapter 9.50), with no employees other than family members or artistic models. Studios may be attached or detached. (See 9.90.060 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, paragraph P.) Group 3. Residential as a secondary use: single-family or multi -family units as a secondary use incidental to a non-residential permitted primary use, physically placed above or behind the primary use(s). a. Residential uses must have independent exterior entry/exit, meeting all building codes for separation of residential and non-residential uses). b. May include an attached artist's studio for personal artistic production as an accessory use. (See 9.90.060 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, paragraph P.) MR/ORDDRFT.014 -4- Group 4. Detached professional studio: a. Indoor, or combination indoor/outdoor work spaces, not attached to a dwelling unit, for professional, creative, artistic production; to include painting, drawing, sculpture, carving, ceramics and pottery, non-ferrous foundry, welding, brazing, kilns, photography, weaving, plastics, jewelry, gemstones, hand -built fine furniture, clay, wax, glass blowing and cutting, silk screening, stone cutting, set building, and costume production. Does not include presentation or sales to the public. Examples: studio, workroom b. Indoor -only space for composing, choreography, casting, rehearsing, arranging, recording or taping (but not performance before an audience) of music, dance, dramatic or comedic material. Examples: studio, practice room, rehearsal hall, recording room, soundstage, videostage C. May include instruction in the form of apprenticeship, tutoring, or classes not exceeding five students at any one time. d. May include employees (paid or volunteer) not exceeding five employees at any one time. (Performers for type "b" studios shall not be counted as "employees".) e. Must comply with 9.90.060 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. Group 5. Commercial guest lodging and associated uses: includes hotel, motel, and bed and breakfast houses not exceeding 25 rooms, conference rooms with combined seating capacity no greater than 100 persons, limited incidental retail sales of items for the MR/ORDDRFT.014 -5- Y? convenience of guests, meals and beverages served to guests. Group 6. Offices: offices conducting business or providing a service, having no retail or wholesale sales, nor repair, nor servicing of goods on -site. Examples: business, insurance, real estate, medical, dental, chiropractic, ophthalmologist, audiology, podiatry, engineer, planner, surveyor, architect, landscape architect, title company, attorney, auto rental (with storage of autos limited to three within the Zone), bank, savings and loan, credit union, loan office, employment agency, library, secretarial and typing service, consultant, tourist information, travel agent, social service agency, bookkeeping, accounting, advertising service, writing service, limousine service (auto storage limited to two within the Zone), answering service, apartment or condo management or rental service, appraiser, office for association or organization, chamber of commerce, counseling, stock brokerage, financial analyst/advisor service, tax service, interior design. Group 7. services and limited sales within offices: offices providing, in addition to the uses of Group 6, services which necessitate the incidental retail sale on -site of goods essential to the service. Examples: optician, clinic, lab in support of other services such as dental, medical, research and testing, hearing aid fitting service, dietician, caterer (not to include on -site production), pharmacy within medical complex. Group 8. Personal services: services with minimal impacts, including on -site retail sales of goods essential to the service, provided not in offices, but in work spaces resembling shops or stores. Does not include sale of motor fuels or servicing of motor vehicles. MR/ORDDRFT.014 -6- Examples: barber or beauty shop, blueprint or duplicating service, tailor or alteration shop, cleaning and dyeing, laundry or laundromat, costume design studio, interior decorating service, post office, shoe and leather repair, shoeshine stand, watch or jewelry repair, picture framing or matting shop, package wrapping/packing/sending service, bicycle repair. Group 9. Food service: prepared foods sold for on -site consumption and/or carry -out, indoor and patio service, (no drive-in or drive-thru), no live entertainment, no alcoholic beverages. Examples: restaurant, sandwich shop, delicatessen, cafe, cafeteria, tea room, coffee shop, ice cream shop, yogurt shop, burger shop, pizza shop, ethnic foods, bakery shop, bagel shop, fudge or candy shop, vending machine food, health food bar, caterer with on -site production. Group 10. Food service plus other attractions: a. Prepared foods sold for on -site consumption, indoor and patio service (no drive-in, or drive-thru), plus one or more of the following additional features: 1) Alcoholic beverages served for on -site consumption only; 2) Live entertainment indoors. (Entertainment must be recurring or continuing during the evening, or be limited to a capacity of 30 tables. Food service facilities with only one show per evening and exceeding 30 tables are considered "dinner theaters" and fall into Group 11 uses); 3) Live or recorded entertainment outdoors; 4) Dance floor; MR/ORDDRFT.014 -7- 91 5) Recreational accessory uses such as pool or billiard tables, dart boards, coin -operated entertainment arcades, shuffleboard tables; 6) Television ,screen exceeding 35-inch diagonal measurement. b. Restrictions may be applied with regard to the following: 1) Hours of operation; 2) Noise volumes permitted at the perimeter of the property; 3) Capacity of area for service or entertainment; 4) Size of group providing the entertainment; 5) Acoustic versus electronic amplification. Examples: restaurant, cocktail lounge, bar and grill, night club, cafe, coffee house, pizza with wine and beer. Group 11. Public assembly: indoor assembly and entertainment facilities attracting large numbers and/or having short peak -use hours. Examples: auditorium, theater, dinner theater, ballroom, social hall, community center, club, bowling center, skating rink, large conference center seating more than 100 persons, recreation facility, gymnasium, field house, concert hall. Group 12. Classes: indoor class facilities for education, training, self- improvement, hobby, health, or vocation; all ages. (See 9.90.060 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, paragraph P.) Examples: instruction for art, cooking floral design, crafts, jewelry, leather working, sculpture, pottery, carving, basketry, pet care and grooming, toy MR/ORDDRFT.014 -8- making, quilting, weaving, knitting, day care, preschool, kindergarten, personal financial management, general adult education, business training, secretarial skills, drafting, landscaping, barber and beauty training, dance, music, swimming, scuba, sewing and tailoring, bartending, gardening, nursing, dental hygiene, electronics, small engine repair, home maintenance, creative writing, photography, management, sports and athletics, health, exercise and diet, philosophy and religion, hypnosis, tax preparation, language, child care skills. Group 13. Art display: indoor spaces for presentation (and possible sale) of works of art (painting, drawing, sculpture, carving, paper, fabric, metal, plastic, wood, clay, wax, mixed media, photographic art, handcrafted pottery, handcrafted jewelry, handcrafted glass, handcrafted fine furniture). a. works of art must be original or limited -edition prints, reproductions, or castings. b. May include accessory art production space, workroom or studio enclosed or attached. C. May permit temporary outdoor display of art works in adjacent pedestrian areas for the enjoyment of pedestrians. Examples: gallery, studio, showroom, museum, art auction room, art consignment shop Group 14. Small goods sales or rental: retail sales and/or rental of "small" goods, i.e., goods which may be carried out by the customer or picked up or delivered by a one -ton pickup truck or smaller vehicle. a. Does not include the sale or servicing of motorized vehicles, structures (assembled or disassembled components), boats, MR/ORDDRFT.014 -9- 1 travel trailers, R.Vs, motorhomes, campers, mobile homes, or any merchandise requiring outdoor display because of its size or weight. b. Includes new or used merchandise. C. Does not include lubricants, fluids, filters, belts, repair parts, or accessories for motorized vehicles. d. Includes repair and service of any items sold or rented, except that repair does not include dismantling for parts, repair of parts of motorized vehicles, or finishing, painting, refinishing, or repainting of any merchandise. e. Does not include sale of motor fuels. Examples: antiques, appliances, arts supply, baked goods, bicycle sales and rental, books, ceramics, clothing, candy, curios, novelties, food, department store, drug store, dry goods, flowers, meat, poultry, seafood, produce, gifts, hardware, hobby materials, watches, jewelry, liquor, wine and beer, music, newspapers and magazines, notions, pets and supplies, office supplies, shoes, sporting goods, stationery, tobacco, toys, radio, television, telephone, VCR sales and service, video sales and rental, office machines, furniture, lighting, home furnishings, cameras and photographic supplies, craft supplies, sick room, handicapped or prosthetic device sales and rental, athletic and recreation equipment and supplies, luggage and leather items, rental service for items used within the home (eg., party supplies), bath shop, kitchen shop, bedroom shop, paint, wallpaper, carpet, draperies, blinds, flooring, ceilings, religious materials, formal wear, costume sales and rental, fashion studio, special hobbies or collections for sale or trade, goods produced in or representative of the Coachella Valley, MR/ORDDRFT.014 -10- records, tapes, discs, imported goods, cutlery, perfume, soap, candles and other scented products. Group 15. Parking lots: off-street (on- or off -site) parking facilities, with associated pedestrian ways, meeting the development standards of the parking section, Chapter 9.160, and the design standards of the Village. E. Village Commercial Conditional Uses. Some uses are deemed desirable in the Village downtown for the convenience of the market segments listed in 9.90.015, but such uses have impacts which must be mitigated by conditions specific to each proposed use. Such uses shall be limited to the minimum number necessary to provide a convenience to the Village. A Conditional Use Permit granted for one use does not create a precedent for another; on the contrary, it should be considered grounds for declining to grant a second similar Conditional Use Permit. The following uses are permitted by Conditional Use Permit (pursuant to Chapter 9.172) in those Subzones where the uses are listed as permissible in that Subzone: 1. Retail sales of motor fuels or bulk pressurized flammable gases. 2. Service and repair of motorized vehicles, limited to personal automobiles, light trucks, and two -wheeled vehicles. 3. Retail sales of lubricants, fluids, filters, belts, repair parts, or accessories for motor vehicles. Such merchandise must be new or factory rebuilt, not used or salvaged. 4. Serving alcoholic beverages for on -site consumption in a food service use not otherwise allowing alcoholic beverages. Providing "additional attractions" (live entertainment or large television, or outdoor entertainment, or a dance floor, or recreational accessory uses) in a food service use not otherwise allowing such uses. MR/ORDDRFT.014 6. Exceeding a stated upper limit for a permitted use, such as a seating capacity for conference facilities exceeding 100 persons, more than 25 rooms in a small hotel, more than five students in a professional studio, and the like. 7. Any use listed as a permitted use for the village Commercial Zone which, in a particular Subzone, must be conditioned in order to be permitted. 8. Special parking lot designs which do not meet the development standards. Conditional Use Permits for special parking lot designs shall be limited to: a) major projects (i.e., those projects which utilize six or more lots of record and cross an alley); b) special designs which substitute a parking lot for an alley or a street; and c) access and parking off north/south streets. F. Uses Not Permitted. Uses not permitted in any Subzone of the C-V Zone are those uses which have one or more of the following characteristics: 1. Do not serve one or more of the market segments described in Purpose (9.90.015). 2. Does not contribute to the support of the themes for the Village, especially the pedestrian emphasis in those Subzones which depend on the pedestrian orientation. 3. Provide goods or services not essential to this location for these markets and would be better provided in another commercial location with less critical thematic requirements. 4. Provides goods of a "large" nature, those requiring land -intensive and/or outside display area (including motorized vehicles, boats, structures, and items which cannot be delivered or picked up by the customer in a vehicle of one -ton capacity or less). MR/ORDDRFr.014 -12- 5. Serves motor vehicles primarily, beyond the minimal level deemed desirable for the convenience of the Village. Drive-in or drive-thru uses. Heavy commercial and industrial uses. 8. Major resort functions having more than 50 rooms, having land -intensive recreational facilities such as golf or multiple tennis courts, or other features or impacts out of scale with the Village. 9. Is potentially disruptive to the Village and/or the adjacent residential neighborhoods. 9.90.030 ACCESSORY USES PERMITTED. An accessory use to a permitted use is allowed, provided the accessory use is established on the same lot or parcel of land, and is incidental to, and consistent with the character of the permitted principal use, including, but not limited to: A. Limited custom or artistic manufacturing, fabricating, processing, packaging, treating and incidental storage related thereto, provided any such activity shall be in the same line of merchandise or service as the trade or service business conducted on the premises and providing any such related activity does not exceed any of the following restrictions: 1. The maximum gross floor area of the building permitted to be devoted to such accessory use shall be 25 percent. 2. The maximum total horsepower of all electric motors used in connection with such accessory use shall be five horsepower. 3. The accessory use shall be so conducted that noise, heat, vibration, dust, odor, glare, and all other objectionable factors shall be reduced to the extent that there will be no annoyance to persons outside the premises. Such accessory use shall be located not MR/ORDDRFT.014 -13- nearer than 50 feet to any residential Zone. 4. Such accessory uses shall be conducted wholly within a completely enclosed building. B. Minor temporary outdoor events. 1. Temporary outdoor events of a "minor" nature, as defined in Chapter 9.216, may be permitted pursuant to that Chapter in the Village Commercial Zone. 2. Permits may be granted for one-time events, continuous events, periodically recurring events or scheduled repeat events. 3. Permits must be renewed on at least an annual basis. 4. Conditions which help protect the public health, safety, and welfare; and/or support the design, themes, or ambiance of the Village as described in the Village Specific Plan may be attached to such permits. 5. Permits may be withdrawn if conditions are not adhered to by the Applicant. 6. Conditions may be amended if unforeseen problems arise which jeopardize the public's health, safety, or welfare; or fail to comply with the Village Specific Plan or this Chapter. 9.90.040 COMMERCIAL AND MULTl-rHM1LT rLur rLeu. nark... READ. All projects which involve construction for, conversion, and/or change of use to any non -single-family detached residential use shall submit for, and comply with, the results of a plot plan review, pursuant to Chapter 9.182. 9.90.050 DESIGN REVIEW REQUIRED. All uses of property, construction, reconstruction, exterior remodeling, conversions of use, landscaping, and exterior major maintenance including painting (other than for single-family detached residential which shall follow the SR Zone standards) must comply with the village Design Standards, contained within the MR/ORDDRFT.014 -14- Village Specific Plan and other adopted standards, pursuant to the Design Review Procedure (Chapter 9.183 of this Title). A. In general, the Village Design Standards require compliance and support of three themes: 1. Desert Oasis, expressed in designs consistent with La Quintals historic architectural vernacular. 2. Pedestrian scale and orientation. 3. Arts theme. B. The following factors and characteristics, which affect the appearance of a development, will govern the Planning Commission's evaluation of a design submission: 1. Conformance to the Village Specific Plan. 2. Conformance to ordinances and codes. 3. Logic and functional effectiveness and efficiency of design. 4. Exterior space utilization and treatment. 5. Architectural character. 6. Attractiveness. 7. Material selection. 8. Internal harmony and compatibility with surroundings. 9. Circulation - vehicular and pedestrian. 10. Maintenance aspects. 11. Integration of the arts theme. C. In particular, the Design Review will examine the following for compliance with the Village Specific Plan: 1. Site planning: pedestrian orientation, automobile orientation, setbacks and yards, building orientation, building height and scale, screening, service. 2. Relationships to adjoining buildings and sites. 3. Landscape and treatment of outdoor spaces: choice, maturity, and placement of landscape materials, handscape, waterscape, uses and arrangements, artistic treatment. 4. Building design and components: general treatment, roofs, walls, windows and MR/ORDDRFT.014 -15- V openings, doors and doorways, shade features, stairways, chimneys, balconies, gateways, colors, building materials, lighting, accent details. 5. Signs: building signs, other signs: placement, design quality, size, relationship to other design themes. 6. Streetscape: screening, vistas, lighting, street furniture, utilities. 7. Maintenance considerations. 8. Other matters as provided in the Village Specific Plan and other adopted standards. 9.90.060 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. Pursuant to the Village Specific Plan, the following shall be the standards of development in the C-V Zone: A. There is no minimum lot area requirement, unless specifically required by a Subzone classification for a particular area, or another Zone to which compliance is required. However, the smallness of a lot, the lack of available square footage, or an insufficient lot width or depth shall not be an acceptable rationale (in and of itself) for any waiver of minimum requirements of development standards. B. Yard (setback) requirements are set forth for each Subzone. 1. The front setback shall be measured from the ultimate planned right-of-way line. The rear setback shall be measured from the existing rear lot line or from any recorded alley or easement; if the rear line adjoins a street, the rear setback requirement shall be the same as required for a front setback. Each exterior side setback shall be measured from the ultimate planned right-of-way line. 2. The setback line shall be considered a vertical plane from finish grade upward. No solid portion of a structure, eave, facade, decorative element, mechanical equipment, or other feature (other than landscaping) shall MR/ORDDRFT.014 -16- penetrate the setback line plane. In the separate Subzones, references to the placement of the building with respect to a setback line shall be interpreted as meaning the furthest projection of any solid portion of the building (e.g., eave line or facade, depending on the architectural type of building involved). In the Core and Park Subzones, setbacks will be stated for the structure as a whole, with a further setback requirement applying only to the ground floor. C. All buildings and structures shall not exceed the height specified for a Subzone or referred Zone. D. Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by Chapter 9.160 OFF STREET PARKING, of this Title. E. Roof -mounted mechanical equipment, including restaurant exhaust fans, shall be permitted only on flat roofs, or where it is screened by bona fide architectural elements. Such roof -mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from the ground elevation view to a minimum sight distance of 1,320 feet. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from the view of ground elevations, and from the view of second story windows where possible. F. Architectural treatment and detail shall be carried out completely around structures so that all visible faces are equivalent in appearance. Structures on properties facing two streets, such as at a corner or on through -lot properties, shall provide equivalent displays, display windows, and signage on all street faces. Blank walls shall not be permitted facing exterior lot lines, at the rear of a structure, or facing interior lot lines where the wall will be visible. Interior lot line side walls which do not immediately abut another building's side wall shall be provided architectural enhancement and detail (consistent with building and fire codes) for relief of blank walls. The sides of structures facing alleys shall be given architectural treatment and detail equivalent to street faces. MR/ORDDRFT.014 -17- G. Landscaping. Each property on which there is proposed a new or remodeled structure or parking facility shall prepare and submit for design review a landscape plan. Landscaping shall be installed and maintained pursuant to the approved plan. (See VSP, Sections 4.8 and 6.3.1, Table 6-1.) Design standards shall establish a minimum of the site to be, landscaped. Effective irrigation systems shall be installed and maintained so that landscaping remains in a healthy growing condition and in compliance with the approved plan. H. A minimum 20-foot building setback shall be required on any boundary where the commercial property abuts a residentially -zoned property. Ten feet of the setback shall be landscaped unless a tree screen is included, wherein the landscaping may be reduced to five feet. The balance of the setback may be used for automobile parking, driveways, or landscaping. Block walls, or other appropriate fencing, may also be required. Z. Shade structures over parking or pedestrian walkways (including any overhangs) shall be set back at least five feet from any alley, and at least three feet from any property line (unless such structures comply with the requirements of a totally non-combustible structure, in which case the setback from the property line may be zero). J. All outside storage, and all solid waste, loading and servicing areas, shall be screened by structures and/or landscaping and located to minimize noise or odor nuisance. Solid waste areas, if not screened by the building, shall be screened with an opaque six-foot high fence or wall, and shall have an opaque gate. K. Pedestrian walkways shall be paved with materials meeting design standards. Landscaping meeting design standards shall also be provided adjacent to walkways. L. 1. Shade for parking or pedestrian walkways shall consist of structural arrangements meeting design standards, providing a range of 50 percent to 75 percent blockage of midday, midsummer sunlight, and/or landscaping materials meeting MR/ORDDRFT.014 -18- design standards having the same effect within two years of planting. 2. Shade requirements shall apply to required pedestrian walkways adjacent to, or connecting to, public streets. The following pedestrian areas need not comply with shade requirements: a. Internal plazas or courtyards. b. That portion of pedestrian walkways which exceed the required dimensions. M. If pedestrian walkways adjacent to commercial uses are utilized for temporary outdoor displays of merchandise as accessory uses, during periods of Village -wide coordinated promotion, or permitted outdoor events, a continuous clear walkway of a minimum four feet in width along the street and into each structure shall be maintained. N. Pedestrian walkways shall be lighted by the adjacent property structures with design -approved lighting fixtures of sufficient output to permit a normally -sighted person to safely utilize the walkways between dusk and dawn. O. Each property shall be responsible for the walkway easement on its property in terms of landscape maintenance, lighting, safety, and cleanliness. P. All uses shall comply with health, safety, and fire codes. All uses, but especially those with some potential for impacts on adjacent properties, such as studios and classes, shall contain within their own property any nuisance factors such as noise, heat, glare, dust, fumes, particulates, or vibration. Q. Other, more specific development standards for each Subzone which are presented in that Subzone. 9.90.070 SUBZONES. Requirements of the following Subzones shall apply where indicated on the adopted Zoning Map. Each Subzone shall require compliance with the Village Specific Plan, and with all general requirements of the C-V Zone as if it were the Zon(�e MR/ORDDRFT.014 -19- 1 `� } I 9.90.071 in its entirety, and shall also add to the general C-V Zone requirements those more particular requirements of the Subzone. Each Subzone serves a specific purpose as a part of the Village Commercial Zone implementation of the Village Specific Plan. Each Subzone presents a particular pattern of development standards designed to support the individual purposes of the Subzone. Uses are permitted only as specified by group with any further modification necessary for a Subzone. C-V-C "THE CORE" SUHZONE. A. Purpose. The Core Subzone of the Village is designed to provide the most intense concentration of commercial activity in a predominantly pedestrian environment. B. Permitted Uses. Uses generally permitted in the Village Commercial Zone are listed and described in detail in Section 9.90.020. In the C-V-C (Core) Subzone, only certain of these uses are permitted. Permitted uses are listed below by the short title for each group. For a full description and examples, refer to Section 9.90.020. For some groups of uses, modifications or special conditions may be required to ensure the compatibility of the group of uses with other uses within or adjacent to this Subzone. C. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Group 3 Uses: Residential secondary use. Group 4 Uses: Detached studios. Group 6 Uses: Offices. Group 7 Uses: Services sales within offices. Group 8 Uses: Group 9 Uses: Group 10 Uses: other attractions. Group 11 Uses: Group 12 Uses: Group 13 Uses: Group 14 Uses: rental. Group 15 Uses: as a professional and limited Personal services. Food service. Food service plus Public assembly. Classes. Art display. Small goods sales or Parking lots. Accessory Uses Permitted. In addition to the accessory uses permitted as described in MR/ORDDRFT.014 -20- Section 9.90.030, in the Core Subzone the following accessory uses shall be permitted: Outdoor displays, sales, service, and minor entertainment; provided that: a. Merchandise displayed or sold and services are permitted uses in the Core Subzone; and, b. Sales and service are conducted by entities having a valid, current La Quinta business license; and, C. Minor entertainment is provided by groups of five or fewer performers, without electronic amplification, performances having a duration of no more than 15 minutes in any one location or a 50-foot radius, the hours of minor entertainment falling between 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.; and, d. All such outdoor displays, sales, service, or minor entertainment takes place on private property with the written consent of the owner or agent of the property; and, e. No display, sales, service, or minor entertainment blocks the required pedestrian walkways; a clear area of a minimum width of four feet shall be left adjacent to the street and to each building entry or exit; and, f. All booths, stalls, carts, or other equipment for outdoor display, sales, service, or minor entertainment at the close of business each day shall be removed or immobilized and secured so as to prevent it from becoming a public safety hazard, nuisance, or a security risk; and, g. The operation of outdoor display, sales, service, or minor entertainment shall be conducted in such a fashion that it does not constitute a threat to the health, MR,ORDDRFT.014 -21- Jo 3 R safety, or welfare of the public, or become a recurring public nuisance. Conditional Uses. By Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to Chapter 9.172, in the Core Subzone, the following may be permitted: 1. Retail sales of motor fuels or bulk pressurized flammable gases by means of transfer to a customer's approved container. 2. Service and repair of motorized vehicles, limited to personal automobiles, light trucks, or two -wheeled vehicles. 3. Retail sales of lubricants, fluids, filters, belts, repair parts, or accessories (new or factory -rebuilt only) for motorized vehicles, provided that, on the same parcel, motor fuels are sold and/or service and repair of motorized vehicles is offered. 4. Exceeding a stated upper limit for a permitted use. 5. Special parking lot designs not meeting development standards. E. Development Standards. Pursuant to the village Specific Plan, in addition to the general development standards contained in Section 9.90.060 for the C-V Zone, within the C-v-C Subzone, the following particular development standards shall apply: 1. Setbacks (See VSP Sections 4.8.2 and 6.1.3 for illustrations): a. Front setbacks in the Core Subzone shall comply with one of the following standards: (1) The structure's front shall extend to the front property line, with 10 feet of ground floor depth left open and reserved as a clear pedestrian walkway easement, covered with a second story, MR/ORDDRFT.014 -22- p4 balcony, or shade structure; OR, (2) The structure's front shall be set back at least 10 feet from the front property line for a pedestrian walkway easement, shaded by landscaping, or with a further setback of the ground floor at least 10 additional feet to achieve either structurally -shaded space, or a landscaped area, or a fountain, or an art display area, or a patio or courtyard, or a combination; OR, (3) A combination of (1) and (2) above, to achieve variety and interesting pedestrian areas. b. Rear setbacks shall comply with the following standards: (1) For parcels fronting on Calle Tampico, Avenida La Fonda, and Calle Estado, the structure's rear shall extend no closer than (a) five feet from the rear property line, with the ground floor set back an additional 20 feet, over which may extend a second story, or balcony, or a shade structure to provide a shaded parking area; or (b) a total structural setback of at least 25 feet from the rear property line, with shade provided to any parking by landscaping; or (c) a combination of the two; (2) For parcels fronting on Avenida Bermudas and Desert Club Drive, the structure's rear shall extend no closer than 20 feet from the rear property line, except that approved parking shade MR/ORDDRFT.014 -23- I structures may extend to within three feet of any property line. C. Side setbacks shall be zero for interior lot lines, and for exterior (corner or through -lot) lot lines, setbacks shall be the same as for front setbacks. 2. Building separations and transitions. In the C-V-C Subzone, the intent is to integrate adjacent buildings and to eliminate separations between the sides of buildings whenever possible. Structural design, roof lines, eaves, side walls, placement with respect to side property lines, transitions between buildings and similar matters will be determined by design review on a case -by -case basis. (See VSP Section 6.2 for discussion, and throughout for illustrations.) 3. Building height. In order to preserve the pedestrian scale of development in the Core Subzone of the C-V Zone, a height limitation of 35 feet shall apply to the general mass of structures, although specific features of less than 15 percent of the horizontal area of the structure may exceed that limit to a maximum height of 50 feet. 4. Parking. a. In order to preserve the pedestrian orientation of the Core Subzone, parking shall not be placed onsite in the front of structures, nor onsite on the sides of structures facing east/west streets. Onsite parking shall generally be placed off alleys and in the rear of structures where possible. (See VSP Sections 4.6.3 and 6.7 for discussion and illustrations.) b. Onsite parking for uses in the C-V-C Subzone shall provide a minimum of 25 percent of the required off-street parking as specified by Section 9.160 MR/ORDDRFT.014 -24- 5. M. OFF-STREET PARKING. The remaining 75 percent required off-street parking may be provided onsite or offsite, pursuant to Section 9.160. C. At least 50 percent of all parking shall be shaded. Servicing. In order to preserve the pedestrian orientation of the Core Subzone, all servicing, loading, and solid waste collection shall take place off-street, away from pedestrian ways, generally in bays provided off the alleys or in screened, internal, rear spaces if alleys are not available. Pedestrian provisions. (See VSP Section 6.1.1 and following sections, and Figure 4-7.) a. Along the street faces of each lot, a clear pedestrian walkway easement shall be provided, a minimum 10 feet in width, either adjacent to the property line, or set back sufficient distance to offset for the depth of pillars, arches, and other supports for shade structures or second -story overhangs, or the depth of street -side landscaped areas. On north/south streets, where sufficient room within the right-of-way is available for the 10-foot walkway, the walkway may be established within the right-of-way, or it may meander between right-of-way and easement across private property behind the right-of-way line. b. Mid -block pedestrian easements, generally north/south in alignment, (minimum 10-foot widths) (no more than two per block face) may also be permitted. C. Adjacent to east/west streets, at least 50 percent of the area of each pedestrian walkway shall be shaded. MR/ORDDRF�.014 -25- Io7 d. On the west side of Desert Club and on both sides of Bermudas, at least 50 percent of the lot width shall provide shade for the full depth of the pedestrian walkway. e. Mid -block pedestrian walkways shall be shaded for no less than 50 percent of their area. f. Displays, display windows, entryways, and signage shall be designed to be primarily visible for pedestrian traffic. g. Because parking will be offered off alleys, and because north/south pedestrian walkways along streets or mid -block will cross alleys, alleys shall be considered potential pedestrian walkways. Displays, display windows, entryways, signage, lighting, landscaping, and architectural detailing shall be provided on the alley side of structures along alleys. 7. Signage. Signs in the Core Subzone of the C-V Zone shall be pedestrian in scale and orientation. All signs shall comply with Chapter 9.212 SIGN REGULATIONS, except that more restrictive provisions of the Design Review Standards for the Village shall apply. (See VSP Sections 4.8.7 and 6.5.) 8. Vehicular Access. No direct access to properties shall be permitted from Calle Tampico. No direct access to properties shall be permitted from Avenida Bermudas within the first 200 feet from the right-of-way line at the intersection with Calle Tampico. 9.90.072 C-V-P "THE PARK" SUBZONE A. Purpose. The Park Subzone of the Village is meant to provide a medium intensity clustering of commercial offices, eating places, and some residential on the north and south sides of La Quinta Park. A pedestrian emphasis applies to the Park Subzone. MR/ORDDRFT.014 -26- B. Permitted Uses. Uses generally permitted in the Village Commercial Zone are listed and described in detail in Section 9.90.020. In the C-V-P (Park) Subzone, only certain of these uses are permitted. Permitted uses are listed below by the short title for each group. For a full description and examples, refer to Section 9.90.020. For some groups of uses, modifications or special conditions may be required to ensure the compatibility of the group of uses with other uses within or adjacent to this Subzone. 1. Group 3 Uses: Residential as a secondary use. 2. Group 4 Uses: Detached professional studios. 3. Group 6 Uses: Offices. 4. Group 7 Uses: Services and limited sales within offices. 5. Group 9 Uses: Food service. 6. Group 12 Uses: Classes. 7. Group 13 Uses: Art display. 8. Group 15 Uses: Parking lots - private lots, on -site only; off -site lots only if in public ownership and operation. C. Accessory Uses. In addition to the accessory uses permitted as described in Section 9.90.030, in the Park Subzone the following accessory uses shall be permitted: 1. Outdoor display and sales of original or limited -edition reproductions of art works; provided that: a. All such outdoor displays and sales take place on private property with the written consent of the owner or agent of the property (art shows on public property will require an Outdoor Temporary Minor Event Permit, pursuant to Chapter 9.216); and, b. Sales of art works are conducted by entities having a valid, current La Quinta business license or the proceeds of the outdoor sales benefit a charitable, tax-exempt institution and related City requirements for solicitation have been complied with. MR/ORDDRFT.014 -27- C. No display or sales of art works blocks the required pedestrian walkways; a clear area of a minimum width of four feet shall be left adjacent to the street and to each building entry or exit; and, d. All booths, stalls, carts, or other equipment for outdoor display and sales of art works, at the close of each business day, shall be removed or immobilized and secured so as to prevent it from becoming a public safety hazard, nuisance, or a security risk. e. The operation of outdoor display and sales of art works shall be conducted in such a fashion that it does not constitute a threat to the health, safety, or welfare of the public, or become a recurring public nuisance. D. Conditional Uses. By Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to Chapter 9.172, in the Park Subzone, the following may be permitted: 1. Group 10 Uses: Food service plus other attractions. 2. Exceeding a stated upper limit for a permitted use. 3. Special parking lot designs which do not meet development standards. E. Development Standards. Pursuant to the Village Specific Plan, in addition to the general development standards contained in Section 9.90.060 for the C-V Zone, within the C-V-P Subzone, the following particular development standards shall apply: 1. Setbacks. (See VSP Sections 4.8.2 and 6.1.3 for illustrations.) a. In the Park Subzone, the structure's front shall extend to the front property line, with 10 feet of ground floor left open and reserved as a clear pedestrian MR/ORDDRFT.014 -28- walkway easement, covered with a second story, balcony, or shade structure; or b. The structure's front shall be set back 10 feet from the front property line for a clear pedestrian walkway easement, shaded by landscaping, or with a further setback of the ground floor at least 10 additional feet to achieve either structurally - shaded space, or a landscaped area, or a fountain, or an art display area, or a patio, or a courtyard, or a combination; or C. A combination of 1. and 2., above, to achieve variety and interesting pedestrian areas. d. Rear setbacks shall comply with the following standards: (1) The structure's rear shall extend no closer than five feet from the rear property line, with the ground floor set back an additional 20 feet, over which may extend a second story, a balcony, or a shade structure to provide a shaded parking area; or (2) A total structural setback of at least 25 feet from the rear property line, with shade provided to any parking by landscaping; or (3) A combination of Paragraphs (1) and (2). (4) Lots with frontage (or "rear frontage") on either Eisenhower Drive or Avenida Navarro shall treat such frontage as if it were a front. e. Side setbacks shall be zero for interior lot lines, and for exterior (corner or through -lot) MR/ORDDRFT.014 -29- lot lines, the setbacks shall be the same as for front setbacks. 2. Building Separations and Transitions. In the C-V-P Subzone, the intent is to integrate adjacent buildings and to eliminate separations between the sides of buildings whenever possible. Structural design, roof lines, eaves, side walls, placement with respect to side property lines, transitions between buildings, and similar matters will be determined by design review on a case -by -case basis. (See VSP Section 6.2 for discussion, and throughout for illustrations.) 3. Building Height. In order to preserve the pedestrian scale of development in the Park Subzone of the C-V Zone, a height limitation of 30 feet shall apply to the general mass of structures, although specific features of less than 15 percent of the horizontal area of the structure may exceed that limit to a maximum height of 40 feet. 4. Parking. a. In order to preserve the pedestrian orientation of the Park Subzone, parking shall not be placed onsite on the fronts or sides of structures. Onsite parking shall generally be placed in the rear of parcels. (See VSP Sections 4.6.3 and 6.71 and Figures 4-5 and 4-12, for discussion and illustrations.) b. Onsite parking in the C-V-P Subzone shall provide a minimum of 75 percent of the required off-street parking for the uses, as specified by Section 9.160 OFF-STREET PARKING. The remaining 25 percent required off-street parking may be provided onsite or offsite, pursuant to Section 9.160. C. At least 50 percent of all parking shall be shaded. MR/ORDDRFT.014 -30- 5. Servicing. In order to preserve the pedestrian orientation of the Park Subzone, all servicing, loading, and solid waste collection shall take place off-street at the rear of properties, away from pedestrian ways, generally in screened bays provided off alleys, parking areas, or in screened internal spaces if alleys are not available. 6. Pedestrian provisions. (See VSP Section 6.1.1 and following Sections and Figure 4-7.) a. Along the street faces of each lot, a pedestrian walkway easement shall be provided, a minimum 10 feet in width, either adjacent to the property line, or set back sufficient distance to offset for the depth of pillars, arches, and other supports for shade structures or second -story overhangs, or the depth of street -side landscaped areas. Where there is sufficient room within the right-of-way for the walkway, it may be provided in the right-of-way, or it may meander between the right-of-way and a pedestrian easement. b. Mid -block pedestrian easements with generally north/south alignments (minimum 10-foot widths) (no more than one per block face) may also be permitted. C. At least 50 percent of the area of each walkway on east/west streets shall be shaded. d. On north/south streets, at least 50 percent of the lot width shall be shaded for the full depth of the pedestrian walkway. e. Mid -block pedestrian walkways shall be shaded for no less than 50 percent of their area. f. Displays, display windows, entryways, and signage shall be MR/ORDDRFT.014 -31- 9.90.073 designed to be primarily visible for pedestrian traffic. g. Because the Park Subzone is surrounded by residential uses, and because parking will be provided on both sides of structures, all visible sides of each structure shall be considered a potential pedestrian approach. Displays, display windows, entryways, signage, lighting, landscaping, and architectural treatment shall be provided on all visible sides of each structure. 7. Signage. Signs in the Park Subzone of the C-V Zone shall be pedestrian in scale and orientation. All signs shall comply with Chapter 9.212 SIGN REGULATIONS, except that more restrictive provisions of the Design Standards for the Village shall apply. (See VSP Sections 4.8.7 and 6.5.) C-V-S "SOUTH" SUBZONE A. Purpose. The South Subzone of the Village is meant to provide a more suburban area of the Village for commercial offices, eating places, galleries, residences, bed and breakfast facilities, and small hotels in an atmosphere of narrow streets and unique landscaping. B. Permitted Uses. Uses generally permitted in the Village Commercial Zone are listed and described in detail in Section 9.90.020. In the C-V-S (South) Subzone, only certain of these uses are permitted. Permitted uses are listed below by the short title for each group. For a full description and examples, refer to Section 9.90.020. For some groups of uses, modifications or special conditions may be required to ensure the compatibility of the group of uses with other uses within or adjacent to this Subzone. 1. Group 3 Uses: Residential as a secondary use. May be placed beside, as well as above or behind, the primary use. 2. Group 4 Uses: Detached professional studios. MR/ORDDRFT.014 -32- 3. Group 5 Uses: Commercial guest lodging and associated uses. 4. Group 6 Uses: Offices. 5. Group 7 Uses: Services and limited sales within offices. 6. Group 9 Uses: Food service. 7. Group 10 Uses: Food service plus other attractions. 8. Group 12 Uses: Classes. 9. Group 13 Uses: Art display. 10. Group 15 Uses: Parking lots. C. Accessory Uses Permitted. Accessory uses in the South Subzone shall be as described in Section 9.90.030. D. Conditional Uses. By Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to Chapter 9.172, in the South Subzone, the following may be permitted: 1. Continuation of existing (but not new construction of) Group 1 Uses: single -family -detached residential as the primary use. 2. Exceeding a stated upper limit for a permitted use. E. Development Standards. Pursuant to the Village Specific Plan, in addition to the general development standards contained in Section 9.90.060 for the C-V Zone, within the C-V-S Subzone, the following particular development standards shall apply: 1. Setbacks (See VSP Sections 4.8.2 and 6.1.3 for illustrations). Setbacks in the South Subzone shall be as follows: a. Front: 20 feet b. Internal Side Yard: 5 feet C. External Side Yard: 10 feet d. Rear Yard: 20 feet, except for properties on the north side of Cadiz which take rear access off the alley between Calle Cadiz and Calle Estado, which shall maintain a 25-foot setback on the ground floor, as in the Core Subzone. 2. Building separations on the same property in the South Subzone shall be a minimum of 10 feet. MR/ORDDRFT.014 -33- j1I 3. Building height. In order to preserve the suburban atmosphere of the South Subzone of the C-V Zone, structures shall be limited to a single story and a maximum height of 20 feet. where a greater height enhances the design and is compatible with neighboring properties, exceptions up to two stories and up to a maximum height of 30 feet for structures may be granted by the Planning Commission. 4. Parking. In order to preserve the suburban and landscaped atmosphere of the South Subzone, parking shall adhere to the following standards (see VSP Sections 4.6.3 and 6.7 for discussion and illustrations): a. Onsite parking in the C-V-S Subzone shall provide a minimum of 100 percent of the required off-street parking for the uses as specified by Section 9.160 OFF-STREET PARKING. An exception may be made by the Planning Commission for corner properties down to a minimum of 75 percent of required parking on -site. The remainder of the required parking must be provided off -site, pursuant to Section 9.160. b. Parking shall be placed at the rear and side of the structure. Side parking areas shall be set back from any exterior side property lines at least 10 feet, and shall be no further forward than the front setback line. All parking shall be adequately screened from public right-of-way views. Properties on the north side of Cadiz may take access from and provide parking adjacent to the alley to the north, observing the five-foot setback required in the Core Subzone. C. At least 50 percent of all parking shall be shaded. d. Joint -use driveways for adjacent lots are encouraged. MR/ORDDRFT.014 -34- 5. Servicing. In order to preserve the suburban and landscaped atmosphere of the South Subzone, all servicing, loading, and solid waste collection shall take place onsite (off-street), and, if possible, away from front - visible areas, generally to the rear of structures in screened areas. Where servicing and loading must take place in visible locations, such activities shall be conducted between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and between 4:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. 6. Pedestrian provisions. (See VSP Section 6.1.1 and following Sections and Figure 4-7.) a. In the South Subzone, the intent of pedestrian provisions is different from other Subzones. North/south walkways along Bermudas and Desert Club and north/south mid -block walkways function to link pedestrian movements from the Core to the South areas. However, east/west walkways are not intended to foster pedestrian circulation adjacent to the streets. Rather, a series of separate, non - continuous links from property to property shall provide a meandering pedestrian route away from street side. b. On north/south streets, along the street faces of each lot, a pedestrian walkway easement shall be provided, a minimum six feet in width, either adjacent to the property line, or set back sufficient distance to offset for the depth of landscaped areas. If sufficient space is available, the walkway may be provided in the right-of-way, or meander between the right-of-way and a walkway easement. C. Mid -block pedestrian easements running north/south (minimum six-foot widths) may also be permitted. jI% MR/ORDDRFT.014 -35- d. On east/west streets, each property shall provide a pedestrian walkway easement from its structural entrance to each adjacent side property, driveway, or to a north/south walkway. Walkways shall be placed so that at no point do they come closer than four feet from the edge of the street, to discourage on -street parking or unloading. The point at which the walkway easement meets the side property line shall be set back from the ultimate right-of-way line by a minimum of 10 feet (measured to the edge of the easement nearest the street). Adjacent properties shall coordinate the placement of walkway easements so that they relate where they meet at the property line. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width. e. Pedestrian walkways on east/west streets, mid -block, and on the west side of Desert Club and the east side of Bermudas shall be shaded for no less than 50 percent of their area by approved landscaping material providing a range from 50 to 75 percent blockage of direct overhead sunlight at mid -summer, mid -day within ten years of planting. 7. Landscaping. (See VSP Sections 4.8 and 6.3.1, and Table 6-1.) a. The design theme for the landscaping in the C-V-S "South" Subzone is a continuation, to its maximum design potential, of the mature landscaping already established. The landscaping focus is the skyline. Large trees - primarily eucalyptus - with high canopies in (excess of 30 feet in height), providing lacy shade, shall be the dominant features. b. The front half of each lot (plus for corner or through -lots, the half lot facing the exterior MR/ORDDRFT.014 -36- side), less the area covered by structures, parking lot, and walkways, shall be intensely landscaped. Emphasis shall be placed on tall shade -producing materials, with appropriate ground covers and intermediate height materials in scale with the structures, as specified for this Subzone by the design standards in the Village Specific Plan. 8. Signage. Signs in the South Subzone of the C-V Zone shall be scaled and oriented to the view of automobile traffic traveling at suburban -lane velocities. All signs shall comply with Chapter 9.212 SIGN REGULATIONS, except that more restrictive provisions of the Design Standards for the Village shall apply. (See VSP Sections 4.8.7 and 6.5.) 9.90.074 C-V-N "NORTH" SUBZONE A. Purpose. The North Subzone of the Village is meant to provide an area for commercial offices in an automobile -oriented setting. B. Permitted Uses. Uses generally permitted in the Village Commercial Zone are listed and described in detail in Section 9.90.020. In the C-V-N (North) Subzone, only certain of these uses are permitted. Permitted uses are listed below by the short title for each group. For a full description and examples, refer to Section 9.90.020. For some groups of uses, modifications or special conditions may be required to ensure the compatibility of the group of uses with other uses within or adjacent to this Subzone. 1. Group 6 Uses: Offices. 2. Group 7 Uses: Services and limited sales within offices. 3. Group 15 Uses: Parking lots (on -site only). C. Accessory Uses Permitted. Accessory uses in the North Subzone shall be as described in Section 9.90.030. MR/ORDDRFT.014 -37- D. Conditional Uses. By Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to Chapter 9.172, in the North Subzone, the following may be permitted: 1. Group 4 Uses: Detached professional studios; 2. Group 8 Uses: Personal services; 3. Group 9 Uses: Food service, indoor service only; 4. Group 10 Uses: Food service plus other attractions; 5. Group 11 Uses: Public assembly; 6. Group 12 Uses: Classes; 7. Group 13 Uses: Art display; 8. Group 14 Uses: Small goods sales or rental; 9. Group 16 Uses: Retail sales of fuels, lubricants, and fluidss for motor vehicles, provided that lubricants and fluids are sold where fuels are also sold. E. Development Standards. Pursuant to the Village Specific Plan, in addition to the general development standards contained in Section 9.90.060 for the C-V Zone, within the C-V-N Subzone, the following particular development standards shall apply (see VSP, especially Figure 4-8): 1. Setbacks. In the C-V-N Subzone, front, rear, and side setbacks shall be 25 feet. 2. Building separations. In the C-V-N Subzone, buildings on the same property shall be separated by a minimum of 20 feet. 3. Building height. A height limitation of 35 feet shall apply to the general mass of structures, although specific features of less than 15 percent of the horizontal area of the structure may exceed that limit to a maximum height of 40 feet. 4. Parking. The orientation of the North Subzone is toward the automobile. (See VSP Sections 4.6.3 and 6.7 for discussion and illustrations.) a. Onsite parking in the C-V-N Subzone shall provide a minimum of 100 percent of the required MR/ORDDRFT.014 -38- off-street parking for the uses as specified by Section 9.160 OFF-STREET PARKING. Parking may be arranged and placed in any locations onsite which meet design standards of Section 9.160, provided that peripheral screening is installed and maintained as required. b. At least 50 percent of all parking shall be shaded. 5. Servicing. All servicing, loading, and solid waste collection shall take place onsite in screened locations which do not interfere with parking, maneuvering, or fire lanes. 6. Pedestrian provisions. a. Along the street faces of Calle Tampico, Eisenhower Drive, and any extensions of Avenida Bermudas and Desert Club Drive, a pedestrian walkway shall be provided, a minimum six feet in width. The walkway shall be placed either in the right-of-way between the pavement edge and the ultimate right-of-way line (if space permits); or on an easement on the parcel adjacent to the property line or set back sufficient distance to offset for the depth of landscaped areas; or a combination of both; or meandering across the ultimate right-of-way line, utilizing both right-of-way and walkway easements. b. Pedestrian walkways on north/south streets shall be shaded for no less than 25 percent of their area. C. Onsite pedestrian walkways shall be provided for parking areas which are more than 65 feet removed from the structure requiring the parking. Walkways shall connect with the nearest sidewalk leading to the entrance(s) to the structure. Walkways whose combined length MR/ORDDRFT.014 -39- from parking area to the entrance or a shade structure exceeds 100 feet shall be shaded for 50 percent of their area. 7. Landscaping. The major emphasis in the North Subzone shall be for shade and screening for parking areas and associated pedestrian walkways. (See VSP Sections 4.8 and 6.3.1, and Table 6-1.) 8. Signage. Signs in the North Subzone shall focus on commercial center or complex identification, oriented to views from automobile traffic. Internal site signage shall be scaled appropriately to its purpose and function. Building identification shall be oriented to parking lot access. Uses within buildings shall be provided with pedestrian directories. It is not intended that all occupants of the C-V-N Subzone have equal signage exposure to the public right-of-way. All signs shall comply with Chapter 9.212 SIGN REGULATIONS, except that more restrictive provisions of the Design Standards for the Village shall apply. (See VSP Sections 4.8.7 and 6.5.) 9. Vehicular access to properties. a. From Calle Tampico: Additional access points from Calle Tampico shall be a minimum of 330 feet removed from the right-of-way line of the intersections with Eisenhower Drive and Avenida Bermudas, and line up with an existing street if possible. No additional direct access points shall be permitted between Avenida Bermudas and Desert Club Drive. Properties in this block shall take access off extensions of Bermudas or Desert Club at a point no less than 200 feet north of the Calle Tampico right-of-way line. b. From Eisenhower: Access points from Eisenhower Drive shall be no less than 330 feet north of the Calle Tampico right-of-way line. MR/ORDDRFT.014 -40- U S E G R O U P S VILLAGE COMMERCIAL SUBZONES VILLAGE SIDENTId CORE C PARK P SOUTH S NORTH N RIV 1. SFR DETACHED AS THE PRIMARY USE CUP g 2. MFR. AS THE PRIMARY USE % 3. RESIDENTIAL AS SECONDARY USE X x g 4. DETACHED PROFESSIONAL STUDIO X X X CUP 5. COMMERCIAL GUEST LODGING AND ASSOCIATED USES g 6. OFFICES % X X X 7. SERVICES AND LIMITED SALES WITHIN OFFICES X X X X 8. PERSONAL SERVICES X CUP 4. FOOD SERVICE X X % CUP 10. FOOD SERVICE PLUS OTHER ATTRACTIONS X CUP X CUP 11. PUBLIC ASSEMBLY % CUP 12. CLASSES X X X CUP 13. ART DISPLAY % % X CUP CUP 14. SMALL GOODS SALES OR RENTAL X CUP 15. PARKING LOTS X X X X CUP CONDITIONAL USES RETAIL SALES OF MOTOR FUELS CUP CUP RETAIL SALES OF LUBRICANTS, FLUIDS, MINOR AUTOMOBILE AND LIGHT TRUCK PARTS CUP MINOR SERVICE AND REPAIR OF AUTOMOBILES AND LIGHT TRUCKS CUP MR/ORDDRFT.014/MR —41— r h AMEND CHAPTER 9.180 PLOT PLANS 9.180.030 APPLICATIONS A. Filing... B. Design Review. Certain zones, areas within the City, and types of applications also require a design review. See Chapter 9.183 DESIGN REVIEW. C. Environmental Clearance... MR/ORDDRFT.015 AMEND CHAPTER 9.182 RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PLOT PLANS 9.182.050 REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL (add) 4. The plot plan meets all design standards for the City and all design standards of adopted specific plans applicable to the location and/or type of construction or use proposed in the plot plan, pursuant to Chapter 9.183 DESIGN REVIEW, as signified by a design approval by the appropriate Design Review Procedure in Section 9.183.050. ins MR/ORDDRFT.019 -1- 78-105 CALLE ESTADO - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 - (619) 564-2246 October 17, 1988 Donald Parker P.O. Box 6011 Sherman Oaks, California 91413-6011 Dear Mr. Parker: The City Manager, Mr. Kiedrowski, has referred your letter of October 7th to my office for response. Please be advised that the City Council did receive a copy of your letter of September 19, 1988 and has taken it under consideration. You will find enclosed, a copy of the City Council Minutes of September 26th in which the Village Zoning was discussed. In those minutes, you will note that your letter of September 19, 1988 was made a part of the record. If I can be of further assistance, please contact me. Si erely, AUNDRA L. JUHOLA Administrative Services Director MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 TELEPHONE (818) 905.1200 AMERICAN INSURANCE CONSULTANTS, INC. 13245 RIVERSIDE DRIVE • P.O.BOX 6011 • SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91413.6011 September 19, 1988 City Council Mayor City Attorney CITY OF LA QUINTA 78105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Sirs: It has been brought to my attention that a "Village Plan" was recently approved by the City Planning Commission which, in effect, would downgrade certain commercial properties that I have around the Park area which has me concerned. There was at least one study done by the City of La Quinta a few years ago for the purpose of projecting what the future build -out would be in La Quinta. That study, as I remember it, stated unequivocably that the commercial land that was in La Quinta would be more than enough commercial land to handle the future growth of the City through the 1990's. After that study and after that fact, the City Planning Department allowed certain changes in the City plan to include much more commercial land by upgrading non-commercial lots and acreage. This was done even though reports prior to this showed that there was not the need for new commercial land. On two separate occasions, which went over a period of approximately 2-1/2 years, I personally talked to two people who represented the City government and was told that the upgrading of these non-commercial properties to commercial would in no way affect my properties around the Park and that my properties would not be zoned down or limited in any way. I question very strongly the intent or reasonings of the Planning Department in their recent considerations and I address this questionable decision to you people on the City Council, the City Attorney, and the Mayor of La Quinta because the City is inundated with large landholders in whatever capacity they might be. I can find no reason for the Planning Department, the City Council, the City Mayor, or any other elected official of La Quinta to be able to deny the rights of the individual property owners -- and that is what I am. I question the Planning Department's ability to objectively make these decisions because of what pressures might be there by whatever groups involved. I am sure that none of those individuals or any individual on the City Council or any other elected official making any of these decisions have personal gain as it would be a conflict and a complete violation of their duties. NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, 94105 ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, 92701 FLORIDA. 33021 San Francisco, 55 New Montgomery Street Santa Ana, 1633 E. Fourth Street, #288 Hollywood, 5555 Hollywood Blvd. #305 American Insurance Consultants, Inc. J City Council Mayor City Attorney CITY OF LA QUINTA September 19, 1988 Page 2. The duties of all elected officials, including those I have mentioned above, are for and on behalf of all of the citizens of La Quinta - not for any selective few - whether it be for a large landowner or builder - or the individual who doesn't own any land but lives in the City of La Quinta. I question the fact that this "Village Plan" that was approved by the Planning Commission has really been given the vote by all of the citizens of La Quinta. La Quinta belongs not to any one person - or a group of 5 or 6 people - or 100 people - it belongs to all of the citizens in the City Limits of La Quinta. I am not against any Village Plan but I am against prohibiting the individual's rights and I believe at this point that is exactly what the intent would be in the Village Plan that was recently approved by the Planning Commission. I now submit this to you people who have the responsibility of every citizen in La Quinta - not the few - to take a step back and that you vote not to zone down our property - or any of the property around the Park. Again I question, under the circumstances, if in the manner of which the changes in the commercial properties have been done that the Planning Department and/or Council would be acting in good faith if these properties were zoned down when reports that were asked for and paid for by the City of La Quinta prior to these large pieces of land that were re -zoned commercial when the reports clearly stated that no more commercial property was needed until the 1990's. I am willing to cooperate with the City and the property owners in La Quinta to see it grow - but in the right way. However, if I feel that I am not getting my rights as an individual and if I feel that there could be a very questionable situation that would cause my properties around the Park to be downgraded when other properties have been up- graded, as I mentioned earlier in this letter, I would be forced to take whatever legal action is needed in order to protect my position and my properties. I do plan to be at the Council Meeting on Tuesday. Sincerely, Donald C. Parker DCP:sh 0 1 TELEPHONE (818) 905-1200 A AMERICAN INSURANCE CONSULTANTS, INC. 13245 RIVERSIDE DRIVE • P.O.BOX 6011 • SHERMAN OAKS, CA 91413-6011 0 October 7, 1988 RECEIVED ' O C T 101988 MAYOR CCTV OF LA CITY OF LA QUINTA Qtf INTA 78105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Sir: This letter will confirm our recent meeting in La Quinta on Tuesday, September 19, 1988, with the City Council. After the City Council meeting, with Bob Yesayian present, you and I discussed our mutual feeling of down grading of the commercial properties around the Park. In this meeting, I gave you the letters for yourself, City Council Members, City Attorney and the City Manager, and discussed my position with you with reference to the commercial properties involved. At that time, you stated that your position was the same as mine in that you felt that there was no necessity to limit the usage for the commercial properties around the Park. You further stated that you would make sure that all of the people involved would be given a copy of this letter prior to their next meeting - which was on Monday, September 26th, and that my letter would be part of the records. I suggested that if I am not there that my letter be read to the Council - and it was my understanding that you were going to follow through with my request. It has now come to my attention that you were not at that Monday night meeting with the Council and that none of the Council people had received my letter. Because of the importance and what appeared to be your strong feelings for the right of the property owners for that area, I am surprised and a little taken back that these letters were not distributed as we discussed - and yet I understand that there was a letter written by you that was read to the Council pertaining to another parcel of land for their review at possibly upgrading that property. Because I don't know if these letters have been dispersed at this point or not, I am taking the liberty of sending a copy of this letter to you and a copy of my letter that you were going to give to these people so that they will have in their possession my thoughts and my comments about the proposed down zoning of our commercial property. I am sure that no city elected official nor appointed member of any City Planning Depart- ment, or any other city government agency, would suggest or push for any individual and/or company's property to be upgraded for any personal gains or favors as this would be, in my opinion, both morally wrong and would be legally questionable. I)7 NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, 94105 ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. 92701 FLORIDA, 33021 San Francisco, 55 New Montgomery Street Santa Ana, 1633 E. Fourth Street, #288' Hollywood, 5555 Hollywood Blvd, #305 14151 495-5730 niei Sev_nona n_._ n1..� ..,, ,,,,. , 1 American Insurance Consultants, roc. MAYOR CITY OF LA QUINTA October 7, 1988 Page 2. I believe it is the responsibility of those people who are representing the residents of La Quinta to do it for all of the residents and not for any selected few - regardless of what power, personal interest, or friendships they may have. I want this letter both read before the Council and put in the records so that there can be no misunderstanding or miscommunication on anyone's part as to my position and/or my intent on this matter. It is not my intention to create any problems for anyone in the city government as I do want to cooperate with them as, I believe, all of the property owners around the Park want to, but I also want the same cooperation from the City and expect the same con- sideration. Sincerely D . Parker DCP:sh Enclosure cc: City Council City Manager Director of Planning City Attorney Philip W. Bartenetti, Esq. Robert Yesayian y PHONE: I3ERMUDAS AT ESTADO (714)564-4218 (714) 345-211 B P.O. DRAWER A LA QUINTA, CA 92253 REAL ESTATE LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 Sept. 20, 1988 Mayor and City Council La Quinta, California Re: Zoning Ordinance Amendment 88-005 Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: With regard to the 'Village Plan' recently approved by the Planning Commission and now under consideration by you, the property owners of land around the Park feel that the plan has a flaw which is dis- criminatory. Our property, which has been zoned commercial for many, many years, is in effect being downzoned to a use that does not allow pure retail sales. Several studies in recent years clearly showed there was more than enough commercial land available for use well into the future. Des- pite this fact, more commercial land was added to the downtown when the General Plan was adopted, primarily because of Councilmen Larry Allen and Fred Wolff, who even attempted to change the entire Desert Club to commercial. The other councilmembers wisely voted down that move. In any event, we do not blame those who have received benefit from the change, but we certainly do not intend to be penalized. Groundwork for legal redress has been set by placing our objections on record at the Planning Commission hearing of August 23, 1988, but hopefully there will be recognition by the Council of the validity of our arguments. Many of the owners around the park may choose to develop office space, however we should retain the right to make the choice. There has been much office space built recently within the 'core', so there will be a need for more retail in other areas, and the park would be ideal for the types of small shops the Village needs. One fact that needs to be brought forth is that when a plan like this is brought along step by step, there is a natural reluctance to make any change, even change that makes sense. I would hope that you will see that the slight change requested will not only be good for the community in fulfilling the future need for retail sales, but out of fairness to the property owners, some of whom have held this land for nearly twenty years, paying property taxes all the time, .,;in hopes of either developing it or selling it to someone who would. ec— L� Rupert - REALTORS - 1 j� X SPP?91988 L J TERRA NOVA PLAN NING"K-'RESEARCH ING September16,1988 Mr. Ted Bower Principal Planner City of La Quinta 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Village Zoning Ordinance Comments And Concerns - September 20th Council Meeting Dear Mr. Bower: Again, I want to congratulate you on the great job you did on the Village Zoning Ordinance. The ordinance is a logical and coherent extension of the Village Specific Plan and provides a usable tool for the Plan's implementation. I am writing to again bring up one of the concerns we voiced at the August 23rd Planning Commission hearing regarding the Village Zoning Ordinance and its potential impact of the Nicholson project and traffic capacities on Calle Tampico. I would like to again request that Staff and the City Council reconsider this portion of the ordinance for the reasons set forth below. The portion of the Village Zoning Ordinance which constitutes the most serious problem for the Nicholson Project is Section 9.90.071 E-8, Vehicular Access in the C-V-C, the "Core" subzone. Specifically, this section of the draft ordinance states: "Vehicular Access. No Direct access to properties shall be permitted from Calle Tampico. No direct access to properties shall be permitted from Avenida Bermudas within the first 200 feet from the right-of-way line at the intersection with Calle Tampico."1 Discussions at the August 23rd Planning Commission hearing indicated that the Avenida Bermudas access planned on the Nicholson Project may encroach into the 200 foot set back required from the Bermudas/Tampico intersection. Staff and the Commission agreed that limited encroachment could be found acceptable. This satisfied our concerns in this regard. i Draft Village Zoning Ordinance for the City of La Quinta. August 23, 1988 Page 26. f 275 NORTH EL CIELO, SUITE D-3 ❑ PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 0 (619) 320-9040 However, the prohibition against direct access from Calle Tampico may have serious repercussions on the effectiveness of our design for this project. As envisioned, the Nicholson project would provide a separate and landscaped "drop-off lane" south of and parallel to Tampico. Access to this "drop-off lane' would only be available to east -bound traffic. Traffic exiting from the separated "drop-off lane" would only be able to continue east on Tampico and would not be able to execute turning movements which would conflict with the predominant traffic pattern. The importance of the "drop-off lane" designed into this project cannot be underestimated. As you know, the development design team has envisioned that the large plaza area will serve as a community gathering place and festive setting for outdoor entertainment, arts and crafts exhibits, art exhibit and showings and many other uses. The "drop-off lane" will allow buses, limosine and others to drop off visitors within the Village shopping district without having to enter onto "interior" village streets, and without interrupting traffic on Calle Tampico. As regards concerns for conflicts with pedestrian traffic patterns set forth in the Specific Plan, the Plan shows both the "drop-off lane" and a pedestrian crossing at Calle Tampico, mid -block between Avenida Bermudas and Desert Club Drive. It would appear necessary for this pedestrian crossing to be signalized with at least flashing yellow warning lights to control traffic. In addition to still posing a dangerous crossing, and one universally refrained from by traffic engineers, the potential hazards are exacerbated by the false sense of security of pedestrians. Generally, it is considered best to limit designation of pedestrian crossings to signalized intersections. A mid -block crossing at this location will also significantly reduce the carrying capacity of Calle Tampico, which is the main arterial into the Village. The stoppage of traffic mid - block could result in the backing up of stacked traffic into intersections to the east and west. As an alternative, we believe that Staff and the City Council should limit pedestrian crossings to the intersections at Bermudas and Desert Club. Therefore, we respectfully request that Staff and City Council consider these issues and delete the currently proposed prohibition to direct access from Calls Tampico, thereby allowing the Nicholson project to take advantage of the "drop-off lane' planned, and eliminating a potentially hazardous pedestrian crossing. Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions or require additional information please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerel , ohn D. Criste ms/jdc ti N M N .�+0 ppp pppdd p(. r�r0 QQ0 xQ80f � ~ Ln F- M M M J w O N J� a y8s Mmss a�syaj�8ssg �� a........... N "Imp M M M 3 ON M � • N N y� yy N li HI � M O J JM Mail N �Qp pMp N yQ� 1 6 N Ma it Ja fi ►�1 ►�.J �NT. � M J 6 ��00� r C7 a'J J 7 tiN KK Xlt itit lot 31C W 31t btbt it3lt m bt 7pt7t itK Mik it iCOUIC 41t bl m w it w w w w w w w w m wbc w w ♦'O M1M1 O.r•+M M-0100► m0"woP P4N00000 �Py .y pM lfNfOPPOOPPN0000Y7C OM0471f100M SIN FAO N.+ IA IAN�OM1 •FIi7 .-•N riC•p�OT �O �ONMON •C��f' • • • N.Oa • �Fi 8W*8*0040 a .+ tp �*j N Qi F- N�ON�O IAifl <000�0t� �N� OP Z P M M1 Ncli FM1 D 4'1N �.� N N .•I!1 M1 N �.•.i .+4C •N er .+ NN NN •y •i ..1 w W �wl;ll �Ir7� QB fppf '' pp.. ♦♦t�� N�I NN pp.. ��VV P M1�P <PY7 PNN In 00 N W a0 Ta P OC ►+ Sri TP . . . . N . . . • . . • •O• • • • OF M1O PIA •V'•! .r X .y IA.• PP .� .ti NPf NNC14.Ni N W s W W K Y tJf N w N t• Ea co 1-- a IC 1GC F� JJg 6�IJ.W� d Q~4 6 ¢ Q H N 11�� !- F {- 1-JJ OF.1 1-1 OF?- toJO JO p o O OOO OOO yy ¢f-yJNaF-td�q l4 QI- F l-- I-- NZN N�F►+F-J 1-1a-OF- Ct1 JQ2imcc �FO- FF �I-1 F{MMN U u"d1't~.7NlM ~ C.70VF-Ff~.iMF W .Oi+N•N M .ON go ffiAMAN N AN ! tZ ��,~�.NiNM 1 �O�O .0+ O< f~ANNN M his I o I F F T �4�yyNN4 �4�jj pp 1 4.4p�.Q}4 4m N I_�p,L{M4M O M M M M M M M MQ N M M MQ M M MM X % M O O S / C+Q oTp of Q8 Qa Q8�7. �L, b t�~LJ s � �O ffi b N CV Na�y aQBry a�y 1eaa4Q�� IeQaj la�j (aQb�io;l aaaa31NIPI A MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM MMMr:•.I-�:+.�ti :y.y.�a .i .li ,titi�:•.I-,:.ti.y NNNNNtV NN W x W W K O a iki� bt at it xit at x it at it x atapt m x 000 . . OOOii CO f`- . OOOOOP Y7 10 pp VV C s . . ybr� 7'�8*`aa�II ..pp O O .. NN d .. . O M rrl�I�i� ...... ..I A A A A M r ill *';Il ;*Wl � ... ... . .... . r r m W J _ W D. {Y. J � a I- 1 0 �S H w� xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx • 17Dh0W 00000000Oh EOM M00Me+P•h.�.ti000mOY'P Q'1(��ONOMOwO1+wOM�O w.O�OwP O • . • • • • . • • • . • . • • • . • . . . pp�(�.f ♦.�O �'nv�y M<.� CC.+M N♦tNPaJ tOOD M mr- 'F2 hM0 N 8S 8 M InNN Nw.i C.-�w .+.-�.�..-�.r MN .-� 1�- .rww •� 8 *8 *888 as 8p gas *N*Iln*p~iSr*0 *2:9*18 * C*8*p* *9!89 *1*WM1*Z?*8 *8 *8 *y*98 *pp Ms QWs98*8 8 m leh* $ IQ 88888ggg8ggg$ggSggg888888888888888888888g8�8888888 88 MIP<� s.� 8ASRS 88V %8 IS" ��fewlqP .. P pper�..NpPN • . N♦-� . ... N N l�J ........ O .•�' 117 f� ~ ... .... Ar- .p P NCO h .pjjjj riN P . . P M-am h �I�' �V~' tOop N +� M �ONP M�(j Nti � x 19r�i •`� M,M w ww [V S �ol sit yt *F * �k ale le �It ale �It �Ic �le pplc N 80 p O 88 S U# M M*�Vk Z�Ic 07K M* NK p7k S�Ic 8�It pk V�R % %�Ic S S�k "�It P�Ic MIc Mk 8� ►QQQ• .. N� f� w SON MIA li7f� O� ti $NN w ..�w Nd N 1p1h, 1+j .Pp V�j' wN1(7 a0.a swMi O% ~v .rM1 •Mrr ti ..�.•Z N7 f' to NM ti SlJ ~ W H �•�. �{NFy .1� •Ci Y r�M �Q i~I � �N �� » Sft5�G�t�jjj� 31— O t�J i►y-' {t�lyy� r��yy � O I t�f�+�NZJ yN/ j��J J y~ O �UUCIO C~A,q�rj Fly F- • 1 1-�yUiS i i OHatl �a�[�t .eMt7rOG�1[A . . F ►r 47 O�NMeIA �O h{�IP O w O .-i ♦ti .a�w.ti.-�.+.a .+.-�.r.�.r .� O .a.�.r..� O �bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb w.-i.-� .�.+.+.+.�.+�.•.r �.+.� .� w .ti .-i .r .r .� .-�.� .ti ..� .ti.� w ti ti wvvTvr: vvv=vvrv.�<�vi7�vv��vv�avvrr* .� w w w w ,-� ,� .• w w w ...+.... ,-�,-�,r .-. a :...,r 2 N X X X X X XX X X XX X X wb"mbt XX w "t X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XX X X X X X X XX X X X A NAAO Pi7DMW OMPOPAOa-�Y7N CDtMQ+O I��O �00 P'OMOOOG70NOPO.+OIAPON QOOmN ONw+ �O • • • • •� p•• • �•jj • . • • • • yy��• • • yy�. • . . M(�• • • • • • • • • • ~ •In R M.N♦NN •M+M .N+ Mf•V m1Q*.min�M C, •}' r N .~+ .A1 OD O• O •• M� NH a **yy��p* .p*Q***p�** p**p M**gyp .sp ****gym m** OS1701~f1� 0$ONO Ifs SY7S NPV4 Ngp;8 8988SS8�OS MSMS.O$�v$�i $$�a°$O.� SS S S SSS S $S S S $ SS S S S SS S S$ S $SSS S S S O O$ O O O O O O O S S$$ S$ P$ . . . mull- ggg� N � 7k 7k * 7K 7k * 71C 71t �It 71t 7k 1pp1t.. �Ic �Ic �Ic �1c 7k y�It� P r .,*pp OO pp.. ppk .p r•�ppk fM�G Plevt 8s81tr48vQsa:s l plt .di N pk pk $g 0 Q. A glf plc. Y'!.~-� �O ppI[.. GY; M1M1. qr ti O� . . .M1 . . mm. . . • . . . . P10 N M .O.-� NN Npy � M Il�Y na . pq. .mp F A . . . pppp �y M p In . N NNM V) !� fit . . . M OO V'M qr M NOS pO� OWN Y lo e H 6lz x °D >C O N N H a H a alP " a vl� a aka 8$8fifC$w�a��5� R $g •1`0 1`0 A A% v .'`,No d, . ccpp. N. p q p N P PNM 1'1� `Og�� IADD I~A {~A N N< �MOOWN M QL rrvvv4wv7v.��v* ;Icac Hyl J� L�JIaHI n JI6[�=l¢G476(yfl_ppQF-1JW N:�~HS ""1-2p[ mf3F�yl H HH►� �6HHl� HH� � 1 ~ JJUI-� ~QH¢�O �M � 44�,yc'vrQi�a�oor�ig�va�000pN a .Ir=vv�arvr•lr ��+r�. aa�vvl rvv�vT 1rrTe'41rTT T /e2GJ M�M1 >ttK>K>K>K>KxitkA,4 xaexxxxxxxx xaexxxxxxxxxxxxxsexatxat>K xxatxxxx x>,exxx OPOOf�M�OV FOO�OOI;OOOONOOPNOPPOO.00OOOMOM.rOf'O. . . . . . . . .f�M . M�Of� Sti M1m �Pm .0+.�-� ~•a-� .Ma.Oi N NC PMC~.�-'� NH InOi GD C y� M 8 SS N S0 �SSROSSSSPSPmSSOOSOWSSM SS �8%SsPSPSSSSTSa MOSOR py • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • r • • r • • • • • • • • • . .5.4 ssssgssgsgsssssssgsssgssgssgsss ss sgssssxsgssssssss g.................. m OIM O N<.ti Cm . .p. rrNIA 1PA P� Qp� I� . �� .... �� I.(p1 . . O (V <Q v+ ADD O O.ti MP � ti SP U SSO O 189! SIr� N 820 O.O 882 • M G3 ♦ • g : xq k •y u $ jz$` I Im 40 `� 1.0 41 file LAJ Q� �x �RU.H ,Oia a M1 8 �vavv.rrrvvv v 5 P Ir NN zI 1 F J06L7 jy O LAJ U)�j 41Wryi J/H-OHty �� O J w0 O ULM& N 000 .r 11�T;gipTI 000 .....,.,.,�.,.,,.. r4i000g�� I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i i t R RRRRRRRRRRRRRRTTV RRRRRRRR rl rr ri rl r�M rl ry ri rd ,y .y 1Iti.,�.lr.yN.�RRy.r.�.y.�.�.�.ti T,�.1+.��T.ti .� ♦'e xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxaeatxxxsexaestxatxxxxxxxxxx O OAP �OOMONO.000 P.y t�POmf'047�NOPODM O�M0470CMP000<'O OO�OOOOOOOIf10 Y7N .. . . NMN N ey .may IA NrN.�y .�-�.�-I.�i.Na V'� O��.y V~'Nti .ri .;i .M+.M-• .tea titi.�-� m I�IfJ a 14 S�M1 SOS . . ..SSSSSOSS�SSSSSSrO�NOvSvS00Y7SM1SSSSNMiWSSSSSTSSO cm N i r.. i T fi 888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 MUNN MNIA O 177 �S SSSQPPSS S SRO INfJm M VI Ln MP13'1 N S f�� S SScm MRS S EM °D8 88891 &W8888 8�v`�i$PLO a �,1l�O N 8 przZw 8 88 ... �3Q$. ..�.. . 11§0 1�WA.71aOn.,Q1... Nl§levi§ {per 1�.. 1..mp.1m�. OPEN �7. ... . . �O lol" P `.p.. yN��+y.VNO� N NIfJ M M FFF777 � r ry w M 1 r M pC 11.... y4, 3yQa� JJ a1 ry dd ��U ry arMrdry�Zi P1Vi WO r QrQ~~rdry ryF r•1r3 JG • r MCr r+Mr� ~��o b or NMp GOo.+ .y.y� .yMv o�b�ord�daao .•.yam 000 .y .y.y +N .y .•ti.y .�.. ,.�,-�.+.y .r .y ti.y .N .y ,.iti.y .H.-�.+.y .r ,.�.y ti.y .y .y .•,-�.y ,-� NOW404444 N N N N N `'TTTTTFFFFFFTFFTFTFFFFFTFFTFTT ...,.y, .,..y.a.....,,,., .y...y.y.y.......,TTvl .....yT M N ry �r � 1 Fry rr dtJ ty M OrrddWF 5e4�w 1.- � Wy - 001 Q� QYQ �p�.�g TFFFFFFFFrFFFTF Q xxxaexxscxxaexaeacxxacxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxaexxxacxx P"1i1O�000 MIl1W OHO VfIA .0O OrtOOWY7OOOOOOOO< M1"�0117WMPOOOOr+N •OOPWM1 ON �+'� '�+y ♦+.+0 � WIfSP WM1FO < OMM � MMMMMNM1 S�O�NPGDM .+ " �• *�N*I'>�pp>K��**��yy �N*1I* 2 .Mif�T6�Sl11S NS M1 8;*28**88 * **A*M**8�18*8� p*m OM*T8R8*� IR IR >tt*** ** *** 7K ****>tl llt******7K ** 8888888888888888888 8888888 8 88888888888888888888 NW4�g � >Rmm*rr��*yy**mm m** ***�j *>K*>«M1M1m*m�* **yyi�p � p.*.q ENOPM M1 PSN NSOW S 8NM 199 3P;88* 1�8 MSO�P Ze8le W O M" n N H N N i i lti Crr' O d° 711 IR 71t 7k IR 1U 7R fk 7p1t It �t �k �k �k �k �Ic �It �k �K * �t �k # �k m �OOM mm F ��*pp M18N yy�� NSOm 1*� ��kpp ..�Ippc m ."i PO W ♦� M1M1 ��jj MSO�1�-S �cVI ppk ..pp y1A� MSO�HO. . gy�pp♦ pp• a • <I� .Pi • • p• • �"f'M� • p• yak• p"p •f'D ♦ pN p •• 1pj • • p. rtM1y�Np . . . N N9-1QP' Q .Mp.Mp pe .tiN O"NtCCVVVY7 + + • r ma M M M MUM In mfffi " G1 SQQ jQ�QX QQ .Q+ O O QQQ'Q� Q"j�^�l Y YYYYYYY YYYYYYY< I.- IF, F,i 9 ►1 U. W t M rs I ha ►+ z a hl (� y [per,, ~~ ~J �MN04O�N��MC�O O�y�~j {i�y, ►4i CJO �Mr �- m aN �NCAiAR1x�73 ., yQOaRS3 �R QQ�aaCC �10 Ogg .+"+-�.r .-t NNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNN/N� Kwx xx at at x M x x Kat at at xx K K xx WK Mx M xat x at WKM xx xxat x KKK w xx x M xx xat xxx • Of�O NMP000++00.+0000►�OpOppf NOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMOO�. G. N .PPO . . . . . • NAP M CDC N 8 Ieo Mvin in 6. N "� m I Ai 1k oo II++�� ..lRpp 1k .p y7 fk 7R 71i * >fi 71C 7� iK 7K 7k 7K 7F 7K 7K 111 IOIC 7K 71C 7K 7oK p 7pk QR 7k 7R Ik 7K SV' ON�OSSS.MiSS�3kSSSg�S SSSv SS SSS$S r�-�SS$�$S��SSSSSS SS 888888888898888 SSSSSS SS SSSSS 8888888888888888 �N fVO�gg�i��.+N.lg� .�+Nl�� N� ... . �5Q5..5�Q5.. �5Q5�.. �5Q5... g�5. �5Qpp55�. 5�Q55�45. lV�� QgS. UlITf86801nt�1�1�f�tl0�1�f! * * IK * *IIt III Ik*IR*Ik **Ik*Ik***Ik lr lk *Ik Ik lk*Ik !s Zlc Z88 8 8% 99 M!8g*$! �R '"C14 PIS °:°:g1�1� r H CD 9 aPA 1p zlc AS 8P S Sm SS SSS I �1 ISM H F- H •a WW J JJJFI^�~ H HHHf t� a s"""sps"s4� C~tf8RN .~iN�~I 1 N Cf�YmWWOD .I .y .M •y ri .d v<caav NNNI N (j� M ,,JJM� JJNJJ H O O N O \ NNNN NNNN NNN�N7 M1� K>K >KkKK '4w xKrKK xKKbtw%g w k>KKrK z't >R • 00000♦• 000000 000•GD OD.��0 r�NItJ0 r 010 M m r O O1AMO 0%0 M'o0 ONOOO OOONOOM OD . . . . . . . . . . . . p• . . . . . p. p. . •. VV!! N .M-�O tia-��.•".��M1 �N N.�i~N NM rP��.�i � .y O $881�%is SSSSSS v�o'Ri 'ar"oti cr'-8P68$Mr498ZSP 8Zr%kp;'Z8a'b' 1188889 ti 01JEE U3 VU CM ~ N N N r 888 8 888888 8888888888888888888 8$8888 8 88888 S r • . ♦ . . . . . . .. . . pig .r .r.� ♦" `� N NN 1� ON A gy�ret .�1ce� �R ��1tc * arc ire �k �k �1*c CId • • • • • • . . • • • • . • • • . qr M M N W M .a T O<.-� .r ..�.r O� O [�Vt M # y7k7 �Mej p p pplc # •� �r .�kp N y� M1# .�pc * .#p .�lpe .�Ipc p. co 11�-I!a IM-!RMCNM W tVPFW MN iR%IeMb sZs8 00 8 $O .D S •�. • • • . . • • . • . • . to MM.. •. •♦H MM fMe O to qr co H � N N N N pp 1M OC a a $ x a a W�W r W •• a LLJ N* ($� to N H fll O O Z (� CA k"MM N~ F� woo ,,,� C�CORI~r r r�-+i—Gir ►-(y��J rr ilia, i� CD u~~F O 26cil1 O � M� V�pay\r NNNr�NM r r r Z orN ui a ta-- MI I N�000.+.H� MM MMV'Yd I .I I I I I l i l l l l l l l l i f l l l t l l l l l l Q Iary j�J�f M I jj$�.d.r.-�.�j+�.yy.M+�Hey.Mr.w�.y.�.yrpl p�.r.-�}.rH�pti pH r-�.M. yM9.pti rMl rMi rp7 rM�♦M'I +iM-I p qq\ C1 1<1 �� I �� It� � �MI�+�MI•7MM MI�7M MF7M�C�MMM�MMMMMMMMgM O( o �O\ �N�NNN NNNNN MM MMMM in rTn in X9')'A �� rM�r%M M r%e%f DEPARTMENTAL REPORT; C MEMORANDUM CITY OF LA QUINTA SEPTEMBER 13, 1988 TO: SAUNDRA JUHOLA, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR FROM: MICHELLE GILSTRAP, COMMUNITY SERVICES SPECIALIST -94: MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT FOR AUGUST 1988 The following will outline the activities at the Senior Center during the month of August 1988. The La Quinta Meals on Wheels program delivered 159 meals in August and had volunteer drivers and coordinators giving 134 hours. Currently Beef & Brew Restaurant is providing the program, but in October, La Quinta Hotel is expected to resume the program. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- The La Quinta Share program had a total of 69 units for August There were 52 participants and 1,142.5 Community Service hours. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Government food surplus (FEMA) program was distributed to 50 families in August. Currently the program offers dried pinto beans, white beans and rice. No U.S.D.A. Commodities we.Vp,_distributed in August _-_____-___ VOLUNTEER HOURS FOR THE MONTH WERE 326 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CRAFTS CLASS TOTAL ATTENDENCE FOR AUGUST 79 (This included a special sweatshirt yoke knitting class taught by Knitting Heaven in Palm Desert. 16 individuals took this class offered on two days.) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BLOOD PRESSURE CHECKS EACH TUESDAY RESULTED IN TOTAL ATTENDENCE: 169 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Senior Health Program conducted complete health assessments for 3 Seniors who can not afford adequate health care and do not have the opportunity to see a physician. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A Special Medicare Workshop was conducted with Jerry Abels, independent insurance agent and Harold Schmaucher, manager for the Indio Branch Office of Social Security. Press coverage include notices in the Palm Desert Post, Desert Sun, K-Best Radio, KNWZ- Radio and KMIR- TV. TOTAL ATTENDENCE: 76 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- An Exercise Class has started on Monday, Wednesday and Friday mornings at the Center. This class is taught by Larry Meyran, retired registered physical therapist. An average of 10 individuals are taking the class which focuses on joint flexibility for individuals with medical limitations. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Senior Support Group is continuing to meet under the guidance of Coachella Valley Counseling of Palm Desert. This confidential group meets to share feelings they are having over situations related to Aging. The total number is 5. I I i l AUGUST MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT 1988 Page 2 Total Walk-ins for the Month of August were: 468 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- INCLUDES JULY AND AUGUST Total Revenue for the Senior Center is: $697.24 (This includes revenue for Blood Pressure, food, coffee, and greeting cards) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- /4� r N m O m ed u .o z w.� v O y > N H m w N FHm 1 .a N d U T� O m y z H .r M m 7 W auIo ruz u00.. W z W U •a Z .i H ea PA x m S N N « .•i 4 :zd� An off � 1 i u 1 � N �u��om u�W1w0iwU4❑❑ 04 i (�XU ONlogSyomzzFz � r E~y�3wEE-dq 1> N U' O N a N F d I9wzzwwow9mow 1 d.0740dHMC6MW4E 1 F N N Z F E 3 0 m WO E Ey/ cn W U I 1> > r.to E s w o r4°aaao0.f 0 gr"00 1" a a"4 wa`4f— H w w N E4 a E. WE+Q..Oow[FHD 4❑ym NN C4004EUE.U.S 4Sy4Ew O WUFIW/!0❑tnori Z a� N H 4 W W a a s W Z a Haa pNp-�NN4a moo QnHOEEn I N4WH(p�tH..Ou FF 07WH0 PNaNONFZaq W z z`t m F W❑z030 n 3 as S W W Z o H a(qq yy 1>: OO X H FU> O H 3446. S D4 S w's a i O a X I ) 0 W H E )MUM C F a H o Ul 14 002 )azo�itl Z H U U H CNP: 4-a i a N 4 H _ E N N a H 54 0 0 w a A v u g0— waM �CA a H c m u+ Ero0Ebl NW E CNy{O• 4 F F wo w H U 'C4r4 O U C W E Z V 141 �Im .>aro W E-a .H W E ul 4o E N S 43U10 W F OWGO 4o •,0E: b U W' d) u U a .� a) U N O m W U >. N O 1 i4> 1 x N 1 F C07 i a.s4' 1 S N Z 1 lzwrn i m 4 1 In o r d H H N 0 0 0 0 0 G C O O. C CEA F (X r1 a a ` 0 0 o --4 I I D I m 1 z w a I w I IA FAH E ul (a IA D E % D W N 0 i4 E W E IL' O 00 z mlz2 O PS0 11:0 0kz m m0 IO ❑ O It: 02 .d 0 0 .d H 0 z 0 0HED a Ha Ha Z w H 3 Hz Z 0 H z O .-I W .-� N H W .� W H N N N .y N to m N N co ew mm O N sago. 00 mmoai e a a C 0 w o w O C 6 L m m t 0 O W 0 O C m O G 3 w w m 30 O Z O O 3 O.a+w 00 m WO 0? C [ p.7 WH C Z4 mV �O7F a W (n N..a10 rorn W'-N y a SL C. .Na fZN Ew EHa 0H p aid n S •CU prl N 1 Z:H 1 N N 0,44 CN W 1 4 go Ai 0 01)1 I S 0 I W 141 0• �Ca5'. CWW Wu•a Wa ON N W E yZ m aE E70C�omri KWE O. E >! P,E ow 0w yd a • NK LOL a N❑ mld0 A N ay3 C4 oQ043 ami CL 8p O ❑o N.87o mX - §-Ima4 .io•.0�1 .0 ami m m.-1 r. a. m+i FIN•i� •a zEya O � yRy m PG4 yCd1 W O C4.•1 z Wr1 iY. .ma'.E. 6> a 0 _ o3w ImI .a 0 ai w 6 001 6r •ma Je 0 ••+ a •a 4 Q i'1 ..4 su>N 4 C.O.a 0 M44 •.i L C .i .4 •./ c G4 4iJyJY� 4OOhd IH 6 m G 3 J W 0 H > U in ^I U m U oraI %H I dHi w04 pA H8y .a 0 li�a7• �d o>oGG• �77 .fin n6 nnEm Id .7 a C MEMORANDUM TO: Ron Kiedrowski, City Manager FROM: Roger Hirdler, Community Safety Director d_ DATE: September 20, 1988 SUBJECT: Community Safety Department Activity Report for August, 1988 Attached are the statistical reports for August, 1988, for the Community Safety Department. A brief review is as follows: CODE ENFORCEMENT Vehicle Abatements - Started 9 Year-to-date 70 Completed 1 Year-to-date 69 Pending 10 Warning Notices Issued -total: 38 Year-to-date 346 Public Nuisance 13 Year-to-date 87 Vehicle Violations 25 Year-to-date 259 Requests for service/ complaints 54 Year-to-date 296 ANIMAL CONTROL: Animal Pickups: Dogs 45 Year-to-date 284 Cats 15 Year-to-date 167 Incidents handled 261 Year-to-date 1,814 on Ron Kiedrowski, City Manager Memo - Community Safety Dept. - Activity Report for August, 1988 Page 2 WEED ABATEMENT REPORT Weed Abatement Notices 8 Abatement Inspections 23 Weed Abatements 19 Year-to-date PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER Monthly Activity Report for August is attached. CRIME REPORT FOR JULY: Burglary - 23 up 27.8% Auto Theft - 3 down - 40.0% Citations - 203 down - 43.5% FIRE ACTIVITY REPORT FOR AUGUST: Not Available RH:es 202 jY i COMMUNITY SAFETY DEPARTMENT CODE ENFORCEMENT REPORT FOR: August, 1988 Aug. YTD ABATEMENTS: Nuisance Abatements Started 3 33 Pending 2 2 COMPLETED 11 31 Weed Abatements Started 8 209 Pending 4 7 COMPLETED 19 202 Vehicle Abatements Started 9 70 Pending 1 1 COMPLETED 10 69 WARNING NOTICES ISSUED: Warning Notices Issued for Public Nuisances 13 87 Warning Notices Issued for Vehicle Violations 25 259 Compliance Received Through Warning 25 305 No Compliance - To Abatement Process 0 14 Warning Notices Pending 13 27 TOTAL WARNING NOTICES ISSUED 38 346 REQUESTS FOR SERVICE: Incident Report Requests 40 223 Inter -departmental Request for Service 14 73 Cases Pending 16 19 Cases Completed 28 239 TOTAL REQUESTS FOR SERVICE 54 296 Aug. YTD ASSISTANCE: Emergency Assistance Given by City Staff Fire 0 0 Sheriff 7 34 Other 0 0 TOTAL ASSISTANCE GIVEN 7 34 City Request for Outside Agency Assistance Fire 0 59 Sheriff 10 50 Health Department 0 0 Other 0 15 TOTAL ASSISTANCE REQUESTED 10 124 OTHER ACTIVITIES: Citations Issued 6 24 Home Occupation Inspections 0 2 Business License Inspections 1 13 District Attorney Filings 0 0 Public Relations 20 160 TOTAL OTHER ACTIVITIES 27 199 ANIMAL CONTROL REPORT FOR: 'August, 1988 ANIMAL PICKUPS: Do s Ae 41 Dead 4 Cats Alive 12 Dead _ 3 Other Animals Alive 2 Dead 1 TOTAL ANIMALS Alive 55 Dead 8 SHELTER ACTIVITY: Adopted Dogs 4 Cats 0 Other 0 Redeemed Dogs 12 Cats 0 Other 0 Euthanized Dogs 19 Cats 10 Other 0 INCIDENTS HANDLED: Bite Reports 6 Follow-ups _ 2 Animals Quarantined 4 Follow-ups 7 Animal Trap Set Ups 14 Follow-ups _7 Cruelty to Animals Investigations 0 Follow-ups 0 Vicious Animal Restraining Orders 0 Follow-ups 0 Warnings 1 Zoning Violations I Lost & Found Reports 13 Animal Rescue 6 Other 7 VIOLATIONS: No Owner Warnings Citations Y.T.D.-Cits. Contact Dogs at Large Noise Disturbance Defecation Removal License violation Vaccination Violation Other TOTAL ANIMAL RECLAIMED FROM ANIMAL CONTROL TRUCK: Dogs 4 Cats 0 23 16 11 45 0 0 0 1 0 _0 0 1 0 0 11 38 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 23 16 22 88 OUTSIDE AGENCY ASSISTANCE: Rec'd Given State Fish & Game 0 0 R.C.A.C. 0 1 Other 1 0 OTHER ACTIVITIES: INJURED ANIMALS Dog Licenses Sold 30 TRANSPORTED: 3 License Renewals Sent 15 Special Hours Patrols _I TOTAL ANIMALS REMOVED 63 TOTAL INCIDENTS HANDLED: 261 YEAR-TO-DATE TOTALS 482 YEAR-TO-DATE TOTALS 1,814 Y.T.D.-Dogs 284 Y.T.D.-Cats 167 j}I CITY OF LA QUINTA MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT MONTH OF ..... AUGUST, 1988 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AUGUST 1988 YEAR TO DATE CITIZEN CONTACTS ............................251 1178 VEHICLE CHECKS...............................92 653 BUSINESS CHECKS..............................45 162 ROADHAZARDS.................................14 84 MOTORISTASSISTS .............................13 61 DEPUTYASSISTS..............................130 586 CITY ERRANDS..................................3 30 CITY ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS ....................31 228 RESIDENTIALCHECKS ...........................17 26 FOLLOW-UP REPORTS .............................8 81 CRIMINAL REPORTS .............................45 111 NION-CRIMINAL REPORTS .........................13 112 TRAFFIC REPORTS...............................4 30 TRAFFIC CITATIONS .............................6 107 COURTESYNOTIFICATIONS .......................43 404 jSz w ri I- <000«000< 000000<0004400<00000<t 0000000 \WV4%0 0mm wo0Z yv OJLIIW�O m111 N0.00NNM «OO2Z MN mf1 10%"O.N•RM-h 6 OIMIL1000r.i0 LOh.�NOHfIOrIM000 � 04AI44000 1MF.iM4 40 N W u < O x.i00«<O«\ ONO.00•0<000« .yW<W0000« riM0000.0 AMOOPOto w "1 NnZ22b21' NN0I N2oO02Z �2P4 cm ij- a 1 .41 of 1 .41 -4NN,f.I 196 _- x I.-NWW040WOO OO"M4ON4ww4ON 06NVNV1Nc i w uOV.I 04 hMN MN r40 0•.4 P. I w OL d JOlW,000r1r.40 N,%-",0*OWMr400 Ou10NrIL�r.100 O.N.OFhrM .4"1 10MN M►1 .dN N u It xro.i«<o« .4000a0r<O0O« NHI<O.r000s< O DOOMOW% u*O. ZZZOZZ O•OO.Odh000ZZ �0O�=0r000ZZ •OMOOMom "1 .d 1 W MN VOILA 14 mmom 1 11 All N .1 1 Y F Mf\OTOVOIf100 .iO.IrNFNIl11n.iON r"OW.gw%NNO.i ION10NIONCO = ONN .-1.-1 WrN rN .IN .IN P. OLN .1 .i u W OC W 6 O uY QknOM O.i111N0 O•.O.OhWrIt OC uj~4 w-N III f-.rO.00NM100 ri.1 hrN ML 4 M.0A.0.y00 MN riri OM r > C N ri 01 O ac K Go 6 I W U.0 m = ti1 N IL IL YO•. W O a W Ww ua W�0 _ � _w Lu z zzeL < 1•• o u uw w a .rw w► z 2 OC < w wOL V WJOILW t»h O W r1 Mu M dWZWM ca u w a I-►- L 1- z I.. MI Wf- OO \ Lt cc O L61L a6 w 0 19064060 1-40 JJW O OL WW w OW w u OZ ►+\V aJ 1 «6 III 6 Y xx = Zx O43 at Z►+Zgxoac W .•/ Z2 pY F « OL ►4- 0 <i OW <w <W"OZ< = O FI"'IN mw J WJ tel < w1y 1111�� up4z ZZW WLC NZ w I uLYYUW m OL L� lYJ2ggYU04 2YlLu<Y\OGt[ =�Y1GJ\tt u F <M ZMWW< W W< zoo22UNW W��..U��rF.�JZW6<W WFZZ=WW Lf O \KNOLCJLwXx gwXUf0"gA«WJx gF1Y.JJOV<Ux gw»owx O OUWJOO<wWI- wwWWJ700WWZ4I- wWx4WJMW4?1- WNftww"N - W W xwzw C<w0 ►+<w=WW<c7tOUS0 N6L/iuWY=WO �0000.0.O z 1-JMLL Y ML Z OIL = us OC<L[ 60 V Z ! 3 a~ q w M O «<Om00< O rNlL1 NONh«< hrNFOh J U 0 9 9 •-OZz • A Ump" ZaZOhOOZ •*..\ `` ••}•.• < N. N 1 `I N Z O M.IM Nlnr rrr .I0Nl02ZZ Mm.boo.O r f II 1 1 111 I II 111111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LC OL.Or4o P. OorrOTOILIN O• oFP FNOM•IMOO 4.00�lmm Wf N M ~ W WNdwi W tr.1NIMf1 ed�1.Hi.04 Y Y 1 1 wK OW L J6 d I-W YWWN m QOOrMPMO 01 MOM ONF.4000 O\MFNN./ 00 F.INr m •+ N M r4r40 N OWOri Ftt WNN.1 In J N N N .1 � < OO�LLL <w F W(O u u VIx q N M w 0U W J w h , u, V v V 0 O Y- < W 2 = = U. ►� -c Wh ILw h F F O . O J 21.0 YO O M N 0 < Wa ILZx wu2U2U2 wm J Uzuzwz w 6J I W wY2W <OZ Z w< Ow ILf! u W<U1ti V O x OCNO 2 611 �"LLJj ce-cl` Y,rw,,f11 "ZZ -cZN(Dutsz J M u W<Jm z J -- Ln ► cce JJ ►OiK2H0►SI N x Wu <M<m 0.- h =6NU' Ki►-w F <JI- $-Waco 0 OL O<OU'ZWmw O F-oI j 1-I1-I. <NzOC►-q� JOOZZ« N-40-= cc I.- < =Wft4mo« I- oww QZZ"H4.W "ZZ&WM .,*/S TO: FROM: DATE: VIA: SUBJECT: DEPARTMENTAL REPORT; e TWit 4 4Q" MEMORANDUM THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SEPTEMBER 20, 1988 RON KIEDROWSKI, CITY MANAGER MONTHLY REPORT Attached are the Current Planning Division, Advanced Planning Division, and Building Division Reports for August, 1988. BJ/ CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION MONTHLY REPORT AUGUST, 1988 The Planning Division reviewed/processed the applications listed on the attached pages for the month of August. The applications, status reports of various applications are listed by category. j5, ,ugust, 1988 CASE TYPE & APPLICATION NAME, PROJECT NUMBER LOCATION PRECISE PLAN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES 88-333 David Cetina 51-265 Quinto 1 1 1 1 88-334 Starr Construction 52-705 Velasco 1 1 1 1 88-335 to It 52-725 Velasco 1 1 1 1 88-336 it It 52-705 Obregon 1 1 1 1 88-337 to to 52-717 Obregon 1 1 1 1 88-338 " " 53-135 Juarez 1 1 1 1 88-339 D& G Construction 53-520 Cortez 1 1 1 88-340 of Is 53-540 Cortez 1 1 1 88-341 Starr Construction 53-265 Obregon 1 1 1 1 88-342 to " 53-945 Cortez 1 1 1 1 88-343 it53-565 Obregon 1 1 1 1 88-344 Cal West Construction 54-420 Madero 1 1 1 88-345 it of" 51-860 Vallejo 1 1 1 88-346 Gregg Karmen 53-422 Diaz 1 1 1 1 88-347 Paul Moss 53-425 Mendoza 1 1 1 1 88-348 Paul Moss 53-445 Mendoza 1 1 1 1 88-349 Dan Featheringill 52-545 Juarez 1 1 1 88-350 Dominic Ratto 53-245 Eisenhower 1 1 1 1 88-351 Joe Stemmer 53-280 Mendoza 1 1 1 1 88-352 Mason 78-715 Ultimo 1 1 1 88-353 Western American Const. 54-080 Diaz 1 1 1 88-354 it ItIt 54-040 Diaz 1 1 1 88-355 Itof of 54-470 Juarez 1 1 1 88-356 Jerry Lugo 51-865 Velasco 1 1 1 88-357 Sunrose Property Inc. 51-701 Martinez 1 1 1 88-358 " it 52-865 Vallejo 1 1 1 88-359 It 01 53-964 Vallejo 1 1 1 88-360 Joe Stemmer 53-165 Velasco 1 1 1 1 88-361 Mike Head Construction 52-690 Alvarado 1 1 1 88-362 Mary Maddick 77-655 Montezuma 1 1 1 TOTALS 1301301 24115 August, 1988 PLOT PLANS PP 88-397 Landmark Land Co. Restroom addition to La Casa at La Quinta Hotel SIGN APPROVAL SA 88-069 SA 88-070 CHANGE OF ZONE CZ 88-034 Williams Dev. Corp. Two-sided project Identification sign TENTATIVE TRACT Howard Nelson Illuminated identification sign. East side Obregon In Process +200' north of Mazatlan N/E corner Dune Palms & Fred Waring Calle Estado office Approved Approved Waldon Financial N/E corner Miles In Process Corp. R-1-12000 and Adams Street R-1 TT 23913 Waldon Financial Corp. 114 lot single-family subdivision on 53.45 acres. TT21880 Bill Young - Heritage Time Extension #1 for + lot subdivision of a total 716 acre site TT 23995 A. G. Spanos Const. Division of 124.5 acres into 1 commercial lot, 3 multi -family lots & 308 single-family lots. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP None N/E corner Miles and Adams N/E corner Avenue 52 and Bermudas North of Channel, west of Adams, east of Washington, & south of Miles In Process In Process In Process August, 1988 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS None SPECIFIC PLAN None ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA 88-099 A. G. Spanos Const. 6P Amendment, Specific Plan and Change of Zone EA 88-100 Waldon Financial Corp. 114 lot single-family development South east corner of Washington & Miles Avenue N/E corner of Miles and Adams Street In Process In Process PARCEL MERGER PM 88-079 P. R. Equities 51-245 Rubio Approved Merger lots PM 88-080 P. R. Equities 77=-044-015 & 016 Approved Merge lots PM 88-081 Parnell, James & 52-337 Navarro Approved Merge lots PM 88-082 B. Claire Nordel 52-045 Carranza Approved Merge lots PM 88-083 Mary Mead-Maddick 77-655 Montezuma In Process Merge lots RPTPD.000 /; a August, 1988 CASE SUMMARY AUGUST YEAR TO 1986 1987 1988 DATE Residential Adjustments 0 0 0 0 Precise Plan 66 157 30 136 Plot Plans 102 18 2 8 Sign Approvals 21 16 2 14 Conditional Use Permits 0 0 0 0 Change of Zones 4 5 1 6 Tentative Tract Maps 7 3 3 8 Tentative Parcel Maps 0 1 0 4 Final Maps 0 1 0 0 Lot Line Adjustments 6 7 0 8 Specific Plans (including Amendments) 4 4 0 1 Environmental Assessments 18 18 2 16 Parcel Mergers 13 18 5 26 General Plan Amendments 8 2 0 1 Street Vacations 0 1 0 0 Variances 0 3 0 0 Public Use Permits 2 0 0 0 Temporary Use Permits (RV's) 2 0 0 0 Zoning Ordinance Amendments 0 3 0 1 Subdivision Ordinance Amendment 0 1 0 0 Tentative Tract Time Extension 4 1 0 0 Home Occupations 9 1 15 Appeals 0 0 0 1 T O T A L S 257 268 46 245 (� RPTPD.000 /� -/ ADVANCE PLANNING DIVISION MONTHLY REPORT AUGUST, 1988 The Advanced Planning Division during the month of August concentrated work on the adoption of Village Zoning; the Residential Density Study, and the Highway 111 Policies plus other activities as described in the attached summary. - 1 - BJ/RPTPD.001 A. ADVANCE PLANNING DIVISION MONTHLY REPORT AUGUST, 1988 Activities on Priority Assignments: (Numbers and Letters refer to assignment priorities.) 1.A. Village Zoning. Reviewed citizen comments on the Village Plan and Zoning. Reviewed draft Negative Declaration and notice activities. Prepared a presentation and conducted the Planning Commission Public Hearing (8/23/88) on the Village Zoning Text (the map adoption will be considered later). The Planning Commission adopted a Resolution recommending the Village Zoning Text to the City Council. Hearing to be held September 20th. 2.A. Coordinate Consultant Work on the Study of Higher Densitv Residential Land Uses. Received Final Report from Traffic Consultant. Wrote brief descriptions of findings to include in final staff report. Presented status report on High Density Study for City Council (8/2). 2.B. Housing Analysis and Recommendations leading toward General Plan Amendment_ of Residential Densities. Prepared analysis of residential densities and three alternative scenarios to compare with present General Plan for Council consideration. Developed tables and graphics to include in draft report. Report will be discussed with Council in Study Session 9/19/88 and on the Council Agenda for staff direction on 9/20. 3.A. Housing Density Implications for Hwy 111 Corridor. Coordinated housing density analysis with policy preview work on Hwy 111 Corridor. Prepared a draft recommendation, subject to Council direction, to be considered by the Planning Commission as a part of their Hwy ill policy work. 3.B. Highway 111 Policy Framework. Reviewed Washington Square and other presubmission concepts for the Hwy 111 corridor. Reviewed Indian Wells draft General Plan and Hwy 111 Specific Plan. Reviewed La Quinta Redevelopment Agency's plans for Area #2. Developed a draft paper introducing the Planning Commission to the draft policies, alternatives, and issues relating to the Hwy 111 Policy Framework so that discussion could be conducted over the next several Commission meetings. Prepared graphics, tables and reworked the early draft into a Hwy 111 Policy Preview, presented to the Commission on August 22nd in Study Session. �51 B. 4.A. Implementation of the Mini Park. Held the CEQA Hearing for the Mini Park before City Council 8/2/88 and turned implementation activities over to Public Works, with assistance as may be requested. 4.B. Annexations. Prepared a map summarizing the results of the pre -annexation survey for the south annexation study area and forwarded the map to Council. Other Activities during reporting period. 1. CDBG Coordination. Worked with re -assigned ECD representative on coordination of grant proposals and ongoing programs. Met with John Schlarb of Riverside County Housing Authority to discuss Home Enhancement Program, the assignment of an additional Housing Authority person to work with La Quinta residents, and a cash flow/payment question. Prepared a status report on the Home Enforcement Program including 2 new applications received. 2. Recreation. Met with and worked on coordination with the staff of Coachella Valley Recreation and Parks District. Discussed District activities in La Quinta. Coordinated on expenditure of Proposition 70 "per capita" grant funds for La Quintals benefit. Prepared a basic strategy for community level park sites and an acquisition program. Field inspected alternative sites and developed internarl priorities. Attended a briefing in Santa Ana on Proposition 70 funding for trails and other recreation grant programs. Responded to an offer to donate land to the City for park purposes. Requested the City Attorney to prepare a donation agreement. 3. Current Planning. Assisted in reviews of major current planning applications, including Washington Square, La Quinta Hotel maintenance facility, PGA West Hotel Expansion, and a mixed use proposal north of Whitewater Wash. KH/DOCTB.001 BUILDING DIVISION MONTHLY REPORT AUGUST, 1988 We have just completed the largest one month total valuation in the City's history. 82 units were issued at PGA West and 26 single-family dwelling were issued for the Cove. The Hotel facilities complex also was part of this month's totals. Through the eight months of 1988, the City has issued two times as many permits representing more than twice the total valuation realized for all of 1987. BJ/RPTBLD.000 n t z Q Y J Qrt &Z7 Z x 0 CD 0 s U p Ln v o 0 • co a E :04 01 N .� M m O ._ CD W • o %D o 0 G o E co E m �a M O %D m .-• O O c C o Lf) r O O N O u1 Lf m O m C r m •� r r v h o m r O L M N .-+ r N m m O M m t0 l0 tD •-4 •-4 m Q r C m m r .--I M r E+ �n •� tf1 N V' M lA 0 o ON o o �D co rl N L l O r V% C m m W tD r kD un r o c o •-' •� O N M M H � ON o v N (m U) In o r o o Un v %0 M r r r+ rn o m M c v rn cJ rn c Ln ,, QG M r N m F ON r rn m w O �D Ln r' c Ln r C O •--1 N O Ln O O r O O CIN U) d' O r O rf) In r N r -M N O m m O m O N to o o M v rn r o v m M r` q9T O N � a' kO Ln Q N r m O O N O E-. O Q N '.� �„� C N a O Cl a' N W E+ < eT v �D M N .y M, N m M >4 c � . -� m co O N r N M O M r O In r �',� Cor, .-1 In N W f6aL.. w O r) LA en Ln r) Ln m LM r) LM r) U1 m LM O O N en O O r4 r) •m O rt N & �q Lc) C) O L0 C) O LO C) O LO C� O LD O) O LD C+ O �0 C+ O LO L4 V' L1 14 r) LO N r) Ln .1 e1 qr N r7 f- r) N N N N N N N Lf) N 00 m O Lfl o Li) Lf) 0 LP Lr) 0 Ln Ln 0 Ln • • V1 0 Ln . Lf) 0 Li) • M) 0 L� . O 0 en . O o O . 0 Lo O . 0 o Ln . Ln Ir LD . O 0 Ln . O 0 Lit m r- ClO . C1 LI) r . Ll) 1` • • L() 1— Ln 1— L!) Ir Lnk r` l" r r) LP lf) N N .--7 .--I N N r) Cr .14 A ' jj EC P" w 0 a) U r-I 3 r-I 3 r-1 3 a) U r, o ;' b o 4J x 0 x 0 x 0 o +� � a ro a r-4 cHa m a N C rtf N p O n O r-, C C C C U) � LL C O U a) a) U) C U a) a) to w )a lu o 43 C O s4 $4 O C rl 7 a) r-i .4 LC a) 14 r-i to o S2 ,, 4J �4 La 4J $4 rt3 rl y $4 c3 y La c1 to r•1 r-1 -14 o O E e0 a) )a A H .p SI a) )4 a > C ra .n m C o --f X-` u E x Ol >> a s x x> u O as H a w O` m 00 Ln N r Ln 0 N O N LO 0 LO Q O LD r) 1 Ln N co 1 Ln O co 1 L%' N L:. I Ln N C` 1 L^ O C` 1 O r r 1 Ln 0D Q 1 Ln r e'V I O N 4 I C) N r- 1 O C`. N 1 Uf Ln r) 1 I r4 Ln 1 r4 Ln I V' Ln I O Ln 1 N 0 Ln V) rl Ln r) Ln fn L^ en LI) en Ln N Ln ` V C' Ln $10 Ln V' Ln LL^ Ln N V 1 a �j �j�y+ r) r. l- M. Q .-4 r- rn R .. C� r) C: r v O cc e^, -or •-+ co en v N 00 M v r) co r) AT v cc en v t cc e^, v �0 w M v Ln m M v ` c en v 1` m r) v 00 rn en c m rn r) v O o tT v •-+ 0 tf Q Ul d' O M Ln M Ln M Ln M Ln M Lfl M Ln fn Ln O O O O N N P O w v %D v LD v LD Q Cf Ln v fn ON O LD O LD O% O VD 01 O 'D o LD O� O LD Q• O LD O N O, M rn Ir N M N M fn rn M ON M rn M m f to N N N N N N N [+ O O O Ln O Ln Ln O Ln Ln O Ln Lr) O Ln Ln O Ln Ln O Ln Ln O Ln O O Ln O O Lr) 00 m v m M -i O Ln \D O Ln w O Ln %D O In LD c c k r Ln N Ln 1` Lr) r Ln r Ln I` Ln 1- Ln r Ln r- N m 14 cn N O ri O r-I O .-I O 14 CIS f f G 14 cu G •ri Q •rl r � A i O a� 'O Q ro w v -+ tp _ _ _ _ _ - ro ro w s4 :5 w o O it ) La r4 - �- a v, a a a cn ai w co' c ro ro G O to O a) ri N a! li N a) 1) G O (1) >~ O 0) G O b+ a) O •r+ a) .-1 0 'O 0 N O 'O s4 3 O ,C G a) 3 O .0 r.G a) w 3 - 0 .r~ (1) 3 0 A G (L) 3 o A r- a) ►, 3 o A r- a) s� 3 o A r: 0 � d i a ro a> ri to 0 7 h H O i4 A o w A 0 la A 0> r 4 Co C O a G o 0} r l w w w Ol rl w w rl w 0) .I w m i w m ,-I w 0 Ln m O I Ln O r 1 Ln M .••L i Ln v ON 1 Ln %D Ln 1 Ln %D N 1 Ln O 1- 1 V1 N r- 1 L.'^ O' r, 1 LD ri r-I 1 m 47S -R7 1 LT 01 V' 1 ON aN v I ON M v 1 ON CA V' 1 rn m a 1 4m O% Rr 1 O 0! � 1 00 r- N Ln M Ln M Ln M Ln M Ln N Ln N Ln O ul -L Ln ON v m v O) v C) v m v ON v O� v O c 61 C N v v Q v qr Ln v v LD v v r v yr 00 e v ON v v O v v c N v v M v Q -Cr v v Ln v v %D v v L- v v 00 v v O% v v C a a r, W Q. to a O r-I O r-4.--4 O r1 Ln O r-4 LD O O V1 c O Q O O d O c O CD v O a O a CD v rl e C. m 14 r1 m �4 m r1 rr m 61 O l0 Ln r In %O r1 In Q rl LI) Q m Ln d' r1 Ln Q M 1l1 Q m Ln Q r1 1n d' r1 Ln Q m Ln Q r1 W r1 O O r c a CO. M V' N N N N N N N N N N r o to m 0 tc Cl) o kc m Ln o Ln o o O N rn ry N m OD rn r 14 rn r 14 m r •-4 m r ri Orn r r-I m r • 1 m r- 14 rn r 14 rn r r-4 r r-I fV r n N N (N N N N Lr) r m %C m r 4 r--r V' ri Q 1-1 r--1 Q ri C' 14 r-I eT 14 r-I vT r..r r--I mr 14 r-1 IT 14 ri -T r-4 r-I Lr Q` L, o N ri r-I ra r-I r I r-I - - - - - - - - A A Q (a cn ro cn ro W ra 8 ro 64 ro tal ri) >4 ri •H 5 w ri to 3 r. >, r-4r-1 .,., E W - - - - - - - - - - - - i � ra r-1 O .a r-i O w r-I O Q) r 4 CT K w r 4 O N ri br K K ri It 41 N ri O- K ° a ° a w u� 04 v� a can 54 N 3 O 4 14 w 3 O X: O 3 O C K O O $4 O O -M ro O O 3 Gl ro O O 3 G) N K O 11 ro O O 3 d) to O O 3 N ro O O 3 N ro O O 3 Iv N K -O +1 ro O O 3 O 41 K O 1.J rc c c 3 c 1 K 0J m W Cl m 14 Q1 m W N $4 .0 O iJr f6 U) C ri O Ol ri 41 > b� 0 Ei Or t0 E O -r•l D4 ri to K ro Ei r-I m K m E r-I IT K ro H 14 O` K m E m N $4 -rl G4 r-1 br C b F m U 1.: •ri k. r- c C K F rn yr Q 1 m or Q 1 rn m Q I r 1-4 r I u7 m Ln 1 L"1 %Z fV 1 L^ rr Q 1 r Ln O 1 r+ a+ O` I m Ln Or 1 m co r'i I r1 d' r-4 I Ir1 11 O 1 m Q 01 I o o O 1 rr r .-i 1 Q ` O 1 Lr a O• 1 Or Q m Q Q• Q N Ln co r ri Lr1 r) L^ Ln Ln Q Lr) qT In Ln to ir1 In Lr) In Q Ln to Ln 4 In Q Lf% Q Ir l ry Q Q fV N Q Q en N eT Q Q N Q Q N N Q Q e. N Q Q rr N Q Q O1 N v C' C r1 Q Q 11 rl Q Q N (`7 V' mr m m Q eT Q r1 V' NT L^ r1 <T e! 10 m V' V' r r7 Q Q ¢ r7 L. Q Q` r- Q Q v a) O' a Rqs — v r! c v r� v ri M 10 m 10 r rn r O, r m rr O+ r m r O+ r m r O� r- O� r O+ r rn OD m O co r1 O cc m OD M O co m O OD !n N OD to N C, m N O) Ch N . m m N . ON ON N . Ch m N . Clk m N . m m N . 01 ON N 01 m N ON m N O` C N a N N fV N N N. . N N N N N N N . N . N . N N .-+ N N N r+ N N N C4 N � U1 r•+ tl1 r tf1 r V1 n u5 n L11 r U1 n ll1 r to r V1 er r U1 v r Ln v r u+. In ON Lf Ql In O% In O) 00 O .-1 Q O '-1 O 14 .-i O 1-4 •-i O e--1 ri O 14 .--� O •-1 .-1 O �4 .--� O 14 .-i O 14 �-1 (: 1-4 e-1 O .-d .-1 C rq ri ty a � 14 w - � ar Ts 0 0 rd 0 ro 0 0 v 0 o a) r.0 rc% o ro a� w ra 0 0 b 0 0 b 0 0 b o 0 ro a) -11 w 0 r. 0 r.o v (D rl w ro 0 b 0 0 zs 0 0 3 C1 .-i a) r-i 3 a) r-4 3 Q! .4 0 +i m a) 3 a) . i tF ro •r1 CL E 3 � .-4 ty 3 a) r-i ty 3 a) r-4 tr 3 a) r4 tr 0 -� 04m E 0 +� a) 0 � m ar to •.a 04 E 3 a) tr 3 al ty 3 a) ,-4 a G ro H G ro E4 C ro Ey C 0 E4 14 --1 k+ z to E+ > .+ O C 0 H r. ro H r. to H ro H •-I O �4 H [H Sa •rl ka >1 14 O C to E-H G ro H K ro H .1 Lrn o r v .-4 .-4 N Co L ON V C% e` r co o r %o r fn Ln .1 01 o, 0 n N o .•{ %o rn m m r- OD rn m O r rn n rn r tf) v o r .1 -+ ,--� r �n �n in in in V) c V) Ln ui rn r- � Ln ui Ln u-� Ln -;r Ln a) r v Ln v Ln c� r Ln N vi V1 it Ln o v v v 1-4 v v v N v v v en v v v Ln vV v c %o e v v r- v v v Do c ak c m c sr v o Ln v v --4 Ln. v v N Ln v v en Ln v v v Ln v v Ln Ln v v %o Ln v a n fn IT v . Ln a) tr ro a IF, r r r pp r OD r OD M �D M �D r M r M r M r M r M r M r M r M r M r rl r tit m ON N m m N r4 N M .1 N M r-t N M m Ln N OD to N O rr V' O r d' O r V' O rr V' O r V' O rr v O r a' O r a' O r er O r v O rr < N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N r Ln tfn .-+ u1 r+ tf) 1-4 %D In 1-1 . �D .-4 Ln %D ,-r In . m %D r . ON %D r m %D r . m %D r m ko r . ON ko r ON %C r . m ko r . m ko r . m %D r m �o r . O r-1 O r-1 O rl O .-4 O r♦ OD O OD O r1 O N .--I . O N 14 O N 14 O M 1-4 O N rH O N r- O N O N O N 14 O N 1-4 O N 1 G •ri r••I w i G -ri v7 to 0 0 ro 0 0 m ro w In ro r-I r+ w •d O O ro 0 0 m ro r-I w ro 0 0 rd O 0 rd 0 O ro 0 O m to r-4 -rA w G ro 0 0 ro O 0 ro 0 0 v 0 0 v G 3 a) �4 o G 3 a) .-+ a G ro •i a E ?, ro •a ar-I E >+ 3 a) 0) G 3 a 14 m G 0 -H a E >1 3 O 14 al G 3 a .-a is G 3 (1) C-A an G 3 (L) r4 m G m -H a E >, 0 41 m a) $4 3 a) .4 a) r_ 3 a �4 ON G 3 al �i m G 3 a) r4 m r-s4 0 4-) m c ro H ro E � O - O ro E ro E 14 O ro H ro E ro E ro E-F 1-4.rq O w ro E•E ro E ro E ro E -+ w m r m 1 M m O 1 M r r 1 M O m 1 M N r1 1 m N 14 1 m O CD I In kD 14 I r -i .4 .-+ I m M O i M r m 1 14 m r 1 \c r m I m U' .+ I Ln O r-4 I M M O I r %o m 1 N s c I v Ln Ln Ln m r- m r Ln Ln Ln L^ m r Ln In Ln in Ln Ln v to m r- v U-` LI) Ln Ln to 1n Ln v UP+ v ul' (� I p� m Ln v v m Ln v v O kc v v r 4 %C v v N %o v v v+ v v %D %o v v r %o v v Go %D v v m %D v v O r- v v r-4 r v v N r- v v M r v v C r v v 1n r v v %D rr v v r r v v (1) tT tv a r fn O fn O O O O O O O O v N m O W Q r+ an r•r N 0 O OD In N N Oi a� Oh C� ON 0� m 0: O r Q' •-I m O N O N O N O N r M r fn ON N fn m r 4 Ln r N O N r N %0 O co %0 ON rf v to r•I OD N ••4 co N r•1 m N ra O, N ry � N N fn N t0 N N fn fn fn f•1 I Q 6� t0 r O O al O O O O �n O O In O O In O r �n o O c O O o O m m r r ; N Un O v o OD r fn co r fn OD r m O r M C).-� N .1 o W - c N c v ao Lry .--� O v o r•1 C r rf c r rl o r r-I .� ,.� tT .rCj r-I tT -� .--� X � � U CP tP •rCi r•i - - - - - I w q r-I ri A Q) A rn a) •.•� rC ri 3 Q i7 w g G -r•I g C •ri w m rI w i ro Ga m � M H 44 - - - - - a (L) r-I UN C C •r-f to 4) a C •rI Ill +) = = - (1) ri tr C rI �a r•i 0 0 m a a) r-I tT C r-+ r4 a) -P 0 -., r-I -ri X a v r-f tT- C •14 cn a W a m m x a cn In 10 r-I k' ,o N a) rt N O s4 3 O N N 10 b o 3 r+ fo s4 3 'O 3 O O fn m W m 14 s4 a �4 a S!) fSWlz] rf 04 E >1 f r♦ v $4 C to S4 $4 - W r♦ .-I C C 0 fA C •r, SI N o ry C C) r, tT C -••i x !C N O rC C C C 0 O7 .0 9: 0 OJ •n a) r-I r 1 N 0 b C 0 4 a) C 7 4 a) C r0 r-, O C r0 .-I 0 C r-d O: to fa U to 9 •r1 w f0 a) Io E- a1 O a) £ •rI w -rf w IC > a) E •r.I a -r•I a. $4 a >a s Ln m r 1 o O r I O @ %0 1 o O r I 0 1-4 m 1 0 r-i r I Ln V Q I o• `C C 1 r, O fn 1 o m N I ON m Q 1 m OD v I o t0 W I Lrn N v 1 M r In 1 In fn 0� 1 C O OC 1 o v 1 a1 r N to N fn M to 1-4 Ln (N Ln fn Ln L'1 Ln V' Ln fn In 01 v L'1 Cr- 1-1 fn fn In In In In a` r 0' r 17C) co r v v 0) Ir v v C Ia v v m v v co v v co v v m v v r m a Q m m v v 0) co v v O ON v v r•+ ON v c N rn v v Q ON v v %C a% Q v r ON v v OC 04 v v a' c c v i v trr ro a OD OD ON rt O) O) Cn O) C' d' Q ef' �' rl rf rl rl rl rl rl rl r c r, 00 N 1-4 OD N .-4 m N r+ OD N r N %D r N �D r N %D r N %D r N kD o O w 0 O )D 0 O kD 0 O to 0 0 )D 0 O W o O kD r4 C O r C c M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M C C «a O0 1` M 00 rr M O0 r M O0 1- fn t.D O m kD O O) kD O as %D O Ch lD O m . N O O . N O O . N O O . N O O . N O O . N O O . N O O . C O N . -4 c fl, . r r-1 . r r ri . r ri . rn ri . r4 m .-+ r+ a1 rti r1 m ri r-1 rn r-1 c C, 0 rn O m O rn O rn O rn O rn 1- .• r- r - = 3 A I >1 ri i I 44 tr) G .rl In ro ro ro ro to p m $4 m $4 ro ro m �4 S4 r-i a L4 Ei r-1 a > 4 E r-1 a S4 E: r 4 a ro ro m $4 m sr o •,4 > W `4 > s4 m .14 > ro ri > x 0) c x a) c x a1 c la v -r1 > s4 v -rl > x C) c ro r-1 0 c b r-I 0 c ra r-1 0 c 10 r-+ O c �4 v - 1 > u w 4 > a x a) c a x a) c .,.1 a a .11 oa .,4 oc .14 a `4 a -rl a •11 a .14 a -r1 a, $4 a w a 44 a l4 a ri a -rl a -.a c .rl a .-1 �D �D 1 Or Ln 1 m M Ln 1 O) C' c 1 ON %D rr 1 M V) m 1 M 1n o, I r M �D 1 1--i it v 1 P %. V. 1 00 w Ir I v OD r- 1 %D r+ co 1 N M 0 1 111 O0 %D 1 )n r V1 1 r+ .- % t r OQ tz 1 In ,n V) U^ In in If) ,n lf) ui LA u-+ In Ln Ln Ln 0 Ln In Ln O1 Ir ON Ir O1 Ir 01 rr to )n 1n V) L^ L Lei Ln 17 l ` f 0 o Lr) C 1) c Lr C N 0 In C M 0 In -KP 0 In LO 0 In 0 1!+ Ir 0 In co o u') (71 c L� o .4 lf) •+ r♦ to N r. lf) M ... Ln v r-r In v% 1-. Lr% %C I L r -+ L^ co 4) a+ ro a G 4 O 0 o 0 ra 0 r♦ 0 ri 0 ri 0 r-1 0 . .-i 0 . .-4 0 . ri 0 ri 0 . ri 0 . ri 0 . 0 0 0 (D . 0 Lf) . 0 o . r. u- et 0 . fn . Rr 0 . v 0 d' 0 v 0 a 0 . Q 0 . v 0 v 0 . C' 0 . v 0 . v o . N N N Q I` r . v v . v . v . v v v v v v v v v o N o 0 In v 0 N v 0 N v 0 N v 0 N v 0 N IT 0 N v 0 N v 0 N v 0 N v 0 N v 0 N 0 0 C 0 0 O N r m 0 V) r c c c r N N r N r N r N r N r r•1 N r r N r .-i N r ri N r rti N r rti N r .- 4 N r� a A A U rl I >. .H ro'O [ H >, 4 ro = - = - - - = - - = +s a > s4 a)i ro 3 V) Q) Un - - - - - - - - - ul (0 04 a� ri c C ro r 1~ .r-1 4.) ro -,1 o a O $4 E rs a s4 E r-I w sa E rf a s4 E ri a $4 E ri a •4 14 O ri E' O F >~ ri C O C N O C O1 -0 4 O 1 O ro r-s O ro ►+ 0 4 To ri O ro r-1 O ro sa N —4 ro sa Cs .14 co s l a) H O U 0) ro > ro 3 t E U r-s N 4J 41 ► c s G •r1 a to ro 3 G -ri a C -ri m C w 4 9 $4 4 l~ 1a > -rl >~ f'a G $i a > -rl a > - 4 a > •rs m ri 4! > t3'. ++ _ r-I to u s-1 O u E c C ! 1-4 r'1 m Ln ri %D O) m m r O, m O iC r ► tD r r I N ON r ► en r+ %D ► m O m ► v N m ► OA O r ► ON %0 Ln ► m m v ► 0 %D %0 1 Lr L` M. ► 61 Lr+ OA ► 0 �D M ► L c c 1 Ln Ln ► to v ► Ln Ln t Ln V) C+ r m ► - m r Ln to a% r m r Ln Ln to to Ln Lr) N Ln cc r r r m LI) r u i OD ri u~ C rn ri Lr) C 0 CV u1 Q N Lr1 V N Ln Q N to V. v N to C in N V) Q tD N Lr) C rr N Lr% Q m N C C o+ N 1f1 C 0 en Ln C ►+ r7 L'I Q N f^ t Q rn en In C a: A) Ln C c r L i a 0 0 (a] .1 lf1 N r N ►n W 0 1n 0 1n Ln 4� r r 0 O 0 O 0 L 1 o L 1 r+ Lt �D N fra r fn ON m r'I m m .-I r 1-4 r N m fV r N O N N N N N 1n r �p O� .•-I t` N 00 V? N N ri C' fr1 F o O 0 O 0 O fn N o O o O rr CT o O 0 O 0 to 0 0 o M m r O sT sT O r O r4 O to )!1 co O 0 rH .-+ rH r-1 CO rra r-4 Q lC r -T V} r-i O N tr C b- C r-I r-I ro ri r-4 A 4J a) v a) A04 a r-I r-4 r-I r-I E ro aa)) cn E m F 3 3 a o U) a w i O O a c O r-I as O r•i w tr ri G H O O a RS TO a tr •ri O O a o 0 .-4 C ri ro r-1 a r0 IC O c r•I 0) •-I • k+ p N ro O aD G 7 V 4) N a O 3 O (ao ••-I +•) 3 N A a N C O U o o 4J o 4J O U tr a) N r-4 tr I~ a E >, m d a4 r-i tr C tr C N ro ro >4 f 4 •rl Ca. E to ro +.) m a) l4 m d $4 m it r A O to F -i O -r1 f:+ ro F -ri > 4 rl A ro U ro F m W H fz+ -r•I G. v > In co m -T R r O fa In O ro N In v In to O 00 ri v %C m L^ %C 1 �D I 1 r 1 fr 1 to I r0 CJ v 1 o 1 p1 I 0 1 6T 1 T� 1 r+ 1 fn in Ln L Q` rr C' Ln 'C' to it [:a Pr) to N In r r O) tr C' Ln v Ln M V 173 [y p V r+ R fV Q M Q aT C' 1n Q %D d' C- Q 00 Q' ON Q O In In N V^ In IT !n Q In R In O to v tr Q Va Q' In -tr fn Q to Q to v In Q Lr Q M MEMORANDUM TO: Ron L. Kiedrowski, City Manager FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: A. Capi 1. We Frank Reynolds, Director of Public Engineer August 31, 1988 Works/City Departmental Report, July and August 1988 rovement Proiects This project has been held up pending the resolution of a dispute between the contractor and the County regarding payment for delay and re -mobilization costs. Another problem the County is having is coordination between the street improvement contractor and the traffic signal contractor. Due to their respective workloads it appears to be difficult to arrange the timing of their operations to get underground work performed at the appropriate time. 2. Jefferson Street, Route 111 To Westward Ho. Request for Proposals for engineering services have been sent to five local firms, and their proposals are due September 9. We have asked for costs for three phases of work: preliminary surveying and soils investigation; design and the production of contract documents; and construction staking and compaction testing. The intent is that if our workload permits we may choose to do the design work in-house, but we will have to farm out the first and third phases because we do not have the necessary surveying and soil testing capabilities at this point in time. 3. Washington Street, Highland Palms to Route 111. The study of various geometric configurations and their impact on right-of-way acquisitions is nearing completion and should be available for evaluation in mid -September. The design of the permanent pumping facility for the Washington Street entrance to Von's shopping center is well along and may be ready for a call for bids at the first Council meeting in September. IV RON L. KIEDROWSKI AUGUST 31, 1988 PAGE 2 4. Minipark The staff has solicited bids for clearing, grubbing, importing fill material, and the installation of underground irrigation and electrical facilities. It is expected that work in these areas could begin in mid -September. In connection with the Eisenhower improvement project which is now under contract, there are four palm trees to be removed, and these will be relocated to the Minipark. 5. Eisenhower, Tampico to Montezuma Work began on this project the last week of August and is expected to be completed at the end of September. While the contractor is required to maintain at least one lane of traffic except under the most extreme circumstances, motorists are being advised to use other streets to reach their destinations. Sunline and Desert Sands School District will use alternate routes. 6. Eisenhower - Coachella Signal The plans and specifications are complete, and it is planned to call for bids on September 6. 7. City Yard A minimal amount of money for a City Yard was budgeted, but its ultimate location remains a question mark. B. Redevelopment Agenc The plans and specifications for all of the proposed improvements except the sanitary sewers are complete. CVWD is still reviewing the proposed sewer system to see if additional cost savings can be effected. The timing of the project is under study, because it has been determined that there currently is a large volume of construction underway in the Coachella Valley involving most of the local contractors. As a result there is some concern that were the projects to be let out to bid at this time, less than the most favorable bids might result. C. Technical Traffic Committee Due to vacation schedules and the shortage of agenda items, the Committee did not meet during July and August. eng78.88 RON L. KIEDROWSKI AUGUST 31, 1988 PAGE 3 D. Streets Division Activit Maintenance activity was routine during most of the reporting period. However, as a result of the heavy rains during the second and third weeks of August all but critical maintenance activity ceased in favor of cleanup from the storms. Major efforts were needed to clean streets of rocks and gravel in order to cut down the potential for accidents. Areas washed away near mailboxes had to be filled so that mail deliveries could be resumed. Efforts were undertaken to direct more of the runoff flowing down Bermudas into the new flood control facilities. Nearly 30 man-hours of overtime were spent in placing flooded signs and pumping Washington and Route 111. E. Parks Division Activity In addition to normal park maintenance, the crew removed some trees and severely pruned others in the islands along Estado and La Fonda. These actions were taken upon the advice of horticulturists who had identified a parasite problem in some of the trees. Those trees that had to be removed revealed another basic problem in that when they had been planted their root systems had been backfilled with a clay material which did not permit the root system to expand. During the August storms this crew joined the streets crew in cleanup activities. F. Engineering Division Activity During the reporting period interviews for Engineering Aide and Secretary II were conducted, with the result that the Engineering Aide, Michael Schedine, reported to work on August 1, and our Departmental Secretary, Sharon Harris, will report September 6. All of the authorized Public Works positions now have been filled. As far as the Engineering Division is concerned, this now means that we can perform more services in-house than we were able to do previously. The following items of work have been completed or are in progress: 1. Pre -submittal reviews of three tentative tracts. 2. Final maps for four tracts and one parcel map. Due to our limited resources, final maps are still being farmed out to consultants. 3. Three plan checks. 4. Processed new bonds and subdivision agreement for Palm Royale (formerly The Reflections). eng78.88 RON L. KIEDROWSKI AUGUST 31, 1988 PAGE 4 F. Engineering Division Activity(continued) 5. Participated in plan reviews and meetings and produced documents in connection with projects being undertaken by private developers and other governmental agencies. G. Miscellaneous An agreement was entered into with Gordon Bricken and Associates for a noise level survey in the Montero Estates area. It is proposed to get the survey underway about the first week in October when more representative traffic volumes should exist. /7/ eng78.88 4 44u&ro oil fyOFTMt COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 9/20/88 ITEM TITLE: CITY-WIDE ANALYSIS OF MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USES BACKGROUND: AGENDA CATEGORY: PUBLIC HEARING: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: April 5, 1988 Memo and Report Parts I & II April 19, 1988 Memo of work proposed FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None APPROVED BY: RECOMMENDATION• Receive presentation in Study Session and Discuss. Provide Guidance to staff in Business Session Submi ed by: Signature -1- Approved for submission to City Council: IZUN K EDROWSKI, CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND MEMORANDUM HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SEPTEMBER, 1988 CITY-WIDE ANALYSIS OF MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY LAND USES On April 5, 1988, a transmittal memo conveyed to the City Council results (to date) of Staff work on the requested City-wide analysis of the General Plan allocation of Medium and High Density Residential Land Uses. Parts 1 and 2 of the Study were presented: Part 1: An analysis of General Plan density and its policy implications; and Part 2: A more detailed look at specific high density areas designated or implied by the General Plan. While these first two parts introduced the issues and explored, in a general way, the possible direction of a resolution of noted issues, the analysis performed to that date was not sufficient to provide a firm basis to contemplate a General Plan Amendment. On April.19, 1988 a recommendation was made and direction given to pursue five additional analytic tasks. The first three of those five tasks are the subject of the attached report: Part 3: A more in-depth analysis of the seven high density residential areas designated in the General Plan, with respect to two technical considerations: a.) Traffic analysis and the effect of high density at each location on the planned road system (and a second analysis presuming a medium density designation); and b.) Market absorption for high and medium density residential units over time to determine whether the General Plan designated land inventory is BJ/MEMOTB.007 sufficient, deficient, or excessive for high and medium densities. Part 3 was conducted by consultants retained to accomplish the technical data manipulation and interpretation necessary to confirm or refine the earlier general Staff analysis in Part 2. Part 4: Reviewing all work, especially the results of Part 3 technical consultant input on traffic and market, Staff would prepare: a.) A comparative summary table of the seven designated high density residential areas, characterizing them across all the variables in a brief, succinct way; b.) A set of concrete recommendations on how to treat each of the designated areas leading to any necessary General Plan Amendments; c.) A set of general recommendations on how to treat the residential potential of the Mixed Commercial Land Use in the Highway ill Corridor, leading to either a General Plan Amendment or a policy directive for the Specific Plan; d.) An analysis of the implications of the above recommendations for the medium density residential category (if, for instance, some high density were recommended to be amended to medium density); e.) A revised Residential Land Use Profile of the City (similar to that found in Part 1), based on the recommendations in the report, to demonstrate the implications of any recommended land use re -designations. Part 5: An in-depth City Council consideration of the Staff analysis and recommendations, resulting in a set of directives to Staff as to which recommendations would be most favorably considered. The remaining tasks, Part 6, Staff refinement of recommendations and preparation of the General Plan Amendments; and Part 7, Environmental Analysis and related considerations, will follow Council's consideration of the attached material and directives to Staff. REPORT The attached report contains two sections: fo 2 - BJ /MEMOTB . 0 0 7 Part 3: Summary of consultant reports on Market Absorption for High and Medium Density Residential units and on Traffic Impact Evaluation of seven designated high density residential locations. The summaries are quite brief. Excerpts, or the full text, of both reports are available to the Council upon request. Part 4: Summary of Staff analysis and recommendations. This part contains two levels of focus. The first deals with the seven designated high density areas in a comparative table summarizing the many considerations surfaced about each area. However, because the high density areas do not exist in a vacuum, the remainder of the analysis focuses on the total residential land use pattern, City-wide, including all densities. Within the analysis section of Part 4, the General Plan, the market, and three alterntive scenarios have been prepared for Council discussion and consideration. For each scenario a pair of maps have been prepared (to compare with the present General Plan Map). For each scenario, a table has also been prepared to describe the acreage, dwelling unit and population implications of each alternative. It is expected that the exploration of these three alternative scenarios will focus on policy positions needing refinement, leading to a Scenario #4 upon which any General Plan Amendments may be based. /Y/ 3 - A.7 /MF.MnTA - n n 7 September, 1988 STAFF REPORT SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE CITY-WIDE GENERAL PLAN STUDY OF MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY LAND USES PART 3: Summary of Consultant Reports on A. Market Absorption for High and Medium Density Residential Units; and B. Traffic Impact Plan Designated Locations A. HOUSING UNIT ABSORPTION Evaluation of Seven General High Density Residential At an average rate of economic growth, between the years of 1990 and 2020, additional housing units could be expected to be absorbed by each of three density categories in the following numbers: 1. Medium Density (4-8 du/ac): 2844 units 2. Medium -High Density (8-12 du/ac): 1773 units 3. High Density (12-16 du/ac): 497 units Total 5114 units In the same period (1990-2020) approximately 5289 lower density units (four or fewer per acre) would be absorbed. By the year 2020, the total housing units absorbed in La Quinta would be approximately 15,245, of which 8,049 (53%) would be at a density of four or fewer dwelling units per acre, and 7,196 (47%) would be above four dwelling units per acre, if the market were the sole determinant of residential land uses in La Ouinta. B. TRAFFIC IMPACT An analysis of the seven designated high density residential areas together with all previously approved projects, compared to the General Plan design capacities of the Circulation Plan "revealed that virtually all intersections within the City would continue to operate well within limiting values after their occupancy". However, the character of the traffic along Calle Tampico and its intersection with Washington dictates consideration of down scaling the two high density areas along Washington (to avoid turning movement problems), - 1 - BJ/RPTTB.09B and a closer look at the other high density areas in the vicinity of "The Village". "...it is concluded that the current location for high density uses should be replaced with medium density. Further, given land area locations that are still available along Highway 111, Washington, and Jefferson Streets, higher density land uses should be planned for those areas." PART 4: Summary of Staff Analysis on: A. Comparison of Seven High Density Areas. B. General Plan and three alternative Scenarios for Residential Land Use Designations. A. Seven General Plan Designated High Density Areas. The General Plan designated seven areas for high density (8-16 du/ac). These areas have been subjected to considerable study as to their potential for high density (compared to other alternatives). The following Map Exhibit 1 indicates the general location of these seven high density areas. The following Table, Exhibit 2 summarizes the analysis of the seven areas and presents a recommendation for each area in terms of both General Plan designation and later zoning changes (if warranted). Following the Table is a discussion of some of the salient points leading to the recommendations. 2 - BJ/RPTTB.09B Y-3 IVE F;QOD AREA 1 = 20 ACRES AREA 2 = 11 ACRES AREA 9 = 40 ACRES AREA 4 = 0 ACRES AREA 8 =45 ACRES AREA 6 = 18 ACRES AREA 7 = 0 ACRES CA O z FE QD .3 J i C IVE AVENUE HIGHWAY 111 W W IL > W 06 NOTE: LOCATIONS ARE GENERAL - SPECIFIC SCALE NOT INTENDED GENERALPLAN DESIGNATED HIGH DENSITY AREAS Exhibit 1 M .11 rN w • ►+ v bill r4 u o a s $4 2 aj I o Ira+i as wvi viFaa C a w >.., .d a ar a+ N a. 0 .+ >� p � g -vq .c ♦+ ++ >. C a C ae1� ayy 1 O w u a+ Li 4 a N M o 3 6 Mlia r4A r "1 1 �Craw� 1G p _� Cyw v �yO1 .ai QN LPG G q o 0 u 3 •• •-1 O LI w q x p •.4 �w V a vn Y V O >. ••+ r+ ++ ..1 I" RI OI N -w-I ACV aCV o sy ►+ �n a M E V a CO •� y b w ..1 emu+ =�p� v . OI 1 O V u w {I O f.1 V V CV a! V V�f V yy a+ - V a+ >V i�,•� aa! N G %1 so u A 1 ya b A?� 0 "4UiA ca c c.,w ,►� eta c, a u w a► +f a OC O a C a O r4 V +I OI A "4 v -+ a `4 "4 1 Q� . 4 1 �E) ++ u a c w a w O c rl c'O a 14 w a N a C V E a a C,4 � ai �N 64 °s �w°O�� m81 c�SK pia �i�°ouw A= uu ar QaQ M 11 w b41 w w E 49 V M N 1 4 1r4 A INA M w uT t w w w W4 1 w wa H e a+ w aC a a, 14 14 y1 y v > c w tow a a a a auu wvl bo e b e b w .ca.ie a5 uA u u u o V ac a> a Ie Ie b w b ..i "4 0 .. •y ��„ r OD r qw W taa7 hl 1 1 1 1 1 IpA Z �4 N N N .-1 PI .-i N pG N oL o6 04 a a oG a a a w �APAAArrrrrr �1 N , O 41 �^ W4 NWW v >, N inw � -41Yi in AG %0 � N 1M�11 V u d Nv�wC -O+ N C O aoA'O wE+w 41v uyo, vuaj d v v.+ 34 C +aa+a o w.+w w ow +v' wVva o a O oC 0 E0�� + f 0+4 aZ3 in9dVA CAAC Oic u QOME+ MN cvA OV OVV C OVE44X I 1J/v �a+ aavw7 •Vw w9a w rnw E ;3a �iia aiA w l J .. . 8 DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL FOR HIGH DENSITY FOR EACH AREA Area 1: (Northwest corner Washington and Tampico) The "location" is poor for high density in that it is on the outside edge of the Village area - and on the side toward Highway Ill - so that its population would not likely support The Village commercial development. The location is too far removed from The Village core for good pedestrian interaction. The "compatibility" is poor because of its location along Washington -- an image corridor emphasizing low density appearance -- and the conflict with the low density lots along the other side of Washington. The "access" is poor because no access can be permitted along Washington (sight distance and separation problems with the elevated bridge and proximity to Tampico's intersection). Any access along Tampico must be at least 300 feet removed (to the west) from the Washington crosswalk. A second access along Tampico would be essential for high density, but not likely, given the frontage available. The market is fair because the site is approximately half the absorption acreage predicted for high density, but the location is far removed from likely employment centers, significant shopping, services, and other Valley amenities. Area #2: (Southwest corner Washington and Tampico) The "location" is poor for the same reasons as Area #1. The "compatibility is also poor for the same reasons as Area #1. In addition, Area #2 abuts medium density (but single family lots) on the south. The "access" is fair (only slightly better than Area #1) because turning movements at Tampico are not absolutely required. If Tampico is used for access, a 300 foot space should be provided between Washington and the access point. Access could be taken from Washington or from La Fonda off Washington (but that would put traffic past single-family lots). Being on the same side of Tampico as The Village core, pedestrian interaction could be accommodated. The "market" for high density in this location would be fair (the size is right) but the opportunities for amenities would be -limited, and proximity to significant shopping and employment opportunities are too far removed. Now that Area #2 is in City ownership as a prospective Civic Center location, this area should be removed from the high density residential land use category. Area 3: (North of Whitewater Wash, Adams to Dune Palms South of Westward Ho) The "location" is fair because the site is north of the low water crossing through Whitewater Wash off Dune Palms and Westward Ho. It is somewhat remote, especially its eastern end. "Compatibility" is poor in that the area to the east along Westward Ho and north along Dune Palms appears to be developing largely as low density areas. The western end of (56"1 - 3 - BJ/RPTTB.09B the area is nearer Adams and is closer to medium density prospects. "Access" could be good, in that the area touches both Dune Palms and Adams, although Adams will be the more major route. Along Adams, the area has a smaller frontage, making access with good sight distance removed from the Wash more difficult. Area #3 has a poor "market" potential because of its 49 acre size, exceeding the projected high density absorption for the year 2020. Area #4: (South of the new alignment of Avenue 52, east of Bermudas, north of the Desert Club property). The "location" is only fair in that it lies close to The Village but, the area is on the far side of Avenue 52, making pedestrian access across Avenue 52 and through The Village South area to the commercial Core unlikely. "Compatibility" for Area #4 is only fair because, although the Desert Club lies to the south and Village Commercial lies across Avenue 52 to the north, lower and medium density residential lie to the east and west (respectively) of the area. "Access" to Area #4 is good, due to Avenue 52 (although on -site access must avoid the intersection with Bermudas). The "market" for Area #4 would be good given the small size of the area, except for its extremely removed location from significant Valley shopping, service, and employment opportunities. Its position on two traffic ways would lessen its appeal for family housing, leaving the market narrowed to singles and seniors. Singles, being more attuned to location, would prefer to be nearer to employment. Seniors, given choices, prefer to be nearer shopping, services, medical, and recreational opportunities. Area #5: (North of Whitewater Wash, west of Adams) The "location" is good in that the area along Washington and its extension along the Whitewater Wash down to Adams appears to be developing as medium or higher density. "Compatibility" for Area #5 is less likely to be a problem. Less single family development will surround this area than areas further east. What single family development eventually abuts this area will not be pre-existing but either simultaneous or subsequent, meaning that buffer arrangements can be designed in. "Access" to Area #5 is good, due to both Adams (which has on arterial status south of Highway 111) and its greater proximity to Washington via Miles. The "market" for Area #5 as high density will be limited (i.e.," poor") due to the size of the area (exceeding the projected acreage left to be absorbed). Area #6: (East of Eisenhower, north of Tampico, south of Bear Creek Channel) The "location" of this area is reasonably good, due to its proximity to The Village Commercial area, especially because it abuts the future commercial expansion area north of Tampico. "Compatibility" of Area #6 is excellent because it has the Bear BJ/RPTTB.09B j Creek Channel to the north, Eisenhower and the golf course to the west, and Village Commercial on the south and east. "Access" to Area #6 is only fair because of the bridge on Eisenhower over the Bear Creek Channel. Because of sight distance and separation problems, no direct access may be permitted from this area onto Eisenhower. Access to this area must come primarily from an extension of Bermudas north of Tampico, and through The Village Commercial to the south, using the commercial access exit onto Eisenhower (if one is permitted) or onto Tampico east of Eisenhower. The "market" for high density is fair due largely to the size of the area and its location, removed from major shopping, service, employment and transportational opportunities of the Valley as a whole. Area #7: (Southeast corner of Eisenhower and Tampico, north of La Quinta Park) The "location" of this area is good because of its relationship to The Village Commercial area (on the correct side of major thoroughfares). As for "compatibility", the area lies between Village Commercial on three sides, while across Eisenhower, the actual land uses are higher density residential. Thus compatibility is excellent. "Access" to Area #7 is excellent in that it is served by Tampico, Eisenhower and Bermudas at multiple points, so that congestion is less likely. The "market" is good from two perspectives. This is the smallest area designated high density, being one -sixth the acreage projected to be absorbed. Moreover, the area is already subdivided into numerous smaller blocks and lots, which will result in smaller projects - a marketing plus. The market is already proven for this location because almost half of the area is already developed in high density residential. The remainder will be merely in -fill. Even so, the market will be limited by the same locational disadvantage suffered by all of the Cove area, due to its distance from Valley employment, major shopping, service, and transportational opportunities. - 5 - BJ/RPTTB.09B PART 4B. GENERAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE SCENARIC I. ACREAGE IMPLICATIONS OF MARKET ABOSRPTION STUDY. A. Market Study In the year 2020, market absorption projections suggest the following acreages and percentages of acres, broken down by densities: Density Acres % Low (avg. 3 du/ac) 2683 73.5 Medium (avg. 6 du/ac) 673 18.4 Medium High (avg 10 du/ac) 247 6.8 High (avg. 14 du/ac) 49 1_3 3652 100% B. Comparison of Market Absorption to General Plan: The General Plan designations by density are as follows: Density Acres % Low (very low and low combined) 5810 72.6 Medium 1825 22.8 Medium High (N/A) -- -- High (medium high and high) 368.5 4.6 8003.5 100% C. Analysis As can be seen by comparing the two tables, the average percentages for low and medium densities are not too dissimilar. However, the acreage figures in the General Plan are more than twice the projected absorption by the year 2020. The medium density figures have some potential for mis-interpretation however. The Cove area, while technically medium density (due to the historical creation of very small lots) is still single-family detached in product type, and hence competes (with a price advantage) in the low density market. Lot sizes such as are found in the Cove will not be replicated elsewhere in La Quinta. The Cove medium density lots account for 927 acres (approximately half) of the medium density General Plan acreage. BJ/RPTTB.09B ( Y In terms of market absorption however, the Cove lots should be considered as a special case of low density. The in -fill of the Cove SFR detached lots (3250) could be completed by the year 2020 at the rate of construction experienced in the last five years. Therefore, the best way to interpret the market projection for medium density is to expect a different product type than can be placed in the SR Zone of the Cove and to count the new medium density acreage as being found elsewhere. The other half of the question comes to the foreground, however. If the Cove is to be considered a special case of low density, and as direct competition for absorption against new low density areas, and if the Cove is only 40.7 filled in, should we count the remaining in -fill against the projected low density absorption? The answer is that we probably should. Therefore, we might expect 927 acres to be absorbed as if it were low density in the Cove out of the 2683 acres projected. This understanding calls for an adjustment to our tables. An adjusted market absorption might appear as follows: Density Acres % Low 1756 48.1 Cove (as if low) 927 25.4 Medium (not in Cove) 673 18.4 Medium High 247 6.8 High 49 1.3 3652 100% A correspondingly adjusted General Plan acreage table might appear as follows: Density Low Cove (as if low) Medium (not in Cove) High Acres % 5810 72.6 927 11.6 898 11.2 368.5 4.6 8003 100% - 7 - BJ/RPTTB.09B I�D If these two adjusted tables are compared, several interesting conclusions are suggested. 1. Residential land will only be about 45% absorbed overall by the year 2020. 2. Low density residential land will only be about 30% absorbed by the year 2020. 3. Low density plus the Cove accounts for 84% of the land inventory provided, but only about 74% of the land to be absorbed. Moreover, the acreages do not compare. There would be, in the year 2020, about 4000 surplus acres of low density land. 4. Medium density absorption could be 18% compared to 11% of land provided, but the acreages are not far off: 898 acres provided versus 673 acres (74%) absorbed by 2020. 5. High density shows an interesting discrepancy. 368 acres are provided versus 296 acres absorbed (80%). High density is 4.6% of the inventory provided and 8.1% of the absorption. But the breakdown of high density in the market study shows that the greatest portion of the absorption will be in the "medium high" category (8-12 du/ac) at 6.8% versus 1.3% of 12-16 du/ac). The market for truly high density therefore, is expected to be very minimal. 6. If left entirely to market dynamics, the profile of the community would be different from what the General Plan would lead one to expect. II. OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS. A. Image Corridors. In the General Plan, Highway 111, Washington, Eisenhower and Tampico are designated as "Primary Image Corridors". Jefferson, Avenue 50 and Avenue 52 are designated "Secondary Image Corridors". (Fred Waring, Miles and Avenue 48 should also be considered for image corridor status.) With regard to residential development, the impact of the image corridor is a need for a low density appearance, via height limitations (Policy 6.5.7). A supportive policy statement might read as follows: 8 - BJ/RPTTB.09B I�� "Within 150 feet of Image Corridor streets, all residential structures shall be low profile (one story), and clustered in no more than six units per structure. Beyond 150 feet, the residential structures shall be limited by the height restrictions for that location." But the "Image Corridor" concept also has implications for densities. Above a certain density, single story development is not feasible. As a result, along Avenue 48 on the north side between Washington and Jefferson, up to the quarter section east/west line (approximately 1,320 feet) and along the west side of Washington from Avenue 48 up to Avenue 47 (Highland Palms), for a depth of approximately 1,320 feet east, residential densities should not exceed "Medium Density" (4-8 du/ac). These areas enhance the image corridors and serve as a transition from low density south of Avenue 48 to higher density and commercial further north. B. Non -Residential Area Along Highway 111. Land along Highway 111 is too valuable to the City for eventual commercial development to be used in the near term for residential land uses. In addition, noise contours for Highway ill suggest that significant structural protection would be necessary to render nearby residential development habitable. The eastern portion of the Highway 111 corridor is also subject to some flooding potential. For these reasons, residential land uses near Highway Ill are generally not appropriate. Specifically, in the areas between Highway 111 and the Whitewater Wash, and south of Highway 111 at least 660 feet (down to about Avenue 47) residential development as the primary land use should not be permitted. Any incidental residential uses proposed in these areas must: 1. Be a part of a larger mixed -use project; and, 2. Be a very small percentage of the total project square footage; and, 3. Be well integrated into the larger development (i.e., not a separate use); and, 4. Serve a legitimate necessary purpose for the development, such as employee housing; and, 5. Have a high ratio of affordability; and, 6. Be subject to specific approval by the City. 9 - BJ /RPTTB . 0 9B Except for integrated mixed -use developments, residential uses should be located at least 660 feet south of Highway 111 and generally along and/or south of Avenue 47 in Section 30. To make clear the policy of the City reserving the immediate Highway ill Corridor for commercial development, a "non-residential area" is proposed in all three alternative scenarios. The guiding principle should be that commercial may displace residential within the Highway 111 Corridor, but residential shall not displace commercial. C. Mixed Residential and Commercial. In the area of Highway Ill Corridor outside of the non-residential area, and especially where higher density residential development may be designated, such higher densities generate a market for, and are generally compatible with properly designed commercial facilities providing personal goods and services. Higher density residential together with commercial (and other facilities) constitute a typical "urban neighborhood mix". Such a mix might contain: --Higher density residential and associated recreational amenities --Congregate living and nursing homes --Personal services --Small goods and convenience retail --Medical, dental, and related services --Finance, insurance, real estate, legal, etc. --Churches --Possible fire station Urban neighborhood mixed uses, including light commercial (personal services, small goods retail, and offices), could be mixed with residential (in any proportions) along Avenue 47 (Highland Palms) between Washington and Adams, and along Adams from Avenue 48 to Avenue 47. Further east between Adams and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel starting 1,320 feet north of Avenue 48 and up to a line south of Avenue 47 extended, higher density residential could be mixed with commercial or hotel uses (in any proportions). The only type of mixed -use (in place of a stated preferred use) which the City should consider in any location within the Highway Ill Corridor is a major hotel mixed with tourist -oriented commercial, intensive recreational, and/or seasonal residential, and/or limited permanent residential uses. A hotel should be permitted to displace residential to any depth south of Highway 111. 10 - J � 3 BJ/RPTTB.09B D. Median Versus Maximum Density Per Acre. Parts I i II of the analysis (already submitted) used the maximum density per acre to calculate the outside number of dwelling units and population capacity provided by the General Plan. The calculations contained in this final analysis use median densities for the General Plan and for each alternative scenario. This results in more realistic figures. E. Commercial at Fred Waring and Washington. A small area of commercial is designated on the General Plan for this location. The area is neither large enough, nor does it have feasible access potential for commercial use. All three scenarios suggest conversion of this small area to medium density residential, consistent with its neighboring parcel. F. Highway Ill Specific Plan. Scenario $3 contains a preview of the direction now being considered by the Planning Commission for residential land uses within the Highway 111 Corridor. G. Givens. Existing development or entitlements such as approved specific plans are treated as "givens" and are not proposed for any changes - except for Village Pointe Apartments. H. Surplus Over Market Demand. In some cases, a scenario may propose what appears to be an over -supply of a particular density. This is done to accomplish three objectives. First, some locational choice should be provided among sites for a density with low acreage totals. No one site should have a monopoly on a particular density. Second, some "shrinkage" may be expected because a development may come in at a density below its designation. And third, mixed use (residential with commercial or quasi -public uses) will absorb some of the nominally residential land inventory for the higher density designations. I. Low Absorption for Low Density. The market analysis suggests that La Quinta will not have absorbed even half of its low density land inventory by the year 2020. The year 2020 is used as a target for absorption for higher densities, but not for low density. A significant surplus is left for future low density absorption well beyond the year 2020. BJ/RPTTB.09B lqy J. High Density Placement. The location of any high density residential should have one of two planning rationales: 1. Be within the Highway 111 Corridor and be within one quarter mile of either Highway 111 itself and/or Washington or Jefferson as Major Arterials; or 2. Be a functioning part of the Village. Higher density residential contributes to the pedestrian theme of The Village and helps create the critical market mass needed for The Village plan to succeed. The degree to which any high density residential is provided in the General Plan should be determined by the degree to which any market warrants a density bonus for providing affordable housing for the City. K. Tighter Control Over Densities. The City should consider adopting a City Policy that medium, medium high, and high density designated acres are just that. Designated higher density areas should not be converted to other uses nor should they be developed at significantly lower densities. Higher density areas are placed on the General Plan for a purpose. Higher density areas should be considered reserve resources, not available for near term conversion. Higher density designations are placed where they are for reasons of traffic, infrastructure and the buffering of one use from another. If particular density areas are permitted to be converted to other uses, then later higher density uses will have to be forceably inserted into neighborhoods where they weren't planned from the beginning, causing even greater disruption and impact. L. Present Medium Density Trends. As an outgrowth of the previous point, some adjustment of medium density seems warranted. Much of the existing medium density designated land is in an area where land prices are relatively cheaper. It doesn't seem realistic to hold this land for future medium density when there is a present market for 7,200 square foot lots for single-family residential at low densities. Medium density should be designated for areas where land prices are/or will be higher. This helps guarantee its use for non -single-family residential detached (i.e., medium density) products. Therefore, in the Scenarios, 12 BJ/RPTTB.09B c much of the medium density inventory along Miles is shifted south into the Highway 111 Corridor. M. to A distinction between one density and another should be placed on the map for reasons of access, compatibility, etc. When a parcel is split between two density categories, the two areas should be treated separately, not averaged. N. Affordable Housing. The analysis of the implications of the SCAG Regional Housing Needs Analysis and La Quinta's resulting obligation for providing afforable housing is not yet completed. However, early reviews suggest that La Quinta will have a sizeable obligation. Affordability is the key. All mechanisms for providing housing afforability will have to be examined. One opportunity is to require a minimum affordable component of all higher density projects, and to provide incentives for higher percentages of afforability. Residential land uses exceeding eight units per acre should contain provisions for requiring low and moderate income household affordability (up to 25 percent maximum of the total units for any one project). A minimum of five percent of the units should be required to be affordable to low and moderate income households. Density bonuses for providing affordable housing should apply only to projects in which more than five percent of the units are affordable to low and moderate income households, as in the following table: Percent Affordable Bonus 5.0% Required 0% 5.1% - 10.0% 10.0% 10.1% - 15.0% 15.0% 15.1% - 20.0% . 20.0% 20.1% - 25.0% 25.0% 0. Design Excellence. Excellence of design should be density/intensity of land guidelines and standards. - 13 - BJ/RPTTB.09B entitled to bonuses in use according to adopted P. Recreation. All residential development should provide sufficient internal active recreational facilities and passive open space. Q. Noise. Because noise contours in the Highway Ill Corridor provide no open locations where exterior noise levels fall below 60 CNEL (the acceptable exterior noise level), residential projects shall be designed so that exterior quiet areas (areas where noise levels are below 60 CNEL) are created for passive recreational uses. Interior noise levels shall meet interior standards for all residential locations. R. Maximum Densities. Residential land uses should not exceed approximately 16 dwelling units per acre (High Density), except for any bonuses for affordability and/or excellence in design. S. Higher Densities in the Highway 111 Corridor. Higher densities (exceeding 8 du/ac) if permitted, should be located south of 47th Avenue (except in Section 30 -- nearest to Washington -- where they may extend up to 660 feet north of 47th Avenue), and north of the quarter section east/west line (1,320 feet north of 48th Avenue), and at least 1,320 feet west of Washington. See Scenario #3. T. Strategy for Consistency with the General Plan. At the same time that the Highway 111 Specific Plan is being finalized, a number of amendments to the General Plan should be considered: 1. The General Plan needs to be amended to allow residential uses in greater than 30-percent proportions where appropriate. Residential should be a designated land use in some portions of the Highway Ill Corridor, and a mixed -use option (in any proportion) in other appropriate locations. 2. The mixed -use commercial land use designation presented in the General Plan, should be amended in the General Plan to a more specific pattern of preferred uses presented in the Highway Ill Specific Plan. - 14 - BJ/RPTTB.09B 3. As soon as practicable after the adoption of the Highway Ill Specific Plan, the City should initiate rezoning of all land within the Corridor to a zoning classification consistent with the Specific Plan land use designations. 4. The Zoning Ordinance Commercial" should create only specific uses and The subzones should be preferred uses expressed Alternatives for preferred but will require a change Amendment for "Mixed subzones, within which mixes will be permitted. consistent with the in this Specific Plan. uses will be specified, of zone/subzone. 5. As an outgrowth of the multi -family residential density study, the residential densities designated in the General Plan may need to be further refined from four categories into five categories by breaking High Density into two levels*: o Very Low Density: 0 - 2 du/ac o Low Density: 2 - 4 du/ac o Medium Density: 4 - 8 du/ac o *Medium High Density: 8 -12 du/ac o *High Density: 12 -16 du/ac This refinement would permit a more precise control of impacts and compatibility among residential land uses. The exact placement of any particular density within the Highway 111 Corridor will be determined by the City Council's decision on how much of any particular density is foreseen as necessary, based on the alternative scenario chosen as appropriate for La Quinta's future. GENERAL PLAN A. Notes on General Plan Residential: 1. The General Plan provides for seven designated high (8-16 du/ac) areas - two iia the north and five around The Village - totaling 160.5 acres. 2. Mixed Use Commercial contains a provision for up to 30% (by acreage) of residential - presumably high density (8-16 du/ac) - amounting to approximately 208 additional high density acres anywhere in the Highway Ill Corridor. 3. Medium density is concentrated in three areas: north of Whitewater Wash west of Dune Palms; the Cove (technically medium density, - 15 - BJ/RPTTB.09B but single-family detached lots in character), dating from historical subdivision activity resulting in what are now sub -standard size lots (50' X 100' vs. 72' X 1001); and an array of medium density areas through the south center of the City resulting from several specific plans of more recent origin. Of these, the area south of Bear Creek Channel (approved as part of Duna La Quinta) knowns as Village Pointe Apartments is designated medium density but contains the accumulated left -over densities of other parts of the same specific plan, and as a result, (if built out at full entitled units) would create an actual very high density area adjacent to the village Commercial north of Tampico. The plot plan for Village Pointe Apartments has expired. However, a subsequent application may attempt to capture most of the leftover units from the Specific Plan. The General Plan designation for this area will be critical. 4. Low density characterizes the remaining residential areas. - 16 - BJ/RPTTB.09B q �l B. General Plan Maps --North Portion: Exhibit 3 --South Portion: Exhibit 4 - 17 - BJ/RPTTB.09B ;) d 0 z Q V � o • V { cc w ..I a., J y Z t o U Q w O Z LU O W O O Z LU O W 00 O UJ 0 W v _X DEIS ... ...... ... . ............ ... :.. ....... ....... ........ ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ......... ....... ......• .._••••. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •••••••••••� •'•'•'•'i •'.'•'• J�-- -- J{ (1 tit • •mow ..• .V A'M w N�14,14 11�I1 :a fi� .... -........ ._ 00 00 —.{ i •` Jet sad S.. Ilst • .�.�••:::::• .... .•:. ••• ••• •�• �1• ...... ....... . I ti + ti■H ,�.�++ ,. ` .. ► _ ■'�'�►i1/{i• tl/ lti/[Hitt/t►H.l{Ill{I Il.tt/t{Iti/lot {Itt11tt11{1.1 tots 3 1� 1»1 d Jt ♦ I ) _�. • •• •� ./ J - ( � i `- - tip. • ••• • I - 1 I J � •Y `I f} \ i 1 • ► , GENERAL PLAN 1 •�yr • >i M � ` I y M< <. . • • ` ` a .•.•. •�: _ . LOW DENSITY (up to 4/ac) .,►. 1 ED,•� .- •• • .� MEDIUM DENSITY (4-8/ac) .>t I i •y••.;� ti ? HIGH DENSITY (8-16/ac) owl F•�' r • r C. Revised General Plan Profile, Based on Avera Dwelling Units Per Acre (rather than maximums), a adiusted totals. Low Cove Medium High Totals Acres 5,810 927 898 368.5 8,003.5 @ 3/ac 6/ac 6/ac 12/ac Dwelling Units 170430 5,562 5,388 41422 32,802 Pers/HH @ 3 3 2.5 2.5 Population 52,290 16,686 13,470 11,055 93,501 - 18 - BJ/RPTTB.09B IV. ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS. Three alternative scenarios have been developed to compare their policy implications with the existing General Plan. The alternatives are as follows: #1 - "Low Density Community" #2 - "Guided Market Demand" #3 - "Recommended" A. Scenario $1 - "Low Density Community". (1.) Notes on Scenario #1: (a.) Scenario emphasizes community intent to remain low density community. (b.) All present high density areas become medium density. (c.) Highest density provided is "Medium" (4-8). (d.) Medium density concentrated in three areas: (1.) Highway 111 Corridor (2.) Around The Village (3.) Existing medium density developments/commitments. (e.) Area north of Whitewater is reserved for Low Density Residential (other than existing and Option 1A). (f.) Option lA allows for an additional area of medium density north of Whitewater Wash, centered on Adams. (g.) Holds "Village Pointe Apartments" area to medium density (as presently designated). (h.) Existing area of very high density north of the park would be allowed to build out only at medium densities for the remainder, thereby lowering the average density in that area. - 19 - BJ/RPTTB.09B Converts Commercial at Fred Waring and Washington to Medium Density Residential. (j.) Removes high density and medium areas where Civic Center will be. Ik.) "No residential" zone along Highway 111 from the north side of Whitewater wash to 660 feet south of Highway 111 (plus down to within 330 feet of Avenue 47 in Section 30) except for west of Washington on south side of Highway 111 behind Plaza La Quinta. (1.) No higher than medium density along Washington and low along Jefferson. - 20 - BJ/RPTTB . 09B (2.) Scenario 11 Maps --North Portion: Exhibit 5 --South Portion: Exhibit 6 - 21 - BJ/RPTTB.09B 710 E2 F ! •r.• ... _ ;•c • • . AT 000 I mom • 1' a +... 46 •r � ' L •• i �•,y i.�t►177711N• •1/11fH1►IItNI/1J1iU7tIftU I/tla116#17Np11H H1112MIli! + �• ;e F a/ 4 A �� 77777IOU ► t 1 •} A• �M ♦ • Pip _ �,, . WAS 0 i/ As ns� /_ • • ►f ,IIN SCENARIO 1 4 • - + - . LOW DENSITY (up to 4/ac) 2-4 j •- `'IIIJJJ- MEDIUM DENSITY (4-8/ac) A1: • . 1 r Y j Exhibit 6 Acres Dwelling Units Pers/HH @ Population (3.) Scenario @1 - "Profile" Low Cove Medium High Med-Hi Hi Total 6,645 927 587.5 0 0 0 80159.5 3/ac 6/ac 6/ac 19,935 5,562 3,525 29,022 3 3 2.5 59,805 16,686 8,813 85,304 B. Scenario #2 - "Guided Market Demand". (I.) Notes on Scenario #i2 (a.) Scenario approaches averages and mix suggested by market absorption study, (but not to full extent and not in locations where market may attempt to place higher densities.) (b.) Exhibits full range of densities. (c.) Introduces a refinement of General Plan "high" (8-16 du/ac) into medium -high (8-12 du/ac) and high (12-16 du/ac). (d.) Recognizes trend of market location preference for low density SFR in north sector and reduces some medium to low. (e.) Recognizes the "Village Pointe" area as a potentially high density development location and scales remainder of Duna La Quinta west of Washington to its actual low density character. (f.) Allows an alternative high density area (in addition to Village Pointe) even though this exceeds the projected market absorption acreage, so that locational choice is made available. (g.) Provides a concentration of density in the Highway 111 Corridor. - 22 - BJ/RPTTB.09B (h.) Recognizes the Washington Square proposal for high density along 47th alignment. (i.) Holds northwest corner Washington and Tampico at medium density (because of access problems). (j.) Down scales other three Village high density areas to "medium -high" (8-12). (k.) Recognizes Dune Palms Mobile Home Park as medium density. (1.) Converts small commercial corner at Fred Waring and Washington to medium density residential. (m.) Floats Option 2A as medium -high density north of Whitewater Wash along Adams (40 acres). (n.) Removes Civic Center high and medium density areas south of Tampico at Washington. (o.) Provides no higher than medium density along Washington, Jefferson, and Avenue 48 in keeping with the General Plan Image Corridor. (p.) Recognizes existing and/or commitments to medium density. (q.) Creates a "No residential" zone along Highway 111. 23 - BJ/RPTTB.09B 12) Scenario #2 - "Maps" --North Portion: Exhibit 7 --South Portion: Exhibit 8 Sri - 24 - BJ / RPTTB . 0 9B • V 4 � Cy r m • � V e 0 1 < W < v H Z N "a v } ~ <_ } W W C pp .Z p W 1 W IF E 10 O Z E 42' JL L..� Exhibit Now 00 •tmbI do 0 Am. 000 3 VA 40 ImLe. PAC It ....... . ....... ...... ......... . .......... . . . . . . . . . . ............. .......... ... . . . . . . . . r 41 ER2 SCENARIO .......... Ten ....... I LOW DENSITY (up to 4/ac) MEDIUM DENSITY (4-8/ac) 'MED HI DENSITY (8-12/ac)o 'HIGH DENSITY (12-116/80' A : Exhibit 8 (3.) Scenario N2 - "Profile" Low Cove Medium High Med-Hi Hi Total Acres 5,958 927 1,074 0 115.5 86 8,160.5 @ 3 6 6 10 14 Dwelling Units 17,874 5,562 6,444 0 11155 1,204 32,239 Pers/HH @ 3 3 2.5 2.5 2.5 Population 53,622 16,686 160110 0 2,888 3,010 92,316 C. Scenario @3 - "Recommended". (1.) Notes on Scenario #3 (a.) Scenario ((3 is a "middle -ground" alternative leaning toward the provision of some limited higher densities, but placing them mostly in the Highway 111 Corridor, and downscaling most of the other density areas elsewhere in the community. (b.) Uses "medium high" refinement (8-12 du/ac). (c.) Provides "No residential" zone along Highway 111. (d.) North sector mostly low density but some medium density is provided along Washington and stair stepping down along Whitewater Wash to cross Adams. (e.) Northwest corner Washington and Tampico held at medium density (access and separation problems). (f.) Area north of Desert Club (south of new Avenue 52) downscaled to medium density. (g.) Area along Eisenhower north Tampico downscaled to medium -high density. (h.) Retain area north of Park as high density. �YY - 25 - BJ/RPTTB.09B Civic Center high and medium density areas removed. Recognizes medium densities existing/ commitments including specific Plan of Duna La Quinta except Village Pointe area: keeps at medium density on plan. (Density even with bonuses should not exceed "medium high" (8-12 du/ac) in this location.) (k.) Most of higher density areas concentrated near Highway 111. (1.) Small high density areas southwest of Adams and Avenue 47. (m.) No greater than medium density along Washington, Jefferson and Avenue 48. (n.) Possibility of higher density Residential and Urban Commercial Mix along Avenue 47 and Adams. (o.) Medium -high density with potential hotel/commercial mix south of no residential zone from east of Adams to La Quinta Stormwater Evacuation Channel. - 26 - BJ/RPTTB.09B 12.) Scenario #3 - "Maps" --North Portion: Exhibit 9 --South Portion: Exhibit 10 - 27 - BJ /RPTTB . 0 9B OD LU 0 ow cf) CL *AIP j 0 z O z z ul 0 w w _j0 2 1.0.44 U) Z 0 IF z EINE] I rop I . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 6 0 ...... . ..... A I. . . I. . . . . •• • ... . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . X: X. . I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. . I. . . . . . . I. I. . . . . . . . . . . a ........ .. I. . . . . . . . . .. • . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . 00 00 MW ... . ...... ....... ..... . ........ .. ........ .......... .. ... ......... . ......... . . ....... ...... X :-,X T.T. ........ .................. ....... ......... .......... .......... ... ......... ... .. ........ Ilk, .... ... ................... ...... ........ ... .... ...... SCENARIO #3 ... .......... ............ LOW DENSITY (up to 4/ac) MEDIUM DENSITY (4-8/ac) OMED HI DENSITY (8-12/808 all 0'HIGH DENSITY (12-16/ac)g f as TF Exhibit 10 V. COMPARISON OF GENERAL PLAN AND SCENARIOS. The following table (Exhibit 11) presents a comparison of the General Plan with Scenarios 1, 2, and 3 in terms of acres, dwelling units, and population percentages across the densities: Low, (up to 4 du/ac); Low density plus the Cove medium density but single-family lots; Medium, (4-8 du/ac); Medium -high (8-12 du/ac); and High (12-16 du/ac). A review of these comparisons may foster discussions, out of which a new Scenario (#4) may be constructed, leading to consideration of possible General Plan Amendments. ') 0 - 29 - BJ/RPTTB.09B Percent of Acres, Dwelling ' Units and Population by General Low Market Recommended Denisty for each Scenario Plan M1 M2 #3 % Acres 72.6 81.4 73 75.4 rpDus 53.1 68.7 55.4 59.3 0II % Population 55.9 70.1 58.1 61.6 `n Acres 84.2 92.8 84.4 86.8 a aw a o Dus 70.1 87.9 72.7 77.1 3U % Population 73.8 89.7 76.2 80.2 $ Acres 11.2 7.2 13.2 11.8 A % Dus 16.4 12.1 2.0 18.5 w z % Population 14.4 10.3 17.5 16.0 % Acres N/A 0 1.4 0.8 q H % Dus N/A 0 3.6 2.2 wx 1: 1 % Population N/A 0 3.1 1.9 % Acres 4.6 0 1.1 0.6 x % Dus 13.5 0 3.7 2.1 % Population 11.8 0 3.3 1.9 Exhibit 11 KH/DOCTB.003 -30- �� C H. BEST, BEST & KRIEGER A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS LAWYERS ARTHUR L. LITTLEWORTH* WILLIAM W. FLOYD. JR. JOHN R. ROTTSCHAEFER KANDY LEE ALLEN 39700 BOB HOPE DRIVE, SUITE 312 GLEN E. STEPHENS* MICHAEL A. CRISTE* MARTIN A. MUELLER ELISE K. TRAYNUM POST OFFICE BOX I555 WILLIAM R. DEWOLFE* GREGORY L. HAROKE J. MICHAEL SUMMEROUR DAVID A. BRANDENBURG BARTON C. GAUT* KENDALL H. MACVEY HOWARD B. GOLDS WILLIAM D. DAHLING, JR. RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270 CHARLES D. FIELD- CLARK H. ALSOP EUGENE TANAKA TERESA J. PRISTOJKOVIC TELEPHONE(619) S68-2611 PAUL T. SELZER- DAVID J. ERWIN* MARGARET F. TANAKA VICTORIA N. KING TELEX 752735 DALLAS HOLMES- MICHAEL J. ANDELSON* BASIL T. CHAPMAN BETTY S. N. ALTON CHRISTOPHER CARPENTER- DOUGLAS S. PHIUUPS* JEFFERYJ. CRANDALL MATT H. MORRIS TELECOPIER(619) 340-6698 RICHARD T. ANDERSON* CHARLES M. EUUS* SCOTT C. SMITH JEFFREY V. DUNN JOHN D. WAHUN* LANTSON E. ELDRED- LANCE A. ADAIR JAMES E. NEUERSURG MICHAEL D. HARRIS- IRWIN L. GOLDS JACK B. CLARKE STEVEN C. DEBAUN GORDON COLOGNE, OF COUNSEL W. CURT EALY* ANTONIA G. WEINER JEANNETTE A. PETERSON BRANT H. DVEIRIN JAMES B. CORISON, OF COUNSEL THOMAS S. SLOVAK- GREGORY K. WILKINSON TERI L. VOLLNOGLE ERIC L. GARNER RICHARD A. OSHINS, OF COUNSEL JOHN E. BROWN- WYNNE S. FURTH BARBARA E. KRISTAL ADMITTED IN NEW YORK. NEVADA, RONALDJ.KOHUT DAVID BRIAN M. LEWIS WASHINGTON, D.C. COURT OF CLAIMS MICHAEL T.. L* EBARON IL.AA. VICTOR A. ETTINGER TIMOTHY M.CONN OR CO JURY MEREDITH A. JURY• VICTOR L. WOLF GEORGE M. CHANT III MICHAEL GRANT* DANIEL E. OLIVIER RONALD A. VAN SLARCOM OFFICES IN FRANCIS J. BAUM* DANIEL J. M-HUGH BRADLEY E. NEUFELD RIVERSIDE(714) 686-1450 ANNE T. THOMAS- CARL F. HERBOLD CECILIA S. WU RAYMOND BEST (1868.19571 PALM SPRINGS (619) 325-7264 O. MARTIN NETHERY* STEPHANIE K. HARLAN MICHAEL E. HULME. JR. JAMES H. KRIEGER (1913-197S) ONTARIO (714) 989-8584 GEORGE M. REYES MARC E. EMPEY GEOFFREY K. WILLIS EUGENE BEST (1893.1981) SAN DIEGO (619) 457.4915 *A PROFESSIONALCOPPORATION September 20, 1988 HAND DELIVERED RECEIVED Mayor City Council 1988 78105 Calle Estado CITY �T La Quinta, California 92253 L.A r) ! I A Attention: Saundra L. Juhola Re: Annexation of 291.6 Acres Avenue 58 Between Madison and Jefferson Dear Ms. Juhola: Please find enclosed a letter dated September 20, 1988 regarding the above -referenced matter. This letter will serve as written request of you to include the attached letter in the administrative record with respect to the annexation of 291.6 acres slated for consideration at tonight's meeting of the La Quinta City Council. Thank you. Very truly yours, CHARLES M. LLIS Best, Best & Krieger CME:blb Enclosure cc: Mr. and Mrs. Howard B. Keck, Jr. ARTHUR L. LITTLEWORTH- GLEN E. STEPHENS* WILLIAM R. DEWOLFE- BARTON C. GAUT- CHARLES D. FIELDS PAUL T. SELZER- DALLAS HOLMES- CHRISTOPHER CARPENTER• RICHARD T. ANDERSON* JOHN D. WAHLIN- MICHAEL D. HARRIS- W. CURT EALY- THOMAS S. SLOVI JOHN E. BROWN• RONALO J. KOHUT MICHAEL T. RIDDELL- MEREDITH A. JURY• MICHAEL GRANT* FRANCIS J. BAUM- ANNET.THOMAS D. MARTIN NETHERY- GEORGE M. REYES BEST, BEST & KRIEGER A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL COPPoRATIONS LAWYERS WILLIAM W. FLOYD. JR. MICHAEL A. CRISTEO GREGORY L. HARDKE KENDALL M. MAC V EY CLARK H. ALSOP DAVID J. ERWIN- MICHAELJ.ANDELSON- DOUGLAS S. PHILLIPS- CHARLES M. ELLIS- LANTSON E. ELDRED- IRWIN L. GOLDS ANTONIA G. WEINER GREGORY K. WILKINSON WYNNE S. FURTH DAVID L. BARON VIRGINIA A. ETTINGER VICTOR L. WOLF DANIEL E. OLIVIER DANIEL J. M-HUGH CARL F. HERBOLD STEPHANIE K. HARLAN MARC E. EMPEY HAND DELIVERED JOHN R. ROTTSCHAEFER MARTIN A. MUELLER J. MICHAEL SUMMEROUR HOWARD S. GOLDS EUGENE TANAKA MARGARET F. TANAKA BASIL T. CHAPMAN JEFFERY J. CRANDALL SCOTT C. SMITH LANCE A. ADAIR JACK B. CLARKE JEANNETTE A. PETERSON TERI L. VOLLNOGLE BARBARA E. KRISTAL BRIAN M. LEWIS TIMOTHY M. CONNOR GEORGE H. CHANT III RONALD A. VAN BLARCOM BRADLEY E. NEUFELD CECILIA S. WU MICHAEL E. HULME, JR. GEOFFREY K. WILLIS KANDY LEE ALLEN ELISE K. TRAYNUM DAVID A. BRANDENBURG WILLIAM D. DAHLING, JR. TERESA J. PRISTOJKOVIC VICTORIA N. KING BETTY S. N. AL TON MATT H. MORRIS JEFFREY V. DUNN JAMES E. NEUERBURG 57EVEN C. DEBAUN BRANT H. OVEIRIN ERIC L. GARNER RAYMOND BEST (166S-1957) JAMES H. KRIEGER (1913-1975) EUGENE BEST (I893.1961) September 20, 1988 Mayor City Council 78105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 Re: Annexation of 291.6 Acres Avenue 58 Between Madison and Jefferson Gentlemen: 39700 BOB HOPE DRIVE, SUITE 312 POST OFFICE BOX 1555 RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA 92270 TELEPHONE (619) SSS-2611 TELEX 752735 TELECOPIER (519) 340-6690 GORDON COLOGNE. OF COUNSEL JAMES S. CORISON, OF COUNSEL RICHARD A. 05HIN5, OF COUNSEL ADMITTED IN NEW YORH. NE VAOA. WASHINGTON, D.C. COURT OF CLAIMS OFFICES IN RIVERSIDE (714) 686-1450 PALM SPRINGS (619) 325-7264 ONTARIO (714) 989.8584 SAN DIEGO (619) 457-4915 The undersigned represents Mr. and Mrs. Howard B. Keck, Jr. who are the owners of several parcels of real property situated immediately adjacent to the portions of the 291.6 acres which are the subject of the pending annexation proceedings lying on the south side of Avenue 58. Mr. and Mrs. Keck ask that you disapprove the annexation in question. My clients' opposition to the annexation is based on their concerns that portions of the property lying on the southwesterly side of the Coachella Valley Water District flood control dike require special consideration and careful study as to the effect that the annexation would have on the development of the same. Annexation will, in the opinion of my clients, tend to encourage development of the annexed properties and, in the case of properties lying on the unprotected side of the above -mentioned flood control works, should be considered carefully and only in the context of the effects on the overall area surrounding it. Mr. and Mrs. Keck urge you to postpone consideration of this annexation until such time as a thorough study of the areas lying on the unprotected side of the above -mentioned flood control dike can be carefully and thoroughly studied with adequate provisions LAW OFFICES OF BEST, BEST & KRIEGER Mayor and City Council September 20, 1988 Page Two for the inherent flood control dangers and other associated environmental impacts that annexation will have on the properties in question. Finally, please be advised that Mr. and Mrs. Keck would withdraw their opposition to the proposed annexation if the same were amended to delete all of the property situated on the unprotected, southwest side of the Coachella Valley Water District flood control dike. Thank you. Very truly yours, HARLES M. LIS Best, Best & Krieger CME:blb cc: Mr. and Mrs. Howard B. Keck, Jr. BUSINESS SESSION ITEM NO. S 253 ORDINANCE NO.128 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM. The City Council of the City of La Quinta does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. That an amendment to the Contract between the City 00 Council of the City of La Quinta and the Board of Administration, California Public Employees Retirement System is hereby authorized, a (� copy of said amendment being attached, marked 'Exhibit', and by such reference made a part hereof as though herein set out in full. QSECTION 2. The Mayor of the City Council is hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to execute said amendment for and on behalf of said Agency. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after passage. SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall within 15 days after the passage of this ordinance, cause it to be posted in at least the 3 public places designated by resolution of the City Council; shall certify to the adoption 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 this day of the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: SAUNDRA L. JUHOLA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California 1988, by WILLIAM R HOYLE, M yor City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: BARRY BRANDT, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California z \J Nmm S }} + P¢ M am lN co SZ \ \P P (p F W r N z mmm WNmP HJ E iJ r u z 0 \z\\\a\m m a o rm �i LLI U' mH11 11a PN W N r a7 a' tzu Or W U' O 6 WZPWPSO:\rA r°W S j Qom\ z W s \'�p1s 7 z S UH S aP m ra IY r H 1 1 C7 P Z Zr z. a r a Z H6;Y W A -m aW W m Yr JJZYF W QUW' -i > F Yra s'>gaiawwmai\ VZ6 Wm ¢ aaHsammmmm U }-ms30W s a� ccQW i rra¢mt�mmmm� a \ Ws\ W W ¢mF r W S tC J rr\ Z'Ir G J zzW Jz f i 1 I( rHU WrUr' wwxwj Jzz a (ASaaiLMM"zHD- UU W 6!A 6 W W WI QI�i r o ormy Jl aH>US �r W 1 6 U' aW W H a W ,,yy��QI- 3 SzHAz Stir 0a. ss mO.M?N?IA I arHOO6H Uamr> W (PL'LQ S r023Qg)-3 W WHLW�Y Sa L�> N a2 M W M M M � W2!- 4USQ W aUzxr E U Ur3 W(AJ� 6>T+S Cam W GrYul a WsYOWKL�yL 0: 0**JYAP0 m aWz ill a1W fOMERWwa;Y0�1C G FYF�WgW�yYQ D!A ZtHxzw3WSil H{r�WJaW QrHFO DOYUtOi IOiWOOaJQ6000ID a W�a Qul zr Z LIL ,Qay} W f0,0 (ppAI M U Uf0 ciLu 0IL 2.a p.+aN y J 6N06��7NOQwJJJ W JQF�JLLU6 W ��FOY�XOQIiOa- 74 a' j Aim v z 7 ti M W z r ~ 0Op OOQN0Cpmh00•0OpHOloom.0.00000o-NO800$N<NrR 0(0"r 0N•ONTO O 000NHNm?Y O NPOP 47 h) Ph70 f` 00 OHO P 0, in O 0 M M'o + M N 00 O Y m M A f, 0000yy7ooP O O v. O Oh)M?ONMMh h7N?+ mNa. Y(NNOO$ Hw Om00M? N?NMNN!-O 0 IOMN?OP r90.+ 47PN Q N MY?.+N m0) MM iil? NCI +e M H rl f-M .i N ti 00• 00 rp O 08pNMNOO ONO 000 00 O <OPO MNO.+-000m 000 L F OOmN00�00 Nh7 •+ODD O h) fP h7 0 0 0 O ?O CIO MNONOMOM O00 U z 00CDN. If) -T 71 0P 0It00 70(- O 10 0 40 O 10000 •pppp • • W 7 h7M?ON Mh N7Hh7mN �ONN 47 �.+ Hm h7 0NN lF ?a0. r8~-I pN 20 MI�M??.�N ;. MMNY NN M ?0l• ? N Q t I. r W Lit W W =0 3 Y ,a, �7 w O W .d U A irLJ O Y O JHu CLX a L) W D�1 O U07 u� Y F Y W ,y �Wy aa ��pp (� W arr r WaF J W Ufm-S G:AA (n LLi OD)0>c fOLXZGaJ •sWa Sz J!-zzY WW Wa z r 0IV Fa r USW OWW W0 iY L:rr m r �y DUr W r z6 zO Lz 6 �m W LZY_ UfA C:r 6 I W OY MT > Wa • a C U 9W F U' Q O iC> UIy�U z W>� QW r a WF— 2 D)y1 0: JWu� uw. �lAi'' a U Q ft YQ SOCW •a z0W U Z zMa Jza c aH Ha as rwrH Ns HFF S HW 373 zcJiMlz-laaz HzH > '9 JzJrr •31i mz QJQFW soz W m z W A W F-W �H wo: H 3¢r 4 WfQWOWsWa'N Pc OZHa2W �X in as 6Cya zZ[p W 3 3 zmCO YO:QW W4�2 UZ H aQJ,S WHQ Zw) w- ew S'07 SOON 17 fW X HYpap' 2 zo W Y3 >G W LL CU QU iHt NJa7LL >4Utz'IQ6 Q04 iJ9 DOCK UU t0.'+ G 8W 4U WL"fW'J tr922 2z1zi OC 3 Y i t* i t• 7 W •OCPQm?P?CN •Y.NM< Nf hi fi• IIAAAA i NMN fVC s m 0, ON f NN W O%0 +Nmv 010 1, NQvYNNN77iNNNN NN YP??Y??QV QfYf Y?? Off Y7Y QQ f YaQQ YQQQfQQY YfQ 11 a �COD I(Me coo gym �m� m9� 9� m (D M mmmmm� P 0li \\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ \\\ \\\ 1% \ \\\\ \\\\\\\\ \\\ 7 NNmm(Q mmmm i•m1p 801 MM MMM MMM MM M MMMM MMMMMMMM M M M W O O O O v O C O O O O v O .a •+ w .� .� .� .y .� .a ,.� .a ,y „a ,i ,.i ,y ,a „i ,i ,a ,a y ,� „� y „y It r \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ a H PPPPPPPP 0P PPPmP OPP PPP PPP PP 0P PPPP PPPP 0P PPP PPP N 8 N .. JJ. T iQ (,7 (� r LX Ef)r00 OH HH r0 :0 � m\ (� 6 I m ,1Z2 Q H W ZZW zQU 0 1)M 3:U) T ¢ Wz C �Hp y� Z \W 4 O NU�I ¢ I Qx ix¢a Ga\4 Chi x QQw, Y'a Oa r OC 6KW C '+ Z r6 Oc 7¢0Yraa Ww WO0)4 57�t�0p aW r ¢ zr 7NJz W Cant¢ 3 U7W ) 7mJZ G1L W WJt-WH0 1 K w2cowzQW Z UUrU z HC.+ s Z H r Y x W r ZHm0.W z w I W tJ Z H CO CL a X H pHH W a OF fL m Js{� XXH ErzNNww NiA�m,��yyr¢4H ��pp EQNW70Zac)A W N77r d JIY O6 wm msm WwWiwH JIY6Oc00WQIYUW U t�+, H\7¢O+YO.ZawU EW tJ\:rll JHNH7QH zQ W uwu mow X1- N 4 JJr J WW QU171 EWZ N WQJ mr O,XH15 i- xj o NXN p4pz0? 4UH�100\rHHcH E Y mHH000- JHdW t�1�. r 70Wr 7K W WU W 1miNG�HU6mjfL �H J C7 QdNuul i-rQp6i�J ^J QW WX WJ7Um7 a az 7 ccH :7ppx7H� w wx y NmNN000E0EOQJQOG U6,r¢NOm¢ ¢i-O O¢¢6UNLL¢Nm¢Xiil� �y < zHa w z p pp I(� pp y� p F. R O O OOGfd loOOMO rll*rl if'�M�NNCMQ.00�OONONrMa��NNdM < 0. O M O P I� M L; m N P O mMMV)[�'T 7Nf�i�.i e+r+O if1 Y1 M 4'1N QL7 �O .+.+N Nf Q .+ O N .< .+ M1 e+ .+ ti O Li IA M M ti O� N p yi N N f t m OONO 00 ON V OM m go. NtP . Ol vN 00 m 0ol iV OOPQ pO �a. r-M 10 Q V rN.o OMP 10 ON 10 MM Y r . . to 0 L)Z N OOm V 00 NNIN +to P P•0 MVM V NPO MV07 .aM N WE m NONP Pm NMON V O V. Ny7M m VN•0 MNNV N H U z �+ V .I M .1 N .� O y� .+ P .i V O H N V 47 N m N N M Q N .+ W .a m ry Y + W T I I I Oz W zZ 0 cc j O yy nU+ p ' W Q Q O Z cc W00 rz>.�a m �LL T H t zIm a W razz orrr W U u c 0 p L� 4 Z0•+W •H�Z W W HH wm W x Hr 0 7 MLLH WI3'..�UO LL d JWH yto w U ¢ E~ H J a LL %.i oQ O a {+ i t p ¢ 0 z-i a d •d U 0. a-j � 0 4 z a� a a a aHH W SW 4 W w N Y ;i rJL Ir r'.I. 7 ix W J O F. rOp S O r4a cc Y mH JNZO 0 1 4 4 z z0WU "I a, ZUHH3 4 r.6 SU w � co Ur LL N H H .E F H 7 BOLL ¢ rJccc ccc�z 4 `pcIr L.S W Y W� W SXXHO H 6 O [[H ¢nf zJ W W C 7Ix Orr UOmJ UOO.I W r U z Q H H � N U U 4 H^ Q c a J J x xO p a aW WQ WJ waaw-.O W WE zOr F—Twc W W W i z J JJE0. 0.0. 4 rt ccs m mm m(!)N fp D XX.+Q ir O W m PO.+N M V 6� V I�mP O .+N M V LP101,00, 0. NM I M V V V) V Vi fh In w o h VI o 10 �0 0 •0 10 •0 10 •0 .0 •0 r I- h r I .t .+ .+ .+ .: .+ .+ .+ .+ v H I m Z V V V V V V V V v V v V v V V V V V V V V V V V V vv V V I V V I M Is CD CD mm mm ommmm m �� mmm mmom mmmmI 11 LL m mmmm CD mmmmm m mmm mmmm mmmml P 0 \ \\\\ \\ \\\\\ \ \\ \\\ \\\\ \\\\I 7 M M M M M t. t, M M M M M M M M 14 M M M M M M M M M M wN . r.r .+ .r . a. r. a.a V rm \ \\\\ \\ \\\\\ \ \\ \\\ \\\\ \\\\I Q A H a,P P P P a- P P PPP P P 010, 010101 01010, a. P PPP I I COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 9/20/88 ITEM TITLE: FEE WAIVER FOR THE 5TH ANNUAL COAHCELLA VALLEY RED CROSS TRIATHLON. AGENDA CATEGORY: PUBLIC HEARING: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: —.�l— STUDY SESSION: BACKGROUND: The Applicant is requesting a fee waiver for the 5th Annual Cochella Valley Red Cross Trathlon. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: $75.00 fee application fee RECOMMENDATION• Submit by: Signature APPROVED BY: Approved for submission to City Council: RON KIEDROWSKI, CITY MANAGER BJ/CC#9/20F.4 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: RON KIEDROWSKI, CITY MANAGER DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 1988 SUBJECT: 5th ANNUAL COACHELLA VALLEY RED CROSS TRIATHLON FEE WAIVER REQUEST In the past, the City has waived fee requests for the processing of applications for community festivals/fund-raisers. The Applicant, Robert W. Schneck, is requesting the City give consideration to waiving the $75 application fee. MR/ -1- 11,"1 ••: t • • August 8. 1988 City of 1AQuinta 78-105 Calle Estado LaQuinta• Co. 92253 Dear City Council; RiRrside Couory Chapter Coaehella valley Bran& 555 S Palm Cayon P.O. Bo: 9435 Palm Springs, California 92263 (619) 3254114 Attached is a completed application for our upcoming 5th. Annual Coachella Valley Red Cross Triathlon. This is a fund raising activity that helps support the Red Cross services to valley residents. We request that you waiver any fees that the applic- ation night require. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely• / � A4,A- W. Sebitick Branch Manager RWS/sc MCI Riraaide Cowry Chapter Coachella Valley Bread 555 S palm Canyon P.O. Box 9435 Palm SpciW, California 92263 (619) 3254111L14 D August 8, 1988 Mr. Roger Hirdler City of La Quinta 78-105 Calle Estado La Wa ta, Ca. 92253 Dear Roger; In response to your letter of July 25, 1988 the following items are submitted. 1. Application for a Minor Temporary Outdoor Event. 2. Letter to City Council. Thanks for your cooperation in supporting this event. Sincerely, (Ea2e&� Robert ii. Branch Manager RRS/sc 30 MCI Riverside County Chapter Coachella Valley Branch 555 S Palm Canyon P.O. Box 9435 Palm Springs, California 92263 (619) 5254114 July 229 1988 Mr. Roger Hirdler CITY OF LA QUINTA 78-105 Calle Estado La Quint&, Ca. 92253 DBar Roger; This letter is to advise you of our upcoming Fourth Annual Triathlon to be held at Lake Cahuilla on Saturday, October 8. 1988 from 8s30Ail.to 11s30AN Required permits are being obtained from Riverside County Park and Road Departments. Coachella Valley Water District and the City of La Quints are additional insured an our insurance coverage. The route will be the same as last year (see attachment). Law enforcement will be provided at stop sign area's. Please issue permit, if necessary, for this worthwhile event. Sincerely Yours, Zee W. r Wd. d� Schneck Branch Manager RWS/sc t APPLICATION FOR RIMOR TOQORXRY CUM= EVEIIT Proposed Uses SIM. AMMUAL COAWUA VALLEY Rm CROSS TSLTIIIb1 !® L•ixnr ACTIVITY TO SUPPORT In CROSS SERVICSS. .. Location: L M CAHOIL! PLr- IILTSON myr? .Arrc�.. s7a»�� _l�enn ND Assessors.Paroel Mo.l R/A ATRWUX 58' Length of Activity: (Dates , MCTOW 1. 19" To: .............. Hours of Activity: GoOO A.M. to 12100 Moos Equipment set up date OCT.1,1984 equipment removal date M,1,1988 Maximum Number of People Working at site during activity at " any one time: 30-40 Maximum Number of People Expected to Attend the Event at any one time: 500 Total Per Day: Grand Total: APPLICANT: Name: ANLRICAN RED CROSS Phone: 32s-All& Mailing Address: P.O. ROr 9435 PALM SPRINGS CA. Signature: PROPERTY OWNER: Name: Mailing Address: Signature: Phone: lRtfftfffftttRRlRffltfffftRtf!!lffttt}fR}f}f!lfttlRRfflff!}}RRfttftt FOR STAFF COMPLETION PERMIT NO. A17CE 1. Site Plan and Description of Activity TY-I aWo r In , r..I,.,tL _ 1 to C'.av\. live c% 2. Signage Permit Fees Paid S Receipt No. 3. Building Permit Fees Paid S Receipt No. 4. Proof of Liability Insurance: 5. Approved By: Planning L Development D rector 6. Approved By: Fire Marshall 7. Approved By: SherifVs Department MAILING ADDRESS - PA. IO% 1m01 - LA OUINTA. CALIFORNIA 92253 ................ MTC& eb ' Lu..:) COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 9/20/88 ITEM TITLE: FEE WAIVER REQUEST FOR 1988 DESERT BICYCLE CLASSIC BACKGROUND: AGENDA CATEGORY: PUBLIC HEARING: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: -�5 STUDY SESSION: The Applicant is requesting a fee waiver for the 1988 Desert Bicycle Classic co -sponsored by the American Heart Association, Palm Desert Chapter. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: $75.00 application fee RECOMMENDATION- Submi ed by: Si nature BJ/CC#9/20F.3 APPROVED BY • C'( Approved for submission to City Council: ON KIE ROWSKI, CITY MANAGER >sy MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: RON KIEDROWSKI, CITY MANAGER DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 1988 SUBJECT: 1988 DESERT BICYCLE CLASSIC FEE WAIVER REQUEST - CO -SPONSORED BY THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION (PALM DESERT CHAPTER) In the past, the City has waived fee requirements for the processing of applications for community festivals/ fund-raisers. The Applicant, Randy Ice, is requesting the City give consideration to waiving the $75.00 application fee. KH/MEMOJH.002 -1- DESERT M* Le CLA551C Em Wadingm d.d., Saim O - WhWw, CaVan i. 9OW August 9, 1988 City Council City of Le Quinta 78-105 Calle Estado La Quintal, CA 92253 Dear Sirs: N TDE 8B-MY This. letter is written to request a waiver of the "Temporary Outdoor Event" fees for the upcoming 1988 Desert Bicycle Classic on October 15th. This is the fourth year of the recreational bike ride, and we expect 2000 or so participants. This ride is co -sponsored by the American Heart Association (Palm Desert Chapter) and serves as a fund raiser through rider pledges for their educational and research projects. In excess of $15,000 has been raised for the Heart Association the last three years. An application form for the "Temporary Outdoor Event" has been filed with Roger Hirdler, Safety Services Coordinator. Feel free to call me at (213) 945-6366 if I may answer any questions. Sincerely, Randy Ice, P.T. RI/sl 6/ 19C8 WWI`- APPLICATION FOR WPM TEMPORARY OUTDOOR EVENT Proposed Use: / 5 JI& D E S E - a 1 cV t LF-- C�.1SSi c- ta'Ef.i-c I• • 1u i AL F 61k1c 410,E) Location: o f 015 slsZ a ff"_ L o sue" Assessors Parcel No.: Length of Activity: (Dates) L to ](42a, To: Hours of Activity: it #*" 7Z V Equipment set up date � b equipment removal date Maximum Number of People Working at site during activity at any one time: d• - to PE . r, Maximum Number of People Expected to Attend the Event at any one time: Total Per Day: Soc Grand Total: 4 e c APPLICANT: Name: Z c E i, i Phone: (+i) -Fe r- 6 36 G Mailing Address: —1711 m --f- 4,}r4 .wC- -,/ ,rL.:) do Signature: �s,L. Cg4`,F to L66 PROPERTY OWNER: Name: ST F,Li, c,S of dSS,r, i.L:,ig Phone: Mailing Address: $17-a2, c.'gsH.•c N s� �a L.1�••„�rra, Signature: 9 zt1� fttft!!!!ff!!tlttfflffffttfffltffttfltfltlfttfttff!!!!lfffflffftlflf FOR STAFF COMPLETION PERMIT NO. rnT06 BB -00JY I. Site Plan and Description of Activity iqmbyQpf, ' 1�Cirt f C/'s_Gc,� oftfl st (-ii.h. III 2. Signage Permit Fees Paid S Receipt No. 3. Building Permit Fees Paid i Receipt No. 4. Proof of Liability Insurance: 5. Approved By: Planning L Development Director 6. Approved By: Fire Marshall 7. Approved By: sheriff a Department MAILING ADDRESS • IA. SOX 1M4 - LA OUINTA• CALIFORNIA IM3 f asmrstwn 7 �3 DfsC-re' $1 GJGLZ C,GASS, c- M tc e 65 roD� m-ro�-es.m{ DENERT N LE CLAWIC UM Ear Washinatm Nvd., suite 0 • Whittier, Cakfarnia 90606 Mr. Roger Hirdler Community Safety Director City of La Quinta 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mr. Hirdler: August 9, 1988 ; r i Enclosed is the application for a Temporary Outdoor Event, as well as a revised route sheet which includes Washington Street. I am sending a separate letter of request to the City Council to waive the fees. I will forward a copu of the Liability Insurance Certificate naming the City of La Quinta as an additional insured in the next 2-3 weeks. It is a $1,000,000 policy. Thank you for your help. RI/sl enc Sincerely, Randy 7V)9.T. P^ DESERT B tmrfttLE CLAWIC August 19, 1988 Mr. Roger Hirdler Community Safety Director City of La Quinta P. 0. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mr. Hirdler: Enclosed is a copy of the letter I sent to the city council asking that the fees be waived for the upcoming 1988 ULTRA ENERGY Desert Bicycle Classic. I am also attaching a copy of the Certificate of Insurance naming the City of La Quinta as an additional insured. The set up for the 2 porta-potties is shown below. L c d c i-1 T rfSr+i+�6 S i Please call me if you have any questions and thank you for your help and cooperation. Sincerely, Randy I P.T. Ride, rector RI/sl enc • 88.001. UM TM W.hiarm n d.. Swift o • .ve:tim. c.Vangs 9 w CENTURY RIDE (100 miles) Start and Finish at Eisenhower Medical Center. Rancho Mirage Point Cummulative Exit Hospital Rd. and Turn Right Bob Hope Drive 0.2 0.2 Left Frank Sinatra Dr. 0.5 0.7 Right Highway Ill 2.5 3.2 Right Gene Autry Trail 3.0 6.2 OASIS HATER PARK SAG/FOOD STOP (#1) 0.9 7.1 Continue North on Gene Autry Trail Becomes Palm Drive Headwinds < Left Dillon Road 8.6 15.7 WATER STOP AT FIRE STATION - RESTRODMS Crosswinds < Right Highway 62 5.7 21.4 Right Indian Avenue 5.6 27.0 Left Mission Lakes Blvd. 3.0 30.0 Right West Dr. 2.0 32.0 Left 8th Ave. 0.5 32.5 Left Cactus - come in back side to 0.2 32.7 Yardman Park - SAG/FOOD STOP 02) Left onto SthAve'. going East 0.1 32.8 Right Mesquite 0.5 33.3 Left Hacienda Ave. (becomes Long Canyon Rd.) 0.9 34.2 Left Dillon Rd. 4.0 38.2 WATER STOP AT SKY VALLEY FIRE STATION - RESTROOMS Indio Hills SAG/FOOD STOP (#3) 12.6 50.8 City of Coachella - Water Stop in shade under I-10 Freeway 11.7 62.5 Continue' straight through intersection - Dillon Rd. becomes Ave. 48 Left Van Buren 2.0, 64.5 Right LaQA OtIV' = Right -Ai►enue 66 Jackson 8.8 73.3 =R.eft Avenue 52 1.0 6.8 74.3 81.1 '■�■� ,�ltight Mashington St. SAG/FOOD STOP (/4) 2.1 83.2 ..heft_ -Highway 111 --2.9 86.1 -----Right Cook St. 3.8 89.9 Right Frank Sinatra Dr. 3.5 93.4 cRight •-Del Safari Rd. 1.0 94.4 _.Right Country Club Drive 1.0 95.4 -Right Robert L. Sinn Rd. 4.1 99.5 into Eisenhower Medical Center - Finish Line 0.5 100.0 �yl 1 CCLAWC WW 11m Wohirs Olvd.. amitt O - WhWa. CIF - "606 IUILF CENTURY RIDE (50 miles) Start and Finish at Eisenhower Medical Center. Rancho Mirage ` Point Cummulative Exit Hospital Road and Turn Right on Bob Hope Dr. 0.2 0.2 Left Frank Sinatra Drive 0.5 0.7 Right Highway 111 2.5 3.2 Right Gene Autry Trail 3.0 6.2 OASIS PARK SAG/FOOD STOP (#1) 0.9 7.1 Continue North on Gene Autry Trail Becomes Palm Dr. Left Dillon Rd. 8.6 15.7 Right Little Morongo Rd. 1.5 17.2 Right Mission Lakes Blvd. 3.0 20.2 Right West Dr. 1.0 21.2 Left 8th Ave. 0.5 21.7 Left Cactus Dr. - come in back side to 0.2 21.9 Wardman Park SAG/FOOD STOP (i2) Left onto 8th Ave. going East 0.1 22.0 Right Mesquite 0.5 22.5 Left Hacienda Ave. (Becomes Long Canyon Rd.) 0.9 23.4 Left Dillon Rd. 4.0 27.4 Water Stop at Sky Valley Fire Station - Restrooms Right Thousand Palms Rd. 10.0 37.4 Left Washington St. 4.7 42.1 Left Varner St. 5.0 47.1 Right Washington St. 0.1- 47.2 Right Country Club 0.2 47.4 Right Robert L. Sinn Rd. into ;6.0 53.4 Eisenhower Medical Center Finish Line '0.5 53.9 `U1 w1ry Eft -my DUERT D *SLC CLAWC UM Im Vmhial , Owd.. kift o • .vex. Cagwi: ix QUARTER CENTURY RIDE (25 miles) Start and Finish at Eisenhower Medical Centere, Rancho Mirage Point Cumulative Exit Hospital and Turn Right at Bob Hope Dr. 0.2 0.2 Right Frank Sinatra Dr. 0.5 0.7 Right Portola 2.0 2.7 Left Country Club Dr. 1.0 3.7 Gs 41,,c4, Right Jefferson St. 6.8 10.5 Right Avenue 5 4.2 14.7 Right Washington St. 3.9 18.2 La Quint& - SAG/ FOOD STOP 0.6 18.7 Left Highway 111 0.7 19.4 Right Portola Ave. 5.0 24.4 Left Country Club Dr. 2.5 26.9 Right Robert L. Sinn Rd. 1.7 27.6 Eisenhower Medical Center Finish Line 0.5 28.1 �Y3 DESERT 0 LE: CLAWC MW bx W.Aierm Ovd.. Inke 0 • Vninia, CaVac@6 WX Tour de Country Clubs Senior Ride (7 miles) Start and Finish at Eisenhower Medical Center, Rancho Mirage Point Cummulative Exit Hospital Rd. and Turn Right Bob Hope Dr. 0.2 0.2 Right Rancho Mirage Country Club entrance 0.2 0.4 Left Kavendish Dr. West 0.1 0.5 Becomes Kavendish Dr. North Exit Rancho Mirage Country Club and Turn 0.3 0.8 Right Frank Sinatra Dr. Right Monterey Ave. 0.5 1.3 Left Palm Greens passing 0.4 1.7 Palm Desert Greens Country Club and Suncrest C.C. Right Country Club Dr. 1.1 2.8 Left Monterey Ave. 0.6 3.4 Right Avenida Las Palmas 1.3 4.7 passing Las Palmas Country Club Right Bob Hope Dr. 1.0 5.7 Left Sunrise Dr. passing Sunrise Country Club 0.4 5.9 Right Country Club Dr. 0.6 6.5 Left Lafayette Dr. passing The Springs Country Club 0.1 6.6 Right Columbia Dr. 0.4 7.0 Left Bob Hope Dr. 0.3 7.3 Right Hospital Road to 0.1 7.4 Eisenhower Medical Center Finish Line 0.2 7.6 14 MEMORANDUM TO: Ron L. Kiedrowski, City Manager FROM: Roger Hirdler, Community Safety Director DATE: September 16, 1988 SUBJECT: Temporary Closure of Calle Estado Mr. Henry Whitlow has requested the City to temporarily close Estado on September 22, 1988 from 9:30 A.M. to 11:30 A.M. in order to facilitate the grand opening of the library. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the library's request as it is in the best interest of the public and the city. RH / lmm codel.bry Celebrating 100 years of library service Riverside City/County Public Library September 15, 1988 City Council City of La Quinta Honorable Sirs and Madam; The official opening ceremony for the La Quinta Branch Library will be held at 10:00 A.M., Thursday, September 22, 1988 on the steps of the library facing Calle Estado. To accomodate the crown of one hundred or more dignataries and guests gathered in frontof the library at that time, we request that the city close the North side of Calle Estado between Bermudas and Desert Club Drive from 9:30 A.M. to 11:30 A.M. on that day. Thank you. HSW/chs Re pectfully, l�- Henr S. Whitlow Branch Head Librarian La Quinta Library 1y6l"� Linda M. Wood, Director • P.O. Box 468 • Riverside, CA 92502-0468 • (714) 782-5211 COMMISSION/COMMITTEE REPORTS ITEM: C. MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: PETE ZELLES ANN YOUNG DATE: SEPTEMBER 15, 1988 SUBJECT: CABLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT As a member of La Quinta's Cable Advisory Committee, I visited the Palmer Cable Vision offices in Palm Desert on September 7, 1988. After a thorough tour of all the departmental offices, I visited the Mt. Edna Microwave Site; Banning Headend; Whitewater Hill; back to the headquarters in Palm Desert; Rancho Mirage Headend and followed the coaxial cable to La Quinta. A full report on the tour and the ongoing effort to improve the television service will be made at the September 20, 1988 Council meeting by both members of the Advisory Committee. J Q *P. J J Q tr f 1 : �S r i t " �i `7 �4b' n N cG C ch rO O U w O cc co co 4 cz co p v 0 '. 6n .. G) > .p O d co O w a� x CO 41 ce bo U Co .� co U� dEc.� d .�...•.....a� C#w �� >U � N .I a)44 N O U c� arx3:W ow �wPC b O 0 x Z Y .rl c y V A m E LL m .0 E Y c q O w y co w O U cs as t7 > .N C tq O 6Qi C C T co bf U k coA O rn U7 U O d Lr CZ V V > k of w O O v PalmerCno H Vision Mr. Peter Zelles P.O. Box 786 La Quinta, California 92258 September 20, 1988 Dear Mr. Zelles: Thank you for participating in our 1988 Cable Advisory Committee meetings. We appreciate your interest and enthusiastic involvement in our ongoing program. We will be holding our next meeting on October 20, 1988, at our Palm Desert Offices located at 41-725 Cook Street. I hope you will be able to attend. At that time we will take an indepth look at customer service activities in our facility and how they function. We will address your concerns in this regard and, hopefully, develop likely approaches to meet your community's needs more effectively. In a continuing effort to upgrade our program offerings, we will be initiating two minor changes within the next month. On October 1, 1988, we will be changing Channel 36 in our Palm Desert system from the Inspirational Network, (formerly known as PTL) to the Trinity Broadcasting Network. TBN will offer our subscribers a wide diversity of multi -denominational Christian programming. We hope that this change will meet greater audience interest. At this time we are also investigating another home shopping service to put on Channel 28 (formerly Z-Sports). We will have more information on the progress of these negotiations at the time of our next Cable Advisory Committee meeting. We expect both of these minor changes to have a nominal impact on our subscriber base. During the weeks ahead, I will be contacting directly members of your city government to discuss this subject with them. Because you are your community's liaison with our Company, I felt you should be apprised of our intentions first. On behalf of the Senior Management at Palmer CableVision, I would like to reiterate my sincere appreciation for your participation in our Cable Advisory Committee. Through the development of this partnership, I am confident we'll be able to continue to meet the entertainment needs of the public we serve. Sincerely, Stewart Nano Vice President Cable Operations 1s3 41-725 Cook Street, Box 368 Telephone: (619) 340-1312 Palmer CableVision/Channel 10 Palm Desert, CA 92261 Telecopier: (619) 340-2384 Services of Palmer Communication, Inc. TO: VIA: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND MEMORANDUM HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL RON KIEDROWSKI, CITY MANAGER PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 6, 1988 FURTHER DISCUSSION OF LOT GRADING/PAD HEIGHTS IN THE COVE Earlier this summer Staff, at the request of the City Council, brought forward a discussion of lot grading and pad heights within the "Cove" area of the City. As a continuation of that discussion and in response to questions and suggestions which were initially advanced, the following is offered: MISCELLANEOUS DRAINAGE FEATURES Swale materials - The lining material of the drainage swales themselves do not seem to present a problem at this time. Concrete lined swales would be the most durable material, but would not necessarily present an aesthetically pleasing appearance. The dirt and/or grass lined swales have been effective, especially in conjunction with masonry retaining walls. Roof Gutters - the use of gutters and down spouts to direct the flow of rain water may have some limited benefit for accommodating site water, but it could not with any reliability be used as a factor in calculating a reduction in grading requirements. ENGINEERED DRAINAGE/PAD HEIGHT CERTIFICATION Several local engineering firms were contacted regarding fees charged for the design of grading plans, as well as certification of pad height once grading had been completed. These fees ranged from $550 (William Fitch) to $2,500 (J.F.Davidson). Filso Engineering charges a midrange fee of $1,010 for the package. - 1 - BJ/MEMOMC.005 �� r ORDINANCE AMENDMENT General Pad Height Provision - The previous discussion included the subject of setting performance standards which establish a maximum pad height. This may be accomplished by a simple insertion in Municipal Code Chapter 9.156 (Zoning Ordinance, General Use Regulations) as follows: 9.156.185. Maximum Building Pad Height - Residential Structures. The maximum building pad height and resultant lot grading for residential districts shall be no higher than necessary to achieve: a 1% gradient from the rear of the lot to the lowest street (frontage); or, a 1% gradient from the pad to any other approved drainage way. Comprehensive Ordinance Amendment - The Special Residential Zone (Municipal Code Chapter 9.42), may be addressed in a more definitive approach to require a number of actions and features for construction in the Cove area of the City. A draft ordinance text has been provided with this memorandum, for purposes of discussion. The features of this draft provide for Planning Commission review of plans involving significant alteration of existing contours. The review is to occur at a noticed hearing before the Commission; surrounding property owners would be alerted to the proposal. Grading plans would be required to be prepared by a registered civil engineer. The Commission would be able to condition approval related to a number of items including: alternate building or foundation designs; requirement for easements or special drainage features; mitigation of visual impacts; and, other elements of the site design. The draft amendment is provided primarily for illustrative purposes, to indicate the subjects and manner in which regulations may be initiated. Depending on the desire and direction of the Council, an amendment could be prepared and circulated for formal review and comment. COUNCIL DIRECTION Staff is prepared to respond to any further direction the Council may have regarding this matter. At a minimum, it is suggested Council direct Staff to process the "Maximum Building Pad Height" Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. JAI 2 - BJ/MEMOMC.005 As a further option, the Council may choose to direct amendments short of the additional provisions contained in the draft Special Residential Zone Amendment and merely request that engineered plans be submitted in the current process and that finish grades and pads be certified. Attachments: Previous memo, dated May 17, 1988 Draft Amendment to the Special Residential Zone 3 - BJ/MEMOMC.005 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL VIA: CITY MANAGER FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: MAY 17, 1988 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF LOT GRADING/PAD HEIGHTS IN THE COVE There are two distinct sets of requirements which govern grading practices and the height of building pads in the Cove area of the City, as follows: FEDERAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM - The City has adopted a model Flood Hazard Reduction Ordinance which allows property owners within the City to take advantage of lower flood insurance rates. With this participation, comes certain obligations on the part of the City to require new residential structures to be built above the anticipated height of flood waters. A map of La Quinta was prepared to graphically display the affected portions of the City and any calculations as to the depth of flood waters. Most of the Cove is in what is termed "Zone B", where the average flood water depth of less than one foot is expected. In seeking a building permit for Zone B, the City reviews the Applicant's plans to verify that all habitable rooms will be at least one foot above the natural grade. The northwest corner of the Cove is in Zone AO (depth two feet). Here the City verifies that the floor elevation of habitable rooms are constructed two feet or more above natural grade. A small southeastern corner of the Cove in in Zone A (flood elevation and flood factor not calculated). In this instance, the Ordinance requires that habitable rooms be two feet above the natural grade. This is, likewise, verified in the application review process. )S � MR/MEMOCC.023 -1- UNIFORM BUILDING CODE GRADING AND DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS - Of more critical concern are the UBC Standards, as applied to new dwelling construction. Essentially, the Code requires that normal water runoff from a lot or parcel of land be conveyed to an approved drainageway. In the case of the Cove, the only drainageway available is the public street. Therefore, all lots have to be set up to drain to the street. Because of topography and direction of natural sheet flow, this means that most lots on the east side of north/south streets, and many west -side lots, have to be built up with imported fill to achieve a positive drainage flow to the street. when this occurs, the height of the new building pad can (at least visually) be elevated significantly in relation to existing older homes (which were not developed to this standard), as well as vacant ungraded lots. As the natural alluvial fan slope increases to the south of the Cove, this situation is heightened, even in the relationship between newly -developed lots. In review of building permit applications, the City verifies that the pad elevation and lot grading plan is no higher than necessary to achieve positive drainage to the street. The authority for the minimum grading standards are founded in the UBC, but a limitation above that minimum is only derived from provisions of the SR Zone, which state the findings required for approval of plans. In pertinent part, these findings provide that the proposed development will not be a detriment to public health, safety, and welfare; and that the design takes into consideration the existing physical characteristics of the site, including topography. COVE DEVELOPMENT ISSUES A number of factors combine to produce less than desirable grading relationships in the Cove. Some of the more obvious elements are: o The original subdivision was created without any notion of how sheet flow (local water runoff) would be accommodated. o Predominant street/lot pattern is in a north/south direction, roughly at right angles to the natural contour of the land. This layout produces a change in elevation between lots that side to each other and also lots which back up. o Lots were generally laid out in the dimensions of 50 feet wide by 100 feet deep. o The housing product being produced today is a conventional slab foundation residence of 1,400 to 1,600 square feet, plus two -car garage. ,2:1� MR/MEMOCC.023 -2- o Many existing residences built under Riverside County jurisdiction, likewise, did not consider their individual site drainage and compound the resulting problem of poor subdivision design. o Much of the Cove is characterized by slope (hillside) topography. With the- north/south orientation of streets, individual lots must "step" up the incline. The lots in the Cove are so narrow that this stepping effect (resulting from conventional level building pads) is exaggerated. In other words, there is not enough lot width to absorb the transition from one step elevation to the next in the higher slope areas. RESPONSE TO DEVELOPMENT ISSUES The City is unable to resubdivide/redesign the Cove streets and lot orientations; therefore, this design configuration is a given factor. With this lot/street orientation, there are three apparent alternative methods of addressing local water runoff (drainage) to reduce the need for importing fill and increasing building pad heights: 1. Maintain individual lot drainage to the front street, but lower the street elevation. This alternative would involve great public expense as streets would have to be lowered several feet in many instances. 2. Orient drainage along the rear of lots and collect runoff downstream at the cross street. This alternative would, likewise, require a large public expenditure in the acquisition of an easement right-of-way. This type of drainage system is the most easily defeated by the individual homeowner with vegetative plantings, yard structures/fences and landscape recontouring. 3. Mandate through -lot drainage to the lower street. This alternative requires the easement to be in place when the higher elevation lot backing to it is developed. In already -built situations, this easement may not be obtainable, and it can also suffer from the problems attributed to rear lot drainage schemes. Lacking feasible alternatives to address drainage systems in the larger context, the question then turns to mitigation at the individual lot level. The situation does not become any less complex, but options might range as follows: o Require lots to be combined to achieve a wider lot in which the "stepping" effect is more gradual. Multiple ownership of lots limits the viability of this option. MR/MEMOCC.023 -3- o Disallow the use of retaining walls between properties. This does nothing for the potential difference in pad elevations between adjacent lots, but the grade change at property line is not made to be so obviously abrupt. Administratively, this tactic has not been employed because, in its practical application, any beneficial use of private yard space is eliminated by the slope angle to property line. Further, some house footprint configurations do not provide enough room between side or rear property lines to achieve the minimum slope required. o Require dwellings to be custom designed to each lot's topography (i.e., split- or tri-level), rather than altering the sloping lot to conform to a "flat land" house design. This option has some merit for further exploration, but probably only very limited application. Again, the typical lot is very narrow, it still has to drain to the street and all habitable rooms have to be raised to the required height above flood waters. o Install specific text language in zoning and grading regulations to limit the height of pad elevations to the minimum necessary to achieve positive drainage to an approved drainageway. This is current practice, but having it formally spelled out in appropriate ordinances might provide for consistent administration through time. It is noted that this requirement is best cited as a performance standard, rather than a numerical limit. Also, in the case of corner lots, the requirement could be stated that they must drain to the lowest street frontage. Potential lot developers would then be on notice to incorporate this consideration into their grading and house design. CONCLUSION The basic design of the Cove subdivision works against any objective to minimize building pad heights. Obvious solutions to the drainage system issue are either too expensive or impractical. Mitigation (lessening or reduction) of the impact of elevated building pads is, likewise, impractical for the most part. Some case -by -case evaluations may be made for other techniques, but they would typically have only limited application. Present administrative procedure may be formalized by ordinance amendment. MR/MEMOCC.023 -4- LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 9.142 ZONING ORDINANCE - SR ZONE (SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY) 9.142.085. Building Site, Special Grading, Padding, and Building Standards. In addition to the standard requirements and procedure of this Chapter, all single-family dwelling construction requiring the approval of a Precise Plan (as stated in Section 9.42.110), which involves a significant alteration of the existing topographic conditions by the importation of fill soil so as to increase the contour height at any point within the building site or lot, two (2) feet above the existing grade, shall be subject to the following: A. Precise Plan Approval. Approval shall be required for Precise Plans as specified in this Chapter, except that where the conditions of this section exist, such application shall be considered by the Planning Commission, rather than the Planning Director (as specified in Section 9.42.110A.5.). 1. Precise Plans shall be considered by the Planning Commission in accordance with the procedures for Public Hearings contained in Article II of Chapter 9.164. 2. In addition to other application submittal requirements, there shall be provided by the applicant all materials necessary to notify adjacent property owners of the hearing, as specified in Section 9.164.040.A. B. Supplemental Application Material. In addition to other plans and specifications for Precise Plan submittals, those applications to be reviewed by the Planning Commission as specified in this Section shall be accompanied by a grading and drainage plan prepared by a state registered civil engineer. Such plans shall depict the following: 1. Grade of the lot or property in its existing state. 2. Proposed contours and drainage features. 3. The use of slopes, swales and retaining walls with detailed design and dimensions. 4. Building pads and finished floor elevations. - 1 - BJ/ORDDRFT.002 5. A statement that the grading design is the minimum necessary to effect positive drainage to an approval drainageway. 6. Other information as may be required to illustrate the proposed building/grading program, existing conditions, or effect an adjacent properties and area drainage. C. Additional Conditions of Approval. In addition to compliance with the general provisions of this Chapter, the Planning Commission in the approval of a Precise Plan may impose additional conditions which require any of the following: 1. Alternate foundation and structure designs, such as the use of piers or split level floor plans. 2. The provision of drainage easements. 3. Special drainage facilities, including dry wells. 4. Mitigation of visual impacts on adjacent properties, related to the design of retaining walls, fencing and landscaping. 5. The alteration or redesign of building heights, roof lines, eves and their overhang dimensions. 6. The requirement for use of slope bank or retaining walls and the method or design of construction. C. Certification of Compliance. Prior to final occupancy approval, a certification shall be provided to the Planning Director, prepared by a state registered civil engineer attesting that the finished grade including building pad height and all drainage features have been constructed in accordance with the Planning Commission approval. 2 - BJ/ORDDRFT.002 1985 EDITION APPENDIX foot and a minimum paved width of 5 feet. A single run of swale or ditch shall not collect runoff from a tributary area exceeding 13,500 square feet (projected) without discharging into a down drain. (c) Subsurface Drainage. Cut and fill slopes shall be provided with subsur- face drainage as necessary for stability. M Dfgloa 0 All drainage facilities shall be designed to carry waters to the nearest practicable drainage way approved by the building official and/or other appropriate jurisdiction as a safe place to deposit such waters. Erosion of ground in the area of discharge shall be prevented by installation of nonerosive downdrains or other devices. Building pads shall have a drainage gradient of 2 percent toward approved drainage facilities, unless waived by the building official. EXCEPTION: The gradient from the building pad may be I percent if all of the following conditions exist throughout the permit area: A. No proposed fills are greater than 10 feet in maximum depth. B. No proposed finish cut or fill slope faces have a vertical height in excess of 10 feet. C. No existing slope faces, which have a slope face steeperthan 10 horizontally to 1 vertically, have a vertical height in excess of 10 feet. (e) Interceptor Drains. Paved interceptor drains shall be installed along the top of all cut slopes where the tributary drainage area above slopes towards the cut and has a drainage path greater than 40 feet measured horizontally. Interceptor drains shall be paved with a minimum of 3 inches of concrete or gunite and reinforced. They shall have a minimum depth of 12 inches and a minimum paved width of 30 inches measured horizontally across the drain. The slope of drain shall be approved by the building official. Erosion Control Sec. 7013. (a) Slopes. The faces of cut and fill slopes shall be prepared and maintained to control against erosion. This control may consist of effective planting. The protection for the slopes shall be installed as soon as practicable and prior to calling for final approval. Where cut slopes are not subject to erosion due to the erosion -resistant character of the materials, such protection may be omitted. (b) Other Devices. Where necessary, check dams, cribbing, riprap or other devices or methods shall be employed to control erosion and provide safety. Grading Inspection Sec. 7014. (a) General. All grading operations for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the building official. When required by the building official, special inspection of grading operations and special testing shall be performed in accordance with the provisions of Section 306 and Subsection 7014 (c). (b) Grading Designation. All grading in excess of 5000 cubic yards shall be performed in accordance with the approved grading plan prepared by a civil engineer, and shall be designated as "engineered grading." Grading involving less than 5000 cubic yards shall be designated "regular grading" unless the 771