POWER POINTS
CITY COUNCIL
MEETING
DECEMBER 19, 2023
December 19, 2023
1 City Council Regular Meeting
Housing Authority Special Meeting
December 19, 2023
12/20/2023
City Council Regular Meeting
December 19, 2023
CLOSED SESSION IN PROGRESS
12/20/2023
1 2
December 19, 2023
2 Pledge of Allegiance
12/20/2023
12/20/2023
3 4
December 19, 2023
3 City Council Meeting
December 19, 2023
Presentation
6 2024 DRAFT TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN
La Quinta City Council
December 19, 2023
Aaron Hake, Deputy Executive Director
5 6
December 19, 2023
4 7
RCTC - Providing Transportation
Solutions To Connect Our Communities
• County‐wide transportation
improvements
• Measure A
• Support Metrolink, RTA, SunLine & other
transit operators
• Toll operations
8 2023 Public Survey – Coachella Valley
68% More than two
thirds of voters in
Coachella Valley
support a transportation
measure
Coachella Valley voter support for transportation measure 7 8
December 19, 2023
5 9
2023 Public Survey
80%
93% 91% 89% 87% 84%
0 0.1
0.2 0.3
0.4 0.5
0.6 0.7
0.8 0.9
1 Great or some
need for
transportation
funding
Keeping
roads in good
condition
Pothole repair Reinforcing
highways,
roads and
bridges from
flooding and
earquake
Improving
safety
Keeping
senior,
student,
disabled and
veteran bus
fares low
72% of La
Quinta, Indio,
Coachella, and
ZIP Codes: 92274,
92254 support a sales
tax measure
Ranking transportation priorities by residents (Coachella Valley) 10 Traffic Relief Plan: Looking Forward
Draft 2024 Traffic Relief Plan...
• Identifies County‐wide transportation projects and
services
• Developed from public input
• Over $25 billion in transportation investment
• Updates the 2020 Commission‐adopted TRP
Draft 2024 Traffic Relief Plan: NOT funded
• Unless voters approve funding
9 10
December 19, 2023
6 11
RCTC is Your Team
Coachella Valley Rail Project Dillon Rd./Indian Canyon Dr. Sunline Transit Operations Monroe Interchange Project CV Link
12 Measure A 2009‐2039 TRP
30‐year funding limit 30+ year funding
Estimates $1.2 billion for Coachella Estimates $5 billion for Coachella Valley Valley
Annual investment $50 million (2019‐ Annual investment $166 million estimate 2023)
8 Investment types
• Highway improvements
• Public Transportation
• Safe Streets and Roads
• New Regional Connections
• Commuter Assistance
• Active Transportation
• Environmental Mitigation
• Flood and Blowsand
Control
3 Investment types:
• Highways and Regional
Arterials
• Local Streets and Roads
• Specialized and Public
Transit
No CV Rail CV Rail
11 12
December 19, 2023
7 13
Measure A Distribution TRP Distribution
Coachella Valley
14 • CVAG administers funding
distribution
• Transportation Project Prioritization
Study (TPPS)
• VMT mitigation, support
TOD/housing, CVMSHCP
• Projects funding for multiple categories
13 14
December 19, 2023
8 • Improve connections to I‐10, Highway
111 and SR‐86
• Local road repairs, safety improvements,
and traffic management systems
• Avenue 50, Highway 111
• SR‐86, Highway 62, Highway 74, and
I‐10 bypass
• Bridges, resilient infrastructure and
flood control investments on:
• Indian Canyon, Gene Autry Trail,
Dillon Road, and Box Canyon Drive
15 TRP Example Projects
• Coachella Valley Rail
• Transit priority lanes, zero‐emission buses,
bus shelters and improving access and
affordability
• CV Link extensions and Palm Desert Link
• Complete streets and multi‐modal
connections
• Preserve Coachella Valley’s natural areas
• Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP)
• Freeway Service Patrol on I‐10
• Employer partnerships
Economic Impact & Regional Investment
16 Over 30 years:
Note: Totals may not add due to rounding
*Jobs Supported = An Industry‐specific mix of full‐time, part‐time, and seasonal employment that are supported by project expenditures this includes Direct, Induced, and Indirect Jobs supported ** Direct, Induced, and Indirect Impact total
Economic
Output
Workforce
Income
Jobs
Supported
TRP
Estimated
Investment
Revenue
Scenario
One‐Cent $25 billion 168,000* $10.9 billion** $30.9 billion** Palo Verde Valley
(Blythe Area)
~$100
million
Coachella
Valley
~$5
billion
Western
Riverside County
~$20
billion
Ensure revenues raised in each region stay
there
15 16
December 19, 2023
9 Accountability to Taxpayers
17 • Independent audits and
mandatory reviews
• Local Voice. Local Control – No
funds to be diverted to
Sacramento or Washington D.C.
• No more than 1% can be used for
administrative salaries
• Cities and County working
together with RCTC
18 • Submit your feedback!
• Traffic Relief Plan at TrafficReliefPlan.Org
• Digital and grass‐roots outreach efforts
Your Voice. Your Plan.
rctc.org
951‐787‐7141
[email protected]
@theRCTC
17 18
December 19, 2023
10 12/20/2023
City Council Meeting
December 19, 2023
B1 – Appoint a Member of the City Council to
Serve as Mayor Pro Tem for One Year
19 20
December 19, 2023
11 12/20/2023
City Council Meeting
December 19, 2023
B2 – Appoint Members of the City Council to
Serve on Various Outside Organizations
21 22
December 19, 2023
12 12/20/2023
City Council Meeting
December 19, 2023
B3 – Appropriate $866,000 and Approve
Purchase of Golf Carts for SilverRock
23 24
December 19, 2023
13 Golf Cart Lease vs Purchase
• Leases do not have a purchase option.
• Current fleet is at end‐of‐life.
• New lease cost is $810,000 over 4 years.
• Purchasing cost is $936,000 with re‐sale value
in the fleet retained by City.
Why Club Car?
• Known in the industry for quality and
reliability
• Longer battery life
• Aluminum frame construction suited for
desert climate
• Ability to deliver quickly
25 26
December 19, 2023
14 Budget Appropriation
• Current SilverRock budget has $70,000 for
leases that can be transferred to the vehicles
account
• $866,000 is needed from unassigned general
fund reserves, to be transferred to the
SilverRock Fund
Budget Adjustments
Expense Revenue
101-1007-99900 Transfer Out 866,000 $
601-0000-49500 Transfer In 866,000 $
601-0000-60211 Rental Expense (70,000) $
601-0000-71030 Vehicles 935,249 $
Account
27 28
December 19, 2023
15 12/20/2023
City Council Meeting
December 19, 2023
S1 – Village Undergrounding Feasibility Study
Financial Options
29 30
December 19, 2023
16 Background
• 2010: Initial Village Undergrounding Study prepared
• 2021 and 2022 Community Workshops: Village
Undergrounding identified as community priority
• December 2022: City Council approved agreement
with NV5 to prepare Undergrounding Study Update
Background
• September 19, 2023: Study Session Discussion for
Draft Undergrounding Study Update
– Project Overview
– Description of Study Areas
– Construction phasing and community impacts Study Area Reviews & Detailed Cost Estimates
– Review of Rules, Regulations, & Franchises Agreements 31 32
December 19, 2023
17 Funding Options
City of
Presented by Jeffrey M. Cooper, PE
Undergrounding Feasibility Study
Funding Options
6 Areas
1. The Cove
2. Downtown Commercial
3. Downtown Residential
4. Sagebrush
5. Highland Palms
6. Westward Ho
33 34
December 19, 2023
18 Funding Options
Local Funding Approaches
Local projects have traditionally been funded through the 1913 Act Assessment Districts and occasionally by Mello‐Roos CFDs.
There are two basic approaches to forming Undergrounding Utility Assessment Districts. One is to form the Assessment District and then prepare the plans and specifications and then get construction bids; the other is to prepare complete plans and specifications and have construction bids in hand before forming the Assessment District.
Included on the following slides are details on the different options available.
Federal & State Grants
There may be grants available, which are presented later in this presentation.
Examples of Successful Assessment Districts
NV5 has assisted with the successful formation of several utility undergrounding assessment districts throughout Southern California.
The table below includes a sampling of recently formed districts that are comparable in size and scope to the City’s areas.
Funding Options
% Approval
(Weighted)
Avg. Cost per
Parcel
# of Total Cost
Parcels
District Name City
UUAD No. 124 City of Newport Beach 966 $32,815,700 $33,970 65.29% UUAD No. 117 City of Newport Beach 268 $4,640,550 $17,315 52.20% UUAD No. 113 City of Newport Beach 215 $6,249,500 $29,067 71.54% UUAD No. 19‐4 City of Manhattan Beach 170 $7,255,000 $42,676 75.38% UUAD No. 19‐12 City of Manhattan Beach 231 $6,735,000 $29,155 62.27% UUAD No. 19‐14 City of Manhattan Beach 244 $6,810,000 $27,909 64.19% Paseo de la Playa UUAD City of Torrance 20 $1,784,400 $89,220 94.31% City of Hermosa Beach 101 $4,031,600 $39,916 65.28% Greenwich Village North UUAD
35 36
December 19, 2023
19 Option One – Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 (Assessment District)
1. The process is initiated by an interested property owner, who acts as a liaison between the City, utility companies, and neighbors
2. Based on the interest letter, the City Consultant prepares a boundary map and submits it to the appropriate utility companies who review the map to ensure that the boundaries are logical and feasible
3. The City Consultant then prepares a petition to be circulated by proponents to all affected property owners within the proposed district boundaries
4. Once the petition is certified by the Assessment Engineer, the City Engineer and the City Consultant will prepare a staff report requesting City Council approval to move forward. With Council approval, the Assessment Engineer will prepare an Engineer’s Report
5. The Engineer’s Report and Resolution of Intention are submitted to the City Council for approval and a public hearing is scheduled
6. The Ballots are prepared with the assessment amount and sent to each property owner within the proposed district boundaries
7. All votes must be submitted to the City prior to the end of the scheduled public hearing. The district passes if the district received greater than 50% approval and is subsequently approved by the City Council. Following approval by the property owners, the detailed design process begins. It usually involves the following steps: Base mapping, IID electrical design, and telephone and cable design
8. Once the project is fully designed, it will be bid with a contract awarded, and then constructed Funding Options
Option One – Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 (Assessment District) Design: After District Formation (Fast‐track)
Pros
• Once the petition is approved, the City can immediately order the Engineer’s Report, go to ballot and form the Assessment District • Up front costs are significantly less and the time period to form the District is reduced to about 3‐4 months. The agency can pay the up‐front costs or request that the proponents pay the up‐front costs by depositing funds with the agency • It is known whether you have an Assessment District before preparing plans and specifications and obtaining bids Cons
• Disadvantage is the bids could come in higher than the estimated cost in the Engineer’s Report causing a shortfall in assessment funds. This can be counter balanced by placing a larger contingency in the Cost Estimate Funding Options
37 38
December 19, 2023
20 Option Two
1. Steps 1‐3 are the same as option 1
2. Once the petition is certified by the Assessment Engineer, the City Engineer and the City Consultant will prepare a staff report requesting City Council approval to begin the design process
3. The design process begins once the utility companies receive the design fee, which is the responsibility of the property owners. The process usually involves the following steps: Base mapping, IID electrical design, and telephone and cable design
4. Once the design is complete and accepted by the City and utility companies, the utility companies provide a “guaranteed cost of construction.”
5. The completed design plans, Engineer’s Report, and Resolution of Intention are submitted to the City Council for approval and a public hearing is scheduled
6. Ballots are prepared with the assessment amount and sent to each property owner within the proposed district’s boundaries
7. All votes must be submitted to the City prior to the end of the scheduled public hearing. The district passes if the district received greater than 50% approval and is subsequently approved by City Council
Funding Options
Option Two
Design: Before District Formation
Pros
• Advantage is costs are known before balloting and forming the District Cons
• Plans, specifications (PS&E) and bidding process must be paid for up front before forming the District • After paying the up front costs, the District could fail to be formed. The agency could lose the funds for the PS&E unless the proponents of the District pay up front the costs, rather than the agency, by placing a fund deposit with the agency • It can take two years to have the plans and specifications prepared and construction bids received and support for the District could change during this period
Funding Options
39 40
December 19, 2023
21 Paying the Assessment & Final Steps
Regardless of which of the two options is selected, property owners will have two options to pay for the assessment:
1. 30‐Day Cash Payment Period: Within 30 days after the close of the public hearing, the property owner has the option to pay the full or a portion of the assessment amount. The property owner will save approximately 8% on the portion of the assessment paid in cash. This 8% savings results from not selling bonds for the amount owed. Bonds will be sold for any unpaid portion of the assessment and a lien will be placed on the property until the bond is paid in full.
2. Bond: If the property owner elects to not pay during the 30‐Day Cash Payment Period, bonds will be sold. Assessments will be placed on the property tax bill to be paid over a 20 to 25‐year financing period. During that time, a lien will be placed on the property until the bond amount is paid in full. Bonds will incur a finance charge.
Once construction of the main line underground infrastructure has been completed, property owners will be responsible for hiring a licensed electrician to connect the property’s existing overhead connection to the underground infrastructure – this cost is not covered in the assessment amount and will need to be completed within the designated time frame by the property owners.
Funding Options
Cost Per Parcel Per Area (Paying in Cash) ***
Avg. Cost Per Parcel
(Paying in Cash) **
Cost of Undergrounding
(On Street) **
Area No. Area Name Parcels in the Area *
1 The Cove 5,046 $117,279,875 $23,242.15
2 Downtown Commercial 85 $4,564,999 $53,705.87
3 Downtown Residential 294 $11,967,959 $40,707.34
4 Sagebrush 116 $2,692,109 $23,207.83
5 Highland Palms 92 $4,482,771 $48,725.78
6 Westward Ho 121 $4,105,195 $33,927.23
Funding Options
* The cost estimate is based on IID maps and the count of services requiring conversion, which may differ from a simple parcel count. Occasionally, a single parcel may contain multiple homes or services, and conversely, a home or service may span multiple parcels. The most accurate option is to conduct an engineer’s field study to obtain a true count of homes ** Includes 15% incidental costs (assessment engineer, CM and Inspection, city time, & bond counsel) *** It is estimated that private conversion costs will be in the $8,000‐12,000 range per parcel. Property owners will be responsible for this amount, which is in addition to their assessment 41 42
December 19, 2023
22 Cost Per Parcel Per Area (With Bonds)**
Avg. Annual Cost per
Parcel (w/4.5% interest
over the 20‐yr life of the
bond) *
Avg. Total Cost per
Parcel
(w/4.5% interest over
the 20‐yr life of the
bond) *
Avg. Total Cost per
Parcel (w/o interest
over the life of the
bond) *
Avg.
Financial
Costs @ 10%
Avg. Cost Per
Parcel
(Paying in
Cash)
Area Area Name
No.
1 The Cove $23,242.15 $2,324.21 $25,566 $38,818 $1,940
$53,705.87 $5,370.59 $59,076 $89,699 $4,484 Downtown
Commercial 2
3 Downtown Residential $40,707.34 $4,070.73 $44,778 $67,989 $3,399 4 Sagebrush $23,207.83 $2,320.78 $25,528 $38,761 $1,938 5 Highland Palms $48,725.78 $4,872.58 $53,598 $81,381 $4,069 6 Westward Ho $33,927.23 $3,392.72 $37,319 $56,664 $2,833 Funding Options
* Rounded to the nearest dollar
** It is estimated that private conversion costs will be in the $8,000‐12,000 range per parcel. Property owners will be responsible for this amount, which is in addition to their assessment Mello‐Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982
In 1982, the Mello‐Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (Government Code §53311‐53368.3) was created to provide an alternate method of financing for needed improvements and services.
• The Act allows any county, city, special district, school district or joint powers authority to establish a Mello‐Roos Community Facilities District (a “CFD”) which allows for financing of public improvements and services. The services and improvements that Mello‐Roos CFDs can finance include streets, sewer systems and other basic infrastructure, police protection, fire protection, ambulance services, schools, parks, libraries, museums and other cultural facilities.
• A CFD is created to finance public improvements and services when no other source of money is available. • A CFD is created by a sponsoring local government agency. The proposed district will include all properties that will benefit from the improvements to be constructed or the services to be provided. A CFD cannot be formed without a two‐thirds majority vote of residents living within the proposed boundaries. Or, if there are fewer than 12 residents, the vote is instead conducted of current landowners. In many cases, that may be a single owner or developer.
• Once approved, a Special Tax Lien is placed against each property in the CFD. Property owners then pay a Special Tax each year. If the project cost is high, municipal bonds will be sold by the CFD to provide the large amount of money initially needed to build the improvements or fund the services.
Funding Options
43 44
December 19, 2023
23 Equivalent Overhead Distribution System: A theoretical feeder and distribution extension designed as if the applicant were going to be served overhead by a new system. The line will follow the basic route of the existing overhead system.
This evaluation involves estimating the costs associated with establishing a new equivalent overhead distribution system used for delivering electricity to the existing residents in the 6 study areas. It encompasses the costs linked to the new primary infrastructure elements, such as poles, arms, insulators, pins, anchors, stud poles, cable poles, guying and the associated labor, equipment and permitting related.
The equivalent overhead distribution and feeder extension must originate from the same existing source. The equivalent study should follow the basic route of the existing overhead system but must also be based on sound engineering practices for overhead construction utilizing proper pole spacing, grade of pole construction, and loading engineering.
The intent of this opinion of probable cost is to explore a credit option so Imperial Irrigation District can consider an equivalent overhead credit for the length of the proposed conversions in the 6 different impacted areas in the City.
Analysis of Equivalent Primary Overhead Distribution: Count and Cost Evaluation Analysis of Equivalent Primary Overhead Distribution: Count and Cost Evaluation This table provides an estimated count of feeder distribution poles, overhead conductors, and other essential components required to construct a comparable overhead primary distribution feeder system.
This table illustrates the estimated costs involved in constructing a comparable overhead primary distribution and feeder system. *Total Distribution Feeder Poles includes ( Distribution Pins, Insulators, Distribution Arms and Anchors ). *Total Distribution Primary Cable Poles represent transitions from existing Underground system to Overhead system or vice versa.
This cost estimate is based on whether a private or public entity, other than IID, was constructing a new infrastructure system. The calculations and costs associated with IID’s utility may differ from those presented. Costs includes IID’s Engineering, Materials, Labor and Permitting. 45 46
December 19, 2023
24 Other Funding Opportunities
Federal Funding/Grants
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, has been labeled as a once‐in‐a‐generation investment in infrastructure to support the nation’s growth. While nearly 400 funding opportunities exist within IIJA, many of them were focused on either finding the most cost‐effective route, directed at clean energy, designed for the state of California to be the applicant, or were focused on rural populations, However, several opportunities presented themselves for the City which may qualify and are presented as follows:
• GRIP (Grid Resilience & Partnership): Department of Energy (DOE) program that supports activities that will modernize the electric grid to reduce impacts due to extreme weather and natural disasters.
This program will fund comprehensive transformational transmission and distribution technology solutions that will mitigate multiple hazards across a region or within a community, including wildfires, floods, hurricanes, extreme heat, extreme cold, storms, and any other event that can cause a disruption to the power system. This program provides grants to electric grid operators, electricity storage operators, electricity generators, transmission owners or operators, distribution providers, and fuel suppliers. This program will provide up to $2.5B over 5 years.
Funding Options
Other Funding Opportunities
Federal Funding/Grants (Continued)
• Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program: As a community development block grant recipient, the City may apply for a Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program grant. This program would help provide low‐cost, flexible financing to support infrastructure that benefits low‐ and moderate‐ income citizens for site improvements. A match is not required and actual funds are unspecified. The funds are distributed on a rolling basis from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. • Public Works & Economic Adjustment Assistance Grant: This grant assist communities implementing long‐term economic development efforts. Through this program, projects that demonstrate climate change resiliency for decades to come are encouraged to apply.
A match from the applicant is required via cash/in‐kind, although actual funds are not specified, and proportions vary based on unemployment rate and per capita income. The original solicitation date was 03/14/2023, but funds are distributed on a rolling basis from the US Department of Commerce.
Funding Options
47 48
December 19, 2023
25 Other Funding Opportunities
Federal Funding/Grants (Continued)
• CWDG (Community Wildfire Defense Grant): With the adoption of a community wildfire protection plan (CWPP), the City could benefit from this program which is designed to help implement projects within the CWPP that are less than 10 years old related to becoming a fire‐adapted community. The due date for this grant is on 10/31/2023 and a cash/in‐king match is required. The actual funds from the US Department of Agriculture are unspecified.
• RCPGP (Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program) FEMA Region 9: This grant covers severe damage or disruption to the infrastructure related to a catastrophic incident impacting the area, focusing on projects that are focused on equity and climate resilience. This grant can be used to build on existing regional preparedness efforts for local governments. Although the original due date of 7/24/2023 has passed, there are multiple due dates for these funds from the US Department of Homeland Security. No match is required for the $12M funds available, with individual projects grants covering up to $3M.
• BRIC (Building Resilient Infrastructure & Communities) Direct Technical Assistance Grant: If the City of La Quinta is able to demonstrate that they have pockets within the community with a social vulnerability index (SVI) score greater than or equal to 0.6, this grant can be applied for. There is no known due date for the next round of funding, but a match is not required for this program funded through the US Department of Homeland Security. This grant is to be used as an additional research resource as the purpose of this program is to provide non‐financial direct technical assistance to applicants.
Funding Options
Other Funding Opportunities
State Funding/Grants
• CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) establishes funding mechanisms for undergrounding and upgrading the power grid through a variety of programs under Rules and Tariffs paid by users and the utility through work credits that accumulate annually in the municipality’s account. The work credits are established by formula based on the equivalent overhead infrastructure improvement that would have been required if not for the construction of the underground facility. The challenge for agencies served by non‐investor funded utilities, such as IID, is that the utility is not obligated to participate in these programs nor set aside work credits to fund future undergrounding as would be required for investor funded utilities, such as SCE.
This is to the benefit of the rate payers in the short term but does not provide a funding source for future undergrounding our upgrades to the power grid. However, the CPUC does have requirements for undergrounding of secondary utilities, such as telecommunication lines, at the utility’s expense along designated scenic highways and in areas where there is a public interest finding that justifies placing the lines underground. This would require these secondary services to participate, at their own cost, in any City sponsored undergrounding project to move the lines into the public right‐of‐way; however, the cost to reconnect service to individual properties may be borne by the property owner. • CERI (Community Resilience Investment) Program: This program will fund projects across California that increase community energy resilience and reliability, promote decarbonization of the electric system, improve energy justice and equity, and create good‐paying jobs. Approximately $170 million in formula funds over the next five years will be distributed under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), section 40101(d) – Preventing Outages and Enhancing the Resilience of the Electric Grid.
Funding Options
49 50
December 19, 2023
26 Summary & Conclusion
Potential funding mechanisms include:
• Local Funding
• Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 (Assessment District) • Mello‐Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982
• Federal Funding/Grants
• GRIP (Grid Resilience & Partnership) Program
• Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program
• Public Works & Economic Adjustment Assistance Grant
• CWDG (Community Wildfire Defense Grant)
• RCPGP (Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program) FEMA Region 9 • BRIC (Building Resilient Infrastructure & Communities) Direct Technical Assistance Grant Funding Options
• State Funding/Grants
• CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) programs • CERI (Community Resilience Investment) Program
Questions?
51 52
December 19, 2023
27 12/20/2023
City Council Meeting
December 19, 2023
PH1 – La Villetta at Avenue 58 Project
EA2021-0006, GPA2021-0001, ZC2021-0001,
CUP2021-0002, & TTM 2021-0004
53 54
December 19, 2023
28 Background
• Project Location:
– South of Avenue 58 between Madison Street
and Monroe Street
– The project site is located on two vacant parcels
(764-180-002 and 764-180-003)
Vicinity
Map
55 56
December 19, 2023
29 Proposal
• 80 detached single-family units
• Landscaping, bocce ball, clubhouse, pool, tot lot, a
passive park, and utility infrastructure
Proposal
• Applications include:
– Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) to find proposed project does not have a significant effect on
environment
– General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative
Tract Map, and Planned Unit Development (Conditional
Use Permit)
57 58
December 19, 2023
30 Proposed RMH PUD Proposal Compliance
zoning
Current RL
zoning
Regulation
Minimum lot 7,200 3,600 2,310 No
area (sf)
Lot Frontage (ft) Minimum 80 Minimum 40 33 No
Yes, with
proposed
Zone Change
Maximum 2-4 du/ac 8-12 du/ac 9.0 du/ac
dwelling
units per acre
Front yard Minimum 20 Minimum 20 *3 No
setback to
house (ft)
Front yard Minimum 20 Minimum 20 *3 No
setback to
garage (ft)
Rear Yard (ft) Minimum 20 Minimum 15 7.5 No
Interior Side 5 5 3 No
Yard (Min ft.)
Exterior Side 10 10 5 No
Yard
Lot Coverage Maximum 50% Minimum 60% 66% No
Private streets Minimum 28 Minimum 28 24 No
Width (No onstreet parking)
59 60
December 19, 2023
31 Elevations
61 62
December 19, 2023
32 Enhanced Elevations
Landscape Plan
63 64
December 19, 2023
33 Findings
• City Council must make findings to:
– Approve adoption of MND
– Approve the GPA and ZC and apply Conditions of
Approval (COA)
– Find the PUD consistent with General Plan and apply
COA
– Approve the architecture, landscaping, and site
design of PUD and apply COA
65 66
December 19, 2023
34 Planned Unit Development
Similar Communities:
Codorniz
(Ave 52 and Jefferson)
Water Colors
(Dune Palms and Ave 48
Centre at La Quinta
(Adams and Auto Centre)
Planned Unit Development
67 68
December 19, 2023
35 Project Comparison
Codoroniz
Ave 52 and Jefferson
La Villetta
PUD Proposal
Regulation Proposed RMH zoning
Minimum lot area (sf) 3,600 2,310 2,000
Lot Frontage (ft) Minimum 40 33 27
Maximum dwelling 8-12 du/ac 9 du/ac 10 du/acre
units per acre
Front yard setback to Minimum 20 3 4
house (ft)
Front yard setback to Minimum 20 3 3
garage (ft)
Rear Yard (ft) Minimum 15 7.5 4
Interior Side Yard (Min ft.) 5 3 4
Exterior Side Yard 10 5 4
Lot Coverage Minimum 60% 66% 60%
Private streets Width (No Minimum 28 24 28
on-street parking)
Parking Requirement 2.5 spaces per unit 2.5 spaces per unit 2.5 spaces per unit General Plan Amendment
• Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium/High
Density Residential (MHDR)
• At the current LDR designation, the Site would
be allowed up to 36 units.
• If changed to a MHDR designation, the Site
would be allowed up to 143 units.
69 70
December 19, 2023
36 Planned Unit Development
• 80 Unit breakdown:
– Plan 1 units: 3 bedrooms, 2.5 bathrooms 1,672 sf two stories – Plan 2 units: 3 bedrooms, 2.5 bathrooms 1,815 sf two stories – Plan 3 units: 5 bedrooms, 3 bathrooms, 2,140 sf two stories – Plan 4 units: 3 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, den, 1,769 sf single story Planned Unit Development
• Architectural styles include Spanish,
Mediterranean, and Santa Barbara
• Architectural features incorporate varying roof
lines, gables, arcades, and swing awnings to
break up the massing of the homes
71 72
December 19, 2023
37 General Plan Amendment
Tentative Tract Map
• TTM 37950
– 80 residential lots
– 5 lettered lots consisting of streets, common area,
and open space
• Lot sizes
– 2,310 sf to 4,623 sf
– Average 2,623 sf
73 74
December 19, 2023
38 Planned Unit Development
• 4 project amenities are required: community
pool/spa, clubhouse, bocce ball, a tot lot, and a
passive park retention basin
Zone Change
• Low Density (RL) to Medium High Density
(RMH)
• Under the current RL zone, the Site would be
allowed up to 36 units.
• If changed to a RMH zone, the Site would be
allowed up to 108 units.
75 76
December 19, 2023
39 Elevations
Enhanced Elevations
77 78
December 19, 2023
40 Elevations
Enhanced Elevations
79 80
December 19, 2023
41 Elevations
Material Boards
81 82
December 19, 2023
42 Recreation Center
Zone Change
83 84
December 19, 2023
43 Traffic
Line of
Sight
85 86
December 19, 2023
44 Traffic
• Access from Avenue 58
• Secondary access is for emergency Fire access
only
• Avenue 58 to be improved to full General Plan
width
Image Corridor
153 feet
87 88
December 19, 2023
45 Conditions of Approval
• There are some minor modifications to help clarify the intent of a few COAs
• Condition No. 34 TTM COA and Condition No. 33 CUP
COA were removed
• These changes were reviewed by staff and the proposed conditions still meet the original intent of the conditions reviewed by Planning Commission
CEQA
• Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared
• Public review period was June 8 to June 28
• The City received two comment letters
• Mitigation measures have been incorporated to reduce
impacts to a less than significant level
89 90
December 19, 2023
46 Landscape Plan
• The landscape area includes a combination of
trees, shrubs, and groundcover
• A meandering sidewalk is proposed along
Avenue 58 to enhance pedestrian connection
Landscape Plan
91 92
December 19, 2023
47 La Villetta at Avenue 58
La Quinta, California
December 19, 2023
Presented By:
Rodeo Credit Enterprises, LLC
La Villetta at Avenue 58
93 94
December 19, 2023
48 La Villetta at Avenue 58
COMMUNITY BENEFITS
The proposed project:
• Has broad‐based community support with little to no
opposition.
• Supports and will contribute to the IID cost sharing
agreement for installation of a new substation benefiting the larger community.
• Will provide much needed housing diversity.
• Fulfills the City’s General Plan Goals & Policies.
• Provides as abundant on‐site parking to alleviate off‐site parking concerns.
Broad‐Based Community Support
for La Villetta
• Desert Valley Builders Association
• Greater Coachella Valley Chamber (La Quinta
Chamber of Commerce)
• Local and Regional Home Builders
• Local Residents
• Adjacent Neighbors
95 96
December 19, 2023
49 LA VILLETTA, DEVELOPERS, IID & CITY COORDINATION - IID Cost Sharing Agreement to Alleviate Electrical Supply Constraints Conference calls with IID Staff and City in September and discussion of project participation in cost sharing;
Attend IID Zoom Meeting/Power Point Presentation with Developers on 11-20-23;
IID topics: Conceptual solution to meet power needs, cost sharing agreement with developers to fund the construction of Avenue 58 Substation - 50 MVA Bank Addition, and discussion of timeline for construction.
City Zoom meeting hosted by the City Manager on 12/13/23 to discuss participation in a cost sharing agreement for funding IID upgrades. The estimated cost is $3,000-$6,000 per home which is similar to capacity charges in other cities. La Villetta affirmed its intention on 12/18/23 to participate in the cost sharing agreement, as well as pay our fair share for the IID upgrades required for the community.
LARGE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED
AS PARTICIPANTS IN FUNDING IID UPGRADES,
ALONG WITH POWER USAGE FOR EACH DEVELOPER
97 98
December 19, 2023
50 Housing
Diversity
ONE OF THE EIGHT GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA IS
TO STRIVE TO ENSURE THAT EXISTING AND FUTURE HOUSING FOR ALL RESIDENTS CONTINUES TO BE DIVERSE IN TYPE AND OF HIGH QUALITY.
Buyer Profile
YOUNG PROFESSIONALS: Cost is especially concerning
for millennials who are burdened with student loan
debt and tighter credit conditions, along with high
interest rates. Today’s young Americans are starting
families later and having few children.
GEN Xers and BABY BOOMERS are also seeking something
simpler by moving to neighborhoods that fit their
needs better – for example, a community with
recreational amenities and less upkeep.
ENVIRONMENTALLY CONSCIOUS buyers are motivated to
live in a more modest home to conserve resources.
Millennials and Gen Xers are focused on smaller
homes as they are easier to maintain, less expensive
to heat and cool and have a smaller environmental
impact, as well as more mindful consumption.
99 100
December 19, 2023
51 CITY OF LA QUINTA PROJECTED HOMES (Approved, Proposed and Under Review) - La Villetta is merely 10 acres within the 36 square miles of the City
Proposed La Villetta Community Fulfills the
City’s General Plan Goals & Policies
• The City’s General Plan is the foundation upon which land use decisions are based. It is an information and planning GUIDE that provides a framework for making informed decisions.
• The planning process provides the opportunity to amend the General Plan and may be needed from time to time due to changed conditions, such as the need for increased housing units. • When considering a General Plan Amendment, review of a project’s contributions is needed to determine if the proposed amendment addresses key issues and guiding principles included in the General Plan and if it furthers implementation of specific General Plan goals and policies. In other words, the findings must be based on the project furthering the City’s goals and being in the City’s interest. 101
102
December 19, 2023
52 La Villetta at Avenue 58
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change
would not result in the development of incompatible land uses, as there is existing residential development to the north and west. Potential land use impacts have been evaluated for land use consistency with adopted General Plan goals, policies and objectives, as well as with the zone change standards and requirements in order to ensure no adverse land use impacts would occur.
The following outlines how La Villetta proposes to meet the City’s General Plan Goals and Policies:
1. LU‐1 Land Use Compatibility Throughout the City and Policy CIR‐1.17: In order to preserve the aesthetic values on the City’s streets, optimum landscape setbacks shall be maintained along all designated General Plan Image Corridors and shall be identified in the City’s Municipal Code and GOAL LU‐4: Maintenance and Protection of Existing Neighborhoods: As depicted on the Line of Sight Plan, the project’s design of one and two story homes would be harmonious with the surrounding single‐story homes and would be consistent.
Similar to the existing residential uses located to the north and west, the proposed project would limit the height of structures along Highway 58 to less than 22 feet which would maintain privacy for the existing and proposed residential uses. The closest two‐story homes to Avenue 58 would be 150 feet and the closest existing residential uses would be 195 feet.
The project also is in compliance with the General Plan Image Corridor requirements by including a 15 foot landscape setback along Avenue 58 and limiting the height of structures within 150 feet of Avenue 58 to under 22 feet. The lower architectural elements and open space along the property’s northern edge create a viewshed that is seamless with the northern existing neighborhoods, thereby illustrating a land use compatibility with well‐established homes.
103
104
December 19, 2023
53 2. LU‐2 High Quality Design That Compliments and Enhances the City and Policy LU 2.7: Continue to Include Park Facilities Planning in Neighborhood Planning Efforts: The proposed project has been designed to be visually compatible with similar architectural elements of Spanish, Mediterranean and Santa Barbara influences that are common in La Quinta. With the required 20% open space, the project has been designed to promote onsite amenities for its residents. The amenities include a clubhouse, pool and spa, tot lot, seating areas with picnic tables and benches ‐ all which promote a high quality of living within the community.
3. GOAL LU‐3: Safe and Identifiable Neighborhoods that Provide a Sense of Place: As a Planed Unit Development, the community provides open space and recreational amenities, as well as landscape treatments to create an identifiable community. The charm of the neighborhood is reflected in its name, La Villetta.
105
106
December 19, 2023
54 4. GOAL LU‐5: Broad Range of Housing Types and Choices for All Residents of the City, Policy LU‐5.2:
Consider Changes in Market Demand in Residential Product Type to Meet the Needs of Current and Future Residents and GOAL H‐1: Provide housing opportunities that meet the diverse needs of the City’s existing and projected population: The proposed project’s 9 units to the acre would provide an additional housing supply and a smaller housing choice that promotes a reduced carbon footprint. In addition, this alternative clustered residential housing product in lieu of a single‐family dwelling development would help meet the housing needs of a wide range of household income levels and range of housing sizes for current and future housing demands in the City.
5. Program CIR‐1.12c: New Development Shall Provide Pedestrian and Bicycle Connections to Adjacent Streets and Assure that Infrastructure and Amenities Accommodate Pedestrian and Bicycle Use, Policy CIR‐1.14: Private streets shall be developed in accordance with development standards set forth in the Municipal Code, relevant Public Works Bulletins and other applicable standards and guidelines and Program SC‐1.5.c: New development projects shall include vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle connections to the greatest extent possible, both through the project and connecting to adjacent projects: The proposed project includes a pedestrian sidewalk along the private driveway which would provide access to pedestrian sidewalks and a Class II Bikeway proposed along Avenue 58. The project will coordinate with the City to ensure that private streets are designed and constructed to meet City standards. 107
108
December 19, 2023
55 6. Policy SC‐1.3: Encourage the use of more environmentally friendly storm water management techniques such as bioswales, permeable surfaces and other methods as they are developed, in all new development, Program WR‐1.4.c: Require onsite retention for new development projects to the greatest extent possible, to provide added recharge of the aquifer and Program FH‐1.3.a: New development shall continue to be required to construct onsite retention/detention basins and other necessary stormwater management facilities that are capable of managing 100‐year stormwater flows The project proposes Light Impact Development/Site Design Drainage Concepts and Treatment Controls as part of the project WQMP and proposes a bioretention basin to capture stormwater runoff and infiltrate it into the ground water basin.
7. Program SC‐1.4.a: Require all new development proposals to demonstrate consistency with the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan and Policy AQ‐1.7: Greenhouse gas emissions associated with a development project shall demonstrate adherence to the City’s GHG Reduction Plan: : The project evaluated Greenhouse Gas emissions and determined that the project contributions would be less than significant and the IS/MND Greenhouse Gas Study evaluated the consistency of the project with the City’s GHG Reduction Plan and determined it adheres to the GHG Reduction Plan.
8. Program SC‐1.5.a: All new development shall be constructed to meet or exceed CalGreen Building Codes: The project will coordinate with the City to ensure the project complies with CalGreen Building Code requirements.
9. Policy H‐1.4: Support the construction of new affordable housing by rezoning, where
appropriate and desirable, to permit higher density residential development: The proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from Low Density to Medium Density which would allow for 44 additional residential units to be developed on the site. The proposed project with nearby single family detached homes would be developed similarly to the existing area of La Quinta wherein the community of Codorniz is located, which has a mix of low, medium and high density homes.
Codorniz & Clubhouse Apartments located near large, single family detached homes on golf courses (Mountain View Country Club, The Citrus Club & Hideway Golf Club) 109
110
December 19, 2023
56 Future Construction of
La Villetta at Avenue 58
• With your approval of this project, we will continue working with a local homebuilder (who has entered into a Letter of Intent) or alternatively, proceed with our in‐house construction partner, Delsa Homes for constructing the homes. Regardless, the construction of these homes will proceed expeditiously. • Since the homes range in size from 1,600 sf to 2,400 sf, the future sales prices for these homes will be based on current market rates in 2025 or thereafter.
• Current housing market comparable: the Richmond American homes at Piazza Serena, located across the street from the proposed project are selling for over $600,000 and are traditional single family detached homes starting at 2,440 sf.
• Similar cluster style communities recently built: Sycamore Hills in Upland, Collett Crossings in Riverside, and Sol Terra in La Quinta.
Rodeo Credit Enterprises’ Construction Partner
• Deer Creek I & II / 29 Quartz Hill (Palmdale) Homes
• Built in 2022‐2023
• Starting at 3,043 – 3,469 sf
• Prices: starting at $800,000
111
112
December 19, 2023
57 Rio Bravo Country Club, Bakersfield
22 Luxury Golf Course Homes by Delsa Homes
(construction starting in 2024)
The Proposed La Villetta Community has an Abundance of On‐Site Parking • 204 total parking spaces
• Each unit has a 2‐car garage
• 44 guest parking spaces to be supervised by a Homeowners Association Management Company • Total of 2.55 parking spaces per unit exceeding the City’s Municipal Code requirements 113
114
December 19, 2023
58 La Villetta at Avenue 58
In summary, the proposed project:
1. Is supported by the community;
2. Will contribute to the cost sharing agreement to fund the future IID power upgrades, which benefits the larger
community;
3. Will provide much need housing diversity;
4. Will fulfill the City’s General Plan Goals & Policies; and
5. Will provide on‐site parking to meet the needs of its residents and guests.
La Villetta at Avenue 58
Project Team
Kris Pinero, Project Manager
Rodeo Credit Enterprises, LLC - Applicant
661-621-8912 (cell)
[email protected]
Henrik Nazarian, Civil Engineer
D and D Engineering
[email protected]
Julie Beeman, President Mike Salazar, Landscape Architect VCS Environmental Koriander Design Architecture
[email protected] [email protected]
Jeff Addison, Principal/Director of Design Angela Besa
Kevin L Crook Architect, Inc. LLG Engineers - Traffic Engineer [email protected] [email protected]
Tim Piasky, Project Consultant
Piasky Solutions
[email protected]
115
116
December 19, 2023
59 117