Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Affordable topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission approves Roadrunner Flats affordable housing subdivision
Summary
The commission voted to approve a tentative map and design review for Roadrunner Flats, a 10.07‑acre affordable housing project proposing 30 single‑family homes with detached ADUs (density bonus yields 31 units), a leasing/amenities building and open space; the developer agreed to a 55‑year affordability covenant and parking meets UDC standards.
The Indio Planning Commission on May 27 approved the Roadrunner Flats project (plan PRD25‑0023; TTM25‑00005), a planning review and tentative map that would subdivide a 10.07‑acre parcel into 38 lots and create 30 single‑family dwelling units with detached accessory dwelling units (ADUs), one amenities/leasing lot, private streets and open space.
Gustavo Gomez, principal planner, told the commission the desert‑estates site is zoned Desert Estates Transition and the affordable project used density‑bonus provisions to increase the unit count; under the Unified Development Code parking requirements the project needs 62 spaces and the applicant proposes 65 enclosed garage spaces plus guest parking. Gomez said the project was found consistent with the City of Indio General Plan and the city’s program EIR; staff recommended forwarding resolutions 2135 and 2136 for the design‑review discretionary approval and tentative map.
Applicant Tong Tran (ATAP Corporation) described the development team’s experience with affordable housing and clarified unit design: ADUs will be detached, include kitchens and will have hookups and meters; the project will provide a central laundry amenity and feature drought‑tolerant landscaping. Tran said the housing will be rental with a 55‑year affordability covenant and that detailed rent levels will be set closer to build‑out.
Three public commenters asked about environmental findings and future sale or rental pricing; staff and the applicant said the project is rental (not for immediate sale) and that the EIR consistency checklist did not identify new significant environmental effects beyond the program EIR that already covered similar densities. Commissioners asked about ADU siting, emergency access and private‑street widths. A motion to approve the project with the modified conditions recommended by staff was made, seconded and carried.
Next steps: the project approvals will be transmitted to the city council as required for final entitlements, and the project will be subject to conditions of approval and subsequent building permits.
