Loading...
2001 03 06 CCCity Council Agendas are now Available on the City's Web Page @www.la-quinta.org City Council Agenda CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 Regular Meeting Tuesday, March 6. 2001 - 2:00 P.M. Beginning Res. No. 2001-13 Ord. No. 353 CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL: Council Members: Adolph, Henderson, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena II. PUBLIC COMMENT At this time, members of the public may address the City Council on any matter not listed on the agenda. Please complete a "request to speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. Please watch the timing device on the podium. III. CLOSED SESSION - None NOTE: Time permitting, the City Council may conduct Closed Session discussions during the dinner recess. Additionally, if the City is considering acquisition of real property, persons identified as negotiating parties are not invited into the closed session. IV. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE City Council Agenda RECONVENE AT 3:00 P.M. Page 1 March 6, 2001 001 V. PUBLIC COMMENT At this time, members of the public may address the City Council on items that appear within the Consent Calendar or matters that are not listed on the agenda. Please complete a "request to speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. Please watch the timing device on the podium. For all Business Session matters or Public Hearings on the agenda, a completed "request to speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the start of City Council consideration of that item. The Mayor will invite individuals who have requested the opportunity to speak to come forward at the appropriate time. VI. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA VII. PRESENTATIONS Vill. 1. UPDATE ON COACHELLA VALLEY ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP BY MICHAEL BRACKEN, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. 1. REQUEST TO UTILIZE CITY PARKING AND FUNDING FOR SHUTTLE SERVICE LA QUINTA ARTS FOUNDATION. 2. LETTERS REQUESTING SUPPORT OF GRANT PROGRAMS FROM TORRES-MARTINEZ TRIBAL COUNCIL. 3. LETTER REQUESTING JOINT MEETING WITH CABAZON BAND OF MISSION INDIANS. IX. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 20, 2001. X. CONSENT CALENDAR Note: Consent Calendar items are considered to be routine in nature and will be approved by one motion unless requested for separate consideration by a member of the City Council or the public. APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER DATED MARCH 6, 2001. 2. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 89-1 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001/2002. 3. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING GUEST BADGES TO THE NABISCO CHAMPIONSHIP GOLF TOURNAMENT. City Council Agenda Page 2 March 6, 2002 .T XIII. XIV 4. APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT FOR THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2000-406, FOR A SIX -STORY, 145 ROOM HOTEL UNDER SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-050 AND VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-005, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 29909. APPLICANT: SANTA ROSA PLAZA, LLC. XI. BUSINESS SESSION 1. CONSIDERATION OF FUNDING REQUEST FROM THE PREVENT CHILD ABUSE COACHELLA VALLEY ORGANIZATION. A. MINUTE ORDER ACTION 2. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 11.88, SECTION 11.88.040 (TERMS OF PERMIT) OF THE LA QUINTA CHARTER AND MUNICIPAL CODE RELATIVE TO SPECIAL SALES EVENTS (GARAGE SALES). A. READ ORDINANCE BY NUMBER AND TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE FURTHER READING. B. INTRODUCE FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE STUDY SESSION - None REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 1. CVAG COMMITTEE REPORTS 2. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WORKSHOP/INFORMATION EXCHANGE COMMITTEE (PERKINS) 3. C.V. MOSQUITO AND VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT (PERKINS) 4. C.V. MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY (SNIFF) 5. DESERT RESORTS REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY (HENDERSON) 6. DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT AD HOC COMMITTEE (HENDERSON/ADOLPH) 7. LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES COMMITTEE 8. MUSEUM EXPANSION COMMITTEE (ADOLPH/SNIFF) 9. PALM SPRINGS DESERT RESORTS CONVENTION & VISITORS AUTHORITY (HENDERSON) 10. PALM SPRINGS DESERT RESORTS AIRLINE SERVICES COMMITTEE (HENDERSON) 11. PALM SPRINGS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT COMMISSION 12. RIVERSIDE COUNTY FREE LIBRARY SYSTEM ADVISORY COMMITTEE 13. RIVERSIDE COUNTY DESERT LIBRARY ZONE ADVISORY BOARD (HENDERSON) 14. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (PENA) 15. SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY/SUNLINE SERVICES GROUP (PENA) 16. INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES DATED JANUARY 10, 2001. DEPARTMENT REPORTS 1. CITY MANAGER A. RESPONSE(S) TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 2. CITY ATTORNEY 3. CITY CLERK A. REPORT ON UPCOMING EVENTS. :1 City Council Agenda Page 3 March 6, 2001 4. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIRECTOR 5. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 6. COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR 7. FINANCE DIRECTOR 8. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER 9. POLICE CHIEF 10. FIRE CHIEF XV. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' ITEMS RECESS TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING RECONVENE AT 7:00 P.M. XVI. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not listed on the agenda. Please complete a "request to speak form and limit your comments to three (3) minutes. Please watch the timing device on the podium. XVII. XVIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS For all Public Hearings on the agenda, a completed "request to speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the start of City Council consideration of that item. The Mayor will invite individuals who have requested the opportunity to speak, to come forward at the appropriate time. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION OF JANUARY 9, 2001, TO REQUIRE THE REPLACEMENT AND REPAIR OF HIGHWAY 111 LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE JEFFERSON PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER PURSUANT TO CONDITION NO. 48 OF RESOLUTION 2001-001 FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-687 (JACK IN THE BOX RESTAURANT) LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND DEPOT WAY. APPELLANT: STEVE SCHNEIDER WITH LYONS, WARREN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR JACK IN THE BOX RESTAURANT. A. RESOLUTION ACTION 2. PUBLIC HEARING TO CERTIFY A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; CHANGE LANDS CURRENTLY MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO VILLAGE COMMERCIAL, DESIGN GUIDELINES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A COMMERCIAL/OFFICE, DISTRIBUTION CENTER AND 227 WHOLE OWNERSHIP SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS WITH THE POTENTIAL OF 365 GUEST ROOMS; DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL AND OFFICE BUILDINGS; AND SUBDIVISION OF 33 ACRES INTO 16 NUMBERED AND LETTERED LOTS. APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. A. RESOLUTION ACTION. 004 City Council Agenda Page 4 March 6, 2001 T XIX. ADJOURNMENT - Adjourn to the next regular meeting to be held at 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 20, 2001, in the City Council Chambers, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253. DECLARATION OF POSTING I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of La Quinta, California, do hereby declare that the foregoing agenda for the City Council meeting of March 6, 2001, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chambers, 78-495 Calle Tampico and on the bulletin boards at the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce and at Stater Bros., 78-630 Highway 111, on Friday, March 2, 2001. DATED: March 2, 2001 N hE � � ""'-1'--"�� JU REEK, CIVIC City Clerk, City of La Quinta, California PUBLIC NOTICE The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's Office at 777-7025, 24-hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations will be made. 0105 City Council Agenda Page 5 March 6, 2001 T March 28, 2001 Honorable John Pena, Mayor & Members of the City Council City of La Quinta P. O. Box 1504 La Quinta. CA 92253 WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE ITEM: rat �FG4 RECEIVED :san ;..#3 as , 2001 FFz 28 PSI ' 1 4 aass:s1< :s .a,+#.t'i1tt �n 4ulnTn CITY 0E LA S OFFICE ARTS CITY CLERK 5 OfFICE FOUNDATION Re: La Quinta Arts Festival, March 15-18, 2001 Honorable Mayor and Council Members: Yesterday in a meeting with our construction manager we learned it is improbable that we would be able to bring temporary power to the Washington Street property to enable lighting of the parking lots within our timeline. Without temporary power for parking lot lighting, we are unable to provide patron parking on the new site for La Quinta Arts Festival, March 15-18, 2001. La Quinta Arts Foundation is very concerned that there will not be sufficient parking available to attendees of La Quinta Arts Festival because of the heavy construction activities taking place in the village. We come before you to request the Honorable Council consider allowing festival attendees to park at City Hall and La Quinta Senior Center lots for no charge to the patrons or LQAF. To secure their safety and protection due to the condition of the traffic arteries and streets leading to Frances Hack Park, we additionally request the City sponsor and pay for shuttle service to be provided at no charge to the festival patrons. Cardiff Transportation recommends two, 24 passenger mini coaches, on a 15-minute schedule. The shuttle would be available from 10 am each day running until one hour past Festival closing hours. Total estimated costs are $5,548.00. The Foundation is prepared to pay additional advertising and signage costs to advise festival patrons of the additional parking available through the City. La Quinta Arts Festival is La Quinta Arts Foundation's and the City of La Quinta's premier event. The City's support of the safety and convenience of festival attendees through the construction period will benefit LQAF, the City and the surrounding businesses during this 19th annual La Quinta Arts Festival. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, 9 Susan Francis Executive Director m POST OFFICE BOX 777 ♦ LA QUANTA, CA 92253 ♦ 760 564 1244 ♦ FAX 760 564 6884 Feb 27 01 11:26a Torres Martinez WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE ITEM: I)-" — t%t7tana k CV Mat, THE TORRES MARTINEZ DESERT CAHUILLA INDIANS P.O. Box 1160 a 66-725 Martinez Road Thermal, CA 92274 760-397-0300 a FAX 760-397-8146 MAU-WAL-MAH SU-KUTT MENYIL February 26, 2001 The Honorable John Pena 78-495 Calle Tampico LaQuinta, CA 92253 Subject: Torres Martinez Grant Proposal for ANA Grant No. 93.612-2002 Category II Language Grant Dear Mayor Pena: The Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians are sccking your support of its Application for Grant Proposal requesting funds from the FY 2002 Administration for Native American's (ANA) Grant above -noted, the closing date for which is March 16, 2001. If funded, this project will enable the Torres Martinez Tribe to literally `save' its native language, which is in jeopardy of becoming generationally extinct. In seeking your support of our efforts on this grant proposal, we are mindful of the tremendous impact your support will have upon the success of Torres Martinez being approved as a finding beneficiary. We trust we can count on your assistance and therefore request that you prepare a letter to that effect [on your letterhead] in the form attached hereto. Since time is of the essence in this endeavor, we would greatly appreciate your sending the letter to us (by facsimile at the fax number noted above) no later than March 7 ". Thank you for your continued support and consideration to this matter. Sincerely, Mary E. Belardif, Tribal Chairwoman Enclosure 007 02-27-01 10: 25 RECEIVED FROM:760 397 8146 P.01 T Feb 27 01 11:28a Torres Martinez (760)397-8146 P.2 PROPOSED LETTER IN SUPPORT OF ANA GRANT UNDER CATEGORY H LANGUAGE GRANT) FOR TORRES MARTMEZ DESERT CAHUILLA INDIANS (LETTERHEAD) Date The Honorable Mary Belardo, Chairwoman Torres Martinez Deser Cahuilla Indians P_ O- Box 1160 Thermal, CA 92274 Attention: Mary E Belardo, Tribal Chairwoman Subject: ANA G rant, No. 93.612-2002 Category 11 Language Grant The [office and/or agency of , is please to support the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians' gran: proposal requesting funding from the FY 2002 Administration for Native American's (ANA) Giant above -noted, with a closing date of March 16, 2001. We understand that this project, if funded, will enable the Torres Martinez Tribe to prevent the virtual extinction of their native languaga. The [office and/or agency] is aware of the diverse areas in which the Torres. Martinez Tribe has become involved in rocent years, including a variety of community, social and political issues. We recognize the extreme importance of these endeavors to the Torres Martinez Tribe, and we wish to convey our support for your efforts to save your native language, which will be a source of great pride and ancestral history to Tribal youth, and Tribal members in general. Our office is also aware of the critical need for such activities, and we appreciate the fact that the granting of funds for this project will have a positive impact for the entire Tribal community. Again, our office is pleased to announce its support of the Torres Martinez grant proposal Sincerely, Name, Title I 02-27-01 10:25 RECEIVED FROM:760 397 8146 P.02 Feb 27 01 11:29a Torres Martinez MAU-WAL-MAH SU-KUTT MENYIL February 26, 2001 The Honorable John Peiia 78-495 Calle Tampico LaQuinta, CA 92253 (760)397-8146 � Z�lul ✓ CAHUILLA(IND�IANS P.O. Box 1160 • 66-725 Martinez Road Thermal, CA 92274 760-397-0300 • FAX 760-397-8146 Subject: Torres Martinez Grant Proposal for FY 2002 HUD — "Indian Community Development Block Grant' Dear Mayor Pena: The Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians are seeking your support of its Application for Grant Proposal requesting funding from the U.S. Department of IIousing and Urban Developljient, under the above -noted program. If funded, this project will enable the Torres Martinez Tribe to construct a gymnasium and recreational center on our Tribal land. In seeking your support of our efforts on this grant proposal, we are mindful of the tremendous impact your support will have upon the success of the Torres Martinez Tribe being approved as a funding beneficiary. we trust we can count on your assistance and therefore request that you prepare a letter to that effect [on your letterhead] in the form attached hereto. Since time is of the essence in this endeavor, we would greatly appreciate your sending the letter to us (by facsimile at the fax number noted above) no later than March 7`h. Thank you for your continued support and consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Mary. . Be do, Tribal Chairwoman Enclosure 009 02-27-81 10:26 RECEIVED FROM:760 397 8146 P.03 Feb 27 01 11:29a Torres Martinez r760)397-8146 p.3 MAU-WAL-MAH SU-KUTT MENYIL February 26, 2001 The Honorable John Peiia 78-495 Calle Tampico LaQuinta, CA 92253 CC .-Cot,�nul THE TORRES MARTINEZ DESERT CAHUILLAtIND7ANS P.O. Box 1160 • 66-725 Martinez Road Thermal, G4 92274 760-397-0300 • FAX 760-397-8146 Subject: Torres Martinez Grant Proposal for FY 2002 HUD - "Indian Community Development Block Grant' Dear Mayor Pena: The Torres Martinez Desert Calluilla Indians are seeking your support of its Application for Grand Proposal requesting funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, under the above -noted program. If funded, this project will enable the Torres Martinez Tribe to construct a gymnasium and recreational center on our Tribal land. In seeking your support of our efforts on this grant proposal, we are mindful of the tremendous impact your support will have upon the success of the Torres Martinez Tribe being approved as a funding beneficiary. We trust we can count on your assistance and therefore request that you prepare a letter to that effect [on your letterhead] in the form attached hereto. Since time is of the essence in this endeavor, we would greatly appreciate your sending the letter to us (by facsimile at the fax number noted above) no later than March 71°. Thank you for your continued support and consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Maryry . Be do, Tribal Chairwoman Enclosure - 010 02-27-01 10:26 RECEIVED FROM:760 397 814E P.03 OG. " WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE ITEM: 3 FEB 2 $ : February 26, 2001 Honorable John Pena City of La Quinta ^ 0 ^ r. ., m... 'V�J Vall bill}TICO La Quinta, CA 92253 Attention: Tom Genovese, City Manager: Dear Mayor Pena: Fax: (760)777-7101 The Cabazon Band of Mission Indians is proud to have developed a fine spirit of cooperation with local governments. To further those relationships, we are inviting our neighboring cities to meet with us, discuss subjects of joint interest, and foster further collaboration. The Cabazon Business Committee recently sat with City of Indio officials in a dialogue to discuss future economic development plans, growth issues and the Cabazon Resource Recovery Park. We would be honored if City of La Quinta officials would accept a similar invitation. We believe you will find such a meeting mutually beneficial. Please contact me at your earliest convenience to schedule a meeting time and luncheon with our Business Committee. The Cabazon Band of Mission Indians looks forward to a continuing friendship and cooperative relationship with the City of La Quinta. Sincerelv, C� Xe���<?,d �--'�c�t,< � ego o Cervantes, Director epartment of Public Affairs GC/sp 011 'n�n�,"►'n`"In�n.�n,�ATATAI211 n�, n,�iin`,"In n�n�n.,�n,VAI 84-245 INDIO SPRINGS PARKWAY 9 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92203-3499 • (760) 342-2593 FAX (760) 347-7880 / T c&44 e(P w F OZ u S AGENDA CATEGORY: OF COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: MARCH 6, 2001 ITEM TITLE: Demand Register Dated March 6, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: Approve Demand Register Dated March 6, 2001 BACKGROUND: Prepaid Warrants: BUSINESS SESSION CONSENT CALENDAR STUDY SESSION PUBLIC HEARING 44303 - 443091 2,226.16 44310 - 443141 1,412.04 44315 - 44319) 1,202.92 44320 - 443241 29,470.73 Wire Transfers) 2,231,571.08 P/R 6456 - 65201 87,452.71 P/R Tax Transfers; 24,840.06 CITY DEMANDS Payable Warrants: 44325 - 444221 1,399,519.27 RDA DEMANDS $3,777,694.97 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Demand of Cash -City $1,915,539.82 $1,915,539.82 1,862,155.15 $3,777,694.97 012 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK TRANSACTIONS 2/14/00 - 2/27/01 2/16/01 WIRE TRANSFER - DEBT SERVICE $2,083,490.37 2/1601 WIRE TRANSFER - DEFERRED COMP $6,231.03 2/16/01 WIRE TRANSFER - PERS $11,188.68 2/16/01 WIRE TRANSFER - CREDIT UNION $5,661.00 2/21/01 WIRE TRANSFER - RDA ESCROW $50,000.00 2/26/01 WIRE TRANSFER - RDA ESCROW $25,000.00 2/26/01 WIRE TRANSFER - RDA ESCROW $25,000.00 2/26/01 WIRE TRANSFER - RDA ESCROW $25,000.00 TOTAL WIRE TRANSFERS OUT $2,231,571.08 2 T ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP5005 CHECK REGISTER 09:07AM 02/27/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE 1 CHECK CHECK VENDOR PAYMENT NUMBER DATE NO. NAME AMOUNT ***NO CHECKS WERE USED FOR PRINT ALIGNMENT.*** 44325 02/27/01 &01191 CALIFORNIA POOLS & SPAS 213.60 44326 02/27/01 &01319 CHAPELLIS 785.00 44327 02/27/01 &01320 DEBBIE DUNCAN 110.00 44328 02/27/01 &01321 DIANE GAGE 60.00 44329 02/27/01 &01322 WANDA HAWTHORNE 60.00 44330 02/27/01 &01323 CARL JOHNSON 36.00 44331 02/27/01 &01324 CAROL MARCKS 25.00 44332 02/27/01 &01325 ALYSON WILSON 48.00 44333 02/27/O1 &01326 LES WOLF 25.00 44334 02/27/01 &01327 THOMAS SULLIVAN 2.00 44335 02/27/01 &01328 BETH K GRIMES 3.00 44336 02/27/01 ABLOOl ABLE RIBBON TECH 245.28 44337 02/27/01 ACT100 ACT GIS INC 2000.00 44338 02/27/01 AME200 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SVCS 55.27 44339 02/27/01 ARC100 ARCH 86.82 44340 02/27/01 ASCO01 A & S COFFEE SERVICE 204.00 44341 02/27/01 AUT030 AUTOMATED TELECOM 239.98 44342 02/27/01 BER125 BERG & ASSOCIATES INC 57809.62 44343 02/27/O1 BER150 BERRYMAN & HENIGAR INC 6793.00 44344 02/27/01 BRI100 BRINKS INC 275.40 44345 02/27/01 CADO10 CADET UNIFORM SUPPLY 277.08 44346 02/27/01 CAL019 CA ASSOC LOCAL ECONOMIC 445.00 44347 02/27/01 CDW050 CDW GOVERNMENT INC 50.24 44348 02/27/01 CMT058 CMTA 2001 CONFERENCE 225.00 44349 02/27/01 COA071 COACHELLA VALLEY PRINTING 279.62 44350 02/27/01 C00300 VALI COOPER & ASSOC INC 33194.85 44351 02/27/01 COS050 COSTCO BUSINESS DELIVERY 411.02 44352 02/27/O1 CRV100 CRV LA QUINTA 70 LP 10370.00 44353 02/27/01 CVA010 C V A G 2224.37 44354 02/27/01 DCT100 DC & TC LLC 110411.00 44355 02/27/01 DENO10 DENBOER ENGINEERING AND 16200.00 44356 02/27/O1 DESO10 DESERT BUSINESS MACHINES 599.87 44357 02/27/01 DES040 DESERT JANITOR SERVICE 4378.50 44358 02/27/01 DES060 DESERT SUN PUBLISHING CO 3325.60 44359 02/27/01 DES065 DESERT TEMPS INC 5940.30 44360 02/27/01 DLO100 DLO ENTERPRISES INC DBA 1909.76 44361 02/27/01 DOU010 DOUBLE PRINTS 1 HR PHOTO 16.67 44362 02/27/01 ECO010 E C SEWER SVC INC 300.00 44363 02/27/01 FEDO10 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 172.86 44364 02/27/01 FIR007 FIRST AID SELECT 199.85 44365 02/27/01 GAR040 GARZA TURF & POWER EQUIP 39.17 44366 02/27/01 GASO10 GASCARD INC 201.05 44367 02/27/01 GCSO10 GCS WESTERN POWER & EQUIP 4803.15 44368 02/27/01 GRA010 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION CO 754401.22 44369 02/27/01 GUM050 BRAD GUMMER 234.50 44370 02/27/01 HIGO10 HIGH TECH IRRIGATION INC 1326.75 44371 02/27/01 HIL150 HILTON FARNKOPF & 15641.57 014 �j ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP5005 CHECK REGISTER 09:07AM 02/27/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE 2 CHECK CHECK VENDOR PAYMENT NUMBER DATE NO. NAME AMOUNT 44372 02/27/01 HOA010 HUGH HOARD INC 888.15 44373 02/27/01 HOM030 HOME DEPOT 2384.20 44374 02/27/01 H00050 FAYE HOOPER 100.00 44375 02/27/01 HOW100 JAYE D HOWARD 14.00 44376 02/27/01 INTO15 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE 245.00 44377 02/27/01 JPRO10 JP REPROGRAPHICS 322.50 44378 02/27/01 JUDO10 JUDICIAL DATA SYSTEMS COR 155.32 44379 02/27/01 KIN100 KINER/GOODSELL ADVERTISNG 5676.53 44380 02/27/01 KRI100 BRUCE KRIBBS CONSTRUCTION 10177.73 44381 02/27/01 LOW100 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC 29.80 44382 02/27/01 MCDO10 MC DOWELL AWARDS 48.37 44383 02/27/01 MOM100 MOM'S GAS STATION 837.38 44384 02/27/01 MUNO10 MUNI FINANCIAL SERV INC 5600.00 44385 02/27/01 MUN175 IRVING MUNOWITZ 472.50 44386 02/27/01 NAWO10 RON NAWROCKI 1200.00 44387 02/27/01 NEXO10 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 2912.23 44388 02/27/01 NIC101 NICKERSON & ASSOCIATES 3210.00 44389 02/27/01 PET100 PET PICKUPS 561.67 44390 02/27/01 PIC100 PICKENS FUEL CORP 5.65 44391 02/27/01 PIT100 NOEL PITTMAN 49.00 44392 02/27/01 PLA020 THE PLANNING CENTER 8219.42 44393 02/27/01 PRI020 THE PRINTING PLACE 500.95 44394 02/27/01 RALO50 RALPHS GROCERY CO 32.49 44395 02/27/01 RAS020 RASA - ERIC NELSON 3500.00 44396 02/27/01 RIV082 RIV PUBLIC HEALTH LAB 50.00 44397 02/27/01 RIV100 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFFS 237634.06 44398 02/27/01 RIV152 RIV COUNTY TRANSPORTATION 11094.00 44399 02/27/01 ROSO10 ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP 25141.23 44400 02/27/01 RUI100 JOHN RUIZ 17.62 44401 02/27/01 SITO50 SITAG 3250.00 44402 02/27/01 SKY200 SKYTEL 15.68 44403 02/27/01 SMA010 SMART & FINAL 107.22 44404 02/27/01 SOCO10 THE SOCO GROUP INC 100.63 44405 02/27/01 SOU007 SOUTHWEST NETWORKS, INC 4678.88 44406 02/27/01 STA045 STAN'S AUTO TECH 1122.75 44407 02/27/01 STA050 STAPLES 172.29 44408 02/27/01 STA150 STATER BROS 123.60 44409 02/27/01 SUN075 SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY 369.00 44410 02/27/01 SUN080 SUNLINE SERVICES GROUP 560.28 44411 02/27/01 SWA075 SWANK 43.00 44412 02/27/01 TER100 TERRA NOVA PLANNING & 24726.22 44413 02/27/01 TOPO10 TOPS'N BARRICADES INC 233.28 44414 02/27/01 USO100 US OFFICE PRODUCTS 601.04 44415 02/27/01 VAN020 DENNIS VAN BUSKIRK 378.00 44416 02/27/01 VID050 VIDEO DEPOT 11.25 44417 02/27/01 VOG050 CHRIS A VOGT 26.00 44418 02/27/01 VONO10 VON'S C/O SAFEWAY INC 34.31 44419 02/27/01 WALO10 WAL MART STORES INC 15.01 44420 02/27/01 WIS020 WISE MAINTENANCE & CONST 450.00 Us 0 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP5005 CITY OF LA QUINTA CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE 44421 02/27/01 44422 02/27/01 CHECK REGISTER BANK ID: DEF VENDOR NO. NAME XERO10 XEROX CORPORATION ZUR050 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES ING CHECK TOTAL 09:07AM 02/27/01 PAGE 3 PAYMENT AMOUNT 1519.20 3245.86 1,399,519.27 an 11 5 K O F Z 0 x O w F N N N N N N N N N N N N £ a Q a m F F E F E F E F F F F E E F M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F N O l0 O O O O O O O O O O Z F a £ a Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U U E F E F H W H a m a a w m x a w a a w a w a a a a a a W o a a a a o o m 0 Q o ❑ o m o m o m o m o 0 w 0 0 0 0 E m E a E H F H E a F Q E a F a O F 0 0 0 0 '❑ a a m a a a a 0 O H W m w m m a m a U a m a m U U a V a U a ❑ a m o ff o 0 0 � o 0 0 0 0 > m ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ o ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ z u z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z H m O❑ O O W ❑ W ❑ W ❑ W ❑ W O w O w ❑ W ❑ W 'J W O ❑ w W W W W W W W w w W W W W m a a a a a a a a a a a a a a W t.. a o❑ W z z£ m m m m io o r m m P r in m ❑ .'J O O O O �D N ifl N l0 N O ❑ O O O O l0 m 41 01 Ol O� m O1 ri m H x a Z m Q m w m a o o W F a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 £ 0 o m o r m io Z ti N N M M M m f`l m m E Z O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U a O o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 o O o m m m m a a a a a a m a m m m m M a N N N O O VI V1 I7 V1 00 0 0 0 4 Z a Z > m a a a m z m o H w a] £ a a Q Q a Z W F U a W E m ❑ (� 3 Z a ❑ m .] Z Z Z Z Z H ❑ a a x a 3 W m l'1 m H a a a a a u x o £ a N 0 0 0 0 W h Z O m x O w s a a m m z o a o E x m a o a a a a a m a z a a r m o F a ❑ a a a a x w ri a Q Q a w x W z U U U U U ❑ ❑ 3 U U a a E m Fm W z O 07 U o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a o F z 0 N � N x U m rl to m ro m m .o �o O W U F F[ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N !V N N N N N N N N N N N m E E F F F F F E E F F F f F F F F F Qd m m o 0 o r N o rn m N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F N O O O N m O l0 O O O O O O O O O Z E W Z Q T r a a o m o r N o m N O N O N m O Ol l0 O ifl m O !'1 F O N O N N Z N W £ Ill w m Q W Z m Q U U U a m a U U U a Q Q H Q Q 4 >>>>>>>> Z E a E Z Z Z F f F o f F Z F m m m vl m m m W O O D O a a a 0 O O y 0 O O O W E m E F E E F E F W f w w f F Y Y Y Y Y Y Y u a > m m a o o m u a w w w w w w w w o ff o u o m m m o o m o o x x o m o x x x x x x S x > a p p m m m p p p w❑ ❑ a p u u u u u u u u z u z z a a a z z a z w z z f z V] w w W m w w w L w a a w m w z z z z z z z w p > x> a m H m H m> H F> a c� a > w> o a w a> w z> o a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a m w co co u £ m u u u u m a m a m a a a w w u W m a r r r o O❑ w m m > > m l0 0I .+ Jl O O m ill 10 m m Z Z £ p D r o 0 0 o N m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 aY z m a m W m a I o o w F W o 0 0 0 o m� o in ul in �n irl �n uri �n F z o 0 0 0 o ri o m rl o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r m io io m io r o m m m m m m to m m m F Z rl �-1 N f�l m ry N N N N N N N N N U U .y Q O o O o 0 0 o O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m V U U U U U U U U > U Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z m W Z H H H H H H H H U H o a > a s m a a a a a a a a o x O a o o ✓1 U w w U U a W m W W a z z z z z z z z a H z a s w w w w w w w w w w w U Y x S S S S S S Q Z O U U U w w [u F E O m b b b W b b b b W E m H H H ❑ w p p m z z z z z z a o a f E E w u E f a a a a a a a a a a a a s m m m m m m m m m H w w O O O O O O O O f'1 !1 N t(1 ✓1 �� ✓1 N ✓1 Vl �� U N rl E F H w u U U U m U U U a m o o w W W w w w w w w a V a a 4 a a a Q a m m m m m m m m m T Z � 01 O 'i 01 O ri N N f`l P 01 !+1 c Jl l0 ifl a ti N N N ti N N N N N N �(1 N N �(1 ill N E Z 0 N _ N U l0 t�l M 1D 10 10 iD 1D 1O (`l t+l 1'1 10 10 10 10 10 O W iJ F a N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N £ Q w H H F F F E F F F F F F F F F E F H F F a a ri O O M o t'� 0 0 0 o O r❑ F O O O O M O f1 O m M o O N O O ill �� O Z F w Z o �n r r 10 io m m 10 o irl N 10 £ O Q� 1D ti 10 ti r ti ifl N N lO r N O O m O O N Jl O O O N O l0 m M ✓1 J1 O � F Ol > > N N c W N O N O Q w O O M U F a a s a F a a w £ z W a U vl vl to 41 £ £ V .] > .] .] W W .] s .] h .] Z ❑ .] .] U > a m a a ❑❑ a u a � a a a a Z U] F H E ❑ O F F F Z F �� O F F F F £ O O a 0 O O O O O F Z O N v] O a u �' Zo Zo w a cui a a 4 a o .. a a O 2 0 ❑ O £££££ E£££ O m N O a O a 0 O N vl O > a V❑ W❑ a a a a a a a a a❑ a a❑ ❑ H❑ a M ❑ (L a❑ .Fi a w O O O O O O O O O W p O w 0 m m w Z w w F W W W W W O > E L > > (J > ❑ a a z z z z Z z z z z w w a W w a w w w �n a a o 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 ££ a a a c� h h ❑ W W u w 10 0 ❑ a o m O w r1 N > > m m o 10 m o o N N r r o Z Z £ m ul ✓1 N N m ✓1 ❑ O O O� ry N N 10 Z O N r ul 01 ✓l ✓1 W m rn N N ❑ Y N O N N N N N N N N N O ti fl 'i N r-� a Z a a m W m a � O O W F a r o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w ill o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m irl o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m o 0 0 0 �rl o £ ❑ m r r r r r r r o1 M m m Z 0 0 - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 � m m 10 10 F .'J N Jl Jl Jl ifl � N ✓1 ill i(1 ✓1 O O ifl i(1 Jl �l1 m m N O P .y M M M P P P v v P 01 01 .y .y c c 1p 1p rl U Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O rY rY 'i ti rl 'i N .y i-1 rl N P P rl 'i N N P P �-1 U' Z Z U U U F F Z ZY w Z £ £ Z Z > O O w r-i ry ti Z Z V a a U U r] M a a a a a a a a a a o o o a a a a a a a a a m � r-i N V1 VI N Vl Vl N N VI w w w Q a W a w £££££ E E E E Q a z z a s w w x a a a a a a a a a u u i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 £ u >> a s W W W W W W a s z w w 0 .] H Z Z Z Z z z z z z z U U O O > o .] .] O O a a K H w w W W W W W W w a s Q U U a a O a ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ .] ❑ W a Q a Q a Q a a a a s O £ 0 0 >> O m m u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u >> u zo > o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ N o .+ .. .. .y .. ,� ti ti .-� .a ,n ill r r o �n U H a �' ❑ ❑ ❑ O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ .] .] 3 F a a O vl U W a a Q a Q a a Q Q a Q a ❑ £ O O O O Q U m m U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U 8 T E Z 0 r N _ U a N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N (V N N N N £ a m F E F F F E F F F F F F F F F F F F F F a m M l0 t't O O O O O r O O O O O O O O O m F m o m o 0 0 o m o 0 0 0 0� m ri o Z F £ .7 I N r N � O � M � � � ✓1 � Jr Q M M N m N ifl ill N r M f`l � W 0 o M o o m �n io VI U U a N V W M N fn V1 VI N �(1 a m M O O N U' O m m m l0 w 6' VI M o a a F Z O .+ a F a o 0 o o z m a x x x z E a o a io a m a a a u u u u U a a W a u a r a a a a a a a s u u > > > > a a z a F E N F w E W W W F £ F >> O O F O O a 0 3 3 3 0 O v1 N O U U O > w a a E N F m E O E W W W F a F a a a a F z 2 Z Z F m m m m a a ❑ a a u a a a a a m. m a F o .. a N a o O a o w o ❑❑❑ o H o a a a a a o . . M o > a w a❑ W❑ E❑ F❑ O O O❑ a❑ O o O O o o❑ E F F❑ Z U a Z U Z d Z ti Z £££ Z 3 Z F E F F E F Z a a a Z w m a> ❑> F> U> 3 8 8> �. > Z Z Z z z z > >>>> Z ❑ O m O w m a O O O Jv a Q a Q a Q ❑❑❑ O a a F h h h h h h a a a u w L. ❑ � l0 O� O M O� O� O I- Y a z m a m W m a I O O w F a N O N O ifl (V O G G O O O w O O O O r O O O O r1 M t`l M rl O O O m m O m O �(1 l0 O O O l0 l0 t0 O m� t0 O O O � £ F O �!1 O ✓1 O O m O O O �(1 � N� O� N O O O ✓1 O rl N rl O r �O Ol Ol O� N M M N N N N N N V M U U a 0 0 0 O O M O c c c O O O O O O O O O O O O O O a a a ❑❑❑ W u u u w w w z z z z w w w w w w > H Q Q a «-I H U U U U U c� U .>. Z Z z z >>>>>> ri W W W a z z z o ❑❑❑ .. .. .. £ W w w W w w �n N N < a W W W a z N z w o 0 0 0 0 o O O O z a H H F F F F F F a a w m z z z m z z z z z z z z z z z z £ w F ❑ a z � a w w W m a a a a a a ❑❑❑ w a z m m m d m h h h h h h v� vi m E mu u a a a Q U 0 0 0 Q F W w W F F F F F F F F F F E a o 0 o a a a a a a a a a a a a a E F E a m m m w w w w w w w w w w w a a o m m Ui > > z z z �/1 V1 m U1 m m (n Ul U] fn UI a ❑ o 0 o w z U U u u u ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � e F ❑ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o G U F m > a F z z z z V] VI VI V1 VI V1 Vi Vl VJ VI VI u I-i 0 O 0 a > a u u u u u u ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ a T 0 Z O E Z O N \ M N S Cl M M M M M M M f'1 M �O �O M M M M l0 M M M M O 4] F N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M m F O O M o r �O O o ry ✓1 0 0 o Z F £ .7 ✓� m O ifl O N O .ti O ifl ifl M �O M m o m m U a z x W z a a ¢ W a a H a a w w a a W W W W Z U U U U U U U U F ❑ F F F a a F 7❑ E F m m m m O > > > > > > > > O O O O U O ££ O N VI O O Q Q 4 a w Ul !n m Ul (/1 N V cIi F U E E H F F F u u O F F E F 0❑ u u U U a F F F F H F F F a F a a w a S a a a a a a Ur.ff,, Uq UQ Uq U U U O V O O W O u� u O a a O w O o W D a qUq r q Q q r m m N H ❑ a a a a Z U a a a a W a 4G z a z o z z z z z E E z ,a rr F F F F F F F F w F w F w w w a a w to m W w W a a a a w W Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z> Z> o> £> W W> a a> w> W W W W ❑ O >> O p p 0 0 �n u u u u u u u u u a w o o W fu U W o o M V m r a M M in �n m �n O❑ W I I I I > > m V1 N ifl C h ifl r O O O O ❑ � O O O O O O O O Ol N �O ri \O O O O O Z r r r r r r r r in o r r M io 0 0 0 0 ❑ �(1 ✓1 � ✓1 � � ✓1 � r V N ✓1 ✓l .y .y N O1 O� T O� H x a Z w Q m W m a O O 4. F W o 0 0 '� N ifl to Jl ifl t() ifl Yl O M � Ol Ol Ol m Z o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F 2 N r-� N '+ ti �+ N .i N N v M m N ✓1 v ❑ o 0 0 �n o �n o o in �n r �n o �n �n �n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O V N N N N M N m M M t0 'i r M M C t(1 ✓1 ill � U Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 O O a Q F m O ❑ ❑ x a a a w W u a a M z a o o a o S U U U W o U U U U U U U U H F 3 �n m .ti v) to U u O H H H H .Zi H ti .Zi Q h vl U w fail Vl N N N N N to N F > a s W W w w w w w w w w w a Z N w w V1 (n U V U U a £ £ £ £ £ E £ £ a rr X X W Zti W F w w w w w w w w a a a W W ❑❑ a iZi rZi rZa a Z F F F F H F F H W w W p m r+ F 3 a a a a F ❑❑❑❑ Q❑ F F F F F F F F z w w Q a a a a Jv a a a a a a a a a W a m aq a E F a a a a a a a w w w w w w w w m w m v� vi N u u u u w a o �n m m m m m m m o '� u ❑❑ a s a m m m m a ❑ w w w w w w w w a o w w .. a a a a a m z ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ W w w c.. w c� c� c� c� p E W W Z O 0 0 o r r o 0 0 0 0 .❑ o Y m o m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 o .. 0 .. 0 .. 0 .. 0 o 0 o 0 c 0 .. 0 .. 0 .. 0 0 U F vl v) VI vl vl vI v) (n O '.� O ❑ ❑ N a a N m v) m� �. U L] 4] 4] 4] 4] L] 4] 4] a O U W W H 4 Q Q Q Q i a � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ W w c.. w `.. u u o u u a An Z r e �n io r- m rn m rn o .y N o P P P P F z 0 N O 4] F N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N £a d m F F F E F E E F F F F E F E F E E F F F t+l �O r N ifl O1 N 1'1 O � O � N ifl J1 �O r ro O� O Z E W Z ul N N N m N £ ❑ N \O O� Q� M N O � r r O1 �p M J+ O m O1 ✓1 N ✓1 M M N N O� �O m M V d a r r y H O N 'll r N M p O O Z Z Z Z Z O M N m N m O O O O O P N m io m E E E F F❑ ❑ U U U U U r w � p ❑ o o ❑ a VI VI m >> N W z z z z Z .-] .] 3 .] v� v� .] .] ❑ a a o 0 0 0 o a a o a a W a z 0 o d o d o 0 o a o a a o o w W F w w w E d d d d d F a E F F o f u F a a a £ H f N H o z o o z ua a a a F a a a a o m w m W H o a a a o o u o a N o m m o W o w W m m > a ❑ w w W❑ E F F F 'O ❑ z S t� W❑ a p v1 N z u z d d w z w w w w W z z a z z£ z z w w z .a a N a a H V1 w w w w W W W W W w w E W W w d W F w w a d d d d W > W W W> a a a a a> rn > F o> o 0 > a> £ d d d d d ❑ 3 3 3 F F F F F z Z �n a s r-� O x '❑ O O In w w vl m m � V] Vl Vl N Q c W a. L. ❑ m m Vl m VI U w P e P ❑ a \\\\\ O ✓1 0 m r N M m Z N N ul N N N N N OJ m O O O O O �+ Y Q Z d a m w m a I O o w E W �(1 J1 ifl � O O O O O N NI £ �O �O �O «1 ✓1 N ✓1 �(1 O O O Y1 N O O m m m m m Z O O O O O M ifl �(1 O O N O O O O O O F e m m io m m m m P m m m m m r r r r r r z io �n in o N N r M M U U Q O o 0 0 0 o O O o o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d d d U U D O O o C 0 0 0 Z q q q U U U U U H W W W Z Z Z Z Z Z Z w w m 0 0 0 0 0 O O M o a a a F F F F F F F a w O w w w U U U U U S 3 3 x O D❑ D W w d O O 0 a a a a a d d U a d d w F F F F F a s O C Z Z z Z z z Z Z Z a Z Z Q a a a 0 0 0 0 0 W a s ❑ E E E F E F w E w W W u u u u u x x a s a 0 0 0 0 0 0 N d 3 3 3 H H H H U F F Z Z x ❑ 0❑❑❑❑ iF+ C O 4 a z z z z z �a ❑ 2 x '' x W W W W w w u u ua 9 r i a 0 0 0 0 0 0 m z u u u u F w w` z o > o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ti MOO MOO MOO OOUa JFU+ ONOON O 4 U (UU u U 0 U t 0 U =tO+i 0 I' Q a o P P ul �n �Il in �n ,n �o ✓t ✓� �n ✓t to to io to m m O E Z N � r N x U lO l0 t0 �D lO t0 �O lO f�l l0 � � l0 m l0 m m 1p m O w U $ Q 4 a F Q W N N E N N E N N F N N F N N E N N E N N F N N F N N F N N F N N F N N E N N E N N F N N F N N F N N F N N F N N F N N E m m O F Z F O t1 M O � O M C1 O O O O O O O :fi N rl O O O r O m O O O O O O O w £ z ❑ m o ry m r r io � O o .i ul N N �n ul o �n m p io r 0 o to a 4 O O O O O N f1 O N N to LD N !n Q ✓1 N Z o a W F Ul a a a a ¢ a F Q £ a a Z O E O H O F O F O N O Q H F O V V V F a w w w m w o u o u o m o o u o > a �-+ ❑ O❑ ❑❑ z a❑ w z p ❑ z Z❑ .. z F a F a F a E o E a F❑ a z F v1 w a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a w> w E m> w F m w > m £ w > z > Y a> w w >>> w w E o>>> w w w s u ❑ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0❑ z z w a a ❑❑❑ a❑❑ w w V w ❑ a �Il P m o .. ,n m �n O > > w m in r ill r x N N P ✓1 to N- m m m V l0 m Z ❑ Z£ U O O O 0 N O Ol N Ol N ifl m rl t1 O N Ol t'1 U ❑ $I v i-1 v' O m O N O O O N O Ql O m Ol � �p ill ✓1 l0 N N ry .-� N .-� N .-� N .y N .y £ a aY z m a m w m a I o o w F m £ m m m m m m m m �(1 Jl O ✓1 O m m m m m m O � y F o r 0 r rl 0 r 0 r rl 0 r m 0 r m 0 r 0 r 0 io m 0 to m � 0 io m 0 to io 0 m e rl m ul 0 io e m 0 m Z n N N rl N rl ri �n U U Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 � 0 0 w o z z z z z z z o U Z U �n H H vl H H F rl w w w F w > w > W > w > W > w > a F o O y O VI O Q O Q O❑ a Q O❑ a Q VI ZU Q ❑ a u x y ¢ a a a a a a I a a a a z a qa' H Q w rn w m w m w m w 0 w m <n m Q w F E 0 E 0 E 0 F 0 F 0 F 0 F 0 F 0 W a 3 O O C9 ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑ 0 0 0 0 0 0 m I-+ a z a a a a a a a a O s F o a o 0 0 0 0 0 a a w r a ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ x ❑ z a a w u a a z a a z a a z w a a w w w w w w w w w w w a w w w w w w u a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ¢ a a w o a Z O o > 0 "I'll" 0 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 1 0 o �n .+ o .. 0 1 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0(� 0 O N V F O ££££££££ o O O O O o O o O .y 3 o F o a O O Z, .+ .+ z .y z U .. Q U 0 x 0 S 0 S 0 S 0 S 0 T 0 S 0 T 0 o z m o H H H a 12 a m m m m r r r r r r r r r r m m m m 0 a F o Z N \ m O L] 2 F N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N L'J 4 a a m N F N F N F N F N F N F N F N F N E N F N F N F N F N F N F N F N F N F o M o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O o O Z W £ E Z .7 M r �0 OI N v' f"1 O O N r O O N O O �I1 r O N O O O O O ✓1 O ✓1 O O O D\ a Q M o 0 0 o M Ri a O O ifl N u F u u u u cai F u u Y Q Z Z z z z z Z z z z Z w a z > w w U w U w U w U W U w U w U w a z F m F F F F F F F F F a a a W a ry a a a z a z z z z z z z z z Z o a a F z F o F 0 F o m a F o \ F o E 0 F o O m F o £££££££££ 0 o 0 a 0 0 u 0 u w p W ❑ w F F F S F a F a F F a F £££££££££ o > a Y a a IF.] a a o ❑ m w �-. a o ❑ a a o ❑ a u a s o ❑ R u s o ❑ u u o a o ❑ a o ❑ a R s o ❑ u u u u u u u u u u R u u R u u u u a RCC u u Z U 3 .a Z .] Z x Z Z m Z a Z m Z m Z m w w ❑ Q H> W a a> W a O> W w > ❑ Z> w F m> w Z U> W .1 .l w > F Z F Z F Z F Z F Z F Z F F Z F Z ❑ .. o a o Q zY .. w 0 u u u u u u u u ❑ a O N l0 IO �p l0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O Z ❑ Z£ O N N N m O �O Y1 (+1 m �(1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ❑ Z m N O N O 'i \ N P N l� r t+l O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N SY z a a m w m a 1 0 o w F a m £ o o M �n o o 0 o io o o N �n ui o �o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ul 0 o 0 0 0 0 � Z F 01 o Ol 0 M 0 M 0 D\ M 0 0 O 0 Jl f+l 0 0 0 0 tll 0 Vl 0 N 0 0 N 0 ❑ �n �n ui o � o m �n �n o o M r m r U Q o O o 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 o O O O Z O z O F U E U U Z I-i m U1 w N W (l] w N (il V1 w m W VI W fn Iil VI W U a U s U z > o a a a a a a a a a M o F z E z m m p a F U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 V 0 V 0 N 0 0 w ❑ N U a m m £ z z u £ w F a N a s o u a a m a Q z d £ o a o u z o z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 Q a U V W ❑ - F F u u u u u u u u u a Q r-1 O ❑ D m D a 3 O U £ O Z > a Z O X w U U U U U U U U U m m .] £ £ T, a Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z zd O 00 o0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 000000000 �24 U F ti i-+ 3 ❑ S Z Z 3 X O O D U U U V U O z z z z Z Z Z Z Z z 13 T Q m m m m Ol O� O� O� O1 O� O1 01 a O 0 E Z r N O w F N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N £d a m F F F F F F F H F F F F F F F F M o z W E❑ z in m � in m P o� �o o m ri o .+ ti �n �n � o N 0 o o �n vi �r U P ifl N N N t•1 M r O �(1 O N ✓1 Ol O O ~ O l0 �O O T O O Fl O ✓1 41 Ol O N O O U N M N N �n ✓1 Z_ m M U v� w w F f/l \ a F F z a a u a a w a a a >>>> a a W Z £ F F a F E F F F U) v1 F £ o u o o ❑ o 0 w o 0 0 0 £' 0 W w £ F F a F a H a E F F F Q F u H W OF w u u u u F a a a s a o u o w w o w o u o u o o w w w w w o x x x x o o w > a ❑ ❑ ❑ z❑ w ❑ u u u u❑ o z z o a z a z w z a z �-+ z �n in z .a N .a z z w❑ w z w w z> m> u> z> o> a a> w a m> a a a a> w o z z o 0 0 0 0 ❑ a a a Q> �n w w u m u x w w In rn �n w a w a a a u w 0 O W O m r r O > Z 2 i O O lO \O ut \p 1p 1p O �(1 01 O ❑ Z O N N M iO m N O ti O '-I O '+ O .y O .y O ry ry ry O N '-I O a Z a a m w m a I o o w H m O m �O ✓1 O O O O O O ifl N� Jl Yl � £ z o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m r �o o m r � r r r m io m io io m H 7 m �(1 O O O if1 � �(1 O O if1 N ifl J1 N p O b P h N P M M N N N P P P V M M U U Q O o 0 o O O o 0 0 o O O o o O o N w m w w m a F w H M w W W z Z z z vl o U a H U U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y Q Q a a a Z Z Z Z w O z o z z U u u u u u u u w E Z O w F Z F E a a a a K K C W a z a o a � z a .� a s W �n �n I I I I ❑ � N d W w w fL m m x x x a a a a r a a a a a a a a a w r ,',',0 F (n z o > o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o p N o 'J O O O O N N N N ✓1 ill NO N N N m O H •.] .] r] N vl N N U iUi fF] rui iFi ra-] K a i>i i>i a s a a a a a a 14 Z O .-� N �'1 P �!1 l0 r 0 � O N ✓1 1p � O ti N M v ✓1 t0 a O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N F Z O N O w F N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N U Q N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Q m E F F F F F F F F F F F E F F E N F F F F F F F F H F a rl E t0 O O N O m �(. N N O �(. O O O O Ot N N O O Z F . W Z M O t(1 m N N IO N �O O N O O O F 'J N r ✓1 r M N ifl M O IO ✓1 O N v(1 O O M O r-� N O r O M OI M O �0 ifl l0 r O1 m 01 � P N N Y ry .v N z z E £ £ r M OI Z 2 V S T O r ❑❑ E O O O M ti Q a a a s VI N a s ❑ ❑ a £ a c� c� a > In a a 3 Z Z u O ?� F F F E F F w vl vl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u m 0 0 0 .] z z Z Z Z m m W W w w w G] Iil 41 [il [il a Q La. la. O O w O❑ o a a z Z Q z z a Z £ £ £ £ £ £ r/I F F F vI m i-+ v O O a O w w w w w w w O z O x x x x F a x! S S U 0. o a a o L] U u u U u u w F F E E cn vl v) w a w O a z Z 7 z F F Q HH a a m a a a W 4 Z Z a Q a a W l U a O O O O O O a £ m w w u u u u a 4. a F E In In x a L] w a fil O .. w w a w w a 0 0 0 ££ u w .. u a z o o F o ti .+ o a > m z z Z z Z Z z 0 r❑ . v H F F F w h .+ W 0 0 ❑ >> m Z u w w w w W w r+ z a z m m w w w w a\ a .7 O S x a x z a a z m m Y w z w w w u u u 0 x a 0 F w w w W W w 3 3 3 3 3 3 0> N> h N m❑ Q m a z z> E F> a m Q Q Q Q Q a O (n fn O .'J >> W m 3 V] a a W w w Z S w w z z a a H H u U W P P P P P N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O w ifl �(1 ✓1 ifl ✓1 ✓1 M T O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Z Z £ O p ti m H❑ I I I I I I I U U U U U U U U U U U V U U U U ul F z .• .+ .. �+ .i .+ .+ a W W W w w w w W W W w W w w w w p � Y o 0 0 0 0 0 o Q ❑❑ m w p p 0❑❑ O m m m p O p .y a Z a a a W m a I o o w F a m N m ul o m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 £ � OI O1 O1 OI O1 O� a\ M M M M M M M M J1 F Z M 10 N M Jl l0 N l0 N N M l0 M t0 M 10 O O O O O O O O O O O O u a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti N N P N P N P N P P N N N N N N ti r4 N w W W a w a w a s C 5 C C a 0 ❑❑ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ 0❑ 0 w w w W W W w F o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 x x z x x x x a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a o a W Z Z z Z Z Z Q V U U U U U U U V U U U U U U U a >> O O I ❑❑❑ a a a a a a Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a Q O O O O O O O E > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I U U U U U U U W W W w w w w w W w W W w w w w w F W W w w w w w F v) vJ vl N v] (n tfi v) vl v1 Vl w vI v1 V] !n N N .] Z O p p p❑❑ p Z i-I H x 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 p p Q 0 vl In cn vl vl m m O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a s r a a a a a a a a u z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z u a a w w w w w w W w w W W w w w w w W w W W W w w Z Z a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z O > O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 O N .y .ti i1 ti O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O u >>> H >i H H>>> > N N m W ti r-i U I -I r-I f. .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 H a 15 T F Z O N W F N N N N N N N N N N N N N N £ Q m F F F E F F F F F E E E E F E F F F Q w m O Z F m N �'1 � ✓1 O O O �(1 �(1 i(1 O rl N O O a w £ a O O l0 N N 11 lO m J1 r � N O lD o r o N N a W a ¢ a a a F U z U U z U z E Z a F Q Q F a F a F o p1 0 0 0 o w o > a>> 2> a o o w o 0 0 0 Qm0wOn0E4FF4F4Fo - ❑ . Uw ❑ .. w wwowo>a , Q z E o fn z W a W z W a a z W a z ti w o w w o w o w w o w w o w z W o r+ z W w w w w W w W W o > Q o d O W O O W O W O > x> W w o w D w o w> D w> o W 0 W w U w a o 0 o m m m m I I I I in O❑ > I Z > Z£ W {O ifl N O1 r O� Ol o O N 0 O N 0 O N O O O N O 0 O N lO 0 l0 0 0 �O 0 l0 N O J1 r ti U O ti 'J m O N ifl ✓1 O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N .y N ry N r� N ry N ti OJ ti N a z w a m w m a I o o w F a o o io m io io rn o 0 o N o m £ z z �n M io ri o r m io 0 0 m m 0 m m 0 io m 0 io m 0 m m 0 m 0 0 io m 0 r a io 0 r 0 r 0 r ri 0 r m 0 r rn 0 N F z m m m m ri m m �n N m N o U N N ✓1 .y .-� .y .y ti ti ry .y � ti rY N r-� N O U a o 0 o O o O o O O O O O O O O O O O U U U U Z U U Z U Z U Z N .Z+ .Z. .z. .Z. U Z tit U h VI v] N u1 N Vl V] w U' o w a 3 w w w w w a z w w 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 W H I Q z O a w z W z w z w z w z w z w z w z Z a o F o .] ❑ Y £ x 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 S 0 ' 0 0 0 Q F Q F Q F Q F Q F a F Z D U) Fw Z w (n vJ F VI vl N V] v] V1 Ui v1 r/) vl v) vl vl Vl vl O i N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 027 O .F. U a Y a £ o o > 0 > 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 'O 0 O o a F a F a F a F a F a F z o 16 r F Z 0 r N N _ O w F N N N N N N N N N N N N U a N f\ N N N N N N N N N N N N N S a m F F F F F F F F F F F F F F E M O N m r m O 01 N W O O F O N N ✓1 N N f'1 O N O O O Z F w Z N U ✓1 r N ti N .-� f'1 m � N O O N W O O O N O N N O O N O M �O t0 W P w N M O r N t'1 O Q P O d ❑ N O a N W m m a U W a O > w a x a r a m a a a a a a a 4 U a a a a Q Q rn Q a Q Z F a E E Z F F E F F E E 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 o < a o z z o 0 E N O F O W O Z p E a W a a to a N vl N a H a w a w a a N w O O 0 w w w w w w w w o V o a O w O w w o w < ry M - u z w z w z a z a z a a a a a a z a z o z z a z a .z. w > > a> a ❑ z � m o 0 0 0 0❑ o z u ❑ o w w U W O 0 O O� Ol N ❑ a M Y1 N 1p 1p O W O Ol �(1 r r ifl M o m N r r-I ❑ ti' p m o o U U V U U U o ❑ .y P E O� O O o O O O m O ti Y Q Z w a m W m a I O O w F £ Z M o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o F Z N f'1 N M M ry N N N U U .+ a O O o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O a Y n U U O Z Z U' Z vl vl N N VI fn `.L Z o O W Z w W U U U U V U Q ✓� W Z ❑ m 0 0 0 CJ 0 w 3 m a U Q Q ❑❑❑❑❑❑ v� W W U 0 0 0 0 0 0 U W a a K a m m m m a E V m F E W W tW/1 j Q w w W W w w a W O O z ❑ a u a� z z w w w w w �. m � w I-i o vl vl a a a z a m o 0 0 0 0 0 o a a o z a a a z ❑ a z a �? ❑ 'J 3 W O �/1 In Vl Ul b y W 2 O a F w W O O O O 0 r O ti O O O O O O N ifl N fi o f z 4 z a z o o z O z z z z z U rr Q U m m 3 w W F O F N O N O w D r� D S O O 7 a > �-+ > O > O > Q 3 17 0 r a s F o z m m m � m N O W Q Y U E+ m m N E m N F m N F io N F ri m O E Z W F Z 0 O O 0 N T O ✓t r N N Ol 0 o m m n tt � N m E O E z o a E o F Z W E a a F o w ¢ F o a E 0 F Z W a W W u 0 Z F U o Z a z a o Z Q W W o Z w a w N a a o Z t� W W ❑ 3 ❑ O U 7 m � m ❑ U w O ❑ w O m N m O t0 'i ml O a z a a m Z O O O m vt O E w m a o o w F z o m rn W m £ z Z o o m O io o m m o m m m O r M m m O r F Z O U U N m N m c ri Q a O o 0 0 F z Z O U a z Z U Z o o W W Z Z O F m w H rn w W N a rZi ry p � O❑ H H l/1 a F W ❑ w 3 X N N Z O or a U > O N o 3 O 0 X O 00 N O N 029 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP5005 CHECK REGISTER CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMBER DATE NO. NAME ***NO CHECKS WERE USED FOR PRINT ALIGNMENT.*** 44320 02/23/O1 BOY075 BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF 44321 02/23/O1 COA080 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER 44322 02/23/O1 IMPO10 IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DIST 44323 02/23/01 LAQ074 LA QUINTA PALMS REALTY 44324 02/23/01 VER200 VERIZON CHECK TOTAL 1:27PM 02/23/01 PAGE 1 PAYMENT AMOUNT 1300.00 4746.25 13268.27 10000.00 156.21 29,470.73 030 IR 19 N M e N t0 r m O� O N l`l F F F F F F F F F F E F F F F F E H F E F F E F N O C r O ✓1 O m O N l0 �O a (1 M r N lO CO O r M .1 M 1p O O z O a a F O F U U U U U U U U U U U U a a a a a a a a a a a a a z W 4] W W fi W W W W W W W W F F F F E E F F E F F H> a a a 4 Q a a a Q Q Q a 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 O O O M O O M P e M M J J m m 1p O m I N �m I O O r� 0 0 0 0 0 0 a r o 0 0 0 o ry M in N o s M .n M o c o 0 E F N N O r r C e P e m M P P P P O O ry N 'J ✓1 O O 41 r N ✓1 M «1 S N i11 Ifl N l(1 N M ✓1 ✓1 r O1 O� ifl O O O N N N t0 l0 M /`l v c P P P P e v v v v v �O lU \O M h T t0 U U a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c o 0 a a a a a a a a a a a a W W W w w W W W W W W W a a a a a a a a a a a a 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 W W W W W U W W W W w W a s a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a > > > > > > > > > > > > a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a W w w W W m W W W W W W s S S x x x x x x m s U U U U U U U u U U U V a a a a a a a a a a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U U U U U U U U U U U U mm m O o 0 0 0 0 m m m mmmmma 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a a a a a a a a a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U U U U U U U U U U U U a -03.1 a W a > ')a Z r m Q N N x O F Z 0 ri N S o W F s E £ Q m H H a w N z E E a w a z 0 m O ❑ W ❑ O 03.". 11 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP3003 CHECK REGISTER 10:32AM 02/22/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE 1 CHECK CHECK VENDOR PAYMENT NUMBER DATE NO. NAME AMOUNT ***NO CHECKS WERE USED FOR PRINT ALIGNMENT.*** 44319 02/22/01 CIR006 CIRCUIT CITY 449.99 CHECK TOTAL 449.99 zz T Z - 6 a E z z 0 N N x U lJ O 4] E £ £ a m F a a 0 fV ti Z F L1 Z £ J Y O v v Q £ w Q m m m a a e F 0 E E � z m m a £ U a a Z a F w O � O m a F U F w a a O 0 w O > a F o Z U ❑ Z N w m > I O O m U O m U m Q O w a O [il > I > m m Z Z £ m � Z O � F F l Q Z [L Q m m m a I O O � F a �n m M m .1 U Z n ~ E Z O J O O o U U a O w a I F a m F U a z a � r a � a a u a a o a a o rn Z U J O U F a U H Q U U 034 23 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP5005 CHECK REGISTER 10:04AM 02/22/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE 1 CHECK CHECK VENDOR PAYMENT NUMBER DATE NO. NAME AMOUNT ***NO CHECKS WERE USED FOR PRINT ALIGNMENT.*** 44315 02/22/01 BEA010 BEACHSIDE CAFE 186.83 44316 02/22/01 CIR006 CIRCUIT CITY 450.00 44317 02/22/01 CPR050 CPRS AGING SECTION 138.00 44318 02/22/01 VER200 VERIZON 428.10 CHECK TOTAL 1,202.93 031 24 T O I I N V I l r m W W W w W W W w E F E E E E E F O O O� 01 Ol 01 O� lO O m !1 N N m r v o M o 0 0 m o 0 � o ❑ m m a N Q a m v ❑ ., v F w F O z a H z o o W F w rn z m W z a x a o a a r Q U Q F Q Q Q H H a H z F F w W O o O W O O w F w F E F \ > > > > > a O w O F O m m m m v O .ai ❑ F ❑ a ❑ o U Z O Z Z W w w w Z Z W a W S w Z Z Z Z z W 7> £> m> 0 0 0 0 0> O O I S S 2 S 'w u u H a w a w ❑ a m N N io w r� m o �o �n �o �n io ✓t io �n r O H o c o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (n n n n ri c� o ri rn r� n O N t�1 f+l f+l t+l nl O O O J1 ifl ✓1 � O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z O F W w U 4] Q J+ Ui U ti U W U ZY m H m Q O O O O O V N U U v1 H H ti rNi Q a a a a a a a w a W w w w w o n o 0 0 0 0 O O O ry N N N N Q a a a a a a a w a w w w W W W U U > > > > > `35 25 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP5005 CHECK REGISTER CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMBER DATE NO. NAME 11:44AM 02/20/01 PAGE 1 PAYMENT AMOUNT ***NO CHECKS WERE USED FOR PRINT ALIGNMENT.*** 44310 02/20/01 COM005 COMMUNITY PRAYER BREAKFAS 36.00 44311 02/20/01 DES005 DESERT BEAUTIFUL 15.00 44312 02/20/01 FEDO10 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 214.74 44313 02/20/01 GEN100 THOMAS P GENOVESE 112.00 44314 02/20/O1 WEL025 WELLS FARGO BANKCARD 1034.30 CHECK TOTAL 1,412.04 31 M Q a o E Z 0 0 N .r _ N U tD U U U U l9 U (9 O w E £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Q m F F F E F F E F a m O o 0 F O O O ✓1 �O N O a £ 0 0 0 0 0 o r o w M f+ ri Q x N Z w O F O m .. O z a > o z W o F m ❑ z z a a E z W w z w w w o £ W a o a a s W a x a s r m a z Q a £ a F a s a Z H w F a E E E W F F m O n O S O £ O S O o: w Z 0 w F E E O F w w E U E F F H Z w z w a m a 0 a S a ❑ a > F a oa Q o 0 o u o a o £ W w o a z u r-i W Q W E w a W £ W U F W w w> w> W> n' > a z W x> p a W > W o o w m m E o a a N a> ❑ w w a .o io io m io a O❑ m r o 0 0 0 > > m o m m m m w z z £ Q Z a Q m W m K � O O W E a o 0 0 0 o m o W o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ r r �n r r r m �n Z M f`l M f+l M O lO l0 t0 �p �O l0 l0 W F Z M N N O O O ul O O O O O U a o o O o 0 o O O W Q W x a w a ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ M m o a a a a o U w U U U U o a a x x x x N W O W W Z Z Z Z a J+ H Vl > a ❑ a W o 0 0 0 a z E m a a ❑ Z F Q Vl w a ❑ a a a ❑ o w w x w w w W H � U ❑ w E 3 3 3 3 w z O O O O O N N N N O N O O O O O O O Q U U ❑ L. l9 3 3 3 3 033 27 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP5005 CHECK REGISTER 4:28PM 02/14/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE 1 CHECK CHECK VENDOR PAYMENT NUMBER DATE NO. NAME AMOUNT ***NO CHECKS WERE USED FOR PRINT ALIGNMENT.*** 44303 02/14/01 BYRO10 RIV CO SHERIFF 256.80 44304 02/14/01 INT005 INTERNAL REVENUE SVC-ACS 50.00 44305 02/14/01 LAQ050 LA QUINTA CITY EMPLOYEES 260.00 44306 02/14/01 RIV040 RIVERSIDE CNTY DEPT CHILD 426.50 44307 02/14/01 SUP100 SUPPORT PAYMENT CLEARING- 150.00 44308 02/14/01 UNI005 UNITED WAY OF THE DESERT 144.00 44309 02/14/01 WAL030 CAROLYN WALKER 938.86 CHECK TOTAL 2,226.16 033 28 a O F z 0 S U• a m Ol O1 m T � O Z F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a £ M d a m O O ul O O O S VJ O J O O �O d O O m U ✓1 i(1 O �D N O � � r+� T S w S T V] !n Vl (n O I w W W O O > z O F a U a a I y N - o d s s O F O ❑ z a a I 4 N o a s s p F O ❑ Z > U a I N o a W N a O F O ❑ z > a a 1 N N 0 a a s Q 0 F O ❑ z > a a 1 u h o a a s s 0 E 0 ❑ Z > z I 4 o a d a a O F ❑ z > N a O Y F ❑ m z vai > o V w ti ❑ a O w > > m Z Z £ F ❑ r, O ❑ ti Z < a Z d Q S W m a I O O W F a w m£ o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o rn Z N N N N ry ry H N N N N N N ry Z 7 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q O O O O O O O ❑ I N U Vl W �] F U• z F Q w x faj O O d m Q Y a F H o a s W o W W m O u > U v] w Z > .] Z a F O a £ w Y I+ F Izi o a W w ❑ Y Z ❑ rn a > a a U � o a W S Q 3 O w H O 3 Z a O U 2 U O Y Z 0 o ri U 29 A/P - AP6002 CHECKS TO BE VOIDED 1:'3PM 02/14/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE I CHECK BK INVOICE VENDOR VENDOR INVOICE NUMBER ID DATE AMT. PAID NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 43924 DEF 01/30/01 2753.46 DOU050 DOUBLETREE HOTEL LODGING/LCCPI TOTAL VOIDED 2,753.46 641. 30 A/P - AP6002 CHECKS TO BE VOIDED CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF CHECK BK INVOICE VENDOR VENDOR INVOICE NUMBER ID DATE AMT. PAID NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 43800 DEF O1/08/01 123.20 B0GO10 G BOGAN & ASSOC INC INSTRUCTOR TOTAL VOIDED 123.20 2:47PM 02/26/01 PAGE 1 31 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: March 6, 2001 ITEM TITLE: Adoption of a Resolution Directing the City Engineer to Prepare the Preliminary Engineer's Report for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 for Fiscal Year 2001/2002 AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: C- ki IIF1111W *Xy W Z F PUBLIC HEARING: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council directing the City Engineer to prepare the Preliminary Engineer's Report for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 for Fiscal Year 2001 /2002. Adoption of this Resolution is the first step of the process for establishing the 2001 /2002 Landscape and Lighting Assessment. As a result of Proposition 218, property may only be assessed for exempt projects which include traffic signals, street lights, and landscaping/drainage facilities within the public Right -of -Way. Parks and landscaping around the City buildings outside of the street right-of-way are not permitted. Last Fiscal Year, staff identified $1,525,360 in total estimated costs for exempt and nonexempt projects. Of this amount, $1,137,308 was eligible for inclusion in Landscape and Lighting District 89-1 as funding for exempt projects. An amount of $388,052 was not eligible. Since the passage of Proposition 218, the City of La Quinta has maintained the Landscape and Lighting District 89-1 Assessment at $35.60 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU). Last fiscal year, the City collected $773,675 in Landscape and Lighting Assessments. The remaining $363,633 for exempt projects, and $388,052 for nonexempt projects, (total of $751,685) was funded by the General Fund. By completing the Engineer's Report for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 utilizing the City Engineer and in-house staff, the City will realize an approximate $25,000 savings as opposed to completing the reports by consultant contract. None. 043 T TW DEFT\COUNCIL\2001\010306b wpd Ly i• G w•"T AWTV11 Provisions of the Lighting and Landscape Act of 1972 require the preparation of an annual Engineer's Report. The Engineer's Report provides the City Council with an annual review of current and projected (Fiscal Year 2001/2002) costs for construction, operation, maintenance and servicing of facilities in the City's Landscape and Lighting Assessment District. Adoption of this Resolution only initiates the process of preparing the Engineer's Report for Fiscal Year 2001/2002. The final Engineer's Report will establish the assessment levels within the District for the upcoming year. During the February 20, 2001 City Council Meeting, the City Council directed staff to investigate the concept of forming a different landscape maintenance district to fund the maintenance and operations of parks and facilities landscaping and to fund the shortfall that presently exists in the Landscape and Lighting Assessment District. This analysis will be brought forward to the City Council as a separate item in the future. Pursuant to this Resolution, the tentative schedule to complete these services is as follows: Action Date Adopt Initial Resolution March 6, 2001 Complete Preliminary Parcel Map Reconciliation April 13, 2001 Complete Draft Preliminary Engineer's Report April 27, 2001 Council Approval of Preliminary Engineer's Report May 15, 2001 Public Meeting/Hearing Notice May 29, 2001 Public Meeting/Hearing June 19, 2001 Adopt Final Resolution June 19, 2001 The recommended actions are required to implement assessments for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 for Fiscal Year 2001/2002. Subsequent to Proposition 218, Landscape and Lighting costs in La Quinta have been partially funded by assessments, with the remaining costs funded by the City's General Fund. A decision not to initiate assessment proceedings would require the City to either reduce maintenance activities or identify alternative funding sources. In Fiscal Year 2000-2001, the Landscape and Lighting District provided $773,675 toward Landscape and Lighting costs, while the General Fund contributed approximately $751,685 ($363,633 for exempt projects, and $388,052 for nonexempt projects). T:\PW D EPT\CO U NC I L\2001 \010306b. wpd The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1 . Adopt a Resolution of the City Council directing the City Engineer to prepare the Preliminary Engineer's Report for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 for Fiscal Year 2001 /2002; or 2. Do not adopt a Resolution of the City Council directing the City Engineer to prepare the Preliminary Engineer's Report for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 for Fiscal Year 2001 /2002; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, Chris A. Vogt Public Works Director/City Engineer Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese City Manager 045 T.\PWDEPT\COUNCIL\2001\010208a.wp4 RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 89-1 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001/2002 WHEREAS, in accordance with Article 4 of Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code, commencing with Section 22565, an annual report must be prepared for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2001 and ending June 30, 2002 in connection with La Quinta Landscape and Lighting Assessment District No. 89-1 . NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Chris A. Vogt, City Engineer for Assessment District 89-1, is hereby directed to prepare the Preliminary Engineer's Report in accordance with the provisions of the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 6`h Day of March 2001, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: JOHN J. PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California i�4J T \PWDEPT\COUNCIL\2001\010306b.wPd TwY' °% 4Qxlxfw AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: March 6, 2001 CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: Adopt a Resolution Accepting Guest Badges PUBLIC HEARING: to the Nabisco Championship Golf Tournament RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving the acceptance of 10 guest badges valued at $75 each for the Nabisco Championship Golf Tournament to be held March 20-25, 2001 in Rancho Mirage, California, that were donated to the La Quinta Senior Center. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Nabisco Championship guest badges were made available to the La Quinta Senior Center as a thank you for hosting the Nabisco Championship "Senior Putting Competition" at the Senior Center (Attachment 1). In the past, the badges have been distributed to those volunteers that had assisted with the putting contest held at the La Quinta Senior Center, in association with the Nabisco Championship. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving the acceptance of 10 guest badges valued at $75 each for the Nabisco Championship Golf Tournament to be held March 20-25, 2001 in Rancho Mirage, California, that were donated to the La Quinta Senior Center; or 047 2. Do not adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving the acceptance of 10 guest badges valued at $75 each for the Nabisco Championship Golf Tournament; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respedtfully s4bmitted, Dodie Horvitz, Community Services Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1. Letter from Tamra Borson, Nabisco Championship WVZ S:\Community Services\CCReports\CC.098.Nabisco Golf Passes.wpd T RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ACCEPTING A GIFT WHEREAS, on February 23, 2001, Nabisco Championship generously donated to the La Quinta Senior Center, a gift of 10 guest badges valued at $75 each for the 2001 Nabisco Championship Golf Tournament to be held March 20-25, 2001 at Ranch Mirage, California; and WHEREAS, the gifts were donated to the City of La Quinta Senior Center and were not given to or limited to the use of any particular employee or official; and, WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of La Quinta to accept the donation and to direct the City Manager to control distribution of the tournament guest badges. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of La Quinta does hereby RESOLVE as follows: 1. The City of La Quinta hereby accepts the donation of complimentary guest badges for the 2001 Nabisco Championship Golf Tournament. 2. The City Manager is hereby directed to control distribution of said tournament guest badges on a first -come, first -serve basis. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 6th day of March, 2001 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: JOHN J. PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California @43 010 j S:\Community Services\CCReports\CC.098.Nabisco Golf Passes.wpd ATTEST: JUNE GREEK, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California cp904 S:\Community Services\CCReports\CC.098.Nabisco Golf Passes.wpd 760-564-5004 LO SENIOR CENTER PAGE 01 ATTACHMENT 1 February 23, 2001 Marilyn Smith La Quints Senior Center 78-450 Avenida La Fonda La Quinta, CA 92254 Dear Marilyn On behalf of the Nabisco Championship, I would like to thank you for allowing us to come to your facility. The Nabisco Championship "Senior Putting Competition" is a long-standing tradition that we look forward to each year. It is our chance to visit with old friends and show our appreciation to the seniors of the Coachella valley. Your support of this event is greatly appreciated by all of us. Without the support of our communities' seniors the Nabisco Championship would not be the success it is today. In appreciation, please accept these TOumament Guest badges. Each badge is good for the entire week or the tournament March 20 - 25, and includes clubhouse privileges. We hope you can share these with those who do the most for you. Enjoy the roumament and we look forward to seeing you again next year Sincerely, Tamra Borson Marketing, Advertising, & promotions IlvoRaepuotClub Oriw RenchaMirage, CA92270 ;;e: "o-'Za.a545 a Far.-760.3?1.0201 a www.nsolacoeham0lonship.gum 051 04 T4'y,, 4 ZA Q" AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: March 6, 2001 CONSENT CALENDAR: ITEM TITLE: STUDY SESSION: _ Approval of the Mitigation Monitoring Report for the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental PUBLIC HEARING: Impact for Environmental Assessment 2000-406, for a six -story, 145 room hotel under Specific Plan 2000-050, and Village Use Permit 2000-005, and Tentative Parcel Map 29909. Applicant: Santa Rosa Plaza. LLC RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Mitigation Monitoring Report for the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Assessment 2000-406 under Specific Plan 2000-050 Santa Rosa Plaza, Village Use Permit 2000-005 and Tentative Parcel Map 29909. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None CITY CHARTER IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: As a follow-up to the recent City Council approval of Santa Rosa Plaza Specific Plan 2000-050 Mitigated Negative Declaration, staff has provided the Mitigation Monitoring report as Attachment 1. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1 . Approve the Mitigation Monitoring Report for the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Assessment 2000-406 under Specific Plan 2000-050 Santa Rosa Plaza, Village Use Permit 2000-005 and Tentative Parcel Map 29909;or U5 L G:\WPDOCS\CCCdlsantarosamitigationmonitoring.wpd, gt47 - pgl ii 2. Do not approve the Mitigation Monitoring Report for the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Assessment 2000-406 under Specific Plan 2000- 050 Santa Rosa Plaza, Village Use Permit 2000-005 and Tentative Parcel Map 29909; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, Jerry Herman V Community Development Attachments: 1. Mitigation Monitoring Report Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager G53 02 G:\WPDOCS\CCCdlsantarosamitigationmonitoring.wpd, gt47 - pg2 i7 ATTACHMENTS 03 654 T olp 16 O zz z x w AT TACHMENT 1 w F d C } \� \U \ ° )\( z«; S;e i � \ j (/ / )\ 2£ § \- \ ®) \ § ) \ \ u j jJ / \� \�j 5 / \\ ( ae ƒ/\ E � ® \\ \\\ )\ \ k\ k) + _§ /) \ƒ § \a [32 QS j \� u \§ \ M. \ /uJ6 y � § /\ * kƒ 4 .2\ ( a { \/ \ \ \ \ E to \ ) \ ) / \ \ \ §§ ;u U \ \ § u / i § ` \\ j( [o \ z . \� ) Cl. § / of 23 ) \� t 2) &® » ) \ } \ \ \ � / ƒ 057 AG w F Q A U cF1 zo ¢w u o�. O U U d CC w F a U U a a T � O z .. F id - O O a d a w w� �O zF z z � O v a m Lam' U z o F � O Q � U a ^ � DWI h 0. W F Q U � G d a � w O 5 U U Q m w a a U o U s a a T U 0. 7 0 O O � U GO O O t a wz �O � F zz 'on 'on w a w w T U U � U C bA o a U F C4 ❑ � °' C 059 0 1 T4ht 4 4Qul«rw AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: November 21, 2000 CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: Consideration of Funding Request from the PUBLIC HEARING: _ Prevent Child Abuse Coachella Valley Organization RECOMMENDATION: As deemed appropriate by the City Council. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The Special Projects Contingency Account #101-251-663-000 has an uncommitted balance of $37,460 as of this report, as provided in Attachment 1 . CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: \ None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: The Prevent Child Abuse Coachella Valley (PCACV) organization has requested that the City of La Quinta participate in the blue ribbon campaign held in April which is designated Child Abuse Prevention Month, as provided in Attachment 2. The City of La Quinta has participated in this program in the past by issuing a Proclamation stating that April is Child Abuse Prevention Month. This year, the PCACV is requesting the City Council issue a Proclamation in April, as in the past. In addition, the PCACV is requesting financial assistance to offset the cost of the blue ribbon campaign. The amounts requested range from $100 to $1,000 or another amount to be determined. The City of La Quinta has not provided funds to this organization in the past. This funding request is being presented for consideration outside of the normally scheduled Community Services Grant Application process due to the timing of the month -long event in April. The next Community Services Grant Application consideration date is May 1, 2001. G 5 1 FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1 . Authorize the funding request from the Prevent Child Abuse Coachella Valley from the Special Projects Contingency Account in an amount to be determined; or 2. Direct staff to resubmit the funding request at the May 1, 2001 City Council meeting to be considered as a Community Service Grant request; or 3. Do not authorize the funding request from the Prevent Child Abuse Coachella Valley; or 4. Provide staff with alternative direction. su Dodie WUV'itz, Community Services Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1 . 2000-01 Special Projects Contingency Account Balance 2. Information Provided by the Prevent Child Abuse Coachella Valley 060 0 0 �. S:\Community Services\CCReports\CC.097.Chi1d Abuse Council.wpd I Community Services Grants Fiscal Year 2000-01 Account# 101-251-663-000 Beginning Balance August 15 Meals on Wheels Program $4,000 Transportation and Assistance ATTACHMENT 1 $67,000 August 15 La Quinta Arts Association $4,000 Insurance Fees August 15 Soroptimist Club $4,070 Facility Rental Fees -Senior Center August 15 Triangular Adoption Program $3,640 Luncheon, Trip to 29 Palms, Marine of Quarter August 15 "Relay for Life" $2,500 Silver Sponsor -Movie Tent August 15 CVRPD Extended Pool Hours $371.81 $3,000 from Account #101-251-663-539 Balance $48,418 September 19 "Relay for Life" $100 Team Registration $48,318 November 7 LQ High Air Force ROTC $2,499 Uniforms and Mayor's Scholarship November 7 LQ High Band Boosters $2,499 Santa Barbara Invitational & Equipment Repair November 7 Living Desert $1,000 Business Shareholder Sponsorship November 7 Tuskegee Airmen Mural Project $1,000 Mural Project November 7 Community Blood Bank, Inc. $1,000 Bloodmobile Sponsorship $40,320 November 21 Coachella Valley Arts Alliance $ 60 Non-profit status filing $40,260 0 1. 004 February 6, 2001 CARE Program $2,000 Seminar Speakers February 6, 2001 Veterans of Foreign Wars $800 Rental Fees -Senior Center $37,460 C-05 ATTACHMENT 2 d :.v iClt Prevent Child Abuse Coachella Valley Post Office Box 311 Rancho Mirage, California 92270 (760) 674-9921 February 1, 2001 Mayor John Pena City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 Dear Mayor Pena: April is Child Abuse Prevention Month. This year, as in past years, the Prevent Child Abuse - Coachella Valley Council is preparing a Blue Ribbon Campaign, to educate our community about child abuse and neglect prevention. We will be participating in many Community gatherings across the valley. I want to thank you for the help and support you gave in 2000. We distributed thousands of blue ribbons and educational information for parents. This year, we hope to distribute even more. I am asking the City of La Quinta to issue a proclamation in support of preventing child abuse. I have attached a sample for your consideration. There are many things one can do to help prevent child abuse and issuing a proclamation is just one of them. What we do will make a better future for everyone. I am asking for your help and support for the Blue Ribbon Campaign. We are asking everyone to wear a Blue Ribbon throughout the month of April, to put blue ribbons on your cars (and to encourage others to do the same) and to post posters about the campaign. To make this possible, we also need your financial help. We would be grateful for a contribution to help defray the costs of for posters, ribbons, pins, advertising and training. Our 501(c)3 tax- exempt identification number is 95-2549152. Please call me at 674-9921 if you have any questions. Thank you. FOR THE CHILDREN Sincerely D9 Teitelba , Co Chair Prevent Child Abuse - Coachella Valley Council C. 0 6 DONATION: (please circle your donation) $100 $250 $500 $750 $1, 000 Other $ AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: o� COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: March 6, 2001 CONSENT CALENDAR: ITEM TITLE: STUDY SESSION: Consideration of an Ordinance Amending Chapter PUBLIC HEARING: _ 11.88, Section 11 .88.040 (Terms of Permits), of the La Quinta Charter and Municipal Code Relative to Special Sales Events (Garage Sales) RECOMMENDATION: As deemed appropriate by the City Council. If the City Council decides to change the number of garage sale permits allowed in a twelve month period then the following is recommended: Introduce an Ordinance amending Chapter 11.88, Section 11.88.040 (Terms of Permits), of the La Quinta Charter and Municipal Code relative to Special Sales Events: A. Move to take up Ordinance No. by title and number only and waive further reading. B. Move to introduce Ordinance No. on first reading. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: At the City Council meeting of February 20, 2001, staff was requested to bring back the Ordinance regulating garage sale permits for City Council consideration. At issue is the number of sales permitted in a twelve month period. Currently the regulations allow three. Staff issues an approximate average of 30-40 garage sale permits a week. There is no charge for the permit. The applicant is given three signs with each permit and is asked to remove them at the completion of the sale. 064 Mm The following table represents a summary of garage sale restrictions in other Valley cities: City Quantity per Year Cost Additional Information Desert Hot Springs 4 $10 Signs not provided Palm Springs 2 $15 Signs not provided Palm Desert 2 $10 Two signs provided Cathedral City 4 $10 Two signs provided Rancho Mirage N/A N/A Not regulated Indian Wells N/A N/A Not allowed Indio 4 $10 Two signs provided Coachella 8 $ 5 Signs not provided FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: Introduce an Ordinance amending Chapter 11 .88, Section 11 .88.040 (Terms of Permits), of the La Quinta Charter and Municipal Code relative to Special Sales Events; or 2. Do not Introduce an Ordinance amending Chapter 11 .88, Section 11.88.040 (Terms of Permits), of the La Quinta Charter and Municipal Code relative to Special Sales Events; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, Tom Hartung, Director of/Building & Safety Approve for submiss n �o Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachment: 1. Copy of Chapter 11.88 of the La Quinta ChartOW Municipal Code tj T ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA AMENDING CHAPTER 11.88, SECTION 11.88.040 OF THE LA QUINTA CHARTER AND MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF SPECIAL SALES EVENTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. That Chapter 11 .88, Section 11 .88.040 of the La Quinta Charter and Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 11.88.040 Terms of Permits No sale may be held for any period longer than seventy-two consecutive hours. Sales may not be conducted earlier than seven a.m. nor later than seven p.m. No more than special sales events may be held at any residence in any twelve month period. SECTION II. EFFECTIVE DATE: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty days after its adoption. OR& SECTION III. POSTING: The City Clerk shall within fifteen (15) days after passage of this Ordinance, cause it to be posted in at least three (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 into the Book of Ordinances of the City of La Quinta. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN John J. Pena, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM M. Katherine Jenson, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 091 "4 ATTACHMENT 1 Chapter 11.88 REGULATION OF SPECIAL SALE EVENTS Sections: 11.88.010 Special sale event —Definition. 11.88.020 Permit required. 11.88.030 Advertising by signs. 11.88.040 Terms of permit. 11.88.010 Special sale event —Definition. "Special sale events" shall include garage sales, yard sales, patio sales and other similar event sales in residential districts for the purpose of offering for sale household or personal goods of the occupant of the premises where such sale is permitted and is not intended for commercial sale of goods purchased or acquired elsewhere for such special sales events. (Ord. 136 § 1 (part), 1989) 11,88.020 Permit required. No person shall conduct a special sales event within a residential district without having procured a permit from the city to do so. (Ord. 136 § 1 (part), 1989) 11.88.030 Advertising by signs. Persons granted a permit to conduct a special sale event shall comply with the provisions of this code and zoning ordinance, regulating and controlling the use of signs, and failure to comply shall result in the permit being revoked and cause to deny future requests for a permit. (Ord. 136 § 1 (part), 1989) 11.88.040 Terms of permit. No sale may be held for any period longer than seventy-two consecutive hours. Sales may not be conducted earlier than seven a.m. nor later than seven p.m. No more than three special sales events may be held at any residence in any twelve month period. (Ord. 136 § 1 (part), 1989) 435 REPORT/INFORMATIONAL ITEM: /gyp INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD Meeting January 10, 2001 CALL TO ORDER Regular meeting of the La Quinta Investment Advisory Board was called to order at the hour of 5:30 P.M. by Chairman Osborne followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENT: Board Members Irwin, Mahfoud, Moulin, Olander, and Chairman Osborne ABSENT: Board Members Filice and Lewis OTHERS PRESENT: John Falconer, Finance Director and Secretary and Mr. Ken AI -Imam CPA Partner Conrad & Associates II PUBLIC COMMENT - None III CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA - Confirmed with the Addition of Several Interest Rate Graphs prepared by Board Member Irwin and by moving Correspondence and Written Material Item A as the Board's first item for consideration, unanimously approved IV CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of Minutes of Meeting on December 13, 2000 for the Investment Advisory Board. MOTION - It was moved by Board Members Moulin/Osborne to approve the Minutes of December 13, 2000. Motion carried unanimously, with Board members Irwin/Olander abstaining. 963 1 Investment Advisory Board Minutes V BUSINESS SESSION January 10, 2001 A. Transmittal of Treasury Report for November 2001 Mr. Falconer advised that on Page 3 the overall annual earnings are a little higher than the 6-month treasury bill. This is the first time in several months the City has met this benchmark based upon the changing interest rate environment. Board Member Moulin mentioned that the Cash line on Page 1 of the Treasurer's Report was off, however, in total the amounts were correct. Mr. Falconer advised that the earnings rate listed on page 2 exceeded the six month bench mark and was higher than the 5% budgeted. Board Member Irwin commented that the portfolio was at the 180 day benchmark and asked if staff tried to keep the portfolio at this level. Mr. Falconer responded that the average maturity for the City is based upon the business cycle of the City. In response to Chairman Osborne about the use of Commercial Paper, Mr. Falconer responded that staff will roll over the $2 million in Commercial Paper and based upon the County Property tax distribution in January will add to our position in Commercial Paper. In response to Board Member Irwin, Mr. Falconer responded that the spread between 30 day Commercial Paper and T-Bills has averaged 60 basis points as outlined in the Other Financial Data Section. In response to Chairman Osborne, Mr. Falconer responded that he expected to shortly invest $5 million in Commercial Paper with a 30-60 day maturity. MOTION - It was moved by Board Members Moulin/Olander to review, receive and file the Treasurers Reports for November 2000. Motion carried unanimously. no Investment Advisory Board January 10, 2001 Minutes VI CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL A. City of La Quinta Fiscal Year 1999/00 Audited Financial Statement Mr. Ken AI -Imam CPA Partner with Conrad & Associates presented the FY 1999/00 City of La Quinta Comprehensive Audited Financial Report (CAFR) to the Board and the results of the audit. The General Fund financial results were presented with the General Fund reserves increasing from $23 to $28 million. This was a result of controlling expenditures which were $1 million less than budgeted and increased revenues. Interest income was $500,000 more than budgeted, property sales and transient taxes were $2 million more than budgeted, building permits were $2.8 million more than budgeted. This surplus was a result of the improved economic climate in California and the nation particularly in the construction area. Mr. AI - Imam cautioned that the nation's economy is slowing down and that this surplus was prudently added to the City reserves. Mr. AI -Imam next addressed the City's cash and investments reported in the CAFR. The accounting standards define three (3) levels of risk in categorizing cash and investment custodial risk. The City of La Quinta is in the lowest (best) category of risk - Category 1. The City has an independent custodian who holds the City investments, separate from the broker/dealers who the City does business with. The independent custodian is only able to take delivery of securities with the City Treasurer's approval. The Audited Financial Statements have been prepared in the format approved by the Accounting Standards Board. In addition , the City has taken steps to enhance their financial statements and have previously received two awards - California State Municipal Finance Officers (CSMFO) award and the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Award and Mr. AI -Imam expects the City to receive these awards for the FY 1999/00 CAFR. The additional steps include the preparation of a transmittal letter. Mr. AI -Imam reported their audit did not report any material internal control weaknesses. The City has an excellent internal control system. Mr. AI -Imam did report that he has communicated to the Finance Director a minor exception Investment Advisory Board Minutes January 10, 2001 in the timely reporting of investments within 30 days after the end of each quarter. For two quarters the reports were submitted a few days late and that staff has taken steps to prepare a report that meets the State requirement. Mr. AI -Imam next addressed the Board concerning a future change in the financial reporting requirements of the City. Beginning in FY 2003 the City will be required to comply with Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Pronouncement 34. The rule substantially changes the way municipal governments report the financial activities. The City has already taken steps on early implementation of GASB 34 by reformatting the FY 1999/00 data into the new format and plan on issuing the FY 2001 /02 CAFR in accordance with GASB 34 two years ahead of the new reporting requirement. GASB 34 will require a new set of summary statements that will show on one page a balance sheet of all the assets and liabilities of the City on the full accrual basis of accounting and an income statement on the full accrual basis of accounting including the depreciation of assets. The new standard also requires the reporting of financial data under the current fund -by -fund modified accrual basis of accounting, with schedules reconciling the full accrual basis of accounting (new requirement) to the modified accrual basis of accounting (current requirement). GASB 34 also requires that the City not only report on its balance sheet its operational assets such as City Hall and vehicles which it currently does, but also must report the City owned and maintained street systems (curbs, gutters, sidewalks, storm drains, streets). This information must be reported on the estimated cost basis and depreciated. In response to Member Moulin, Mr. AI -Imam stated that the City will not have to maintain two separate sets of books and report monthly two separate sets of data based upon the full accrual and modified accrual basis of accounting. The Accounting Standards Board has come out with an opinion not to change the current monthly fund by fund reporting requirements. Spread sheets would be used at the end of the year to convert the City accounting data to the full accrual basis of accounting. Mr. Falconer reported that this spreadsheet conversion has already been done by staff except for the fixed asset valuations and depreciation. Staff will first attempt to use the City Geographic Information System (GIS) system to produce the data and use the auditors in an advisory role. If that attempt fails, staff will obtain a complete asset valuation. 6'� 4 Investment Advisory Board Minutes January 10, 2001 In response to Board Member Irwin, the cost of these roads is based upon the actual or estimated historical costs. GASB 34 places an emphasis on the income statement - the cost of providing government services. The cost of providing these roads to the public is reflected in the depreciation expense. In response to Board Member Osborne, the depreciation method used will be the straight line method of depreciation. The useful life will be based upon the age of the streets and their maintenance program and set by the City. Board Member Osborne asked Mr AI -Imam how will the auditor be able to express an opinion on the financial statements if each City is using a different method to value their streets. Mr. AI -Imam responded that the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) is in the process of issuing a draft audit guide to help auditors in this area. GASB 34 has set forth that estimates may be used to value assets. The AICPA has set forth that the auditor must through inquiry and discussions with management gain an understanding of the methodologies used. The auditors will test these methodologies, which are very subjective, to gain a comfort level as to how this data was compiled. Mr. AI -Imam stated that the most important audit area for his firm is the investment area, which from an audit standpoint is the easiest. GASB 34 now requires infrastructure assets be audited which is probably the most difficult and time consuming, and from a audit prospective the least important. Therefore, the GASB and AICPA have given the auditing profession leeway in the infrastructure area. Board Member Irwin commented that the new financial statements will greatly improve the financial reporting and make it easier for the citizens to understand. Mr. AI -Imam responded that the new document will be larger but will contain summary information that is easier to understand. In response to Board Member Moulin, Mr. AI -Imam stated that the auditors did not have any recommendation in their management letter over the cash and investment area. In response to Board Member Moulin about Footnote 2 on page 21 of the financial statements, Mr. AI -Imam stated that the auditors did not have any 19 a Investment Advisory Board Minutes January 10, 2001 audit adjustments between fair and book value for cash and investments. In response to Board Member Moulin about the increase in the portfolio and whether or not the staff should be increased, Mr. AI -Imam stated that it is always better to have more staff but that has to be balanced against being a good steward of its resources. In response to Board Member Moulin about the need for an Investment Manager due to the size of the portfolio, Mr. AI -Imam stated that it is unusual for a City with the size of La Quinta's portfolio to have an Investment Manager. Mr. Falconer added that the only City in the Coachella Valley with an Investment Manager is Palm Desert which has a portfolio of $300 million. In response to Board Member Olander about how many Cities receive the CSMFO and GFOA award, Mr AI -Imam stated that the percentage in California was 20% which leads the nation in reporting and is quite higher than the national average. In response to Board Member Moulin about his opinion of the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), Mr AI -Imam tells his clients to monitor the LAIF fund for its maturities and its composition but that the firm does not have any particular concerns because of its size and the requirement of State agencies to participate. In response to Board Member Moulin about his opinion of our investment policy, Mr. AI -Imam stated that he was not an investment advisor but that based upon his auditing experience he did not believe it was too restrictive or lacking and that it was in the range it should be. In response to Board Member Osborne previously notifying the IAB about the late submission of the Investment report to the Council within the 30 day time State requirement, Mr. Falconer responded that the City does not receive financial information in time to do the complete Treasurer's Report; however, a summary of investments is prepared to meet the state guideline. Mr. AI -Imam stated that this a problem with all of his clients and believed the State should have used a sixty day requirement. In respond to Board Member Irwin about submitting reconciled statements, Mr. G7 Investment Advisory Board Minutes January 10, 2001 Falconer responded that he believed that these constituted a complete Treasurer's report. The State 30 day requirement necessitated the summary of investments which is not based on reconciled cash but is based upon the best available information. In respond to Board Member Osborne about the $500,000 increase in investment income, Mr. AI -Imam responded that this was based upon conservative budgeting. Mr. Falconer stated that when the budget was prepared, staff used a 5% interest rate with actual rates exceeding 5%. In addition, with the General Fund reserve increase from one time revenue the interest income allocated to the Fund also increased, and from year to year fund balances go up and down in each of the Funds depending on the activity. B. Month End Cash Report and other selected financial Data - December 2000 In response to Board Member Moulin about the favorable budget to actual variance on Page 12 of $1.9 million for other expenditure items, Mr. Falconer stated that staff will investigate the variance and report back at the next meeting its findings. Noted and Filed C. Pooled Money Investment Board Reports - October 2000 Board Member Irwin commented that the Pooled Money investment Account average maturity of 199 days and City average maturity of 180 days were close as were the average yields. Board Member Irwin also stated that the City Investment Policy was more conservative than LAIF. Board Member Olander commented that with the current power problems faced by the State of California and the rippling effect this will have on the banking system and Corporations, that the City investment policies and investment choices are correct. Board Member Moulin, Olander and Irwin commented about have recent power problems and the impact it may have on the banking industry. 7 075 Investment Advisory Board January 10, 2001 Minutes VII BOARD MEMBER ITEMS - None Board Member Irwin commented that the new capital rules and subordinating debt for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are continuing but may not be finalized before the adoption of next years Investment Policy. Board Member Irwin commented on the graphs of weekly numbers tracking (1) the yields of 2 year Treasuries, FNMA, Freddie Mac and FHLB paper, (2) Treasury yield curves and (3) the spread between the ten year Treasury and 13 week T-Bill. Board Member Moulin commented upon the very good stock performance of Fannie Mae, VIII ADJOURNMENT MOTION - It was moved by Board Members Moulin/Olander to adjourn the meeting at 6:32 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. SU by, John M. Fal oner Finance Director DEPARTMENT REPORT: -A _s w TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager ,y1 DATE: March 6, 2001 RE: Department Report — Response(s) to Public Comments The following is the response to public comments made at the February 20, 2001 City Council meeting: 1 . Mr. Fred Wolff, 77-227 Calle Ensenada, addressed the City Council regarding the hotel project submitted by Santa Rosa Plaza. Mr. Wolff urged the City Council to reconsider their action taken on February 6, 2001. He stated that many residents are upset by the height of the hotel and informed the Council that a referendum drive is underway. The City Council and City Attorney responded during the meeting. No additional response was necessary. 077 DEPARTMENT REPORT: 3-A CITY COUNCIL'S UPCOMING EVENTS MARCH 15-18 LA QUINTA ARTS FESTIVAL MARCH 20 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 22 CULTURE IN THE COURTYARD APRIL 3 CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 6 MAINSTREET MARKETPLACE APRIL 17 CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 26 CULTURE IN THE COURTYARD MAY 1 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 15 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 21-23 INrL COUNCIL OF SHOPPING CENTERS SPRING CONVENTION - LAS VEGAS JUNE 5 CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 19 CITY COUNCIL MEETING T March 2001 Monthly Planner SundayMonday.. .. .. .. ..Saturday µv` 1 2 3 12:00 PM 6", February .: April Mayors Lunch t!t ` S MT W T F S.,...i: S M T W T F S i _.. 1 2- 3 lnrroroW5� -1 2 3 4 5-- 6 7 '�` 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ` ..n 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 18 19 20 21 22 23 24� 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 25 26 27 28'� r 29 30 q � 'k tfi1„m '6;!� t 4+Y.,2';R^'.i+ � -.:. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 :00 AM Spec- 2:00 PM City 10:00 AM ALRC 12:00 PM ial City Council Council Energy/Envi- Meeting- Meeting Sniff Disaster Contin- 7:00 PM Cultural gency Planning Arts Commission 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 10:00 AM CVAG 7:00 PM C.V. 9:00 AM RCTC- 3:30 PM Historic Public Safety- Mosquito Pena Preservation VV Perkins Abate. -Perkins 5:30 PM Invest- Commission 12:00 PM CVAG 7:00 PM Plan- ment Advisory St. Patrick's Transp-Perkins ning Commis- Board Da y 6:00 PM League sion Meeting of Calif. Cities- Riv.Div. 7:00 PM Commu- nity Services Commission 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 9:00 AM CVB- 9:00 AM Henderson LAFCO- 2:00 PM City Henderson Council Meeting 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 6:00 PM CVAG- 7:00 PM Plan- 12:00 PM CVAG Exec Com-Pena ning Commis- Human/Com- Sion Meeting Adolph 4:00 PM DRRA Airp-Henderson Printed by Calendar Creator Plus on 3/l/2001 April 2001 Monthly Planner z)unaay moricial,r- ..., 3 ;;eonesaaj, 4 i nlirsuay.. 5 6 ... 7 1 2 2:00 PM City 10:00 AM ALRC Council 6:00 PM - 9:00 Meeting PM Joint City Daylight Savings Council/ Time Begins Planning Com- mission Meeting 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 10:00 AM CVAG 7:00 PM C.V. 9:00 AM RCTC- 12:00 PM Public Safety- Mosquito Pena Energy/Envi- Perkins Abate. -Perkins 5:30 PM Invest- Sniff 12:00 PM CVAG 7:00 PM Plan- ment Advisory 7:00 PM Cultural Transp-Perkins ning Commis- Board Arts Commission 6:00 PM League sion Meeting of Calif. Cities- Riv.Div. 7:00 PM Commu- nity Services Commission 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Easter 9:00 AM CVB- 3:30 PM Historic Henderson Preservation 2:00 PM City Commission Council Meeting 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7:00 PM Plan- 12:00 PM CVAG 9:00 AM ning Commis- Human/Com- LAFCO- sion Meeting Adolph Henderson 4:00 PM DRRA Airp-Henderson 29 30 w 6:00 PM CVAG- �' Exec Com Pena r March May S MT W T F S S MT W_ T F S — 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 -.: •�., 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 s. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 27 28 29 30 31 %te Printed by Calendar Creator Plus on 3/l/2001 r May 2001 Monthly Planner Sunday Monday Tuesday ei-n—esday — —Thu ir��a_i_ Friday Saturday April 2:00 PM City Council 10:00 AM ALRC 12:00 PM Mayors Lunch - S M T W T F S '`. Meeting 0W 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 rQA :1 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 r 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ' f< 29 30 v.' ti.JR i i'10 e-02Y i✓�4 6 7 8 9 10 1 12 7:00 PM C.V. 9:00 AM RCTC- 12:00 PM Mosquito Pena Energy/Envi- Abate.-Perkins 5:30 PM Invest- Sniff 7:00 PM Plan- ment Advisory 7:00 PM Cultural ning Commis- Board Arts Commission sion Meeting 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 10:00 AM CVAG 9:00 AM CVB- 3:30 PM Historic 066 Public Safety- Henderson Preservation Mother's Day Perkins 2:00 PM City Commission 12:00 PM CVAG Council Transp-Perkins Meeting 6:00 PM League of Calif. Cities- Riv.Div. 7:00 PM Commu- nity Services Commission 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 7:00 PM Plan- 12:00 PM CVAG 9:00 AM ning Commis- Human/Com- LAFCO- sion Meeting Adolph Henderson 4:00 PM DRRA Airp-Henderson 27 28 29 30 31i®�� Alorial Y�� Day (City June Hall •.,d S M T W T F S Closed) 1 2 ' 3 4 5 6 7 8 9, 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 * �""- 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 �p 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Printed by Calendar Creator Plus on 3/1 /2001 -----Original Message ----- From: Phil_Keipper@hilton.com rmailto:Phil Keipper(a)hilton.com] Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 4:29 PM To: Harms, Thomas E. Subject: RE: Hampton Inns & Suites We recently opened a 4 story Embassy in Destin/Miramar Beach, FL. We also have fairly new 3 story versions in Oxnard -Mandalay Beach, CA and Napa Valley, CA. In the total system, there are 22 existing Embassy Suites that are either 3 or 4 stories. Phil Keipper VP Franchise Design & Construction HHC Franchise Hotel Group 9336 Civic Center Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90210 (310) 205-8693 Voice (310) 205-3337 Fax phil_keipper@hilton.com -----Original Message ----- From: "Harms, Thomas E." Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 11:59 AM To: Phil Keipper Subject: RE: Hampton Inns & Suites Sounds good. Thanks for the information. Are there any other recent Embassy Suites locations in the three or four story category I should look at? -----Original Message ----- From: Phil_Keipper@hilton.com [mailto:Phil Keipper(o-)hilton.com] Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 11:45 AM To: Harms, Thomas E. Subject: RE: Hampton Inns & Suites The only prototype drawings that we currently have for Embassy Suites are those that you have referenced. Your particular situation with height restrictions is not unusual and it is very common to site adapt a design that meets the requirements of your location. We currently have an Embassy Suites in preliminary design right now for Boulder, CO that is 130 rooms/3 stories. The Architect is Doug Comstock in Colorado Springs who has designed nearly 20 Embassy Suites projects. He might be willing to look at your site plan and evaluate how the hotel could be designed to fit. His phone number is 719/520-9595. 403265/1 661z 7 Phil Keipper VP Franchise Design & Construction HHC Franchise Hotel Group 9336 Civic Center Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90210 (310) 205-8693 Voice (310) 205-3337 Fax phil_keipper@hilton.com -----Original Message ----- From: "Harms, Thomas E." Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 7:52 AM To: Phil Keipper Subject: RE: Hampton Inns & Suites I also have a question about the Embassy Suites. Is there a viable building format other than Prototype Drawings (DWF) Version 5.0 Two Tier — 145 Suites - 6 Story Prototype if local zoning does not allow that height but may allow the room density?? -----Original Message ----- From: Phil_Keipper@hilton.com [mailto:Phil Keipper(a hilton.comj Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 6:21 PM To: Harms, Thomas E. Subject: RE: Hampton Inns & Suites Hi Thomas Sorry I'm a little late in responding; the best place to locate development information for all of our brands is at our web site... Hiltonfranchise.com This site contains prototype drawings and specifications for Hampton Inn as well as Hampton Inn & Suites, Homewood Suites by Hilton, Embassy Suites and Hilton Garden Inn. There is also information regarding Hilton Suites, Hilton, Doubletree, Doubletree Club and Doubletree Guest Suites on the website. If that is not sufficient, I can assemble a package of materials which we will be happy to ship overnight. Please let me know if that is the case. Also, we have an in-house development team that would be happy to assist you with evaluation of your proposed location and identification of the necessary steps to become one of our franchise partners. Please let me know how we may assist you further. Thanks, ' w' 403265/1 2 Phil Keipper VP Franchise Design & Construction HHC Franchise Hotel Group 9336 Civic Center Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90210 (310) 205-8693 Voice (310) 205-3337 Fax phil_keipper@hilton.com -----Original Message ----- From: "Harms, Thomas E." Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 11:38 AM To: Phil Keipper Subject: Hampton Inns & Suites I am an attorney in Minneapolis. I am interested in finding information on design guidelines used in the construction of Hampton Inns over the last few years. My inquiry relates more to the overall design (number of floors, amenities, etc) and foot -print of the building, not detailed architectural information. Even a photo array of current and planned buildings would be helpful. Lest the word attorney bother you, this has nothing to do with anyone planning to sue anyone. it has more to do with assessing a business opportunity for the placement of a hotel. Is there any information source that you can point me to for this data. Thanks for your assistance. Thomas E. Harms i 403265/1 7 Twy,, 4 4a Q" COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: March 6, 2001 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing to Consider an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Decision of January 9, 2001, to Require the Replacement and Repair of Highway 1 1 1 Landscaping and Irrigation Improvements for the Jefferson Plaza Shopping Center pursuant to Condition #48 of Resolution 2001-001 for Site Development Permit 2000-687 (Jack in the Box Restaurant) Located at the Northwest Corner of Highway 111 and Depot Way Appellant: Steve Schneider with Lyons, Warren & Associates, Inc. for Jack in the Box Restaurant RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Planning Commission Recommendation: adopt a Resolution of the City Council upholding Planning Commission Resolution 2001-001, for Site Development Permit 2000-678, Condition of Approval No. 48 requiring "Landscape and irrigation improvements in the Highway 111 parkway and on -site shall be repaired and/or replaced prior to a final inspection" in the construction of the Jack in the Box Restaurant. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The cost to restore the landscaping per the approved landscape plans is estimated to be $30,000. These monies would be expended from the Public Works Landscape and Lighting Contract Services Agreement (Account 101-454-609-000). The estimated annual cost for maintenance of the landscaping is $4,500 and water is $4,700. These monies would be expended from the Public Works Landscape and Lighting Contract Services (Account 101-454-609-000) and Pubic Works Landscape and Lighting Utilities (Account 101-454-631-632) respectively. CITY CHARTER IMPLICATIONS: None. 085 G:\WPDOCS\CCCdlJackBoxAppeal.wpd, gt47 - pgI BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: The Planning Commission at its January 9, 2001 meeting approved the building elevations, landscaping, lighting and sign plans for the Jack in the Box restaurant under the Site Development Permit (Attachment 1). Included in the Conditions of Approval is Condition No. 48 requiring the repair and restoration of the landscaping along Highway 111 prior to final inspection. The appellant is requesting modification of Condition #48 under Planning Commission Resolution 2001-001, which reads "Landscape and irrigation improvements in the Highway 111 parkway and on -site shall be repaired and/or replaced prior to a final inspection." They are requesting it be changed to read "Landscape and irrigation improvements in the Highway 111 parkway frontage of the associated parcel shall be repaired and replaced prior to final inspection" (Attachment 2). Site History The proposed Jack in the Box restaurant will be located within the Jefferson Plaza Specific Plan (SP 96-027). This document contains the development standards and design guidelines for a 218,300 square foot commercial development on 20 acres at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street (Attachments 3 and 4). There are two phases in development of the shopping center, the first phase is Home Depot, built in 1996 and the second phase will consist of several retail and restaurant uses. International House of Pancakes, built in 1999, and the proposed Jack in the Box are within Phase Two. The City Council at its December 3, 1996 meeting, adopted Ordinance 292 approving Development Agreement 96-001 by and between the City of La Quinta, Home Depot, Inc., and Credit Suisse Leasing 92, L.P. This agreement allows the developer/owner to develop the project and public improvements, along the Highway 111, Jefferson Street right of way and the Whitewater Channel, in exchange for assurance from the City that the developer will be permitted to implement the development in accordance with the terms and conditions as set forth in the Agreement. The Developer Lease Agreement (of the Development Agreement) Section 3. Public Property Lease states, "The term of the Public Property Lease shall commence on the date that the City or its designee accepts conveyance of the Dedicated Property and Property Sublease, as described herein, and upon termination of the Public Property Sublease, the Public Property Lease shall likewise terminate for the Highway 111 portion of the Public Property, the Public Property Lease shall terminate upon the City's transfer of the Highway 111 Dedicated Property to the State." The parkway improvements, including the landscaping and irrigation, were conveyed to and accepted by the City. However, the 22-foot wide Highway 111 parkway has not been conveyed to Caltrans. Therefore, the City is responsible for the 22-foot wide parkway G:\WPDOCS\CCCdlJackBoxAppeal.wpd, gt47 - pg2 replacement/restoration and maintenance until conveyance to the State of California at which time Home Depot will then assume responsibility. The City's Public Works Department will begin the conveyance process immediately and anticipates it may take several months for Caltrans acceptance of the parkway. Because of the poor condition of the entire perimeter landscaping including the approximately 8-10 feet behind the parkway (Home Depot's responsibility) between International House of Pancakes and the west boundary, staff is recommending modifying Planning Commission Resolution 2001-001, Condition No. 48 such that the City will assume its pro rata share of not only the repair and/or restoration of the landscaping, but also the maintenance and utility cost for the landscaping located within the Highway 111, 22-foot wide parkway until such time as the parkway is conveyed to Caltrans. Thereafter, Home Depot would assume 100% responsibility for landscape maintenance and utility cost for all perimeter landscaping including the parkway. One additional concern that has been raised is that Home Depot controls the irrigation system for the entire perimeter landscaping. Therefore, to ensure that irrigation is uniformly provided and implemented within the entire Highway 111 perimeter landscaping, staff is recommending a maintenance agreement between the City and Home Depot. The pro rata share will be determined as to the cost of repair/restoration, maintenance and utilities for the landscaping and will be properly apportioned in the maintenance agreement. Staff is recommending that this should occur prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Jack in the Box. As Home Depot is the current owner of the proposed site for the restaurant, this would offer assurance that the repair and restoration of the landscaping will occur in a timely manner. Public Notice: The case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on February 21, 2001. All property owners within 500 feet of the affected area were mailed a copy of the public notice as required. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: Findings necessary to approve this request per Zoning Code Section 9.210.010 can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. The alternatives available to the City Council include: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council denying the appellant's request and upholding Planning Commission Resolution 2001-001, for Site Development Permit 2000-678, Condition of Approval No. 48 requiring "Landscape and irrigation improvements in the Highway 111 parkway and on -site shall be repaired and/or replaced prior to a final inspection" in the construction of the Jack in the Box Restaurant; or 2. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council denying the appellant's request and PiS'N modifying Planning Commission Resolution 2001-001, for Site Development Permit 2000-678, Condition of Approval No. 48, as recommended by staff to 03 G:\WPDOCS\CCCdlJackBoxAppeal.wpd, gt47 - pg3 read, "The City will assume its pro rata share of the cost to repair and/or replace the perimeter landscaping, between International House of Pancakes and the west boundary, along Highway 111. The City's share is the 22-foot wide parkway and Home Depot's is the remaining landscape setback. Additionally, the City will assume its pro rata share of the maintenance and utility cost for the landscaping located within the Highway 1 1 1 parkway until such time as the right of way is conveyed to Caltrans. Thereafter, Home Depot shall assume 100% responsibility for landscape maintenance and utility cost for all perimeter landscaping including the parkway. A maintenance agreement shall be executed between the City's Public Works Department and Home Depot prior to issuance of a building permit for the Jack in the Box restaurant to ensure irrigation of the site and to facilitate implementation of the condition"; or 3. Direct staff to prepare a Resolution removing Condition of Approval No. 48 under Planning Commission Resolution 2001-001, for Site Development Permit 2000-678: or 4. Direct staff to prepare a Resolution approving the appellant's request to modify Condition No. 48 to read: "Landscaping and irrigation improvements in the Highway 1 1 1 parkway frontage of the associated parcel shall be repaired and replaced prior to final inspection."; or 5. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, Jerry Herman Community Development Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1 . Planning Commission Minutes of 1 /9/2001 2. Written Appeal by Steve Schneider for Jack in the Box 3. Jefferson Plaza Site Plan 0913 4. Jack in the Box Site Plan 04 G:\WPDOCS\CCCdlJackBoxAppeal.wpd, gt47 - pg4 :7 ALTERNATIVE 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPELLANT'S REQUEST AND UPHOLDING PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-001, CONDITION OF APPROVAL NO. 48 FOR THE JACK IN THE BOX RESTAURANT LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND DEPOT WAY ON APPROXIMATELY 0.9 ACRES CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-687 APPELLANT: LYONS, WARREN & ASSOC., INC. FOR JACK IN THE BOX WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 6" day of March, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Lyon, Warren and Associates to appeal a requirement by the Planning Commission to repair and replace landscape and irrigation improvements in the Highway 111 parkway prior to a final inspection of the proposed Jack in the Box restaurant at 79- 724 Highway 111 within the Jefferson Plaza Shopping Center (Specific Plan 96-027); more particularly described as follows: Being Lot 1 of Parcel Map No. 28573 within a portion of Section 29, TSS, RSE, San Bernardino Meridian (Assessor's Parcel No.: 649-020-037); Pad #1 of Phase 2 of SP 96-027 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 91h day of January, 2001, hold duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Lyon, Warren and Associates to review development plans for Jack in the Box restaurant in the Regional Commercial (CR) Zone on approximately 0.9 acres at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Depot Way within the Jefferson Plaza Shopping Center (Specific Plan 96-027), and on a 4-0 vote, recommended approval, subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the Architectural and Landscape Review Committee of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 3rd day of January, 2001, recommend approval to the Planning Commission of Site Development Permit 2000-687 by adoption of Minute Motion 2001-01, subject to conditions. resoCC sdp687 Jack/BoxAppel 47Crcg T R-Ra 65 Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687, Appeal Jack in the Box Restaurant March 6.. 2001 WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did make the following Mandatory Findings to justify denial of the appeal of Condition #48 for Site Development Permit 2000-687: 1 . The project is consistent with the General Plan, Specific Plan and Zoning Code. The City's General Plan Land Use Element designates this site as Mixed Regional Commercial with a nonresidential overlay. This designation provides for commercial uses including restaurants as is proposed. Therefore, development of the subject property with commercial uses will be compatible with adjacent properties provided the applicable conditions as recommended by staff are complied with. 2. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (Environmental Assessment 96-325) was certified for Specific Plan 96-027 in 1996. No changed circumstances or conditions and no information provided which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent Negative Declaration. 3. The architectural design of the project, including but not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City. The architectural elements of the building are compatible with the design elements of the buildings in Jefferson Plaza in accordance with the Specific Plan Design Guidelines. 3. The site design of the project, including but not limited to project entries, interior circulation, pedestrian and bicycle access, pedestrian amenities, screening of equipment and trash enclosure, lighting, and other site design elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City. Parking for this site is proposed on the east side of the building with a single drive -through lane on the west side for take-out service needs. The parking lot, complies with the required design standards of the Zoning Code and Specific Plan. The project design, along with the recommended Conditions, assures required design standards are met. The development of the restaurant will comply with applicable development standards. 5. The landscaping for the project has been designed to comply with the design parameters of Specific Plan 96-027. 66 P:ABETTY\resoCC SDP687JackBoxAppeal.wpd a Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687. Appeal Jack in the Box Restaurant March 6, 2001 The proposed plant palette is consistent with Specific Plan 96-027 and the Highway 111 Design Guidelines as conditioned. 6. The sign program is consistent with Chapter 9.160 of the Municipal Code, and proposes common design elements. The south and east facing corporate ID signs are compatible with the architectural elements of the building and proportionally suited, complying the adopted Sign Program for Jefferson Plaza. 7. The landscaping for the project has been designed to comply with the design parameters of Specific Plan 96-027. The proposed plant palette is consistent with Specific Plan 96-027 and the Highway 111 Design Guidelines as conditioned. However, the landscaping and irrigation have not been maintained along the entire Highway 1 1 1 parkway and landscape setback. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the City Council in this case; 2. That the City Council does hereby deny the appellant's request to modify Condition #48 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions; and 3. That the project has been assessed under EA 96-325 for which a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been certified, and the mitigation measures identified are hereby required to be met. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 61h day of March, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: /e\'1 *775 -LTLil*3 ABSENT: 0 ABSTAIN: 07 P:ABE'l rY\resoCC SDP687JackBoxAppcal.wpd T Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687, Appeal ,lack in the Box Restaurant March 6, 2001 JOHN J. PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California (City Seal) APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California r ti 68 P:ABETTY\resoCC SDP687JackBoxAppeal.wpd RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-687 JACK IN THE BOX RESTAURANT - APPEAL MARCH 6, 2001 GENERAL 1. Upon approval by the City Council, a memorandum noting that the City Conditions of Approval for this application exist and are available for review at City Hall shall be recorded against the property with Riverside County by the applicant. 2. The Site Development Permit shall be used (beginning of construction) by March 6, 2002, pursuant to Section 9.200.080 of the Municipal Zoning Code, unless a one year time extension is granted, prior to expiration. 3. The proposed restaurant development shall comply with all applicable conditions of Specific Plan 96-027 (Jefferson Plaza). 4. Parking lot light standards shall match those used in the construction of Phase 1 of the Shopping Center and not exceed 25-feet in overall height pursuant to Condition 2 of Specific Plan 96-027. 5. Prior to the issuance of a grading, improvement or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside County Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES 093 P.IBETTYICond CCsdp687 JackBox.wpd Page n 9 �l n Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site. 6. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion. PROPERTY RIGHTS 7. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets from all frontage along the streets and properties except access drives described herein. 8. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. 9. The applicant shall dedicate ten -foot public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. The easements may be reduced to five feet with the express concurrence of IID. 10. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 11. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur. 12. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property owners. P:IBETTYICond CCsdp687 JackBox.wpd MI Page 2 10 i Z Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 13. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media. GRADING 14. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard Regulations). If any portion of any proposed building lot in the development is or may be located within a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year) flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall furnish certifications as required by FEMA that the above conditions have been met. 15. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and an approved grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on final maps (if any are required of this development) that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 16. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 17. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The Applicant shall furnish security, in M, P: IBETTYI Cond CCsdp687 ✓ack8ox. wpd Page 3 11. T' Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 18. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 19. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each pad, the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 20. Stormwater drainage shall comply with the approved Hydrology Plan for the Jefferson Plaza Shopping Center. 21. Nuisance water shall be retained and disposed of on -site in an approved facility. The facility shall be designed to infiltrate five gallons per day per 1,000 square feet (of landscape area) and to accommodate a surge rate of three gallons per hour per 1 ,000 square feet. UTILITIES 22. To ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes, the applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within the right of way and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone stands. 23. All proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. 24. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. P:IBETTYICond CCsdp687 JackBox.wpd Page 4 1� Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 25. Parking lot design shall conform with the City's Off -Street parking Ordinance as delineated in Chapter 9.150 of the LQMC. 26. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks). 27. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials): Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b. LANDSCAPING 28. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. 29. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit plans for approval by the Community Development Department prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking is complete, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for signature by the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 30. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. 31. Landscaping within the Jefferson Plaza Shopping Center shall be commonly maintained under a single maintenance contract pursuant Condition 59 of Specific Plan 96-027. 097 P., I BETTYI Cond CCsdp687 ✓ackBox. wpd Page 5 13 Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 32. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department for review and approval a landscape and irrigation plan showing the following: A. African Sumac trees shall replace Olive trees to match the existing parking lot trees at the Home Depot facility (24" box with 2.5" caliper). B. A minimum of three California Fan Palms, averaging 20 feet high, shall be installed at the southeast side of the parking lot to conform with the City's Highway 111 Landscape Guidelines in lieu of installing new shade trees at this location. These parkway palm trees shall be uplighted with fixtures mounted eight foot above the finished grade level to deter vandalism. A minimum of two palms shall be lighted for decorative purposes. C. The proposed California Pepper trees in the Highway 1 1 1 parkway shall be removed and replaced with a tree type as specified in the Highway 111 Design Guidelines. D. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of aboveground utility structures pursuant to Condition 56 of SP 96-027. E. Parking lot trees shall be 24" box tree or larger with 2-1 /2" to 3" diameter (caliper) trunks pursuant to Condition 60 (D) of SP 96-027. Newly planted trees shall be staked with lodge poles to prevent damage from gusts of wind, etc. F. The parking lot shall be screened by using a combination of berms, walls, and landscaping so that the vehicles will not be visible from Highway 1 1 1 , consistent with requirements identified in SP 96-027 (i.e., Condition 61) and Chapter 9.150 (Parking) of the Zoning Ordinance. The height of the screen wall for the drive -through lane shall be measured from the curb height. G. A low profile wall (two foot high) shall be constructed along the west property line to ensure blowing sand does not overrun and destroy the landscaping improvements adjacent to the drive -through lane. 093 P: I BETTYI Cond CCsdp687 JackBox. wpd Page 6 14 .m Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 H. Replace the turf areas north of the building with less demanding water use materials (i.e., desertscape). QUALITY ASSURANCE 33. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 34. The applicant shall employ or retain qualified civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other appropriate professionals to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 35. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program but required by the City as evidence that construction materials and methods comply with plans, specifications and applicable regulations. MAINTENANCE 36. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. FEES AND DEPOSITS 37. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be thosein effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. 38. Prior to on -site grading or building permit issuance, Fringe -toed Lizard mitigation fees shall be paid to the City (i.e., $600.00/acre) unless proof of payment can be provided to the Community Development Department. 39. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. 40. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of +, 09 P:IBETTYICond CCsdp687 JackBox.wpd I Page 7 15 ii Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 building permits. SIGN PROGRAM 41. Prior to sign permit issuance, the following sign modifications shall be made, subject to approval of the Community Development Director: A. Directional signs for the drive -through lane shall be limited to three square feet per Table 9-17 of the Sign Ordinance, and the sign copy shall read "Drive-thru" with directional arrow. The logo shall be deleted. B. One of the three building mounted signs shall be deleted. C. Only one freestanding menu board sign is permitted, unless otherwise determined by the Community Development Department based on a survey of other existing fast food restaurants on Highway 1 1 1. All menu board signs shall have monument bases. FIRE MARSHAL 42. Complete building plans will be required for review and approval by the Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. 43. Fire hydrants in accordance with Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) Standard W-33 shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 2,000 g.p.m. for a 2- hour duration at 20 psi. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of the streets directly in line with the fire hydrants. 44. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant/developer shall furnish one blue line copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review and approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans must be signed 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 100 P.IBETTYICond CCsdp687 JackBox.wpd Page 8 10 Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 45. The required water system including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. 46. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning and Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. MISCELLANEOUS 47. The developer shall provide a bicycle rack at the front of the building pursuant to Section 9.150.060(D3b) of the Zoning Ordinance. The rack shall accommodate a minimum of five bicycles and be shaded by building and/or landscape features. 48. Landscape and irrigation improvements in the Highway 1 1 1 parkway and on -site shall be repaired and/or replaced prior to a final inspection. M P. IBETTYI Cond CCsdp687 JackBox. wpd Page 9 7 1 1 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPELLANTS REQUEST AND MODIFYING CONDITION OF APPROVAL NO. 48 FOR THE JACK IN THE BOX RESTAURANT LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND DEPOT WAY ON APPROXIMATELY 0.9 ACRES CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-687 APPELLANT: LYONS, WARREN & ASSOC., INC. FOR JACK IN THE BOX WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 61' day of March, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Lyon, Warren and Associates to appeal a requirement by the Planning Commission to repair and replace landscape and irrigation improvements in the Highway 111 parkway prior to a final inspection of the proposed Jack in the Box restaurant at 79- 724 Highway 111 within the Jefferson Plaza Shopping Center (Specific Plan 96-027); more particularly described as follows: Being Lot 1 of Parcel Map No. 28573 within a portion of Section 29, TSS, RSE, San Bernardino Meridian (Assessor's Parcel No.: 649-020-037); Pad #1 of Phase 2 of SP 96-027 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 9"' day of January, 2001, hold duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Lyon, Warren and Associates to review development plans for Jack in the Box restaurant in the Regional Commercial (CR) Zone on approximately 0.9 acres at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Depot Way within the Jefferson Plaza Shopping Center (Specific Plan 96-027), and on a 4-0 vote, recommended approval, subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the Architectural and Landscape Review Committee of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 3`d day of January, 2001, recommend approval to the Planning Commission of Site Development Permit 2000-687 by adoption of Minute Motion 2001 -01, subject to conditions. 102-1 resoCC sdp687 Jack/BoxAppel 47Greg T 18 Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687, Appeal Jack in the Box Restaurant March 6, 2001 WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did make the following Mandatory Findings the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify approval of Site Development Permit 2000-687: 1. The project is consistent with the General Plan, Specific Plan and Zoning Code. The City's General Plan Land Use Element designates this site as Mixed Regional Commercial with a nonresidential overlay. This designation provides for commercial uses including restaurants as is proposed. Therefore, development of the subject property with commercial uses will be compatible with adjacent properties provided the applicable conditions as recommended by staff are complied with. 2. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (Environmental Assessment 96-325) was certified for Specific Plan 96-027 in 1996. No changed circumstances or conditions and no information provided which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental review per Public Resources Code Section 21166. 3. The architectural design of the project, including but not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City. The architectural elements of the building are compatible with the design elements of the buildings in Jefferson Plaza in accordance with the Specific Plan Design Guidelines. 4. The site design of the project, including but not limited to project entries, interior circulation, pedestrian and bicycle access, pedestrian amenities, screening of equipment and trash enclosure, lighting, and other site design elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City. Parking for this site is proposed on the east side of the building with a single drive -through lane on the west side for take-out service needs. The parking lot, complies with the required design standards of the Zoning Code and Specific Plan. The project design, along with the recommended Conditions, assures required design standards are met. The development of the restaurant will comply with applicable development standards. 10,E 5. The landscaping for the project has been designed to comply with the design parameters of Specific Plan 96-027. 19 P:ABETTY\resoCC SDP687JackBoxAppeal.wpd .r Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687, Appeal Jack in the Box Restaurant March 6, 2001 The proposed plant palette is consistent with Specific Plan 96-027 and the Highway 111 Design Guidelines as conditioned. 6. The sign program is consistent with Chapter 9.160 of the Municipal Code, and proposes common design elements. The south and east facing corporate ID signs are compatible with the architectural elements of the building and proportionally suited, complying the adopted Sign Program for Jefferson Plaza. 7. The landscaping for the project has been designed to comply with the design parameters of Specific Plan 96-027. The proposed plant palette is consistent with Specific Plan 96-027 and the Highway 111 Design Guidelines as conditioned. However, the landscaping and irrigation have not been maintained along the entire Highway 111 parkway and landscape setback. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the City Council in this case; 2. That the City Council does hereby deny the appellant's request to modify Condition #48 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions; and 3. That the project has been assessed under EA 96-325 for which a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been certified, and the mitigation measures identified are hereby required to be met. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 6th day of March, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 104 r�O P:\BETTY\resoCC SDP687JackBoxAppeal.wpd Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687, Appeal Jack in the Box Restaurant March 6, 2001 JOHN J. PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CIVIC, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 105 P:\BF,TTY\resoCC SDP687JackBoxAppeal.wpd RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-687 JACK IN THE BOX RESTAURANT - APPEAL MARCH 6, 2001 GENERAL 1. Upon approval by the City Council, a memorandum noting that the City Conditions of Approval for this application exist and are available for review at City Hall shall be recorded against the property with Riverside County by the applicant. 2. The Site Development Permit shall be used (beginning of construction) by March 6, 2002, pursuant to Section 9.200.080 of the Municipal Zoning Code, unless a one year time extension is granted, prior to expiration. 3. The proposed restaurant development shall comply with all applicable conditions of Specific Plan 96-027 (Jefferson Plaza). 4. Parking lot light standards shall match those used in the construction of Phase 1 of the Shopping Center and not exceed 25-feet in overall height pursuant to Condition 2 of Specific Plan 96-027. 5. Prior to the issuance of a grading, improvement or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside County Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES 106 P:IBETTVICond CCsdp687 JackBox.wpd Page 1 22 ti Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site. 6. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion. PROPERTY RIGHTS 7. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets from all frontage along the streets and properties except access drives described herein. 8. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. 9. The applicant shall dedicate ten -foot public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. The easements may be reduced to five feet with the express concurrence of IID. 10. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 11. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur. 12. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property owners. P:IBETTYICond CCsdp687 Jack Box,wpd 107 Page 2 ,r)J .m Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 13. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media. GRADING 14. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard Regulations). If any portion of any proposed building lot in the development is or may be located within a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project 000-year) flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall furnish certifications as required by FEMA that the above conditions have been met. 15. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and an approved grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on final maps (if any are required of this development) that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 16. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 17. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The Applicant shall furnish security, in 108 P:IBETTYICond CCsdp687 ✓ackBox. wpd Page 3 24 t. Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 18. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 19. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each pad, the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 20. Stormwater drainage shall comply with the approved Hydrology Plan for the Jefferson Plaza Shopping Center. 21. Nuisance water shall be retained and disposed of on -site in an approved facility. The facility shall be designed to infiltrate five gallons per day per 1,000 square feet (of landscape areal and to accommodate a surge rate of three gallons per hour per 1 ,000 square feet. UTILITIES 22. To ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes, the applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within the right of way and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone stands. 23. All proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. 24. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. P: I BETTYI Cond CCsdp687 JackBox. wpd 109 Page 4 '4r T Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 25. Parking lot design shall conform with the City's Off -Street parking Ordinance as delineated in Chapter 9.150 of the LQMC. 26. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks). 27. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials): Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b. LANDSCAPING 28. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. 29. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit plans for approval by the Community Development Department prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking is complete, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for signature by the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 30. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. 31. Landscaping within the Jefferson Plaza Shopping Center shall be commonly maintained under a single maintenance contract pursuant Condition 59 of Specific Plan 96-027. 11 9Q P.IBETTYICondCCsdp687JackBox.wpd Page r� Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 32. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department for review and approval a landscape and irrigation plan showing the following: A. African Sumac trees shall replace Olive trees to match the existing parking lot trees at the Home Depot facility (24" box with 2.5" caliper). B. A minimum of three California Fan Palms, averaging 20 feet high, shall be installed at the southeast side of the parking lot to conform with the City's Highway 111 Landscape Guidelines in lieu of installing new shade trees at this location. These parkway palm trees shall be uplighted with fixtures mounted eight foot above the finished grade level to deter vandalism. A minimum of two palms shall be lighted for decorative purposes. C. The proposed California Pepper trees in the Highway 1 1 1 parkway shall be removed and replaced with a tree type as specified in the Highway 111 Design Guidelines. D. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of aboveground utility structures pursuant to Condition 56 of SP 96-027. E. Parking lot trees shall be 24" box tree or larger with 2-1/2" to 3" diameter (caliper) trunks pursuant to Condition 60 (D) of SP 96-027. Newly planted trees shall be staked with lodge poles to prevent damage from gusts of wind, etc. F. The parking lot shall be screened by using a combination of berms, walls, and landscaping so that the vehicles will not be visible from Highway 1 1 1, consistent with requirements identified in SP 96-027 (i.e., Condition 61) and Chapter 9.150 (Parking) of the Zoning Ordinance. The height of the screen wall for the drive -through lane shall be measured from the curb height. G. A low profile wall (two foot high) shall be constructed along the west property line to ensure blowing sand does not overrun and destroy the landscaping improvements adjacent to the drive -through lane. I I P:IBETTYICondCCsdp687JackBox.wpd Page dry �, t Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 H. Replace the turf areas north of the building with less demanding water use materials (i.e., desertscape). QUALITY ASSURANCE 33. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 34. The applicant shall employ or retain qualified civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other appropriate professionals to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 35. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program but required by the City as evidence that construction materials and methods comply with plans, specifications and applicable regulations. MAINTENANCE 36. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. FEES AND DEPOSITS 37. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. 38. Prior to on -site grading or building permit issuance, Fringe -toed Lizard mitigation fees shall be paid to the City (i.e., $600.00/acre) unless proof of payment can be provided to the Community Development Department. 39. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. 40. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of 112 P: I BETTYI Cond CCsdp687 JackBox. wpd Page 7 28 Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 building permits. SIGN PROGRAM 41. Prior to sign permit issuance, the following sign modifications shall be made, subject to approval of the Community Development Director: A. Directional signs for the drive -through lane shall be limited to three square feet per Table 9-17 of the Sign Ordinance, and the sign copy shall read "Drive-thru" with directional arrow. The logo shall be deleted. B. One of the three building mounted signs shall be deleted. C. Only one freestanding menu board sign is permitted, unless otherwise determined by the Community Development Department based on a survey of other existing fast food restaurants on Highway 1 1 1. All menu board signs shall have monument bases. FIRE MARSHAL 42. Complete building plans will be required for review and approval by the Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. 43. Fire hydrants in accordance with Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) Standard W-33 shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 2,000 g.p.m. for a 2- hour duration at 20 psi. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of the streets directly in line with the fire hydrants. 44. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant/developer shall furnish one blue line copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review and approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans must be signed 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 113 P: I BETTYI Cond CCsdp687 ✓ackBox. wpd Page 8 v) 2 J (1, �s it �*., I .n• ,� Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 45. The required water system including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. 46. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning and Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. MISCELLANEOUS 47. The developer shall provide a bicycle rack at the front of the building pursuant to Section 9.150.060(D3b) of the Zoning Ordinance. The rack shall accommodate a minimum of five bicycles and be shaded by building and/or landscape features. 48. The City will assume its pro rata share of the cost to repair and/or replace the perimeter landscaping, between International House of Pancakes and the west boundary, along Highway 111. The City's share is the 22-foot wide parkway and Home Depot's is the remaining landscape setback. Additionally, the City will assume its pro rata share of the maintenance and utility cost for the landscaping located within the Highway 111 parkway until such time as the right of way is conveyed to Caltrans. Thereafter, Home Depot shall assume 100% responsibility for landscape maintenance and utility cost for all perimeter landscaping including the parkway. A maintenance agreement shall be executed between the City's Public Works Department and Home Depot prior to issuance of a building permit for the Jack in the Box restaurant to ensure irrigation of site and to facilitate implementation of the condition. P.IBETTYICond CCsdp687 JackBox.wpd 114 Page 930 Resolution 2001- Site Development Permit 2000-687 Jack in the Box Restaurant - Appeal March 6, 2001 accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 45. The required water system including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. 46. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning and Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. MISCELLANEOUS 47. The developer shall provide a bicycle rack at the front of the building pursuant to Section 9.150.060(D3b) of the Zoning Ordinance. The rack shall accommodate a minimum of five bicycles and be shaded by building and/or landscape features. Landscape and irrigation improvements in the Highway 111 parkway frontage of the associated parcel shall be repaired and replaced prior to final inspection andll�ma-riintaine_d}.. J 11-5 P.• I BETTYI Cond CCsdp 687 JackBox. wpd Page 9 ATTACHMENT #1 Planning Commission Minutes January 9, 2001 Waring Drive.... and the City declined the portunity". There being no further corrections, it was moved,aseconded by Commissioners Butler/Kirk to approve the minutes corrected. Unanimously approved. B. Department Report: None. C. Planning Manager Downs, who woi various cases. i V. PRESENTATIONS: P VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: ie di lorio introduced Associate Engineer Brian representing the Public Works Department on A. Site Development Permit 2000-687; a request of Lyons, Warren and Associates, Inc. for review of plans for a one story Jack in the Box restaurant with a drive-thru located at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Depot Way in the Jefferson Plaza Shopping Center. 1 . Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked if modifications would be made to Depot Way for access to the drive-thru. Staff explained the circulation pattern and discussion followed. 3. Chairman Robbins stated the plans does not show what the limits of their improvements will be. Associate Engineer Brian Downs stated they have been conditioned to go off -site to make the improvements necessary. Depot Way is currently paved and is used as a permanent access to the site. 4. Chairman Robbins asked what method the City has to ensure that the developer maintains the landscaping around the restaurants. Planning Manager Christine di lorio stated this is an on -going issue with this development and staff has been working with the Code Enforcement Department to resolve this issue, but other problems have taken precedent. Some improvements have bene made to the Home Depot frontage. As projects are proposed the site, it is 1,16 32 G:\VVPD0CS\PC1-9-01.wpd 2 .1. Planning Commission Minutes January 9, 2001 an opportunity to bring these issues to light and place conditions on the projects to bring the landscaping into compliance with the Conditions of Approval. Chairman Robbins noted the problem existed at other centers as well. Staff stated this is an on -going issue with Code Enforcement. 5. Commissioner Kirk asked if the Planning Commission could use Code Enforcement concerns as a rationale for rejecting or significantly modifying a subsequent approval. Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated they could use it to modify an approval particularly when it sounds like this is an on -going issue that has arisen contrary to prior conditions of approval imposed. His recommendation would be in respect to this application, that the Commission take this option rather than denying the project because this applicant is not contributing to the problems. 6. Commissioner Tyler asked which document took precedent in regard to conditions being met. Staff stated the Specific Plan, and Home Depot is the property owner and responsible for meeting the conditions. 7. Chairman Robbins stated that with no malice toward this applicant, does the Commission have the ability to deny further expansion of the project because the property owner has not met his obligations. Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated he was not prepared to render an opinion at this time. Certainly the Commission has wide latitude and discretion with respect to imposing conditions and certainly with respect to on -going code enforcement matters that can always be a factor with respect to how the Commission further tightens conditions. He would review the matter and report back to the Commission shortly. 8. Commissioner Butler stated that before issuing final inspection on this site, the Commission could require these prior conditions be resolved. Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated yes, they could. Commissioner Butler stated that way they were not stopping the project, but allowing it to go forward and still requiring the master developer to meet the prior conditions. 9. Chairman Robbins asked if they wanted to go to the extreme to have the entire Highway 111 landscaping replaced, they could Il f, this. Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated the extrem are the difficult ones. He would have to review the issue further. G:\WPDOCS\PC1-9-Ol.wpd 3 33 Planning Commission Minutes January 9, 2001 Some sort of nexus issue on that level may be needed and he does not have the background to answer the question adequately. If the Commission wants further advice on the issue at this meeting, he could quickly review the issue to provide the Commission with an answer before the end of the meeting. Chairman Robbins pointed out that the Commission's purpose is to get the property owners attention and have some mechanism to resolve the issues. They do not want the developer to continue to expand if they are not going to meet the conditions imposed on them regarding the landscaping. Assistant City Attorney Ramirez stated this type of anecdotal discussion is useful to the extent it is utilized in code enforcement actions that may occur in the future. Staff noted that Condition #32.A should be changed to make "A" Condition #48 and state "...prior to final inspection". 10. Commissioner Butler asked staff to identify where the applicant would be expanded the site for the street improvements. Associate Engineer Brian Downs explained on the site plan the location to be expanded onto. 1 1 . Commissioner Tyler asked if the sign was a national logo. Staff stated yes. 12. Commissioner Butler stated he had no objection to the second menu board as it does assist in speeding up the ordering; why was staff requesting the removal. Staff stated because there were too many signs and other establishments have been restricted to one. 13. Chairman Robbins asked the size of the signs. Staff stated 5-feet by 5-feet on the tower elements and staff would reword Condition 41.B. to allow the applicant to determine where he wanted to place the two signs. Staff was also requesting the addition of a condition requiring a monument base on the menu board sign. 14. Commissioner Tyler questioned Condition #32.B. as to why the Olive trees were not being used and the only reason given was that they do not match the trees being used by Home Depot; why was staff denying the Olive trees. Staff stated for compatibility throughout the parking lot. Commissioner Tyler suggested removal of the Crape Myrtle as it grows so slowly. Staff stated they would remove it. Discussion followed regarding the trees recommended. 113 34 G:\WPDOCS\PC1-9-01 .wpd 4 G7! Planning Commission Minutes January 9, 2001 15. Commissioner Kirk stated the sign program does allow national tenants, or is there some type of sign regiment for the center; some sort of consistency in terms of colors, materials, etc. Staff stated not in regard to colors, but materials and channel letters. 16. Chairman Robbins stated the first time this project was proposed there was a problem with slope protection problem; has that problem been resolved? Staff stated the entire phase had been protected. 17. Assistant City Attorney Ramirez stated that in general they would need to look at Phase II of the Specific Plan with the possibility of amending and tighten up the conditions. There is also a Development Agreement that may help to resolve the issue and he and staff would be reviewing it to that end. Chairman Robbins stated there must be a way to reach the developer to address this issue. 18. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Steve Schneider, representing the applicant, stated they would be closing escrow once the approvals have been attained to build the building. In regard to how far they are going to make street improvements, he explained on the site plan where they would be making their improvements. On the two building signs their preference would be to have them on the east and west elevations. The final item, or the two menu boards, they would like to request the second as it does improve the speed of the drive -through. As the menu boards are on the interior to the center and all the illumination is pointing interior to the center which ultimately will be developed as a shopping center building significantly behind them. The menu board staff is requesting to be eliminated is completely screened from view by their trash enclosure. So from the public right of way, it is virtually impossible to be seen, but it does benefit them significantly from an operational standpoint. In regard to the landscaping on the street frontage, they have no control over this, but will be maintaining their own landscaping. They will be addressing the Commission's concerns with the property owner of the center. 19. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Kirk asked how much of the landscaping 119 would be in turf. Mr. Schneider stated it is minimal. Staff stated it was in the rear of the building. Commissioner Kirk asked what G:\WPDOCS\PC1-9-01 .wpd 5 35 Planning Commission Minutes January 9, 2001 the purpose was for the turf. Mr. Schneider stated it adds color. Commissioner Kirk stated it was an odd location for turf. Mr. Schneider stated they would work with staff to use some other material. 20. Commissioner Kirk asked if the applicant had any other concerns regarding the conditions. Mr. Schneider stated no more than what had been raised. 21. Commissioner Tyler stated that at the entrance to the drive - through there is a 12-foot canopy; is there anything that can be done to dress it up. Mr. Schneider stated it was a standard canopy and a necessary evil. They would welcome any suggestions. 22. There being no further discussion, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 23. Commissioner Tyler stated he had no objection to allowing the applicant to determine where the signs would be located. In regard to the menu boards he had no issue with having two. 24. Commissioner Butler stated he thought there were others that had two menu boards and he had no objections to allowing two. Staff noted they would survey the fast food restaurants to determine the standard. 25. Commissioner Kirk stated he did not have any strong concerns regarding the two menu boards. He did not like fast food restaurants as they do cause sign clutter and an auto orientation. They do however, need to stick with whatever the precedent is, if there is one. Maybe the Commission could go with staff's recommendation, but if the survey determines that other restaurants have been approved with two signs, then give this applicant the same opportunity. The other point is the suggestion of the monument base for the menu boards whether one or two, and the idea of sending the message to the master property owner regarding the landscaping. Condition 32.A., in his opinion, does not do the City justice. They need to see that the master developer meets the conditions of the Specific Plan for the lr�o landscaping along Highway 111. He would change the condition to require all the landscaping on the project site and not just Highway 111 Corridor. The applicant can work with staff to find a less water demanding ground cover. 36 G:\WPDOCS\PC1-9-01 .wod 6 Planning Commission Minutes January 9, 2001 26. Chairman Robbins stated he had mixed feelings regarding the two menu boards, as he does not like sign proliferation either, but he can understand the need for both. He wold agree with Commissioner Kirk that if other restaurants have two, they let them have two, if not leave it at one. 27. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Resolution 2000-001, approving Site Development Permit 2000-687, as conditioned with the following changes: a. Condition #32.A: Changed to Condition #48. Existing landscaping in the Highway 1 1 1 parkway and on site shall be repaired or replaced prior to final inspection. b Condition 32.B.: One of the three building mounted signs shall be deleted. C. Condition #41.C.: Dependent upon other fast food restaurants, only one freestanding menu board is permitted and the sign(s) shall include a monument base. d. Condition 32.H.: Replace the turf areas north of the building with less demanding water use materials. 28. Commissioner Kirk asked if staff could get a report back to the Commission letting them know that Home Depot has complied and Jack in the Box has received their final inspection, just to keep them informed of what has happened. Staff stated will keep the Commission informed as to the progress. If the landscaping is approved by some other means, prior to Jack in the Box final inspection, staff will let the Commission know. 29. Chairman Robbins stated they did not want to put too much a burden on this developer, but on the master property owner of the center. 30. Commissioner Butler stated he would rather let them build it and then not allow occupancy unless the landscaping is done. Thisl2i a stronger message. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Abels. ABSTAIN: None. 37 G:\WPDOCS\PC1-9-01 .wpd 7 Ii City of LaQuinta Comm•Dev-Dept ID= 750 City ofla Quinta Community Development Department 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 (760) 777-7125 FAX: (760) 7 7-1233 660 67T1 _ 89Co ATTACHMENT #2 OFFICE USE ONLY CW To. Date Re d. / - L3 fee: I I 1 Related Apps.: <oP")e% - Logged In —2a_-61 Application for Appeal of Findings And/Or Conditions Appellant's Name Date 1 11`R ) o I Mailing Address t0_231 I_V?_eej1cA $uLTe 2-01 �Ms T o , CA 9 2-13 I Phone: (852? 11 578 8380 L:oA1�T 10N oc Resolution # and Condition(s) of Approval being appealed oG Qt—co�vTto �—t 1Jo . 2oOt - ool Any development review action may be appealed pursuant to Section 9.220.130 of the Zoning Code_ Please identify the type of application: Type of Appeal: Change of Zone Tentative Tract Map Specific Plan Tentative Parcel Map Conditional Use Permit C Site Development Permit Variance Temporary Use Permit Minor Use Permit Other Please provide sufficient information so as to makc clear the substance of each of the grounds for appeal. If applicable, indicate the number of the specific condition which is being protested. E A-MACA+et5 T>t S tAa s i t C)" . Use additional sheets if necessary. TIN 1`4 Gj h, L I ➢UGaI rlfld4'C.Ond b Y n G' JO�.N QAri ,��'�' � Gig% >a•�rNr� of M 38 T Grounds for appeal of Condition of Approval Number 48 of Resolution 2001-001: The above listed condition requires that all landscaping for the entire Highway I I I frontage of the Jefferson Plaza (approximately 1400 lineal feet), as well as all existing onsite landscaping within the approximately 15 acres of developed area be repaired and or replaced. Whereas this resolution is for the purpose of developing a specific .9 acre legal parcel with a Highway 111 frontage of 171 lineal feet within a multiphase 25 acre commercial center, and whereas Jack in the Box will have no means of controlling or legally requiring the ownership of the other 5 legal parcels to conform to this condition of approval, I am appealing this condition on the basis that the condition is overly restrictive and impossible for Jack in the Box to conform with. After Jack in the Box takes ownership of the parcel, if the adjacent ownership refuses to conform to this condition, or should they be found to be in non-conformance at a future date, Jack in the Box would be liable for conditions that are out of their legal control. As such, I am requesting the condition be amended such that only the landscaping associated with the parcel in question be required to repaired and/or replaced and that all references to existing onsite landscaping be omitted. Example Condition: Landscape and irrigation improvements in the Highway III parkway frontage of the associated parcel shall be repaired and/or replaced prior to final inspection. 39 -- 133tl15 111 WJ 11T 6�uT, 'Dv ATTACHMENT #3 V r _ NOStl3jj3" 1 l�l _.,�1111111111� €LI' Im I nn m -------- G n -^ t Y fJ9i iy GGa � •mco.r r mr wu. � 0 � }i9f} qq (� i ?��wb.aassa9� w gillgg � a �e�j1F ATTACHMENT #4 z z Luu, �/ N �W LI LL Oz � Z O HZ� Z U z, a� i 1.23 41 T4t�t 4 stp Q" COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: March 6, 2001 ITEM TITLE, Public Hearing to Certify a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; Change Lands Currently Designated at Medium High Density Residential to Village Commercial, Design Guidelines and Development Standards for a Commercial/Office, Distribution Center and 227 Whole Ownership Single Family Dwellings with the Leasing Potential of 365 Guest Rooms; Development Plans for the Residential and Office Building; and the Subdivision of 33 Acres into 15 Numbered and 17 Lettered Lots. Applicant: KSL Development Corporation RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: 12-_. 1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council Certifying a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-411. 2. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving General Plan Amendment 2001-075, re -designating a portion of the site from medium Density to Village Commercial. 3. Move to take up Ordinance No. _, by title and number only and waive further reading. Move to introduce Ordinance No. on first reading. 4. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Specific Plan 2001-051, providing design guidelines and development standards, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval. 5. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Village Use Permit 2001-007, approving the development plans for the residential/guest rooms and office building, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval. 6. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map 30043, for the subdivision of a 33 acre parcel into 16 parcels and 17 lettered lots, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval. 1..a It G:\WPDOCSIccihKSLVM.wpd FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW The project site is currently vacant land which was previously in date palm and citrus cultivation. The site is bounded on three sides by roadways: Calle Tampico on the south, Eisenhower Drive on the west, and Avenida Bermudas on the east (Attachment 1). The La Quinta Evacuation Channel occurs along the northern boundary of the site. The northern one third of the site is currently designated for Medium High Density Residential, while the balance is Village Commercial. The entire parcel is within the boundary of the Village Design Guidelines. Project Request In addition to the Environmental Assessment, the following applications have been filed: 1. A General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to eliminate the Medium High Density Residential designation on the northerly one third of the property, and change it to Village Commercial. 2. A Specific Plan to establish design standards and guidelines for 227 dwelling units (with the leasing potential for 365 guest rooms), retail commercial space up to 20,000 square feet, office commercial space up to 20,600 square feet, a 40,000 square foot distribution center for the La Quinta Hotel, and employee/special event parking for 630 cars. 3. A Village Use Permit to review the building elevations, site landscaping, and lighting plan for the residential and office commercial components of the plan, as well as the construction of perimeter improvements for the site. 4. A vesting tentative tract map which divides the proposed 33 acre project site into 16 numbered lots and 17 lettered lots. The Specific Plan provides the design guidelines and development standards which will guide the future development of the site. The Specific Plan requires that Village Use Permits (VUP) be secured in the future for the construction of the retail commercial and distribution center/employee parking lot on the site. The Specific Plan further details the potential architectural style of the buildings, and the types of matey' IISS which will be utilized. These are also itemized in the Village Use Permit materials. lae ; G:\WPDO CS\ccjh KS LVM. Wpd construction of the residential component and the office component of the plan are the only immediate projects being considered at this time. The variations to the City's zoning standards are discussed individually below, under Design Issues. The project will be accessed from all three streets. The primary access points will be located on Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico. Secondary access to the retail commercial component (right -in, right -out only) is proposed on Calle Tampico. Access on Avenida Bermudas is also proposed for the office and distribution center/employee parking lot. Avenida Bermudas is proposed for vacation, from the mid -point of the property northerly. The General Plan Amendment and Zone Change apply to the northerly one third of the 33 acres. The land is currently designated Medium High Density Residential and is proposed for Village Commercial. The change represents a logical extension of the Village Commercial land uses, and encourages the construction of mixed land uses, which will enhance the resort residential and commercial opportunities within this area of the City. Issues associated with the design of the project are discussed below. Conditions of approval have been included to address these issues, and are discussed individually. Architectural and Landscaping Committee The Architectural and Landscaping Committee at its February 7, 2001 meeting discussed the articulation of the Office building architecture, and requested that a condition of approval be included which requires that window inset depths and wall texture be submitted prior to the issuance of building permits (Attachment 2). Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission reviewed this project at its regularly scheduled meeting of February 27, 2001, and unanimously recommended approval of all applications (Attachment 3). A number of issues were discussed. These are enumerated below. Retail Commercial The Retail Commercial component of the plan includes the possibility for restaurant use. Parking allocation in this area has been calculated at 250 s.f. per parking space; however, which is the general commercial calculation. The standard for restaurant use is much more stringent, since restaurants are much more parking intensive. In order to control this potential problem, it is recommended that the maximum square footage which could be developed as restaurant space in this area be 5,000 s.f., which would require 67 parking spaces. Based on the assumption that a restaurant use would have its peak hours after retail commercial uses were closed, this allows for shared parking within this component of the plan. A condition of approval has been added to requir ;� this addition (#12). G:AWPDOCS\ccjhKS LVM. Wpd (� iJ Trash Enclosures Neither the Specific Plan nor the Village Use Permit include trash enclosure locations. A condition of approval has been added which requires Community Development Department review and approval of such locations prior to issuance of grading permits (#1 3). Signage The signage proposed in the Specific Plan does not provide sufficient detail, including size and location, to make a determination as to its adequacy. A condition of approval has been added (Condition #14) which requires that signage for the project be processed through a Village Use Permit, and that all signage shall conform to the standards of the Zoning Ordinance. Development Standards The development standards in the Specific Plan (pages 2.18 through 2.31) include the statement "whenever possible" for each standard listed. As such, the standards are meaningless. It is recommended that the words "whenever possible", "wherever possible", and "are encouraged" be eliminated from this section. The condition has been amended to reflect this (#15). Zoning Regulations The Specific Plan uses the term "limited" for conference space as a permitted use (page 3.3, item B.2.; page 3.9, item B.6.) without quantifying the term. It is recommended that the Plan be amended to include a limitation of 10% of the maximum square footage for these uses, so as to ensure that they do not become principal permitted uses, with inadequate consideration of parking needs. A condition of approval has been added (#18). On page 3.3 of the Plan, second sentence under item B.2., was requested to be changed by staff to ancillary uses only. A condition of approval has been added to correct this sentence (#19). The residential component of the plan proposes buildings of 37 feet in height (page 3.5, Table). The height limit within the Village Commercial design guidelines is 35 feet. The architecture of the buildings is varied considerably, and not all roof peaks will occur at this height. The Planning Commission recommends that the height limit of 37 feet be allowed, but that architectural projections not exceed 2 feet above 37 feet. The condition of approval reflects this change (#20). The office building is proposed to have a tower at its center which extends to a height of 27 feet. The building, however, is located within the 150 foot setback of a Primary.," Image Corridor, which requires a maximum building height of 22 feet. After much G:\WPDOCS\ccjhKSLVM.wpd discussion, the Planning Commission recommended that the maximum building height be restricted to 22 feet, and that architectural projections, including the central tower, not extend more than 5 feet above that. The conditions of approval have been modified to reflect this recommendation (#21). Landscaping The landscaping plan has not been detailed in the materials submitted. The plant palette is acceptable, but the size, distribution, location of plantings, location of walls and berming have not been provided. The Planning Commission expressed a concern that the project must meet the City's water conserving landscaping ordinance. This change is reflected in the conditions of approval. Finally, the submittal does not demonstrate that perimeter landscaping will be completed for the entire site at the initiation of the project. It is therefore recommended that the applicant be required to submit landscaping plans for ALRC approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. Such conditions have been added (#16 & 17). Parking The residential component of the Plan allows 1.5 parking spaces per unit, equivalent to a hotel use. No provision is made in the Plan for covered parking, which would be required for residential land uses otherwise located in the City. It is recommended that 50% of the parking be covered for the residential component. Further, commercial land uses are required to provide 30% covered parking, which is not included in this proposal. This standard should also be maintained, and such a condition has been added (#25). The Zoning standards for the residential component call for 1.5 parking units per residential unit. The parking standard at 1.5 spaces per unit would result in a total of 341 parking spaces being required. The project, however, could generate a total of 365 bedrooms, if all units are locked off. This would result in insufficient parking for all guests. A condition of approval has been added requiring that the Specific Plan be amended to reflect a minimum standard of 1 space per bedroom (page 3.5, Table). FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The findings necessary to approve this request can be made, and are included in the attached Resolutions. The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council Certifying a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-411; and Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving General Plan Amendment 2001-075, re -designating a portion of the site from medium Density to Village 1"Ja Commercial; and G:AWPDOCS\ccjh KSLVM.wpd o l u Move to take up Ordinance No. _, by title and number only and waive further reading; and Move to introduce Ordinance No. on first reading; and Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Specific Plan 2001-051 , providing design guidelines and development standards, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval; and Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Village Use Permit 2001-007, approving the development plans for the residential/guest rooms and office building, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval; and Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map 30043, for the subdivision of a 33 acre parcel into 16 parcels and 17 lettered lots, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval; or 2. Do not adopt the above Resolutions; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted by, Jerry Herman Community Development Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1 . Location map 2. Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee Minutes for February 7, 2001 3. Planning Commission minutes for February 27, 2001 4. Specific Plan document and Tentative Parcel Map 29909 (City Council only) U 4i G:\W PDOCS\ccjh KSLVM.wpd RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-411 PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-075, ZONE CHANGE 2001-067, SPECIFIC PLAN 2001-051, VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-007 AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30043 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-411 APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 6th day of March, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 2001-411 for General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 located at the northeastern corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico, more particularly described as follows: APN 773-022-014 and 773-022-032 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 27th day of February, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 2001-411 for General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 located at the northeastern corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico and unanimously recommended Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-411 under Planning Commission Resolution 2001-017; and WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2001-411) and has determined that although the proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the assessment and included in the conditions of approval and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and, VV G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResEA41 1 .wpd U��7 City Council Resolution 2001- Environmental Assessment 2001-411 KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montana WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify certifying said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no significant unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment 2001-411. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. 4. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 do not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the Environmental Assessment. 5. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the proposed project. 6. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. G:\WPDOCS\VlylCCResEA41 1 .wpd City Council Resolution 2001- Environmental Assessment 2001-411 KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montana 7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. 8. The City Council has considered the Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1 and the Environmental Assessment reflects the independent judgement of the City. 9. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d). 10. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of the City Council for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby certify Environmental Assessment 2001-411 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum on file in the Community Development Department. 3. That Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1 reflects the independent judgement of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 6th day of March, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JOHN J. PEI A, Mayor City of La Quinta, California G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResEA411.wpd V iJ 9 City Council Resolution 2001- Environmental Assessment 2001-411 KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montana ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC/AAE City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResEA41 1 . wpd Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Change of Zone 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051 , Village Use Permit 2001-007 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Christine di lorio 760-777-7125 4. Project Location: Northeast corner of Calle Tampico and Eisenhower Drive. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: KSL Development Corporation 55920 PGA Boulevard La Quinta, CA 92253 6. General Plan Designation: Current: Village Commercial & Medium High Density Residential Proposed: Village Commercial 7. Zoning: Current: Village Commercial and Medium High Density Residential Proposed: Village Commercial 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone to change Medium High Density Residential land to Village Commercial on a portion of a 33 acre site. Specific Plan to establish design guidelines and development standards for 227 whole ownership single family dwellings with the leasig potential of 365 guest rooms, 20,000 square feet of retail commercial, 20,600 square feet of corporate office space, a 40,000 square foot distribution center and 630 employee parking spaces. Village Use Permit for review of the development plan for the residential guest room buildings and the 20,600 s.f. Corporate office building. Vesting Tract Map to divide the land into 16 lots and 17 lettered lots. 9. Surrounding Lane Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. North: La Quinta Evacuation Channel, golf course at Duna La Quinta South: Calle Tampico, generally vacant Village Commercial lands East: Vacant Village Commercial lands, recently approved for hotel and commercial development West: Eisenhower Drive, golf course 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval aG participation agreement.) Coachella Valley Water District G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD �� 1 i- Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services Hydrology and Water Quality Recreation Land Use Planning Transportation/Traffic Mineral Resources Utilities and Service Systems Noise Mandatory Findings Population and Housing I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier FIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Date Christine di Iorio Printed Name I ►i u CITY OF LA OUINTA !" For G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD G 1 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact' answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A 'No Impact' answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact' answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) 'Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more `Potentially Significant Impact' entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) `Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact' to a "Less Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVIII, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVIII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) The analysis of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance 1W G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD II G 1 .) Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (General Plan Exhibit CIR-5) b) Damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (General Plan FIR, page 5-12 ff.) c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Application materials) d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application materials) IL AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES:. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Dept. Of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29, 5-32) b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (Aerial photographs) HE AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) c) Result in a net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Application materials) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X X X X X F.1 X X X X al G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD ` 4 C% t e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Application materials) X IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (LSA, letter report, 1/17/01) b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (LSA, letter report, 1/17/01) c) Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (LSA, letter report, 1/17/01) d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? (LSA, letter report, 1/17/01) e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (La Quinta Municipal Code; General Plan) I) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (LSA, letter report, 1/17/01) V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource which is either listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic Resources, or a local register of historic resources? ("Historical/ Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report," CRM Tech, 1 /8/2001) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resources (i.e., an artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions, has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest or best available example of its type, or is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person)? ("Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report," CRM Tech, 1/8/2001) c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site? (General Plan EIR p. 4-77 ff.) X X X X X X X X G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD 0 15 d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of X formal cemeteries? ("Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report," CRM Tech, 1/8/2001) VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (General Plan EIR, Exhibit 4.2-3, page 4-35) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) iv) Landslides? (General Plan FIR, page 4-30 ff.) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (General Plan FIR, page 4-30 ff.) c) Be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on - or off -site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-32) VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application Materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Application Materials) c) Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Application Materials) d) Is the project located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing) X X X X X X X X X ly 91 9 141 G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD 016 e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip; would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-11) h) Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildlands fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) Vlll. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-26, 6-27) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? (General Plan EIR, page 4-57 ff.) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off - site? (Preliminary Hydrology Report, MDS Consulting, 1/17/01) d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? (Preliminary Hydrology Report, MDS Consulting, 1/17/01) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control? (Preliminary Hydrology Report, MDS Consulting, 1/17/01) f) Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-13) g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-13) IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: F1 KI X X X X X X X X X a) Physically divide an established community? (Specific Plan Project Description) ;' G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD ( 1. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local costal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (General Plan Land Use Element) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5- 5) X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29) b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29) XI. NOISE: Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? ("Noise Impact Analysis," LSA, 1/16/01) b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels? ("Noise Impact Analysis," LSA, 1/16/01) c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ("Noise Impact Analysis," LSA, 1/16/01) d) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Application Materials) e) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive levels? (General Plan map) NIL POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) 9 (General Plan, page 2-14) b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials) c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials) G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD V1 X X X X X X X X X X ISAJ Vl� XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. ) Police protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. ) Schools? (General Plan MEA, page 4-9 ff. ) Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, page 4-14 ff. ) XIV. RECREATION: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application Materials) - b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application Materials) XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?("Traffic Impact Analysis," Endo Engineering, 1/16/01) b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? ("Traffic Impact Analysis," Endo Engineering, 1/16/01) c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (Application Materials) d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ("Traffic Impact Analysis," Endo Engineering, 1/16/01) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Application Materials) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Application Materials) g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Application Materials) XV1. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 X X X X X X X X X1 G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 ) c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, page 4-27) d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, page 4-20) e) Has the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? (General Plan MEA, page 4-20) f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?(General Plan MEA, page 4-28) XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current project, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? XVIII EARLIER ANALYSES. 1: X X 0 X 0 M X 9 Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. No earlier analyses specific to this project site have been used. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were�� addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Not applicable. G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. See attached Addendum. SOURCES: Master Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 1992. SCAQMD CEQA Handbook. General Plan, City of La Quinta, 1992. Paleontological Lakebed Delineation Map, City of La Quinta. City of La Quinta Municipal Code "Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report," prepared by CRM Tech, January 8, 2001. "Vista Montana Village Use Permit Traffic Impact Analysis," prepared by Endo Engineering, January 16, 2001. Letter Report regarding biological resources prepared by LSA, January 17, 2001. "Vista Montana Development Noise Impact Analysis," prepared by LSA, January 16, 2001. "Preliminary Hydrology Report," prepared by MDS Consulting, January 17, 2002. G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD Addendum for Environmental Assessment 2001-412 a) & c) Calle Tampico and Eisenhower Drive are both Primary Image Corridors in the General Plan. In addition, the intersection of Eisenhower and Calle Tampico is designated for Primary Gateway Treatment, and the intersection of Calle Tampico and Avenida Bermudas is designated a Secondary Gateway Treatment. This designation requires that special landscaping, building heights and building setbacks be incorporated into project design. The Specific Plan and Village Use Permit have incorporated these standards, with the exception of building height. The proposed residential project is planned for a maximum 37 foot height, which is 2 feet above the height limit in the Village Commercial Zone. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1. The maximum building height in the residential component of the proposed project shall be 35 feet. I. d) The proposed project will occur on a currently vacant parcel which does not generate any light, and will therefore represent an increase in light levels for the area. The project will, however, be required to meet the City's standards for outdoor lighting, which will ensure that lighting is directed downward and contained within the project site. These standards will mitigate the potential impacts of light and glare to a less than significant level. III. a), c) & d) The proposed project is consistent with the Village Commercial land use designation assigned to the site. The northerly one-third, currently designated for Medium High Density Residential, is proposed for Village Commercial designation. A high density residential project on this site would generate a comparable number of trips as the residential component of the proposed project. Similar land uses were analysed as part of the General Plan EIR. The proposed project will result in 227 whole ownership single family dwellings with the leasing potential for 365 guest rooms, 20,000 square feet of retail commercial development, 20,600 of commercial office development, a 40,000 square foot distribution center, and an employee parking lot. The traffic study prepared for the proposed project estimates that the project at buildout will generate 4,370 trips'. As shown in the Table below, the project will not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds. Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Endo Engineering, January, 2001. 147 G:AWPDOCSVVM EA Add.WPD Running Exhaust Emissions (pounds/day) •u 0100009191 WINNERYNAWe CO ROC NOx Exhaust Brakes Tires 45 mph 215.12 9.65 38.59 -- 0.96 0.96 Daily Threshold* 550 75 100 150 Based on 4,370 trips/day and average trip length of 10.0 miles, using EMFAC7G Model provided by California Air Resources Board. Assumes catalytic light autos at 76°F. * Operational thresholds provided by SCAQMD for assistance in determining the significance of a project. The Coachella Valley has in the past been a non -attainment area for PM10 (particulate matter of 10 microns or smaller). In order to control PM10, the City has imposed standards and requirements on development to control dust. SCAQMD also suggests mitigation for vehicular emissions, which are integrated into the following mitigation measures: 1 . No earth moving activity shall be undertaken without the review and approval of a PM10 Management Plan. The applicant shall submit same to the City Engineer for review and approval. 2. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. 3. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary power poles to avoid on -site power generation. 4. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities. 5. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site. 6. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of three feet prior to the onset of grading activities. 7. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on -going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall be watered at the end of each work day. 148 G:AWPDOCSVVM EA Add.WPD 6 1 3 8. All disturbed areas shall be treated to prevent erosion until the site is constructed upon. Pad sites which are to remain undeveloped shall be seeded with either a desert wildflower mix or grass seed. 9. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. 10. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of construction - related dirt on approach routes to the site. 11. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. 12. All buildings on the project site shall conform to energy use guidelines in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. 13. The project shall provide for non -motorized transportation facilities and shall implement all feasible measures to encourage the use of alternate transportation measures. 14. Bicycle racks and/or other mandated alternative transportation provisions shall be included in project design, in conformance with City ordinances in effect at the time of development. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, the impacts to air quality from the proposed project will not be significant. Moreover, improvements in technology which are likely to reduce impacts, particularly from motor vehicles or the transit route improvements in the future which may occur at the project site are not included in the analysis. Further, the air quality impacts from the proposed project fall within what was studied in the General Plan EIR. The City determined at that time that air quality impacts associated with the buildout of the City required a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which determined that the impacts to air quality of development of the Plan would be cumulatively significant when considered in conjunction with regional development, and that the City would implement all feasible measures to reduce emissions within its boundaries. IV. a) A biological survey was conducted for the proposed project2. The survey found that the site provides poor habitat due to previous disturbances on the site. Although common species were found at the time of the survey, no threatened species are expected to occur on the site. No mitigation measures are necessary. 149 Letter report prepared by LSA, January, 2001. () —'i G:\WPDOCS\VM EA Add.WPD V. b) A cultural resource survey and testing program was conducted for the subject property'. The survey and testing found that no resources occur on the site. The report further finds that it is possible that buried artifacts could be encountered during the construction process. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1. Should any earth moving activity on the site uncover a potential archaeological resource, all activity on the site shall stop until such time as a qualified archaeologist has evaluate the resource, and recommended mitigation measures. The archaeologist shall also be required to submit to the Community Development Department, for review and approval, a written report on all activities on the site. VI. a) i) The proposed project lies in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The property, as with the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the event of a major earthquake. In order to mitigate and protect the City from this hazard, the City has adopted the Uniform Building Code, and the associated construction requirements for seismic zones. The City Engineer will require the preparation of site -specific geotechnical analysis in conjunction with the submittal of grading plans (please see below). This requirement will ensure that impacts from ground failure are reduced to a less than significant level. This mitigation will be sufficient to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. VI. b) & c) The site is not located in a blowsand hazard area. As discussed above, the soils on the proposed site are loose silty sand. Sandy soils must be properly compacted prior to construction to assure long-term stability. The City's standards for site preparation shall be adhered to, as required by the City Engineer. In order to reduce the impacts of unstable soils on the proposed site, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1 . Prior to issuance of a grading permit for any structure on the proposed site, the applicant shall submit, for review and approval by the City Engineer, a detailed, site specific soil study, which shall include recommendations designed for the specific structure(s) being constructed. VIII. a) The proposed project will be required to retain the 100 year, 24 hour storm on - site. This requirement includes the installation of "water cleaning" devices when necessary to ensure that no contaminants are introduced into the storm water system. This requirement will reduce the potential for violation of a water quality standard to a less than significant level. 1 ��? Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report, prepared by CRM Tech, January, 2001. G, 11 17) G:\WPDOCS\VM EA Add.WPD VIII. b) All development adds to demand for groundwater. Domestic water is provided by the Coachella Valley Water District, which extracts groundwater from a number of wells in the Lower Thermal sub -basin. The project will be required to retain storm flows on -site, which will encourage percolation of storm water into the ground. The project proponent will be required to implement the City's standards for water conserving plumbing fixtures. Finally, the proposed project will be required to meet the requirements of the City's water -conserving landscaping ordinance, which requires that projects demonstrate that landscaping plans are water -efficient. These mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. VIII. c)-e) The proposed project, through the construction of buildings and parking lots, will create impermeable surfaces, which will change drainage patterns in a rain event. The project site is located in an AO Flood Zone. The project will,be required to meet the City's standards for retention of the 100 year storm on - site. This will control the amount of runoff which exits the site during a storm. The site's drainage plan will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading permits. This will ensure that impacts to the City's flood control system are reduced to a less than significant level. VIII. f) & g) The proposed project is located in an AO flood zone. The City Engineer will require that all structures on the site are constructed above the potential flood level in this zone. This standard will serve to mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant level. XI. a) & c) A noise impact analysis was prepared for the proposed project`. Noise impacts exceeding the City's standards will occur during construction activities. At buildout, however, the proposed project will meet the City's current exterior noise standard for sensitive receptors. Construction mitigation measures are offered below. These mitigation measures will ensure that impacts from noise are reduced to less than significant levels. 1. All construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the La Quinta Municipal Code. 2. On -site generators, if required, shall be located in the northern portion of the site. a Noise Impact Analysis, prepared by LSA, Jamiary, 2001..'� 6 4) G:\WPDOCS\VM EA Add.WPD XIII. a) The construction of the proposed project will result in short-term potential impacts for both police and fire services. The property, once developed, will generate sales and use tax and property tax. These taxes will contribute to the City's General Fund, and off -set the potential impact to police and fire service. All development has an impact on governmental facilities and services. The project proponent will be required to participate in the City's Impact Fee Program, which helps to offset roadway improvements. In addition, the revenues generated by the site will result in sales tax for the City, which will offset any needs for additional municipal services. The project will also be required to pay school fees, as required by law. The proposed project is not expected to have a significant impact on municipal services or facilities. XV. a) & b) A traffic analysis was prepared for the proposed projects. The analysis found that the proposed project will generate approximately 4,370 trips per day at buildout. The analysis found that surrounding intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service, with or without the proposed project. Minor alterations to lane geometries will be required to accommodate the project, and are listed below under mitigation measures. The study further found that signalization would not be necessary for either the project entrance on Calle Tampico or that on Eisenhower Drive. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1. Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico will be fully improved to their General Plan half -widths adjacent to the project site. 2. All project exits will be STOP sign controlled. 3. The project proponent will contribute his fair share to the signalization of Eisenhower and Calle Tampico. 4. The project proponent shall provide lane geometries as depicted in Figure VI-2 of the Traffic Analysis, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 5. The project proponent will participate in the City's Impact Fee program. The implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce the potential impacts to the circulation system to a less than significant level, XV. d) The project proposes a right -in, right -out access onto Calle Tampico, between Avenida Bermudas and the primary site access. The distance between these Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Endo Engineering, January, 2001. V ,�rf✓ G:\WPDOCS\VM EA Add.WPD a XV. f) drives may not be sufficient to allow for safe ingress and egress. In order to ensure that this potential impact is mitigated, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1 . A right -in, right -out access on Calle Tampico, between Avenida Bermudas and the primary access point to the project, will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading permits. Said access point shall meet all City standards for separation between driveways. If these standards cannot be met, the access point shall not be permitted. The commercial retail component of the proposed project includes the potential for restaurant land uses. The parking on this portion of the site, however, has been calculated for general retail use, which is much less stringent than restaurant use. Should large portions of the retail square footage be dedicated to restaurant use, the site would have insufficient parking. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1 . Restaurant use within the Commercial Retail component of the proposed project shall be limited to 5,000 square feet gross floor area. XVI. a)-f) The construction of the proposed project will have an impact on utilities and public services. However, the overall impacts of the project on these services is not expected to be significant, insofar as these suppliers will charge the business operators for their services, and provide improvements to these services as needed. In addition, connection fees will be required of the project proponent at construction of the project. These fees and charges will mitigate the potential impacts to a less than significant level. G:AWPDOCSVVM EA Add.WPD ti; } \ \ § / % ) \ \ � \ Q \ / g j \ ( § \ t § / } \ \ z § •• d \)\ / { § PLO [ § § \ 2 z o a 2 \ \0N _ ~ / \ / 5©/�� § z ®/° } e 2 = § j f o / r- 2 & = \ c2\=A ■ = z ) \ \ \ \ k E \ j § j \ � \ \ � \ \\ /> / ƒ\t ))\ 22± 2 [ � \ ( \\ / - § \ \ \ d / \ } . b27 § \� 26 j§ ! § § u \ ; (y )) \k �2 m ( \ \� } M \ d 2 ? § 2 155 b2Q ( c )) \U / / ] a ; ) § g ./ 7 \ \ 7 \ } \/\ § \ [ [ § [ [ § [ § ) § t {a; - . c/ 2 / u\ � ) \ \ \ \ } \ ( } k to \ ( \ \ \\\ ){ jR7\ ( f3f C\I § \� u \U / § \ ; (/ (/ \\ $2 ■ $z § \ 4 \ \ \� k§ E§ k - 2 ° �\( «g; S#! 9 � § � ` \ / »7 / $2 »g §\ 22 ( � \ d �\ 1 \\ } )S k( 5E \ 2 - /\ 732 E ® \\ cc \ &\ /[\ \ �( $k m \\ >® u2 / § U = m §! 7 I§S b\S Ln \ \� j) 2; ES k \ \ ; )/ )k /k &® � \ ( ®� $ \§ ) /§ k \ \° §� \/ / \\\ d ) (\[ / \\} / ® )$ E ( ) ® )) ±) \ 2 )® ] § 2E/ /W \ ( \\ § \((! 2 # 7 - / ?° \E (/ \� uu u= / ) § ( u u \ \ )/ )¥ )/ )) /( /k z2 m &2 m � k \ § \/ \ \ \ & ®ƒ \ § \ \ 2 ) § PQ a 2 G ( d ) § /\ \ \ 160 \ G/7 } \ }� )§ -S !m . ek ;k k5 kE SE E3 < ! ( § 3 u 3 2 / � E / § ' � ) ; \ )o )_ §§ ! )2 (\ ® (\ Lei 2 $2 ■ ./ . q 2 ) ( _ \& \ \ \ \ �CA / 5 \ \ \ S G / 9 \t / 2 ` \ i © { E., ;f C\G } \ \� \� �k ;k \U \U d \ 3 ) 3 @ \ § k w / a \\ f §E ƒ) §f /\ 3\ \\ j2 \ § b Q \ \ • # � ± # 4 e= � a bm } \§ 2d \� 2 v ( ( ` [ § / t E E \ / / , \\\ \\ \\ & » 3 !& s c £ = 2 f / # \ \�I_ ` \ $ r 7 \ e ( ) \ \ § ' EL ) 92 § / § / \ \ \ % { \ 7 163 ) W F d q U m Z q Q W a `.0 U W x O UU d a w cG U U z H x o� w� �O zz 0 0 w a O W U > V N F U ro y x 0. �I IC F � ICI N W 164 him 165 RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CHANGE OF LAND FROM MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO VILLAGE COMMERCIAL ON A PORTION OF A 33 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF THE LA QUINTA EVACUATION CHANNEL AND EAST OF EISENHOWER DRIVE CASE NO.: GPA 2001-075 APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 6th day of March, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL Development Corp. for review of a General Plan Amendment to assign a land use designation of Village Commercial to a portion of 33 acres located at the southeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, and more specifically described as follows: APNs 773-022-014 and 773-022-032 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 27th day of February, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL Development Corp. for review of a General Plan Amendment to assign a land use designation of Village Commercial to a portion of 33 acres located at the southeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel and unanimously recommended approval under Planning Commission Resolution 2001-018; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said City Council did make the following mandatory findings to approve said General Plan Amendment: 1 . Internal General Plan Consistency. The proposed amendment to the Land Use Map would change the designation from Medium High Density Residential to Village Commercial. The proposed amendment is an existing land use designation in the General Plan. The proposed amendment maintains consistency within the other General Plan elements, insofar as the Village Commercial designation is predominant in this area of the General Plan Land Use Map. The continued development of a mix of uses is consistent with the goals of the General Plan for this area of the City. 2. Public Welfare. The proposed project requires the extension of all public services to the site as part of project development. In addition, conditions of approval and environmental mitigation measures have been included for this G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoGPA.wpd G ' pj City Council Resolution 2001-_ General Plan Amendment 2001-075 KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montaria project which address safety and welfare issues, including noise, flooding and seismic safety. As the Specific Plan is built out, through the Village Use Permit process, site -specific issues which might affect the public health and safety will be further addressed. 3. General Plan Compatibility. The proposed General Plan amendment will be compatible with the surrounding designations in the project area, insofar as the Village Commercial land use designation is predominant in this part of the City. 4. Property Suitability. The property is well suited to commercial development, being primarily flat, and having adequate access to major roadways. 5. Change in Circumstances. The continued development of the Village requires a unified General Plan designation for this area, in order to meet the goals of the General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the City Council in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment 2000-411 assessed the environmental concerns of the General Plan Amendment; and, 3. That it does approval General Plan Amendment 2001-075 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as contained in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part of. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 6th day of March, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: IM JOHN J. PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California G:\WPDO CS\VM CC ResoGPA. wpd-� " i City Council Resolution 2001-_ General Plan Amendment 2001-075 KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montana ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC/AAE City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California G:\W PDOCS\V MCCResoGPA. wpd 7 EXHIBIT "A" 0; _ F ?wo , Existing Land Use Designations. MHDR, .MDRVY + , ,— - — - G ' YC C r,' �✓ .... CAiLE TA� —GO V C."�r� i MDR'%tea O > 41v Proposed Land Use Designation ..i ----- �. MDR' ' W s VC VC G ' ._ _rC JJ "...iCLE TAIWPLQ, VCR: MDR' a. J ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO VILLAGE COMMERCIAL ON A PORTION OF A 33 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF THE LA QUINTA EVACUATION CHANNEL AND EAST OF EISENHOWER DRIVE CASE NO.: ZONE CHANGE 2001-067 KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 6th day of March, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL Development Corp. for review of a Zone Change to allow Village Commercial zoning on a portion of 33 acres at the southeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel; and WHEREAS, at said Public Hearings, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said City Council did make the following mandatory findings recommending approval of said Zone Change: 1. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan, and the Land Use Map for the General Plan and surrounding development and land use designations, ensuring land use compatibility. 2. The Zone Change will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, as it has been designed to be compatible with surrounding development, and conform with the City's standards and requirements. 3. The Zone Change is compatible with the City's Zoning Ordinance in that it supports the development of mixed uses in the Village. 4. The Zone Change supports the orderly development of the City. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California that it does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. PURPOSE. To rezone a portion of land generally located immediately south of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel and east of Eisenhower Drive, more particularly described as APNs 773-022-014 and 773-022-032, from Medium High Density Residential to Village Commercial. SECTION 2. ENVIRONMENTAL. This Zone Change has complied with the requirements of the CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended) and adopted by City Council Resolution 83-68, in that the Community Development Director has determined that the proposed Zone Change will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. SECTION 4: POSTING. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, and shall cause the same to be posted in at least three public places designated by Resolution of the City Council, 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 approved and adopted at a meeting of the City Council held on this 6th day of March, 2001, by the following vote: F.AYA NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JOHN PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 71 C:Ord ZC 01-067 ( li'Y� EXHI BIT "A" Existing Zoning i z�' Proposed Zoning Designation ! FP RM VC VC "GC.- .., •TH ' L�ALLETANJPIGQ t. c 1 r RMN, 177 7 RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN GUIDELINES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A COMMERCIAL/OFFICE, DISTRIBUTION CENTER AND 227 WHOLE OWNERSHIP SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS WITH THE LEASING POTENTIAL OF 356 GUEST ROOMS ON 33 ACRES AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND CALLE TAMPICO CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-051 APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 6th day of March, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for the Vista Montana project for review of a Specific Plan approving design guidelines and development standards for a commercial/office, distribution center and 227 whole ownership single family dwellings with the leasing potential of 356 guest rooms at the northeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico, more particularly described as: APN 773-022-014 and 773-022-032 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 27th day of February, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for the Vista Montana project for review of a Specific Plan approving design guidelines and development standards for a commercial/office, distribution center and 227 whole ownership single family dwellings with the leasing potential of 356 guest rooms at the northeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico and unanimously recommended approval under Planning Commission Resolution 2001-020; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1, and all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said City Council did make the following mandatory findings approving said Specific Plan: 1 . The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan, the Land Use Map for the General Plan and supports the development of the proposed project, as conditioned. 2. The proposed Specific Plan is compatible with the City's Zoning Ordinance and the Village Design Guidelines in that it provides standards for the proposed land uses. G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoSP.wpd y City Council Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montana 3. The proposed Specific Plan will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, as it has been designed to be compatible with surrounding development, and conform with the City's standards and requirements, as conditioned. 4. Development of the proposed Specific Plan is compatible with the parcel on which it is proposed, and surrounding land uses, as conditioned. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the City Council in this case; 2. That it does hereby require compliance with the Conditions of Approval for the proposed Specific Plan; 3. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment 2001-411 assessed the environmental concerns of this Specific Plan; and, 4. That it does hereby approve Specific Plan 2001-051 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 6th day of March, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: /e1c19A0k0 ABSTAIN: JOHN J. PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC/AAE City Clerk City of La Quinta, California G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoSP.wDd City Council Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montana APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 179 G: \ W PDO C S\ V M CC ResoSP. wod 17 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2001- SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-075 - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2001-051 - VISTA MONTANA MARCH 6, 2001 GENERAL 1 . Upon conditional approval by the City Council of this development application, the City Clerk shall prepare and record, with the Riverside County Recorder, a memorandum noting that conditions of approval for development of the property exist and are available for review at City Hall. 2. The subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this tentative map or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 3. Right of way dedications required of this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1. Avenida Bermudas (Collector) - 32 foot half of 64 foot right of way, up to the point of proposed street vacation. Note: Applicant shall submit application for street vacation as a separate action. Street vacation application shall be compatible with Santa Rosa Plaza requirements (east side of Avenida Bermudas). 2. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - 50 foot half of 100 foot right of way. 3. Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - 50 foot half of 100 foot right of way. B. PRIVATE STREETS 1. Residential Entry Drive (off Calle Tampico): Minimum 40-foot width, back of curb to back of curb to a point past the first right hand turn available to in -bound traffic. 2. Residential Entry Drive (off Eisenhower Drive): Minimum 40 ft. width, back of curb to back of curb. 178 G:\WPD0CS\VMCCResoSP.wpd r f City Council Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montana 3. Residential: 31-foot minimum width back of curb to back of curb. On -street parking is prohibited and provisions shall be made for adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors. The CC&R's shall contain language requiring the Homeowner's Association to provide for ongoing enforcement of the restrictions. C. CULS DE SAC 1. For culs de sac use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A (offset) with 39.5-foot radius, or larger, or specific design as approved by the City Engineer. For non-standard culs de sac, right of way dedication shall be as required by the City Engineer. 4. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as follows (listed setback depth is the average depth if meandering wall design is approved): A. Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - 20-feet B. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - 20-feet C. Avenida Bermudas - 10-feet The setback requirement applies to all frontage including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall dedicate blanket easements for those purposes. 5. Existing aerial lines within or adjacent to the proposed development and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv are exempt from this requirement. 6. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements shall conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - Construct modification to raised median to include a dedicated left turn lane to the site from eastbound Calle Tampico @ Ave. Mendoza. 173 C I G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoSP.wpd City Council Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montana Applicant shall bear the cost of roadway improvements on the outer twenty (20) feet of the roadway. Eisenhower Drive (Major Arterial) - Construct 38-foot half of 76- foot improvement (travel width, excluding curbs) plus 8 ft. meandering sidewalk. Applicant shall construct the full raised center median. Center median shall include turning pocket for left turn from southbound Eisenhower Drive. Applicant to design improvement to compliment the alignment of the bridge. Applicant shall bear the cost of roadway improvements on the outer twenty (20) feet of the roadway. The cost of the median modifications shall be reimbursed from the Development Impact Fee fund in an amount not to exceed the budgeted amount. B. PRIVATE STREETS - 1 . On -site streets: a. Two -Way Traffic: Construct 28-foot minimum wide full - width improvements (measured gutter flowline to gutter flowline) within the 31-foot right of way. All on -site streets shall be constructed with "wedge" type curb design as approved by the City Engineer. b. Project Entry Streets: Construct 37-foot minimum wide full - width improvements (measured gutter flowline to gutter flowline) within the 40-foot right of way. All on -site streets shall be constructed with "wedge" type curb design as approved by the City Engineer. C. Cul-de-Sacs: All private cul-de-sac bulbs which contain raised landscaped islands shall be designated as "One way" and applicant shall construct minimum 20-foot wide full - width improvements (measured from gutter flowline to gutter flowline). Design approval and right of way dedication shall be at the discretion of the City Engineer. 2. All on street parking is prohibited and the applicant shall be required to provide for the perpetual enforcement of the restriction by the Homeowners' Association. 180 Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, turn knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved City Council Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montaha construction plans may warrant additional street widths as determined by the City Engineer. MAINTENANCE 7. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. The applicant shall maintain required public improvements until expressly released from this responsibility by the appropriate public agency. 8. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. 9. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit plans for approval by the Community Development Department prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking is complete, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for signature by the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 10. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 11. On page 2.6 of the Specific Plan, in Table 1, the maximum square footage of the office building shall be added at 20,600 s.f., and of the retail commercial space at 20,000 s.f. 12. On pages 2.11 (in Table 3) and 3.7 of the Specific Plan, the following shall be added: Maximum restaurant space: 5,000 s.f. 13. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Specific Plan and Village Use Permit documents shall be amended to show the location of all trash enclosures on the site. The plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Departmentl $I for review and approval. G:\WPDOCS\VM CC ResoSP. wpd t W 7 City Council Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montana 14. A master signage program shall be submitted for the proposed project, subject to Village Use Permit review, prior to the issuance of building permits. All signage on the site shall conform to the standards of the Zoning Ordinance. The Specific Plan shall be amended to reflect this requirement (page 2.19). 15. Throughout the Specific Plan the words "whenever possible", "wherever possible", and "are encouraged" shall be eliminated. 16. A final landscaping plan, which shows plant size, location, berming and walls shall be submitted to the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of grading permits. Trees along the perimeter of the site shall be a minimum of 24" box. 17. The landscaping plan shall include all frontages on City streets, and shall be installed as part of the first phase of construction on the project site. 18. The word "limited" on pages 3.3 and 3.9 of the Specific Plan shall be eliminated, and the words "no more than 10% of building square footage" shall be added. 19. The second sentence of Item B.2. on page 3.3 of the Specific Plan shall be amended to read Permitted ancillary uses shall include indoor or outdoor professional...." 20. The maximum allowed height in the residential component of the project shall be 37 feet. The "*" in the Table on Page 3.5 shall be amended to read, "...shall be permitted to extend up to two feet above the maximum structure height." 21. The maximum allowed height in the office component of the project shall be 22 feet. The Specific Plan shall be amended to reflect this standard. The "*" in the Table on Page 3.12 shall be amended to read, "...shall be permitted to extend up to five feet above the maximum structure height." 22. The Table on page 3.5 of the Specific Plan shall be modified to add the maximum number of dwelling units at 227 with the leasing potential for 365 guest rooms. 23. Within the Zoning Regulations section of the Specific Plan, the following shall replace the second sentence of the paragraph immediately following item 8 on page 3.7; and the second sentence of item B. on page 3.1 1 : "All interpretation of permitted uses within this Planning Area shall be made pursuant to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance." 182 G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoSP.wpd `m G I City Council Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montana 24. On page 3.8 of the Specific Plan, within the Table, the following shall be added: Maximum building area square footage: 20,000 s.f. Parking for Restaurant Use: 1 space per 75 s.f. of GFA. 25. The Specific Plan shall be amended to require that 50% of the residential and 30% of the commercial retail and office parking be covered by a shade structure. Plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. All references to garages in the Specific Plan shall be deleted. 26. On page 3.9 of the Specific Plan, item B., Permitted uses, the sentence beginning "Permitted uses for land designated.." through and including 1. Retail Uses" shall be deleted. 27. On page 3.10, item E., of the Specific Plan, the word "separate" shall be added immediately preceding "Village Use Permit." 28. On page 3.10, Table, of the Specific Plan, the following shall be added: Parking provided: 630 spaces. 29. On page 3.12, Table of the Specific Plan, the following shall be added: Maximum building area square footage: 20,600 Minimum Parking: 1 space per lock -off bedroom. 30. The Specific Plan shall be modified throughout to include the statement "All landscaping plans shall conform to the City's Water Efficiency Ordinance." 31. All changes to the Specific Plan which are also included in the Village Use Permit shall be made to the latter to ensure consistency. The project proponent shall submit amended documents within 30 days of City Council approval of the Specific Plan and Village Use Permit and/or a grading permit whichever occurs first. 32. The mitigation measures contained in Environmental Assessment 2001-411 shall be incorporated into the conditions of approval for this project. COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 33. The project proponent shall install suitable facilities to prohibit public access to the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. 183 GAWPDOCS\VMCCResoSP.wpd f a^ . City Council Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montaha 34. The project proponent shall obtain an encroachment permit from the District prior to any construction within the right-of-way of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. This includes, but is not limited to, surface improvements, drainage inlets, landscaping and roadways. 35. This project shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 55 and 82 of the District for sanitation service. 36. All Bureau of Reclamation facilities on the subject property shall be abandoned prior to issuance of building permits on the site. 37. Plans for grading, landscaping and irrigation systems shall be submitted to the District for review. 38. This area is within Improvement District No. 1 of the District for irrigation water service. Water from the Coachella Canal is available and shall be used for green belt irrigation purposes. 1.84 G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoSP.wpd G',6 185 RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL GUEST ROOMS AND A 20,600 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING ON A 33 ACRE SITE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND CALLE TAMPICO CASE NO.: VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-007 APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 6th day of March, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL Development Corp. for review of development plans for residential guest rooms and a 20,600 s.f. office building on a portion of a 33 acre site located on the northeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico, more particularly described as: APN 773-022-014 and 773-022-032 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 27th day of February, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL Development Corp. for review of development plans for residential guest rooms and a 20,600 s.f. office building on a portion of a 33 acre site located on the northeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico and unanimously recommended approval under Planning Commission Resolution 2001-021 WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for the City of La Quinta did, on the 7th day of February, 2001 recommend approval of the proposed project, by adoption of Minute Motion 2001-006, subject to conditions of approval; WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1, and all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said City Council did make the following mandatory findings approving said Village Use Permit: The proposed Village Use Permit is consistent with the General Plan goals, policies and programs relating to the Village Commercial land use designation, and supports resort residential and commercial opportunities for the residents and visitors to the Cove. 2. The proposed Village Use Permit is consistent with the standards of Specific Plan 2000-051, which establishes development standards for the project. 1$ G\WPDOCS\VMCCResoVUP.wpd / `� City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montana Village Use Permit 2001-007 3. The proposed Village Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, as it has been designed to be compatible with surrounding development, and conform with the City's standards and requirements, as conditioned. 4. The proposed Village Use Permit complies with the architectural design standards for Specific Plan 2000-051, and implements the high quality standards called for in that document. 5. The proposed Village Use Permit is consistent with the landscaping standards and palette in Specific Plan 2000-051 . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the City Council in this case; and 2. That it does hereby approve Village Use Permit 2000-007, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto; and 3. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1 assessed the environmental concerns of this Village Use Permit. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 6th day of March, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JOHN J. PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California 187 G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoVUP.wpd r City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montana Village Use Permit 2001-007 ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC/AAE City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 188 G:\WPD0CS\VMCCResoVUP.wpd 183 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-007 - VISTA MONTANA MARCH 6, 2001 GENERAL: 1. The maximum square footage of the office building shall be added at 20,600 s.f. 2. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Specific Plan and Village Use Permit documents shall be amended to show the location of all trash enclosures on the site. The plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. 3. A master signage program shall be submitted for the proposed project, subject to Village Use Permit review, prior to the issuance of building permits. All signage on the site shall conform to the standards of the Zoning Ordinance. 4. A final landscaping plan, which shows plant size, location, berming and walls shall be submitted to the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of grading permits. Trees along the perimeter of the site shall be a minimum of 24 inch box. 5. The landscaping plan shall include all frontages on City streets, and shall be installed as part of the first phase of construction on the project site. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the office building elevations shall include the depth of the window insets and design treatment as well as the texture of the wall to be similar to the residential component. 7. The word `limited" shall be eliminated, and the words "no more than 10% of building square footage" shall be added. 8. The permitted uses in the Commercial Residential and Commercial Office shall be made consistent with the final Specific Plan. 9. The maximum allowed height in the residential component of the project shall be 37 feet. The "*" in the Table on Page 3.5 shall be amended to read, "...shall be permitted to extend up to two feet above the maximum structure height." The maximum allowed height in the office component of the project shall be 22 feet. The Specific Plan shall be amended to reflect this standard. The "" in the Table on Page 3.12 shall be amended to read, "...shall be permitted to extend up to five feet above the maximum structure height." G:AWPDOCSVVMCCResoVUP.wpd �% �� City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended KSL Development Corp. - Vista Montana Village Use Permit 2001-007 10. The maximum number of dwelling units allowed in the residential VUP is 227 with the leasing potential of 365 guest rooms. 1 1 . 50% of the residential and 30% of the commercial retail and office parking be covered by a shade structure. Plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 12. All changes to the Specific Plan which are also included in the Village Use Permit shall be made to the latter to ensure consistency. The project proponent shall submit amended documents within 30 days of City Council approval of the Specific Plan and Village Use Permit. G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoVUP.wpd RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION OF A 33 ACRE PARCEL INTO 16 PARCELS AND 17 LETTERED LOTS CASE NO.: VESTING TRACT MAP 30043 APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 6th day of March, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL Development Corp., in order to subdivide a 33 acre parcel into 16 numbered lots and 17 lettered lots, generally located at the northeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico, more particularly described as: APN 773-022-014 and 773-022-032 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 27th day of February, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL Development Corp., in order to subdivide a 33 acre parcel into 16 numbered lots and 17 lettered lots, generally located at the northeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico and unanimously recommended approval under Planning Commission Resolution 2001-022; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said City Council did make the following mandatory findings to approve said Vesting Tract Map 30043: Findina_Number 1 - Consistency with General Plan: A. The property is designated Village Commercial. The Land Use Element of the General Plan encourages mixed use development in this land use designation. The project is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2) because mixed use land uses are proposed. Finding Number 2 - Consistency with City Zoning Ordinance: A. The proposed retail development is consistent with the land uses specified in the Zoning Ordinance, as conditioned. Modifications to the City's standards, which are included in Specific Plan 2001-051, are justified. 192 G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoVTM.wpd V �'� City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 March 6, 2001 Finding Number 3 - Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act: A. Parcel Map 30043 is subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act per Public Resources Code Section 65457(a). An Environmental Assessment (EA 2000-41 1) has been prepared, and a mitigated Negative Declaration has been proposed. Finding Number 4 - Site Design: A. The proposed design of the subdivision conforms with the development standards found in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, as modified in the Specific Plan. B. The site is physically suitable for the proposed land division, as the area is flat and without physical constraints, and the Vesting Tract map is consistent with other parcels surrounding the project site. Finding Number 5 - Site Improvements: A. Storm water retention will be provided on -site, and conveyed to existing storm water systems adjacent to the site. B. Infrastructure improvements such as gas, electric, sewer and water will service the site in underground facilities as required. No adverse impacts have been identified based on letters of response from affected public agencies. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the City Council in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1 assessed the environmental concerns of this Vesting Tract Map; and, 3. That it does hereby approve Vesting Tract Map 30043 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 6th day of March, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: 193 G:AwPDOCSVVMCCResoVTM.wpd �A City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 March 6, 2001 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JOHN J. PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC/AAE City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoVTM.wpd V L i 195 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30043 - VISTA MONTANA MARCH 6, 2001 GENERAL 1. Upon conditional approval by the City Council of this development application, the City Clerk shall prepare and record, with the Riverside County Recorder, a memorandum noting that conditions of approval for development of the property exist and are available for review at City Hall. 2. The subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this tentative map or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • State Water Quality Control Board (SWQCB) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit. This project shall conform to the requirements of the NPDES General Permit. The applicant shall submit a copy of the SWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site. lq& G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoVTM.wDd F. City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 March 6. 2001 4. Final maps under this tentative map shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of final map approval. PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. Prior to final approval of the General Plan Amendment application, the applicant shall apply for and acquire a street vacation on the effected portion of Avenida Bermudas and acquire the property rights to that portion of Avenida Bermudas that will belong to the property owner on the east side of Bermudas following the vacation, comprising that portion of Bermudas east of the current roadway centerline as depicted on Tentative Tract Map 30043. Applicant shall also acquire or confer easements and other property rights required of future tentative map(s) or otherwise necessary for construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of essential improvements. 6. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. 7. Right of way dedications required of this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1. Avenida Bermudas (Collector) - 32 foot half of 64 foot right of way, up to the point of street vacation. Note: Applicant shall submit application for proposed street vacation as a separate action. Street vacation application shall be compatible with Santa Rosa Plaza requirements (east side of Avenida Bermudas). 2. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - 50 foot half of 100 foot right of way. 3. Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - 50 foot half of 100 foot right of way. B. PRIVATE STREETS 1. Residential Entry Drive (off Calle Tampico): Minimum 40-foot width, back of curb to back of curb to a point past the first right hand turn available to in -bound traffic. 197 G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoVTM.wpd City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 March 6, 2001 2. Residential Entry Drive (off Eisenhower Drive): Minimum 40 ft. width, back of curb to back of curb. 3. Residential: 31-foot minimum width back of curb to back of curb. On -street parking is prohibited and provisions shall be made for adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors. The CC&R's shall contain language requiring the Homeowner's Association to provide for ongoing enforcement of the restrictions. C. CULS DE SAC 1. For culs de sac use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A (offset) with 39.5-foot radius, or larger, or specific design as approved by the City Engineer. For non-standard culs de sac, right of way dedication shall be as required by the City Engineer. 8. Right of way geometry for knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 9. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. 10. The applicant shall dedicate ten -foot public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. The easements may be reduced to five feet with the express concurrence of IID. 11. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as follows (listed setback depth is the average depth if meandering wall design is approved): A. Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - 20-feet B. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - 20-feet C. Avenida Bermudas - 10-feet The setback requirement applies to all frontage including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall dedicate blanket easements for those purposes. 193, G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoVTM.wpd ( U City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 March 6, 2001 12. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 13. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets and properties from all frontage along the streets and properties except access points shown on the approved Specific Plan. 14. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur. 15. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property owners. 16. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted of recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval of this tentative map by the City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the property unless such easements are approved by the City Engineer. GRADING 17. A substantial portion of this project site is within the Special Flood Hazard Area inundated by a 100-year flood as identified by the Flood Insurance Rate Map. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard Regulations). The development shall be graded to ensure that all floors and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year) flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall furnish certifications as required by FEMA that the above conditions have been met. 18. Prior to issuance of any grading permit(s), the applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and an approved grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist. 19. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscapil R'3 areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoVTM.wpd '- S r City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 March 6, 2001 20. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting properties and between separate tracts and lots within this development. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within a tract or parcel map, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. The limits given in this condition and the previous condition are not entitlements and more restrictive limits may be imposed in the map approval or plan checking process. If compliance with the limits is impractical, however, the City will consider alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 21. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a Fugitive Dust Control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 22. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 23. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each pad, the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. 24. Prior to any disturbance of the site, the applicant shall furnish verification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board that an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed. Applicant shall also provide a copy of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for this development project. DRAINAGE The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the following: 25. Applicant is required to file a Notice of Intent (N01) with the State Water Quality Control Board comply with the terms of the NPDES General Permit. Provisions of the General Permit also require the applicant to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). X. G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoVTM.wpd h" City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 March 6, 2001 26. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm (the design storm) shall be retained within the development unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 27. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual - lot basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for lots 2_ acres in size or larger or where the use of common retention is impracticable. If individual -lot retention is approved, the applicant shall meet the individual -lot retention provisions of Chapter 13.24, LQMC. 28. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated, unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route. 29. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on site or passed through to the overflow outlet. 30. The property must continue to accept off -site storm water from Eisenhower Drive that currently drains to the property. Applicant shows an existing stormwater inlet on the east and west sides of Eisenhower Drive that drains to the southwest corner of the property. This stormwater utility does not appear to exist. Applicant shall provide drainage for this section of Eisenhower Drive in a manner approved by the City Engineer. 31. Retention facility design shall be based on site -specific percolation data which shall be submitted for checking with the retention facility plans. The design percolation rate shall not exceed two inches per hour. 32. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. Maximum retention depth shall be six feet for common basins and two feet for individual -lot retention. 33. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in an approved manner. 34. In developments for which security will be provided by public safety entities (e.g., the La Quinta Safety Department or the Riverside County Sheriff's Department), retention basins shall be visible from adjacent street(s). No fence or wall shall be constructed around basins unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 35. The applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge which may be required under the site specific, City, or regional NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executec!201 and furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoVTM.wpd r City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 March 6, 2001 building permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this tentative map excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. 36. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water from any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. UTILITIES 37. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within the right of way and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 38. Existing aerial lines within or adjacent to the proposed development and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv are exempt from this requirement. 39. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 40. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements shall conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1 . Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - Construct modification to raised median to include a dedicated left turn lane to the site from eastbound Calle Tampico @ Ave. Mendoza. Applicant shall bear the cost of roadway improvements on the outer twenty (20) feet of the roadway. 202, G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoVTM.wpd G 1 1_ City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 March 6, 2001 2. Eisenhower Drive (Major Arterial) - Construct 38-foot half of 76- foot improvement (travel width including bicycle lane, excluding curbs) plus 6 ft. meandering sidewalk. Applicant shall construct the full raised center median. Center median shall include turning pocket for left turn from southbound Eisenhower Drive. Applicant to design improvement to compliment the alignment of the future bridge. 3. Applicant shall bear the cost of roadway improvements on the outer twenty (20) feet of the roadway. The cost of the median modifications shall be reimbursed from the Development Impact Fee fund in an amount not to exceed the budgeted amount. B. PRIVATE STREETS - 1 . On -site streets: a. Two -Way Traffic: Construct 28-foot minimum wide full - width improvements (measured gutter flowline to gutter flowline) within the 31-foot right of way. All on -site streets shall be constructed with "wedge" type curb design as approved by the City Engineer. b. Project Entry Streets: Construct 37-foot minimum wide full - width improvements (measured gutter flowline to gutter flowline) within the 40-foot right of way. All on -site streets shall be constructed with "wedge" type curb design as approved by the City Engineer. C. Cul-de-Sacs: All private cul-de-sac bulbs which contain raised landscaped islands shall be designated as "One way" and applicant shall construct minimum 20-foot wide full - width improvements (measured from gutter flowline to gutter flowline). Design approval and right of way dedication shall be at the discretion of the City Engineer. B. All on street parking is prohibited and the applicant shall be required to provide for the perpetual enforcement of the restriction by the Homeowners' Association. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, turn knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved construction plans may warrant additional street widths as determined by the203 City Engineer. 6s2 G:\WPDOCS\VM CC ResoVTM.wpd City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 March 6, 2001 41. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs, and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 42. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks). 43. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. 44. Knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 45. Public streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations which convey water without ponding and provide lateral containment of dust and residue for street sweeping. On -site private streets shall have a wedge curb, the design of which shall be approved by the City Engineer. The lip of the wedge curb at the flowline shall be vertical (1/8" batter) and a minimum of 0.1' in height. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to normal curbing prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot. 46. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials): Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b. Collector 4.0"/5.00" Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00" Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00" Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50" 47. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate grada' G:\WPDO CS\V MCCResoVTM.wpd G',' 3 City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 March 6, 2001 test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. 48. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the project or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. 49. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Main project entry (Off Calle Tampico across from Avenida Mendoza). No restrictions applied to turning movements at this location. B. Main project entry (Off Eisenhower Drive) - To be located approximately 645 feet north of the centerline of Calle Tampico along Eisenhower Drive. Access and egress will be restricted to right turn in, right turn out and left turn in. C. Avenida Bermudas - No restrictions applied to turning movements at this location. LANDSCAPING 50. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. 51. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit plans for approval by the Community Development Department prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking is complete, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for signature by the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. GAWPDOCS\VMCCResoVTM.wpd G ,'. 4 City Council Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 March 6, 2001 52. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. PUBLIC SERVICES 53. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by Sunline Transit and approved by the City Engineer. MAINTENANCE 54. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. The applicant shall maintain required public improvements until expressly released from this responsibility by the appropriate public agency. FEES AND DEPOSITS 55. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. 21() G:\WPDOCS\VMCCResoVTM.wpd p. U '.' 5 bm ATTACHMENTS :MIs G `, ii 07,01 G , ', ATTACHMENT #2 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes February 7, 2001 2. Committee Member Bobbitt questioned the bids that had been submitted as to whether or not there was any stipulation requiring which bid must be accept. Staff stated no; if the bid is over $3,OOO a different bidding procedure has to be followed. 3. Committee Reynolds stated it appears they are bidding on two different things. The bid for $2,9OO is for two coats of paint. The other bid has a sealer and two coats of paint. Staff stated one of the issues is that there are no plans or specifications required. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that if there are no specifications then different contractors will bid according to what they think is needed. If the lower bid is acceptable to the applicant, it should be up to the applicant to make that decision, as long as it is a reputable contractor. 5. Ms. Franco stated she would be going with the lower bid. 6. Commissioner Reynolds stated it seemed better to have the sealer as it is an older building. 7. Commissioner Bobbitt stated it should have the same score as the previous application as it is a continuation of the work previously reviewed. 8. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Reynolds to adopt Minute Motion 2001-005 recommending approval of CPIP 008 with a scoring total of 72.5, as the previous application. Unanimously approved. B. Village Use Permit 2001-007; a request of KSL Development Corporation for review of landscaping and architectural plans for the residential and office components of a 33 acre site located on to north side of Calle Tampico, and bounded on the west by Eisenhower Drive and the east by Avenida Bermudas. Planning Manger Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff noted that due to the generality of the landscaping it be brought back to the ALRC. 2. Mr. Forrest Haag, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the project, and stated he had no objections to the conditions F as submitted by staff. O:\WPDOCS\ALRC2-7-Ol.wpd 2 G c `7 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes February 7, 2001 3. Mr. Frank Stalls, South Coast Architects made a presentation on the architectural plans. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the existing height restrictions. Staff stated they were 35 -feet for the buildings and any buildings along an Image Corridor, within 150 feet of the right- of-way, cannot exceed 22 feet in height. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if they exceed that height. Staff stated yes, but the Planning Commission would address this issue at their meeting. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what the actual use of the buildings would be. Mr. Haag stated they will be single family attached, whole ownership partnership that can include lock off guest rooms. An individual unit can lock off a room and lease it. Planning Manager Christi di lorio stated they are designed for to allow individual rooms to be locked off. 5. Committee Member Reynolds asked if they could be used by the La Quinta Hotel as rentals. Mr. Haag stated yes. With the success of the Resort Homes at the Hotel, the owners of these units can allow the Hotel to use the keyed rooms for rentals. KSL has not yet defined how that leasing will work. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if it is like a condo, pud, and who will maintain the grounds. Mr. Haag stated there will be an HOA who will be responsible for the common area with their HOA dues. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the building maintenance will be handled by HOA. Mr. Haag stated yes. 7. Committee Member Reynolds stated that when this area was considered for an elementary school there was problems with the access off of Eisenhower Drive and a determination was made that it should be a right in and out. Mr. Haag stated the traffic study stated that at the City's buildout, they were directed to use the City's traffic engineer and he determined that no left turn out would be allowed. There would be a right in and out on Eisenhower Drive. As there is room in the median a left turn in would be allowed with no traffic signal. Full turn movement would be allowed at the Calle Tampico entrance. At the office site it would have a full turn movement at Avenida Bermudas. 8. Mr. Jack Di Benedetto, representing Williams Scotsman, stated they were a modular contractor, and the plan is to fabricate the frame of the buildings (commercial coach) in Riverside and transport them in sections to the site. He proceeded to explain the G:\WPDOCS\ALRC2-7-Ol.wpd 3 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes February 7, 2001 construction of the units. The modulars will be used as the KSL corporate headquarters. Mr Haag stated the veneers proposed for this commercial coach will replicate the feel of the residential component of this site. Mr. Di Benedetto stated they are unfinished when they arrive. The plan is to have all modules installed and secured within two days. The exterior will be a constructed of plywood with a stucco covering to have the appearance of a residential house. Staff asked what the depth of the widows would be. Mr. Di Benedetto stated they will be inset. The walls will have a ten to 12 inch thick. 9. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the windows need to have the same appearance as the condos. The rendering shows some shutters and others do not and this should be clarified. He does have a concern with the term modular as they can be unsightly and the current ones used by KSL are unsightly. If they have a stucco finish it will improve their appearance. He asked if it was to be a tile roof or mansard. Mr. Di Benedetto stated trusses will be applied on site. Mr. Haag stated it was a shed roof with a parapet. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the air conditioning equipment. Mr. Di Benedetto stated it will be hidden within the roof well. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if it would be a concrete slab foundation. Mr. Di Benedetto stated it will be a monolithic concrete stem wall foundation with concrete supports. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the grade was existing or lower. Mr. Di Benedetto stated it would be 18 inches above the grade. Committee Member Bobbit stated that may be a problem with the type of soils in this area and asked what type of arrangements are being made to get the water out from under the floor. Mr. Di Benedetto stated a concrete slurry seal with drain to storm system system. 10. Committee Member Reynolds asked how many years other modular units that they have installed have lasted. Mr Di Benedetto stated the corporate office buildings were 20 years old. Committee Member Reynolds stated it appears to be a temporary building. Mr. Di Benedetto stated it is anything but temporary. Mr. Don Ferguson, also with Williams Scotsman, stated they have been doing buildings like this especially with the military. Now commercial uses are being used as well as hospitals. Mr. Haag asked the square footage cost of the of these buildings. Mr. Di Benedetto stated approximately $100 a square foot. Mr. Haag stated that KSL, with their limited timeline for use of their site development permit for their existing location, they are looking to 2,1.t use this type of building because of their fast construction time. G:AWPDOCSVALRC2-7-Ol.wpd 4 r-, Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes February 7, 2001 They are becoming an asset to while minimizing the site impacts. Mr. Di Benedetto went on to explain the State building requirements they have to meet. 1 1 . There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Member Bobbitt/Reynolds to adopt Minute Motion 2001-006 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2000- 007, as recommended. a. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the office building elevations shall include the depth of the window insets and design treatment as well as the texture of the wall to be similar to the residential component. Unanimously approved. C. Site Development Permit 2000-688; a request of John Vuksic, Architectural Project Manager, for building elevations and landscaping plans for two retail buildings located at the northwest corner of Highway 11 and Washington Street within the Point Happy Commercial center. 1. Planning Manager Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Mr. John Vuksic, architect for the project, made a presentation of the project. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what the uses would be. Mr. Viksic gave the uses. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the widows and surrounds on the windows would be as proposed as he likes the shutters. He was concerned however, about whether or not there was any other treatment that could be applied to them to have them hold up in this weather to not let them dry up and crack. Mr. Vuksic stated they could be made out of metal which would not have the same look. Discussion followed. 4. Committee Member Reynolds stated he had no comment. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Member Reynolds/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2001-007 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2000-688, subject to the conditions. Unanimously approved. j G:\WPDOCS\ALRC2-7-Ol.wpd 5 �,^ .+ r ATTACHMENT #3 Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2001 B. Chairman Robbins opened the public h ng and asked for the staff report. Staff requested thi5litem be continued to the Planning Commission meetiwof March 27, 2001, as requested by the applicant.-� 2. There being" no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Tyler to continue this item to March 13, 2001. Unanimously approved. KSL Development Corporation for 1) Declaration of Environmental Im designated as Medium High Densit, and review design guidelines ai commercial/office, distribution cent family dwellings with the leasing poi of development plans for the resider and 4) the subdivision of 33 acres it for the property locatedat the north Calle Tampico. e Trast"Map 30043; a request of wtification of a Mitigated Negative �,t 2); change lands currently esiclerttial to Village Commercial, development standards for a and 227 whole ownership single Lial of 3655 guest rooms; 3) review 1/9uest room and office buildings; 1:itumbered and 17 lettered lots It corner of Eisenhower Drive and 1 . Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins stated he understood they were requesting 38 feet in height within the Specific Plan. Staff stated that the Specific, Plan was silent as to the height limitations within the Image Corridor and therefore the Zoning Code would govern and that a 22 foot requirement would apply along Calle Tampico. So the applicant is speaking to the 38 feet outside of the Image Corridor within the residential. Staff clarified that the office building is 27 feet in height and the tower element is the only part that extends beyond the 22 feet. 3. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Butler asked if this type of building structure proposed for the office was allowed in the City. His concern was whether or not this buildings ability to be temporary would be an issue. Staff stated yes, the building structure was allowed and the applicant could explain it in more detail. G:\WPDOCS\PC2-27-01.wpd 2 G ;? Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2001 4. Commissioner Tyler asked if these were the same modulars that were currently being used by KSL Development Corporation at PGA West. Staff stated no and the applicant would explain the construction during their presentation. Commissioner Tyler asked when the applicant was required to remove the modulars at PGA West. Staff stated June, 2001. 5. Commissioner Kirk asked if this project met the Water Efficiency Ordinance. Staff stated yes. Commissioner Kirk asked that the Commission see the calculations to understand how a project that devotes most of its landscaping to a lake meets a Water Efficiency Ordinance. Staff stated the applicant has the calculations. Commissioner Kirk asked why the. Mitigation Monitoring Report was included at this time and not previously. Staff stated it should have been included with all reports and would be included in future reports. Commissioner Kirk questioned why it was necessary. Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated it was reviewed by staff and the analysts concluded that the Mitigation Monitoring Plan should be attached, for the Commission's review and approval along with the required environmental assessment. He would prepare a more detailed explanation to present at their next meting. 6. Commissioner Kirk stated he would like staff to explain the phasing. plan in regards to the corporate office and the reason stated for its priority, secondly would be the parking, thirdly residential, and lastly retail/commercial. The Commission is being asked to approve Phases I and III and not ll, and he would like staff to explain the timing and why they were not approving Phase ll. In addition, he would like to know from the applicant if and how staff's recommendation on reducing the height of the structure affects the residential component of the plan; can you get three stories into a 35 foot structure. 7. r> %Commissioner Tyler stated he did not understand why the Commission was only reviewing the architectural design and site plan for the residential/guest rooms and the office components. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste stated the design of the individual components need to be reviewed as part of individual Village Use Permit (VUP) and it is the applicant's choice at this time to only submit VUP's for the residential and office Z components, not for the others which will be brought to the Commission at a later date. U�3 G:\WPDOCS\PC2-27-01.wpd 3 Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2001 8. Commissioner Kirk stated the phasing plan suggests I -office, II - parking, III -residential and yet the applicant is only submitting Phases I and III. The phasing diagram does not agree. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste clarified they are Planning Area numbers rather than Phasing Plans. Commissioner Kirk stated they are on the Phase Plan pages. It appears that Phases I and 11 have very little to do with Phase III as the circulation is not tied. There is a common wall or boundary, but the projects do not appear to be interrelated and maybe the applicant could explain why they chose to take this direction. 9. Commissioner Tyler questioned the street vacation status as it was to be tied with the Santa Rosa Plaza project and he was wondering whether or not the two could be tied together. Also the calculation of parking spaces per, square feet for the retail component which cannot have restaurants; but in the Specific Plan where they list the types of uses that may take place in the residential component, restaurants are included. It seems the same guidelines should be applied to Part A as it is in Part B. The same thing applies when you are placing percentage limits on how much of the office component can be used for meeting rooms. A similar percentage should be applied to all the non-residential uses that can be accommodated in the residential component. There seems to be an inconsistency as to how they are applied. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste explained the restaurant use in the commercial component is proposed as a principal use. The retail uses that are proposed in the residential section are proposed as either ancillary or supporting to the guest services and therefore are treated differently in the two sections of the plan. Commissioner Tyler asked if this implied that a non -guest cannot use thosefacilities and therefore does not need to park anywhere. It is confusing why the differentiation. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste stated it does not imply that a non -guest would not be using the facility, but just as a calculation for a hotel would be based on the number of rooms and that calculation factors in the potential for guests coming in addition to the guests staying in the hotel rooms, guests using the facilities at the hotel in addition to the guests are factored into the flat rate that it is a parking space requirement. Commissioner Tyler asked if it would be appropriate to put a limit on the amount of ancillary floor space that can be G:AWPDOCSVPC2-27-01 .wpd 4 �1 !k Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2001 devoted to ancillary items. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste stated the Zoning Code defines the limits between principal uses and ancillary uses. Commissioner Tyler asked that Condition 3.A.1. should be amended to state the "potential" street vacation. Also references to garages should be deleted or addressed. 10. Commissioner Kirk stated that on Page 2.3 and 2.4 of the Specific Plan it shows the existing land use and zoning designations as VC on the southern property, why the project!aind Its neighbor to the east are zoned differently as implied by a different color shown within the Specific Plan; what is the difference? Staff stated there is no difference. 11. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address0e Commission. Mr. Forrest Haag, representing KSL Development Corporation, gave a presentation on the project. 12. Commissioner Abels asked what the rationale was for using this type of building structure for the office instead of permanent structure. Mr. Haag stated timing._ All the concepts are coming together at the same time and with the time constraints to move the corporateoffices from PGA West to this new site, the corporate buildings are being built off -site and will be ready for placement in order to meet that time constraint. Commissioner Abels asked if they did not have the time constraints would they use the 'same building structure. Mr. Haag stated yes, because they are basically being built the same way. There is an economy factor to having the building built off -site while they are preparing the site where they can control the labor, weather, material supplies, etc. Mr. Hosea, KSL Development Corporation, stated they ,are 'using this construction type not only due to the speed but also because of the quality. Commissioner Abels asked about the longevity factor. Mr. Hosea stated it would be the same as a stick building. It is their intention to occupy these buildings forever. 13.''' Commissioner Tyler asked if there was a problem with semantics. The Code refers to temporary interim buildings and that is being applied here, but seems to be an inappropriate use of those terms. Planning Consultant Nicole stated the Code addresses the uses in the zone, not the structure. This is not intended to be a temporary structure. G:\WPDOCS\PC2-27-01.wpd 5 G 15 Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2001 14. Commissioner Butler asked if the distribution center would be modular and what would be the use of the building. Will it bring more traffic into that area which will need more parking and the report states there is more than adequate parking being provided? Mr. Hosea stated there are currently 630 parking spaces. They are replacing the 230 parking spaces for employees, now parking in the interim lot at the southeast corner of Avenue 50 and Eisenhower Drive. The distribution center is planned to replace the one at the La Quinta Hotel which will help the traffic circulation problems currently at the Hotel 15. Commissioner Kirk stated the design is good, but `the concern is with the quality of the building.. Why are they using this type of building for themselves and not for the products they are selling Mr. Hosea stated market acceptance ,would not allow this. Commissioner Kirk asked about the two foot height reduction and what impacts will this have on their residential product. Can they get a three story building,in under 35 feet?Mr. Hosea stated yes, and it does have a significant impact because the only place you can get it is out of the plate line, They are taking their plates from 10 or 11 and making them 9 or 1 P116 accomplish the one or two feet. They have pushed the buildings back out of the Image Corridor setback and are asking for the additional height. Commissioner Kirk asked if, the residential component is now Phase II„is this a change in the corporate policy. Mr. Hosea stated it was an: oversight on their part. They do intend to build the office building and parking lot this summer. The buyer of the residential product is also intending to begin construction this summer. They will probably start all three phases at the same 16. Commissioner Butler asked about the additional ten feet for architectural features. Mr. Hosea stated they would remove that in hopes of having the 37 feet. They want the proposed office tower to break up the roof lines. 17. Commissioner Abels asked if they could live with the 35 feet. Mr. Hosea stated they are hoping for the 37 feet. Commissioner Abels stated he has concern with the 37 feet. 18. Commissioner Tyler stated the ten foot height footnote for architectural features appears on three charts in the Specific Plan. Would they be willing to waive that footnote in all cases? Mr.0$-z.0,: 2 w GAVVPDOCS\PC2-27-01.wpd 6 Cr�1) Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2001 Hosea stated that allowance is on all their documents. Commissioner Tyler asked where the 37 feet is measured from. It appears there is a berm and will take the building above the ground level. Staff stated that it would be measured per the Code requirement which is the finish grade at the base of the wall. Mr. Chris Bergh stated the existing ground is at elevation; of 38 or 39 and they are putting pads level at elevation 42. The entrance off Eisenhower, the existing street is about 44.5 so they are 2.5 feet below Eisenhower Drive and on Calle'rTampico the existing elevation at the intersection is about 44, so they are a couple feet below that as well. They have taken care of the flood, issue but are still below the exterior streets. 19. Chairman Robbins asked if there wasany other public comment on this project. 20. There being no further public comment, Chairman Robbins closed the public participation portion of the hearing and asked if there was any Commission discussion.11 21. Commissioner Kirk stated he supported the design, but he has concerns with the construction of the corporate offices. An even greater concern is with the lake. Did the City go through the Water Efficiency Ordinance and do the calculations? Staff stated no, it was done by the applicant. Commissioner Kirk asked if staff determined whether or not the applicant's request meets the Code. Staff stated they have shown us a draft of meeting this requirement and the Code requires them to submit the final calculations prior to issuance of a grading permit. 22. Chairman Robbins stated he too does not understand how the use of the lake can meet the Water Efficiency Ordinance. Could staff give ai presentation on how the Ordinance is applied to such a project so the Commission can understand how this can work. 23. Commissioner Kirk stated he has a problem with our Image Corridor and it appears there is a conflict. With the Village Commercial we are trying to encourage a pedestrian feel, relegating the automobile and then the Village Corridor do exactly the opposite by pushing structures away from right of way and have lots of landscaping and encourage parking lots along the x G:\WPD0CS\PC2-27-01.wpd 7 Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2001 street frontage. The update of the General Plan offers us an opportunity to take a look at our Image Corridors. Where an Image Corridor and the intent of the Village are in conflict, he would prefer that the Village be the priority. He does not want to see the Village become a parking lot. He would prefer to give the applicant some latitude to allow other structures instead of so much asphalt within the parking lot behind the distribution center. He supports the height request of the applicantand in fact he would approve an additional one or two feet for architectural projections for the residential portion of the project. 24. Commissioner Abels stated he's It is a great project and he su modular building. 25. Commissioner Butler stated' he contractor of the modular,buildin staff's recommendation. the construction of the to hear from the 26. Chairman Robbins reopened the; public hearing. Mr. Jack Di Benedetto, representing Williams%Scotsman, gave a presentation on the modular construction. 27. Commissioner Butler asked ` who completes the tenant improvements. Mr. Benedetto stated they will. The exterior and roof elevations will be completed on site. Because of the speed the impact on the community is less. 28. Chairman Robbins closed the public hearing 29. Commissioner Butler stated he agrees with Commissioner Kirk on the setback and as far as the height of these buildings and the setbacks. he does not think two feet is an issue. 30. Commissioner Tyler stated he agrees with comments as stated by the other Commissioners. He agrees with Commissioner Kirk that it does not make sense in the total scheme of things to put the parking lot in front of the building to meet a height restriction. As far as a tower at 35 or 37 feet as an architectural element he would have no objection as long as the extra ten feet for chimneys, etc., are deleted. G:\WPDOCS\PC2-27-Ol.wpd (,r J S Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2001 31. Chairman Robbins stated he supports the project and has no objection to the 37 feet. He agrees that not having the parking in the front is a much better design. He is neutral on the 35 feet for the residential. He is concerned about the word in the Specific Plan as it refers to the Landscaping Ordinance at it sort of states it will comply with the Landscape Ordinance, by stating "...by keeping with the City's desire to promote water efficient landscaping...... It still does not state they will 'comply. Staff noted the environmental mitigation requires that they comply, so the Specific Plan becomes irrelevant. Chairman Robbins stated he agrees with the parking in the rear and has no objection to the height of the tower on the office and residential units. 32. There being no further discussion, 1: was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Butler to adopt,; Planning Commission Resolution 2001-017 recommending Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental:Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001 411, as recommended ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abets, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and ChairmanRobbins. NOES; "None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 33. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to adopt Planning, 'Commission Resolution 2001-018 recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 2001-075, as submitted. 34. AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. )ved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Commission Resolution 2001-019 recommending of Zone Change 2001-067, as submitted. _L>'CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 35. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-020 recommending approval of Specific Plan 2001-051, as amended: 011, Pt G:\WPDOCS\PC 2-27-01.wpd 9 (i ti Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2001 a. Condition #3.A.1. Add the word "Potential" street vacation. b. Condition #6.A.1. Calle Tampico: delete the sentence "The cost of the median modifications shall be reimbursed from the Development Impact Fee fund in an amount not to exceed the budgeted amount." C. Condition #15: Wherever "are encouraged" are used in the Specific Plan it shall be eliminated d. Condition #20: Residential Component shall be 37 feet. The "*" in the Table on Page 3.5 shall be amended to read, shall be permitted to extend up to two feet"'!' e. Condition #21: Office component maximum iheight shall be 22 feet. The "*" in the Table on Page 3.12 shall be amended to read, "...shall be permitted to extend up to five feet above the maximum structure -height." f. Condition #24: All reference to garages in the Specific Plan shall be deleted. g. Condition #29: The Specific Plan shall be amended to include the statement, "Aft landscaping plans shall conform to the city's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance." h. Condition`#37: chanaed to'28.b. ROLL CALL: AYES: "'Commissioners Sutler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: Commissioner Abels. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None, 36. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-021 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2001-007, as submitted. a. Condition #9: The maximum allowed height in the residential component of the project shall be 37 feet. The *" in the Table on Page 3.5 shall be amended to read, "...shall be permitted to extent up two feet above the maximum structure height." The maximum allowed height in the office component of the project shall be 22 feet. The Specific Plan shall be amended to reflect this standard. The "*" in the Table on Page 3.12 shall be amended to read, "...shall be permitted to extend up five feet above the maximum structure height." ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairmaft, ,? Robbins. NOES: Commissioner Abels. ABSENT: None"'" ABSTAIN: None. G:\WPDOCS\PC2-27-01.wpd 10 r�� Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2001 37. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-022 recommending approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 30043, as amended: a. Condition #7: a.1. Add the word "potential" street vacation. b. Condition #4O.A.1. Calle Tampico: Delete, "The cost of the median modifications shall be reimbursed from the Development Impact Fee fund in a amount not to exceed the budgeted amount. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Chairman Robbins. ABSTAIN: None. Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Robbins recessed the meeting at 8:42 p.m. and reconvened at 8:49 p.m. C. Environmental Assessment 89-110 and Tract M"aD 24230. Amendmer #1; a request of The Spanos Company for C tification of an Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration of vironmental Impact and the creation of a left turn access from shington Street onto Lake La Quinta Drive located at the east si of Washington Street, north of Avenue 48. Chairman Robbins 0pe d the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Plannin Manager Christine di lorio presented the information contain in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Communit Development Department. Senior Engineer Steve Speer st ed that in 1990's when this was first submitted and revised, a General Plan only allowed full turn at '/2 mile intersection . Since that time there have been several proposals on this site d each time they have wanted an improved turning movem t at Lake La Quinta Drive and staff has consistently denie it. Over the years circulation has become an issue that staff has had to address. On Major Arterials, staff has been all ing left turn in and no left turn out. The left turn is always t e most dangerous and would only be allowed with a signal. The pplicant at this time is proposing a lengthy left turn pocket which would allow enough time to make the left turn. This has been done similarly at Simon Drive and Washington Street, Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street as well as Avenue 50 and Jefferson Street. In regard to connecting with the Arts Foundation, it could be accomplished as they are off -set. He noted that Condition 13 needed to have the last sentence deleted. G:\WPD0CS\PC2-27-01.wpd 11 (i TO FROM Tiht 4 XP Qum& MEMORANDUM HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Y6 MARCH 6, 2001 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING NO. 2 Please find attached revised conditions for the Vista Montana Specific Plan and Tentative Tract Map as requested by the Public Works Department. Ti'T 4 4Qamrw MEMORANDUM TO: Community Develop ent Department FROM: Steve Speer Senior Enginee� DATE: March 6, 2001 SUBJECT: SP 2001-051, Tentative Tract Map 30043 Vista Montana - Modification to Engineering Conditions of Approval The Public Works Department requests that the following modification be made a part of the Conditions of Approval. Modify the following engineering condition of the Specific Plan 2001-051 to read: 3. Right of way dedications required of this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS Avenida Bermudas (Collector) - 44-foot of right of way, from centerline, up to the point of the street vacation. Please add the following conditions of approval of the Specific Plan 2001-051: STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS Q A. OFF -SITE STREETS 2. Avenida Bermudas (Collector) - Reconstruct the northeast corner of Avenida Bermudas and Calle Tampico and install new curb at 32-feet west of centerline, widening Avenida Bermudas for 100-feet north of the curb return. Provide 15:1 taper from 32-feet to 20-feet. Provide additional lane on the west side of centerline to provide dedicated left turn lane and through/right turn lane. Provide additional paving as necessary on the east side of the centerline, if no paving exists, to provide for a total of two 14- foot travel lanes. 227 ." Modify the following engineering condition of the Tentative Tract 30043 to read: Right of way dedications required of this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1. Avenida Bermudas (Collector) - 44-foot of right of way, from centerline, up to the point of the street vacation. Please add the following conditions of approval of the Tentative Tract 30043:: STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS EM A. OFF -SITE STREETS Avenida Bermudas (Collector) - Reconstruct the northeast comer of Avenida Bermudas and Calle Tampico and install new curb at 32-feet west of centerline, widening Avenida Bermudas for 100-feet north of the curb return. Provide 15:1 taper from 32-feet to 20-feet. Provide additional lane on the west side of centerline to provide dedicated left turn lane and through/right turn lane. Provide additional paving as necessary on the east side of the centerline, if no paving exists, to provide a total of two 14-foot travel lanes.