The URL can be used to link to this page

2001 11 20 CCCity Council Agendas are 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, November 20, 2001 - 2:00 P.M. Beginning Res. No. 2001-146 Ord. No. 364 I. 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 1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION, CITY OF INDIO v CITY OF LA QUINTA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, INDIO BRANCH, CASE NO. 025560, PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) 2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION, CITY OF LA QUINTA v COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, RIVERSIDE SUPERIOR COURT INDIO BRANCH, CASE NO. INC 010827 PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956(a) 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 do not attend the closed session. City Council Agenda Page 1 November 20, 2001 001 RECONVENE AT 3:00 P.M. IV. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 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 - None Vill. WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE IX. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6, 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. 1. APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER DATED NOVEMBER 20, 2001. 2. TRANSMITTAL OF TREASURER'S REPORT AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2001. 3. TRANSMITTAL OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 30, 2001. 4. DENIAL OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FILED BY JANILEE SAW - DATE OF LOSS: OCTOBER 15, 2001. 5. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR, SENIOR CENTER SUPERVISOR, AND ONE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSIONER TO ATTEND THE CALIFORNIA PARKS AND RECREATION SOCIETY CONFERENCE IN LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA APRIL 3-6, 2002. City Council Agenda Page 2 November 20, 200 6 0 6. ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT NO. 98-18, COVE OASIS/LAKE CAHUILLA TRAILHEAD IMPROVEMENTS. 7. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF A FINAL MAP AND SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT NO. 290457-2, RANCHO LA QUINTA, T.D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT. 8. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF A FINAL MAP AND SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT NO. 30125-2, SEDONA HOMES. 9. APPROVAL OF A CONTRACT TO RETAIN ROY F. STEPHENSON, P.E. OF BERRYMAN AND HENIGAR AS INTERIM PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER. XI BUSINESS SESSION 1. CONSIDERATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2001. A. MINUTE ORDER ACTION 2. CONSIDERATION OF PARTICIPATION IN THE COACHELLA VALLEY VIOLENT GANG CRIME TASK FORCE (VGCTF) A. MINUTE ORDER ACTION 3. CONSIDERATION OF AWARD OF CONTRACT TO TERA-CAL CONSTRUCTION, INC. TO CONSTRUCT THE CIVIC CENTER CAMPUS IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT 97-09. A. MINUTE ORDER ACTION 4. CONSIDERATION OF A PARK NAME FOR PARK LOCATED BETWEEN SAGUARO AND BOTTLEBRUSH DRIVE. A. MINUTE ORDER ACTION 5. CONSIDERATION OF SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY PROPOSAL TO CREATE OR AMEND A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT TO FACILITATE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ELECTRIC POWER PLANT. A. AS DEEMED APPROPRIATE XII. STUDY SESSION - None City Council Agenda Page 3 p0 November 20, 2001 XIII. REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 1. CVAG COMMITTEE REPORTS 2. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WORKSHOP/INFORMATION COMMITTEE (PENA) 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. LA QUINTA FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY 8. LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES COMMITTEE (HENDERSON) 9. MUSEUM EXPANSION COMMITTEE (ADOLPH/SNIFF) 10. PALM SPRINGS DESERT RESORTS CONVENTION AND VISITORS AUTHORITY (HENDERSON) 11. PALM SPRINGS DESERT RESORTS AIRLINE SERVICES COMMITTEE (HENDERSON) 12. PALM SPRINGS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT COMMISSION 13. RIVERSIDE COUNTY FREE LIBRARY SYSTEM ADVISORY COMMITTEE 14. RIVERSIDE COUNTY DESERT LIBRARY ZONE ADVISORY BOARD (HENDERSON) 15. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (PENA) 16. SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY/SUNLINE SERVICES GROUP (PENA) 17. INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES OF OCTOBER 10, 2001. 18. CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 2001 19. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 9 AND 23, 2001 20. ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPE REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 3,2001 21 HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 20, 2001 XIV. DEPARTMENT REPORTS 1. CITY MANAGER A. RESPONSE(S) TO PUBLIC COMMENTS B. UPDATE ON CITY'S MARKETING PLAN 2. CITY ATTORNEY 3. CITY CLERK A. REPORT ON UPCOMING EVENTS B. SELECTION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD MEMBER 4. BUILDING AND SAFETY MONTHLY REPORT FOR OCTOBER, 2001 5. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MONTHLY REPORT FOR OCTOBER, 2001 6. COMMUNITY SERVICES MONTHLY REPORT FOR OCTOBER, 2001 7. FINANCE DIRECTOR 8. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER MONTHLY REPORT FOR OCTOBER, 2001 9. POLICE CHIEF MONTHLY REPORT FOR OCTOBER, 2001 10. FIRE CHIEF QUARTERLY REPORT XV. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' ITEMS 1. DISCUSSION REGARDING DOWNTOWN BUSINESS DISTRICT (COUNCIL MEMBER HENDERSON) 2. DISCUSSION REGARDING PARKING AND SIGNAGE RELATING TO CALLE ESTADO . (COUNCIL MEMBER HENDERSON) 3. DISCUSSION REGARDING BANNERS IN THE VILLAGE AREA (COUNCIL MEMBER HENDERSON) 4. DISCUSSION REGARDING COUNCIL MEMBER'S CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (COUNCIL MEMBER ADOLPH) 004 City Council Agenda Page 4 November 20, 2001 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. PRESENTATIONS - None XVII1. 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. 1. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING TO CERTIFY A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-418, AND A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITHIN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA FOR SUBSEQUENT ANNEXATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 200 ACRES, BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY AVENUE 52, ON THE EAST BY MONROE STREET, ON THE SOUTH BY AVENUE 53, AND EAST OF THE EXISTING CITY LIMITS. APPLICANT: NRI, LA QUINTA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. A. ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION B. RESOLUTION ACTION 2. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A STREET NAME CHANGE (2001-012) TO CHANGE THE NAME OF A PORTION OF VIA TRIESTE TO VIA LIVORNO WITHIN LAKE LA QUINTA. APPLICANT: LAKE LA QUINTA COMMUNITIES. A. RESOLUTION ACTION 3. PUBLIC HEARING TO CERTIFY A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-429; REVIEW OF AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO SPECIFIC PLAN 87-011 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-708 TO APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A 25,240 SQUARE FOOT TWO-STORY BUILDING FOR COMMERCIAL, RETAIL, AND OFFICE USES; AND REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-064 TO ALLOW THE USE ON APPROXIMATELY 1.78 ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF AVENUE 47, WEST OF ADAMS STREET. APPLICANT: THOMAS LATHROP, LATHROP DEVELOPMENT. A. RESOLUTION(S) ACTION 005 City Council Agenda Page 5 November 20, 2001 XIX. ADJOURNMENT - Adjourn to the regularly scheduled City Council Meeting, commencing with closed session at 2:00 P.M. and open session at 3:00 p.m., December 4, 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, do hereby declare that the foregoing agenda for the La Quinta City Council meeting of November 20, 2001, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico and on the bulletin board at the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce and at Stater Bros. 78-630 Highway 111, on Wednesday, November 16, 2001. DATED: November 16, 2001 J S. GREEK, CIVIC City Clerk, City of La Quinta, California PUBLIC NOTICES 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 If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the City Council, arrangements should be made in advance by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 777-7025. A one (1) week notice is required. If background material is to be presented to the City Council, during a City Council Meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the City Clerk. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the 3:00 p.m session or the 7:00 p.m session for distribution. 00F City Council Agenda Page 6 November 20, 2001 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: NOVEMBER 20 2001 ITEM TITLE: Demand Register Dated November 20, 2001 AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION CONSENT CALENDAR STUDY SESSION PUBLIC HEARING RECOMMENDATION: Approve Demand Register Dated November 20, 2001 BACKGROUND: Prepaid Warrants: 47242 - 472731 18,715.76 47274 - 472801 5,939.86 47281 - 472901 53,704.97 47291 - 472951 45007.58 Wire Transfers} 1385294.21 P/R 7810 - 78791 118,689.85 P/R Tax Transfers} 43,690.52 CITY DEMANDS $938,972.89 Payable Warrants: 47296 - 474281 822,992.62 RDA DEMANDS 267,062.48 $1,206,035.37 $152065035.37 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Demand of Cash -City $938,972.89 alconer, Finance D&ector 007 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK TRANSACTIONS 10/31/01 - 11/15/01 11/09/01 WIRE TRANSFER - DEFERRED COMP $5,604.87 11/09/01 WIRE TRANSFER - PERS $9,937.84 11/09/01 WIRE TRANSFER - CREDIT UNION $4,733.00 11/09/01 WIRE TRANSFER - RDA ESCROW $25,000.00 11/09/01 WIRE TRANSFER - RDA ESCROW $25,000.00 11/09/01 WIRE TRANSFER - RDA ESCROW $65,070.00 11/15/01 WIRE TRANSFER - RDA ESCROW $2,948.50 TOTAL WIRE TRANSFERS OUT $138,294.21 11: 002 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP5005 CHECK REGISTER 4:56PM 11/14/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE 1 CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE VENDOR NO. NAME ***NO CHECKS WERE USED FOR PRINT ALIGNMENT.*** PAYMENT AMOUNT 47296 11/14/01 &01583 TANNI TYTEL 25.00 47297 11/14/01 &01584 VACATION POOLS 206.40 47298 11/14/01 ABL001 ABLE RIBBON TECH 149.18 47299 11/14/01 ACE010 ACE HARDWARE 827.63 47300 11/14/01 ACT100 ACT GIS INC 1700.00 47301 11/14/01 ALC050 BOB ALCALA 56.00 47302 11/14/01 ALL100 ALLIANCE SERVICE STATION 1345.99 47303 11/14/01 ALL200 ANN ALLMAN 336.00 47304 11/14/01 AME175 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES 210.00 47305 11/14/01 AME200 AMERIPRIDE UNIFORM SVCS 58.27 47306 11/14/01 AND050 ANDY'S AUTO REPAIR 348.67 47307 11/14/01 ARC100 ARCH 667.67 47308 11/14/01 AUT030 AUTOMATED TELECOM 410.32 47309 11/14/01 BAN015 DAVE BANG ASSOCIATES INC 3640.17 47310 11/14/01 BEN100 BENLO R V II 30.00 47311 11/14/01 BI0100 BIO TOX 99.40 47312 11/14/01 BLA200 BLAKENSHIP POLICE SUPPLY 777.40 47313 11/14/01 BOG100 SHARON BOGAN 170.10 47314 11/14/01 BRA150 JOHN BRANSTETTER 600.00 47315 11/14/01 BUI010 BUILDING HORIZONS 92700.00 47316 11/14/01 CAD010 CADET UNIFORM SUPPLY 332.89 47317 11/14/01 CAL019 CA ASSOC LOCAL ECONOMIC 75.00 47318 11/14/01 CAR300 CARQUEST 77.25 47319 11/14/01 CIT050 CITY CLERK'S ASSOC OF CAL 190.00 47320 11/14/01 COA071 COACHELLA VALLEY PRINTING 337.68 47321 11/14/01 COL020 PAT COLE 343.00 47322 11/14/01 COM015 COMPUTER U LEARNING CENTR 825.00 47323 11/14/01 COM030 COMSERCO 298.85 47324 11/14/01 CON025 CONTINUING EDUCATION OF 101.48 47325 11/14/01 COR150 CORPORATE EXPRESS 865.46 47326 11/14/01 COS050 COSTCO BUSINESS DELIVERY 638.27 47327 11/14/01 DAN200 DANONE WATERS OF NORTH 328.30 47328 11/14/01 DCT100 DC & TC LLC 5397.32 47329 11/14/01 DEP150 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 35.00 47330 11/14/01 DES018 DESERT ELECTRIC SUPPLY 73.18 47331 11/14/01 DES060 DESERT SUN PUBLISHING CO 826.59 47332 11/14/01 DES065 DESERT TEMPS INC 5111.46 47333 11/14/01 DII050 CHRISTINE DIIORIO 678.38 47334 11/14/01 DIS075 DISPLAY SALES 1913.45 47335 11/14/01 DRU100 DRUMMOND AMERICAN CORP 3035.43 47336 11/14/01 ECK100 HARRIET ECKSTEIN 112.00 47337 11/14/01 EDU100 EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES 44.03 47338 11/14/01 ELM100 ELMS EQUIPMENT RENTAL INC 328.98 47339 11/14/01 ENT050 ENTERPRISE RENT -A -CAR 704.43 47340 11/14/01 EQUO10 DALE EQUITZ 50.00 47341 11/14/01 EXP200 EXPRESS DETAIL 1210.00 47342 11/14/01 FIR007 FIRST AID SELECT 1205.43 009 003 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP5005 CHECK REGISTER 4:56PM 11/14/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE 2 CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE VENDOR NO. NAME PAYMENT AMOUNT 47343 11/14/01 FIR017 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES 193.50 47344 11/14/01 GAS010 GASCARD INC 66.59 47345 11/14/01 GE0010 GEORGE'S GOODYEAR 129.32 47346 11/14/01 GUM050 BRAD GUMMER 1001.00 47347 11/14/01 HAR010 HARRIS & ASSOCIATES 14385.00 47348 11/14/01 HEG050 HEGGE ELECTRICAL 910.60 47349 11/14/01 HIG010 HIGH TECH IRRIGATION INC 494.41 47350 11/14/01 HOA010 HUGH HOARD INC 185.00 47351 11/14/01 HOM030 HOME DEPOT 1208.57 47352 11/14/01 IBI100 IBI-INTERNATIONAL 199.00 47353 11/14/01 IMP100 IMPACT SCIENCES INC 5810.40 47354 11/14/01 IND030 INDIO SHOE STORE INC 140.29 47355 11/14/01 INF030 INFORMATION RESOURCES 210.00 47356 11/14/01 INL200 INLAND POWER EQUIPMENT CO 16.07 47357 11/14/01 INT018 INTERNATIONAL PERSONNEL 247.50 47358 11/14/01 JIF100 JIFFY LUBE/AFMS 30.19 47359 11/14/01 JIM050 JIM'S DESERT RADIATOR 275.63 47360 11/14/01 JOB020 JOBS AVAILABLE INC 147.60 47361 11/14/01 JPS100 JP STRIPING 665.00 47362 11/14/01 KEY100 KEYSTONE RIDGE DESIGNS 4799.00 47363 11/14/01 KIN100 KINER/GOODSELL ADVERTISNG 52733.09 47364 11/14/01 LAQ100 LA QUINTA VOLUNTEER FIRE 448.50 47365 11/14/01 LEA020 LEAGUE OF CALIF CITIES 375.00 47366 11/14/01 LES020 JANELLE LESLIE 9.10 47367 11/14/01 LIN050 JAMES LINDSEY 91.97 47368 11/14/01 L00010 LOCK SHOP INC 92.91 47369 11/14/01 LOP050 RAY LOPEZ ASSOCIATES 7200.00 47370 11/14/01 LOS050 LOS ANGELES TIMES 72.00 47371 11/14/01 LOW100 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC 197.80 47372 11/14/01 LUN050 LUNDEEN PACIFIC CORP 52737.96 47373 11/14/01 MCDO10 MC DOWELL AWARDS 39.83 47374 11/14/01 MEE100 WAYNE MEEDS 175.00 47375 11/14/01 MON300 MARIA MONTEZ 300.00 47376 11/14/01 MUN010 MUNI FINANCIAL SERV INC 5329.13 47377 11/14/01 MUN175 IRVING MUNOWITZ 367.50 47378 11/14/01 NAW010 RON NAWROCKI 3900.00 47379 11/14/01 NEX010 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 1970.21 47380 11/14/01 NIC101 NICKERSON & ASSOC INC 11433.50 47381 11/14/01 OFF005 OFFICE DEPOT INC 593.92 47382 11/14/01 OLI100 OLINN MESSAGE CENTER 100.70 47383 11/14/01 OUT100 OUTDOOR SERVICES INC 200.00 47384 11/14/01 PAR125 RACHEL PARRISH 308.70 47385 11/14/01 PCM050 PC MAGAZINE 39.97 47386 11/14/01 PER010 RONALD A PERKINS 26.92 47387 11/14/01 PIT100 NOEL PITTMAN 140.00 47388 11/14/01 PLA100 PLAZA SHELL 50.00 47389 11/14/01 PRI020 THE PRINTING PLACE 934.18 47390 11/14/01 PUB050 THE PUBLIC RECORD 52.00 47391 11/14/01 RAL050 RALPHS GROCERY CO 14.95 010 004 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP5005 CHECK REGISTER 4:56PM 11/14/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE 3 CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE VENDOR NO. NAME PAYMENT AMOUNT 47392 11/14/01 RAS020 RASA - ERIC NELSON 235.00 47393 11/14/01 RHF100 R H F INC 170.93 47394 11/14/01 RIG100 RIGHT CONEXTIONS 1494.25 47395 11/14/01 RIV020 RIV CNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLR 663.00 47396 11/14/01 RIV080 RIVERSIDE COUNTY HEALTH 2340.00 47397 11/14/01 RIV081 RIV COUNTY HEALTH SERVICE 73.00 47398 11/14/01 RIV100 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFFS 479870.16 47399 11/14/01 RIV110 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFFS 7728.00 47400 11/14/01 RIV152 RIV COUNTY TRANSPORTATION 12028.64 47401 11/14/01 SAX100 SAXON ENGINEERING SERVICE 2205.00 47402 11/14/01 SMA010 SMART & FINAL 206.38 47403 11/14/01 SMI150 MALCOLM SMITH MOTORSPORTS 229.04 47404 11/14/01 SOCO10 THE SOCO GROUP INC 96.20 47405 11/14/01 SOU007 SOUTHWEST NETWORKS, INC 4812.50 47406 11/14/01 SOU034 SOUTHERN CALIF ASSN CODE 240.00 47407 11/14/01 SOU400 SOUTHERN CALIF WATER COMM 750.00 47408 11/14/01 STA020 STANDARD REGISTER 1397.76 47409 11/14/01 STA045 STAN'S AUTO TECH 187.29 47410 11/14/01 STA050 STAPLES 166.96 47411 11/14/01 SUN075 SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY 384.00 47412 11/14/01 SUN080 SUNLINE SERVICES GROUP 446.36 47413 11/14/01 TOP010 TOPS'N BARRICADES INC 246.80 47414 11/14/01 TRU010 TRULY NOLEN INC 74.00 47415 11/14/01 TTI100 TTI NATIONAL INC 7.88 47416 11/14/01 USH100 USHERWOOD & ASSOC OF CAL 18.87 47417 11/14/01 VAL005 VALLEY ANIMAL CLINIC 608.90 47418 11/14/01 VAN020 DENNIS VAN BUSKIRK 462.00 47419 11/14/01 VAN075 VANDORPE CHOU ASSOC INC 1687.50 47420 11/14/01 VID050 VIDEO DEPOT 31.06 47421 11/14/01 VIS100 VISIBLE COMPUTER SUPPLY 90.13 47422 11/14/01 VON010 VON'S C/O SAFEWAY INC 14.48 47423 11/14/01 WAL010 WAL MART STORES INC 169.82 47424 11/14/01 WHE050 WHEELER'S 195.00 47425 11/14/01 WIN010 WINSTON TIRES 134.64 47426 11/14/01 W00100 DEBBIE WOODRUFF 410.50 47427 11/14/01 XES100 XESYSTEMS INC 365.00 47428 11/14/01 YOU100 YOUNG ENGINEERING SERVICE 2205.00 CHECK TOTAL 822,992.62 O11 z N l0 r m M ri N M rr Ln l0 r m m O c Ln lD r m r4 0 \ A~ H O z r~ ri U M M M M M (`') m m m m m m m m m m (l) M M M M ri W U Q a a H m r-4 ri H -4 ri H r-1 1-4 H r-I -4 H 1-4 I E+ ri F- H ri H ri r-+ E-H 1-4 ri H .-i H H ri ri H 1-4 ri H 1-4 4 H 11 r-4 H 4 r4 H ri ri H r-4 ri H ri .-+ H 1-1 ri H ri ri H ri ri H Ln N .. V` E-H z H O O O O O O m r-+ m Ln C' - ri m m l0 V' m Ln m O m N O O O O m 0) O 0 W z =) N (0) N O1 10 M (N c Ln m a) Ln C Ln 10 a) N m N w l0 Ln lD m O O �O Ln c l0 M a r� ri H O o 0 c m .a M w O 0 O 0 m rn Ln N a z a z a z a z �o o rn c r N o O 1� Ln Ln v W O W O W O W O N ri m r M H H H H a r� H rz w aL H rz w a H rz w a H rz w a a r� a Q a Q w U .-a Q a < U) w a Q 41 z O " U) U) < H O H C7 m C7 0 C7 0 0 0 H O H H 0 H H o H z < H H O E-H f.Z H O H U) < x H 0 H rZ H Uz mmmmz cnZ H a O a � a OrL4 O > (Z 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 w H 0 C.a w Fi w H w H w H w H w H w H w H w H w H w H 0 0 cn Cl) 0 0 U D O 0 M a 0 0 U 0 z H U Cl) z D z w z o z a z m z a z w a a z w a as .a a a as a a a a a a a aL a a a a, a a a a z w < z W rz H z w a z w cz H w O rL w > r34 w W w rL w rL w > a> O a D a a a O a O a 0 a n a D a =) a D a D a> O U) H > U) z > w> m U) z U) W rL z cZ Z a a co (n Cn Ui (n U (n vi Cn in � in U7 H rL H U W H Ca O z W m Ln 0 m Ln 0 m Ln 0 m u) 0 k.0 ri ri i > I z H 0 > z H m x M m •-+ m I r O I r O 1 r O r O r-+ 0 Ln Ln d' o Ln m Qr cr v' r A m -T l0 m m -1 0 r-1 0 Ln Ln m m Ln m m N C' O l0 \ H 0 z N r+ O O O o O 0 O o ri r1 O r O r O r O r O r O r r-1 r O r O r O r O r O N O ri H dG �C z a m w m a o O cL H a W m O o 0 O 0 0 o 0 0 O o 0 o O 0 0 o o r c m r c m r c m r IT m r c m r c m r c m r c m r v m r c m O o 0 0) o w N m Ln lD 110 N 0) Ln J z m M m ri r-1 N O N 0) ri ri O M O ('M O M O M O M O M O M O M O M O M O M O Ql O O) O O) ri O) O H z O O O O O ri (`') M M (`') ry) rM M M M M r N N r-i M O O O O O (D O O O O (D O U-) M Ln c Ln v Ln �T Ln qT Ln vT Ln IT L.f) V' Ln NT u ) qT Ln LI) M O Ln O N O U) Ln N U ri O I O ri O O r1 O r/ O r i O ri O .-� O r1 O r i O H O r 1 O r 1 O r I O 1 O r i O N O ri O ri O r 1 O ri r-♦ ri ri r-1 r1 4 ri 1-4 r-1 -4 ri r-1 1-4 ri ri r-I Ln ri Ln e-4 z 0 H H M O E-H U) O 'n a rC m a m a m a m a x U w H w U H Q a 0 o a 0 0 a o 0 a O 0 a z w x w a w x w rx w cZ w a w a w x w a w a w a U a w w H w H o m FC 3 3 �C 3 �C 3 3 �C 3 r� 3 3 FC 3 3 Q 3 z F-+ a U) z �4 z CO H >+ H z O z O z o z O m H CL z a a a a z a a a z U U a < 7 a s a z H H H Q H a w x Q x x x x x x Q x Q x x x H 0 .a z N a a a o z z H U U U U a w w w w w w w w w w w H m a z U) H rL W > > > > Q fOA Q z o 0 > M m c m qT m 17 m cT m r4 o O ri O r1 O H O ri O r1 O ri 0 ri o ,-, O ,-, O ri O ,-+ O o O Ln O o O 0 0 U H U H Ln ri o Ln r-+ 0 Ln ri 0 Ln ri 0 Ln ri o O a m O w U O w U O w U O w U O w U O w c O w U O w U O w U O w U O w U ri H U O U a ri L4 a N .7 a U w LjJ LZj w Lb FC FC Q Q< Q Q<<< < Q Q Q 012 006 z a 01 O 1--1 14 -i N H M r 1 CT r1 Ln H l0 H r r-i OD H m '--1 O N N N N .-i H Iz E-1 O Z r1 O \ r1 \ N �--� x U M M M M M M M M M M M M M M co ri W E rS H m 1-1 H r-i F r-+ H r-.q H H H H H H H H H H H H H E-1 E-+ F a a Ln (N .. v H 0 o 0 0 0 o r N r 1.0 0) OD OD r o o OD m IT M r .+ o 0 0 -7 0 c 0 H Z W E H z M N Q .-+ N r C 0D Ln 00 IT Ln 00 ri 00 m O r Ln I'0 o tT o M rn Ol r r o r >4 < a 0 0 .--i o r M r d' r N N l0 M r o 0 r 0 H O M O 0 r-+ 0 Ln 00 r M o H .--+ 0 C O o M C' m m c r F r M N M cw �D M cn r w a (� o M 0 0 a 0 < a < U) a H s a Q a < H z a < c Ix H a Q W,U) a H a a Q Z O H O O 0 O 0 O H 0 0 E+ o < a H 0 H O E-F O W E H O < Q. H 0 O 0 H 0 r l H < 0 w U H &- F a m a m a H m F w rz H U U H U H w H H w a H a m H m F a O H o Oa ff a O U U a U o a O w z o >> U) U) a O > U) a a o a a Za o w o (.90 rx a a O H U > Z Ix U Q Z z H z H z o H Z o Z a U o Z 0' a o z a w w 0 o Z w o z a U o z z " o Z U o H Z 0 Ix "u) w W > `.4 O x O x w o > Cf) H W > "W x > c4 C7 w (7 w > w 0 z O fz < w > x rz w > H x w > A4 o w > EIW U > H CO cn 0 0 m 0 m 0 m < w > << w w < w x w x U < a w > O m Q H z H w r-4 U W H o a Ln I 0) N Ln O > I Z > Z 14 m E N '-i c cM O (Y) OD l0 m O (M %l0 O N M 0) M O -1 N Ln -r '-1 O Ln N a) M O 00 0 co c H W H h1 a Z T O N O M O to lD 01 H N N ('') M 1-4 c -4 c' N O ('M cM r O O r O c' H x H .-1 '-1 (n N �D x r-i '-q r-1 ri N OD H z a < m w m a I o o w F Z w m 00 Ln 00 u) OD u) M m C' o 110 %.0 0 l0 t10 0 l0 0 l0 r-a ri M Ln Ln o, V' k.0 I'D N Ln o 00 Lrn N Ql Ln z rn rn rn rn rn Ln Ln Ln ri m 0') 0') 01% m z O l0 O l0 O l0 0 l0 H lD (M l0 ('M l0 m lD M N 0 1-1 O O 0 H z D O H O M r-1 O M r-1 O M N (D N -4 0 Ln M U) r-1 M LI) r-i (M Ln -A l0 M Ln .-i l0 r-I Ln M �D l0 Ln l0 l0 r-i O L) l0 r-1 O M lD .-1 O rl) l0 N O N U r!r O -I 0 r1 O H O H o Lll O '-1 o r-i o r-I O r-1 o r-1 o Cr O Ln O -4 O -1 o 1-4 Vl W U) v) w U) (n w U) CO U U z H a a a o z rZ z a z > cn U) 04 0 M O o U H U H U H E fz O x H < E O E O E O EE, Q H W U Ln a < U) z W U) z w U) z w 114 H z al w a U W a U w .a U w .4 U O U)o H a I z O fz O lz O D O w H w H w H U) < H H a z < W H a z Ga z G4 z G z H M < L] w O W W w C7 z > H x O m < a z w O F-1 x Q a a < x H w W a Q < Q< o m m m � z 0 Z:) O >+ > Ln r r1 Ln r r-1 Ln r r-i o 0 N 0 Ln O 0 o '-1 0 0 H 0 M O 0 M o 0 M O Ln ,-1 O 0 0 ,--1 0 0 r-1 0 0 N 0 0 H U H �� W w W W Ca U << U H <<< H H Z CQ z m o Im < QQ C7 m0 3 007 z Q a o M N V' N Ln N l0 N r N N N m N O M .--1 M M r-1 17 r-1 N M -i to r-1 l0 N (") M IH 0 F. z � M x U M M M M M M M M M OD O M V' 00 OD CD M r-4 E a Ln W 0 a F < CT) -i E-H r 1 H r1 H .-1 '-1 F r-I r-1 H 1-1 H H ri ri H -1 -4 H -4 11 H 'A r-1 H ,-A r-1 H -4 ri F e-+ r-1 F -1 ri H 1-1 r 1 H 4 H r-i r H N •• C' H z w H z O O o O O o N M In r m n CO N M CO O r 00 O r 00 O r OD o r In r CD Ln N lD r (N N OD 0) v; O O o OD lD r O O M O O In E >4 FC M 0 E O lD O r N O ri Q1 O .-i c N r1 lfl Ci• .--1 M M c M N OD a r.>r 0 0 rn o m 0 In 0 OD o ri O r '-i U' z H O O 0 lD w w a O O o r 00 N M f`'l O to r N r r o O 0) l0 r M M 0 M cl M z C7 N E w a U U z a w a w O a N z a �C O a a < a s 14 Q a a Q F a Q a Q z O H 0 O a F 0 x F O E-H 0 11 F 0 U) H co H H O F O U < F 0 F 0 W U H F E-/ CO H W r-a F F a H a H F a a < F a H F F a O H a O H O a H a O z " a O m a O cn E U) E U) E U) E U) E U) E U) E a O x Cl) x U) a O a a a O x U) a O w z a 0 F U a O F U z a U n z < H 0 z 0 a 0 z a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 0 z a W a W 0 z a H a H 0 z a w 0 z z O 0 z O a 0 z 0 a H U) w W .7 z 0 W .i O W W > U4 . Cu . Cu H 44 H Cu 1--1 44 F-I Cu H W > CL1 E fA , w > < a < a W .7 E w .7 U) a w > F U) W .7 H U) U) 0 O w C:. z 0 z 0 z a z a z 0 z 0 z 0 W E W E W a W s w E w a z H z H U H w W C) a In N 0 z I > z w (i1 E co N in O Lc) CO M N N r r N r-1 N I r-1 N 1 lD N H G] H H M z cT Oil c Lr) (3) c' r C' -�T r m Q' vm CT) O r-1 O ri r M O x a) 01 M r4 rn M 0) r r N a z � w w w I a 0 0 F w a w M O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 o 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 C1 01 c O o O 0 N rn N m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to l0 0 0 In p z F rn o l0 OD r lD r ,-1 l0 r l0 r to r l0 r lD r ri l0 r 4 l0 rn v lD m I�r to rn r1 lD rn .-1 l0 rn v l0 r c l0 rn o lD rn 0 l0 z O r In (M M O 0) M Ln M Ln M In r In r Lo r Ln M r In M N O m LO O Ol ri O l!n r-1 O In r-1 O N V' O r I N O N N 0 N U FC ri O r-i In vT N .-1 O r-1 r-1 O r-I r 4 O 1-4 r1 O r-I r-1 O ri -4 O r-1 r-1 O 1.4 uj O cT lD O Q' -1 O In 1-4 O In r-1 O r-1 r-1 O -1 r-i O r-1 o U U a + w z p( I W H a O E a 0 E a 0 E a 0 E a 0 E a 0 E a 0 E a 0 U O U O U) - a w a W H z x H " H" H H" a a a as �C z H W U z H z a z a z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 U 00 U H U) F U) w a a a w r 7 a w >+ < a a z 0 ra H w H W H w F W H W H w H W U) co r>r cn co rC G] 0 0 W 0 01 U >A W x u O U H 0 a a cn Q a 0 z x H m 0 u 0 u 0 u 0 u 0 u 0 u 0 u u u a u s F u o to 0 ri 0 r-1 0 r-I 0 1--1 0 H 0 ri 0 r-4 0 r-1 m 1-1 rn 1-1 0 O 0 O o Ln r+ r O N In O UP U >+ H H O H 0 O 0 FC O 0 �C O 0 �C O 0 < O 0 rC O 0 O 0 O h4 Q O 4 FC M a FC (Y) s rS O H H O <�l O O O r♦ 0 O O 1 U CQ co U U U U U U U U U U U U U U LAB U 1 1 008 z Q V' M r OO r-4 m r-4 O N Un M l0 M r M -4 N N N O M M M O C' N Io r V' N C' M N a H 0 z -I O \ ,-I U M -4 OD r 1 00 OD 07 11 M M !'M OD CD .-a M -4 M r-1 l'M 1-1 -�r M M M OD .-4 0 E Q a a Ln Q W r 1 H . H H H 11 H H H H H r-1 H EI -4 F r-1 H H r 1 H r-1 F ' + H r-1 E-+ N .. In OD 00 Q' Q1 .4 01 Ln V' r Q' N 01 Ol e--I r r N O Uo Lr) In to QO Ln Ln Ul oo N M O O OD r-1 Ql Ln z w x H z p C 0rn o C� lD L� 01 M r4 lzr ri U; OD In m CO M Ln M to M w r 0 rn Ln r m In M M r N >+ < O N M -1 ri l0 r-1 rl) Lr) OD a O O Ln OD 00 C' l0 c r N O M N M O O 00 H Io N CO 0) CD lD OD M OD N co r m z 10 M M r N N r1 OD lD M ❑ z p M In 1� 0 w U w a 0 U a Q ,4 a H H U < a Q a a a < w a w a w a w a w< a H z w .4 Q a rtr a ❑< a z 0 H 0 H o a a H 0 H O E-1 H 0 H Q H H �C H Q H O E �+ H O OE- 0 0 EF O W H H H F E-1 H F 3 3 S 3 3 H < F 7 H °4 H OH a DS O W Ho a z H z O w cn W cn w cn W cn W cn w a 0 a C7 O z C� z C7 z C7 z C� z a 0 a W z 0 a (DO ma W O cn > z z U 0 z 0' w a z z o 0 H z a H a H a H a H a H a p z p F-1 z a4 H a4 H x 1-- x H 4 0 z > o ❑ z z 0 Hz H p a z M Q H cn w w > H H> w c i w a > a a a a a a, a, a a a as w > a> w z H z H z H z H z H> w x> w a4 w O> a w a4 > m U) p a> W I z H ❑ > z H w (17 r N O I lD r N OD M ri p ❑ N O p 0 m W 0 0 r-1 V' Ll p .-1 cr a p m to U a N Q' O O Q' to M r-1 O r N M N l0 N M lD 1,0 N M r Ln N m In r l0 m Q' IT (n OD O N ri H ❑ H .`G z ('M O r O r-I O 1--1 O r-1 O r-1 O .--1 O r-i O r r1 M m V' m c 01 Cr 0') Cr 0) l0 M CT) In OD . 1 Q z a w w cn a I o 0 w H a W r 1 r 1 O O O O O O N O O O ra ri O O M N O O N OD N 00 N OD r v co U-) l0 OD O O O O (� l0 O O O OD O O O O O N w OD w Ln LO O O O z H N l� r-1 +O to M O r-1 O M O H O M O r1 O rl) O .--1 O rr) O f'M O M O M O co l0 Ol O M O M v H z O r 1 Un r-1 O r r 1 In r r 1 Ln r M Ln r N O r M Ln r ri O r N r ri to r M Io r M Lo r M V) r M Ln to N O to '-1 O r r LO lD IV O O U M C' C' c' r-1 N M V' '-+ r1 r-1 G' lD M M r-1 U rC O -1 O r-i 0 r-1 0 r-i 0 e--1 0 H 0 r-i 0 r-1 O H CD 0 0 0 0 O O O O 1-4 W 0 w > x H x H x H x H x H W a O 0 0 a o 0 0 0 0 H a H M o O H H cn m cn m cn m cn m m cn m w 0 z Cu z 44 z Cu z Cu z C>a H Un p : cn x cn H In a U ❑ W a w Cr w a w a W a W a U) U) 0 0 0 0 0 h U H a pq �C ❑ w a x a x a x a x a x a x w z cn a cn s cn a cn s U) rx [:a o a F p a I < W H C7 z w W W w W w W w W w W W H O W F r.> W H < W H < W H < W H < U .a a E-F z U W .7 z a !� hz1 U a p Q Q FC rHr�� rHr�� W 3 3 3 3 �C ❑ a < a w cn z H a o a a 0 a a 0 a a 0 a R: 0 a a 0 a O U w z w z w z W z W z H H Cr H a H a a< O E H z a a a a a a H U) 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z w < a w cA w U) a ❑ z O U O U O U O U O U O U O U O U O U 4 ❑ O M iO N O IO O ul O iO O Ln O I.o O io O I.n O O O O O O O O O Co O O O In co -4 O lfl O ? U H U H O 0 O O z O .-1 a O r1 a O 1-1 a O r a O -4 a O r-1 a O O 0 O N z r.>; N z at± N z < N z FC N z FC r-1 H U e--1 a W O W cn6�� O < U U U U U U U U U U ❑ ❑ O ❑ ❑ ❑ p O 009 z M .7 U) lD V' N M L N r C 00 v M v c O ul -4 Ln N u) (Y) Ln T U-) -4 O a H O z C V C v �r Ln r-i x u M M M M C7 V' 00 M M M V' M m m M M W c r� H < 00 -4 r-+ E-+ � -1 H -4 r1 H � .-a H r-1 r-4 H r-q ' + H r1 r-i H r1 H H 1-4 r-i H -1 1•4 H -1 r•i H -4 H -1 .� H -+ H � H a a u) N .. Q H w Z O ri N l0 U) L� O 00 do O O N M 00 Ln v M M d O O N M O C O o m Q) M O M C C' 00 O Cfl N Ol O O O O O O y+ a M 0 M r r r N r lD r lD -+ Dl r-i M O M --i -4 cT M CT N U) r O M Ln -1 c p\ i1) C 00 rM L c M C O O M 0 OD a) M C O O 0o 00 M m o N C' OD � r z O (Z Ln W x a a a a a a v) w a < a F� H Z U) a W rt a U) w a (f) 14 a a Q z O H E-H a < < H z O H 0 U > U > U > U > H O H o H a H 0 H O H 0 )-i a E+ o w a H U 0 H" U U H H 0 a H 0 0 z H W H H MMMMH E-H H H O H a H H H W W W H � H < H O a H a O H U H U H U H U a O w Z a O U) a O H a O H U a O Z U) Cr O z wCl) > O > > a O a U O W > z Z U ❑ z Z a z o U ❑ z a W ❑ z a ❑ z ❑ fZ ❑ Z H ❑ Z x a w a ❑ a Z Q< a a ❑ Q z Z ❑ H Z a U H U) W W > H Z H Z H Z H Z> W <> W z Z> W x a> w H cn w > z W w > H =) U CD W H > Z H Z H w Z> x W a> H x U) ❑ 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U a 2 < ao U) Q z H > w a WO o W a w a w a FC a w > w w U w H❑ 0G r O i O i rn 0 r O > i z > z W co x o m 0 M 0 M 0 m M o r-I ri r M r rn O o tlD U") U) Lr) U-) rn Ln N m Lr) N rn U) N o U7 H ❑ H ❑ H o z (") 00 to M OD Ln (Y) OD Ln lM OD a) r o r-i N lD O N N to N O V' N O C r O ❑ r O ❑ r O ❑ O M H x < z a < ao w w x i O 0 w H a W pq M U) M Ln m Ul) M LO o O o N 0o M 00 N m Lf) w Ln c O o O 0 0 O co r U-) OD r U') m r U-) o (D o rn c lD z lli O ul Lfi O ul to O U7 Ln O Ln r M In O LD M O r Cn O lD r M Q' U7 r-i lD In r-1 lD Ql O 1p Ql O lD Ol O lD Ol O lD Ol r-i lD H z r-i z 0 U7 c' Ln M U7 N o N O c Ln N U7 v O N O 0 in v U1 17 O M O M O rn U) m O in U U a r-I O .-A ri O r-4 O .--1 0 r-1 '-i 0 r-i H O -i r1 O .--I H O r-I ri O r-1 r-i o -4 .--I 0 -1 r1 0 .-A '-i O r-i r-i o r•i r-I O ri r♦ O U) U z U z H a O w 1--i M U a z z u U U o U U U U Q z O w w a Q a Lf) a z H z . z H z H rZ 0 U H H w Cl) w H H H Z E-+ Z H Z a U) H H cn W z w H U) W Z W z W G] tz W m W z H a a a a ❑ a < x U a E a E s w w w N H H w W H a Z W F, W H W H W H W Z U) ❑ W Z 0 H o H Z U) H U) F-4 U) H ❑ CQ H �C Z E-+ H H H H H >H < z 0 H W H H a W s W a a Ol a Cr a a W U) cn �+ a x a w a w a w a w U) H a a 2: z H a U cn cn z WWW a a w w a a a 0 ❑ cn w C/) w Cl) w cn w a x U) H a a a Q a ❑ E a E s H z H z H z a r� a x cn H Gu z w ❑❑❑❑ U ❑ ❑ x w w w WWW ❑ w z 0 a > Ljr) lD Lr) lD u) lD Ln lD O U') Ln r o o o O O O O O O O o U-) 0 U-) 0 Lf) Cl -4 O O 0 >+ U H U H O U) w O U) w O U) w O U) w O H H O U) H 1" O a r i `.L U 11 a ❑ .-i £ a 1-1 x s O H z O H z O H z O M a N a w x (v; FC U ❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ w W w w w w w w wo 010 z Ln Ln lD Ln r Ln w Ln Ln ID r ID N ao rn 0 -1 m Ln 0 110 r N -+ l0 N ID M IO c ID w N r-1 0 11 a H o z r--1 U M M M M v" c C' m c c' IT M M OD M M M M 00 W C7 r� a a Ln H W r1 r-+ H ri � H r-I H r-1 r-i H r-I H 11 '--i H r-I r-I H H 1-4 ri H 14 -1 H 1-4 -4 H -4 -4 H r-1 -1 H -1 r-I H r-I r-4 H -4 r + H r-i r-I H r-I , r-+ H r-I -4 H N •• a H O O O O m C' CD O N Ln O .r u 0) CDLC) Ln M C N O O O O N M O O O O O O O 0 O ID O 00 Z w X H z O O O O O r r IO O O O 0� cr r 1 r M m N N lD N N l0 r l0 r r c N u r O r-I O H 00 M >4 Q a O yr c Ln M -A r-I r-I Ol Ln Ln OD N m M O O o m C' Ln O O Ln ri 01 m Ln to ID N M rn O O r- x O O Ln O l0 x o r-I N ,-, N 1-1 N cn w O O 1-1 F-I W rt x a H 00 M Q' r 1 Lti M H x W w W CU) a s H H H r7 H a a a H a a as H a a a, a < U) W H « l (!r U] w U) w Co w r� Q Q a a Q H Z w a Q a r.� a w a ❑ Q z 0 z H z H E-H o x� cn En M cn H o a a H o al < U) < Co < H o x 0z H o C� w H o �❑ w z H o H FH < o W U H H Q< H ❑❑❑ H a H x U x U x U H H << H H H no LL H > Q D O H H H U) H O a H w w 0 w w<<< H H H Z O U) a O a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 w w a W x 0 D. x H U a O a cn a O a a 0 cn w > z z U a U a U ❑ z H a F-i a H H H ❑ z w w ❑ z a a a ❑ z tz Cii ❑ z O U D a ❑ z z (D z (D ❑ z a ❑ z H a H Co w H x H x> W a a a a M a M a M a> W w w> W ,4 w a w a w> w w c� w x> w a H cn W > H U) H cn w > H W cn > a a Co ❑ W > W > O Ul O U) H Lv H Lu H Lu O U Lu O L14 O Lu H H H H x W z H W ❑ W ❑ z H O Co W Lu H ❑ (Z Ln Ln oD O O O > I z > z W CO m Ln 0 m Ln r In l0 r lD v lfl r-I r O �r M N 1-4 00 I 0 I CT 0 1 v 0 lD 0 O Ln O O M r N IT N 0 H ❑ H H ,') z H Ln O Q' N O N O N cr N vM Ln O r-I 'A (D O O O O O r-a M 0) N r-1 r-4 N O O O lD H ❑ H x C' M M M r I . I M 0\ Ol 01 a) Q1 01 O O r-i Lr) � z a < oa w cn x I o O w E-H D; W 0') C' lD M d' ID 01 r-1 m 01 r-1 m O O O O O O O O O O OD OD l0 VT ID l0 c l0 l0 qT l0 dl c lD 01 v l0 O O O N O) Ln N M Ln N M Ln O O O r v7 m O m 0) M M M M m M Q1 01 Ol 0) Ol r Cn Ln Ln M M z H I tD H ID O r O r O r O r O r O r r-i ID r-1 ID r-1 lD r I lD r-1 lD M lD O lD O lD O lD O r O r z O r-A O Ln r-I O Ln Ln j� M Ln Ln M C' Ln C' C Lo C' V7 Ln -W ry) Ln -1 ri O Ln -4 O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln Ln ' T in N r4 r co ID U-) M Ln c' U U a e--1 O r-1 O 1-4 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O In Ln r-1 1-1 r--I r-1 -i r1 In Ln Ln Ln Ln r-I r-I V' Nr U z W H Co H z O M 0 Ln H U H U H U H U H U a W rt w Q w W H W H H a a s w w w w w U U v 1 < a H w s H W w cn w w w cn w cn w U H U z U z U z o O (D o O U rx W 0x w co U) < U) U) r.> a H U a H W H a 'z., CO H ❑ U] ❑ U) ❑ H Q ❑ H < ❑ H Q ❑ H Q ❑ H < O a.. U H ❑ I --I ❑ H ❑ U) - U) - z '�" z W W W r 7 W x U W < ❑ >4 01 w a U) w a U) w z E-+ cn H cn H cn H cn H cn H U) rz < UUU rz < rz < W (D Z w (D Z U ❑ (D ❑ U) H Dx U) H a W 0 H x a o x x x. a a x a � Q Q o o ag a << w U) E-I C1 z W W w Lu 44 w U4 w w 0 c� (� c� m cn x x x x z 0 .7 > 0 O 0 O r 0 r O r O r O r CD r r-i 0 r1 0 r-1 0 r-i 0 r-i 0 r-1 0 Ln 0 Ln 0 1-1 0 r-I O Ln o -1 O >+ U H U" I FC U N a x w N s x W O cz H w O a H w O a H Gu O a H w O a H Lu O a H Lu O cn < ( � O cn < o O Cl) < u O o w u O o w u O x ',) c� O z D O a Q x O s a' x O 0 W x O 0 x H o f Oil z M N ri r--1 N lD lD lD r W m W N r-1 M 4 v, ri Ol lfl O r m M U') . i O M r-1 r r1 M N M r-4 O C� F O Z � H r x U m C' M M rn M C' C' -T m rl) m m a Ln c� sCQ F < r-i ,--1 H r-A r1 H —4 r-H H r-a H —4 F 1-4 F 11 H -1 H -4 H F H -4 F H H 1-1 H r1 F a H N Q H z F m M M N O Ln O Ln Ol Ln v m a> w r l0 m N O O O 0 O c 01 N O O r O O U) O'N r-1 W �+ z O cn O N In Ol O r 1 Lf r m w N r N 1-H m lD r-1 N m N w (1) r m M m m O r4 00 O v O 'i N l0 r T N O M .-+ c o O r N O O 0 v rn N 0 O r O o U') v rn Ln m m o rn 0) o 0 T 0 r-1 to -1 r v c r1 N -4 (7 z CD z r1 m In H � N N E-F co H U) U W cn F cn cn a H a H s x U x U cn w H a < Q a a Q x w x W a Q a a Q a rC 0 z a Q a < a z O H O a W s W F O F O 0 z O z E. 0 H O H O 0 O F O v) H H O z < F O z U H H oG !Z F H H H H as F Hz H Q H H F H o a ff cn w cn w x 0 0 z 0 z a o w cn w cn w cn w x o Cf) cn co co a o rC x x o o 0 a 0 x u Cr o a s O a a. s 0 W > z Cr U H a H a 0 z 0 U 0 U 0 z M W H a H a H a H a 0 z W z w z 0 z H 0 z m 0 z < ua 0 z fz " 0 Z a < 0 z a U H cn w w a as a W .7 04 a' w > 04 M a a s a as a a a W r• H (n H m w > z H W r' .Y. a w > a w .7 < a W .7 co w i H x u) U) a cq < < Ft E, o cn o Cn cn o a CA s W o a O W w (z O h w w U H O w W 0 • (z W O m H c M O M Ol M m In M c O �+ 0 r1 z H I O > z H m x =) m l0 If) r m 1.0 LO m m l0 N m w O N r-1 N N l0 r-i N M N N -1 N un m M O N O T Ln m r r-1 lD r N l0 c O .-i Ol r 1 N Ln r 0 H H x z r-1 to 1-4 Ln N M N M O N O N O lD O m r-1 r N ri N .-a r-1 r r l0 Ln N lD c lD m Ln IT Q a z < w cn m a o H O G.. a W r cr r N 00 O -4 o O o O r C r v r V' 00 O O 0 O r N o O m v m O lD v Oa m m O l0 O O m m m O O O m O l0 m tD J z M O r M O r r I N l0 m O l0 In O r Ln O r M O r M O r M 0 r-1 In -4 Ln lD (`) O M O m -1 M O m r 1 F z c in M In r In N O r In c' In v In cT In r vT In l0 M O l0 (M O N O O r M Ln l0 c O l0 -4 O r cr O lD r 1 O U M N M c -�v c c r1 r1 O d r1 u) i O in U < o 0 0 0 0 0 0 r A 0 r-a 0 .-1 0 r-1 0 4 0 o O 0 L O O al U z U z O U H O H O U 2 U) U E-H z E W z O M 0 T) H Q O H < U << z z z ~ U) I"1 W a z O U) a o 01 Cn w a cn a a H a fz H x A4 U z H z U H o o w U O H w a w a I W a F z H x U H x U 0 a << 0 s H 0 a F 0 a H 0 a F 0 a H 0 a z 0� W z a W Iw1 U m W O x O H F 14 30 O a H H W pq CU H a W H W F O x O x w 0 W 0 W 0 w 0 W 0 F H F H E, U) E 0 � z a < a< a z O 0 x 0 H x 0 H x U .-� x O .� W x 0 W x 0 W E 0 W x 0 W E 0 I H W I H W < a E O 0 z O Gu z Q a z W H z (34 U4 H Cn H w Z w �." x x x x x x x x H H 1--1 H H H H z D O > O r-1 O r-i O r1 O 1-1 O M O M O M O M O M O O O O O O O M O m O O m O O U U < >+ H H U O u H x O O H x O << 00 x O x O E O x O x O x O E O x O E O x O x O x r-i H Coco H r--1 H H ri a x H O 0 z H O fJ4 z H N a z H ri O H z H 0 r-q C2.1 H �"- O 18 012 z N (M r-i M x Ln lD r O m 0 .-+ N M vT Ln l0 r O m O r-A N < r r r M M M m M M M c �T' �r � C' � a, v� V' .:x Ln u7 a o H z ri 0 00 x ri U M M M C W d] m N N N O N CO O CU 00 CO m OJ CO OD 00 V r-I r-I ,--4 r-i r-I r1 r-I -1 -4 11 1-4 r-I IH -1 H r-I r+ r-I rH r1 r-i H 0 r i -� r -+ -4 H - -1 '-A ,--4 r-i r-I --I -i r-) H r-i 4 � -1 -4 H x< W F H H H H F H H H H H H H H H F F H F F H H H H a a Ln N M O O O O O O O o I'D r m 0) OD cT O O O0 r O Ln Ln Ln r a H O O O O O O O r r u) Lo C -i 01 OD r ri O Ln N r c z F 10 z r Ln 0� L� O O O r r-i 1- O O lD O r M M" O r C O E O r Q' l0 01 N O U-) Ln r M M r r M 00 N r 0) l0 OD lD lO l0 M >� O N H l0 r Ln -7 �r O Ln m co Ol m Ln ri Qr M lD %V M r O r-4 r Q £ Cl r-+ 1-4 ' M r �r w N LP) r-I r-i N a a Ol (`') O O O l0 l0 O O 0 Ln r u� rn H H a m r �r lD rn H H H N ) l0 Q a Q Q ❑ a Cc z ❑ ❑ H a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 z w En 'J H H H H H a s o u o o > W M M (7 a a a4 p' z F H Q O x r❑r�� r❑� 0 . H H H❑� H Cn a a a R: a 04a0,4 H a 01 > z H z H a F «a H H F a a a a a U U o W > > 0 0 F-4 0 0 r-4 0 a o H H H F-i H� W H H Q H E-H H W H W H Q<< Q< z z z z U z U H F.., z a U U4 [L 44 [L [X4 H . . . �' ,� H H H H W H > > H "a a a W a Cr W a M M W M o O D U U U a 44 W W M 0 O w o z o a o a 0 w w w w w H H H H 44 w Z a a a" H❑❑ H > a ❑ a❑ �-❑ a ❑ c� U c� c� U H H H F z z w w w w❑ U F z U z U z O z < z x z a a a a H H H U) W H w a w H w U) w a 4 a a a w w w w---1 0 0 0 0 U U z z w w > x> a> v7 > > a a a a a>>>> a a 44 [sa 44 U4 M M O 0> in W x z a H H H H H ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ < < z Z ,'Z z U U U U ❑ U) W [za > W H H > > > > > FC FC Oa H H H F-i H H W W FC U W H ❑ a 0 W rn > 1 > Oo OD Ln -7 aD r N N M (M 0 Ln _4 00 N l0 0 OD z z x 0 r1 l0 u-) u ) LC) Ln u7 m 00 00 W l0 l0 O O (M M O m a) 0) C' H ❑ H =) r-1 (Y) O 01 O O O O O O O O O lD W .--I H -4 .--4 O O O O O H z V' N l0 r IT cT 117 cr �r �r � IT -r Cw -7 cT ❑ H x (N e--i (`) H r-I r-I �C z a m w ao a o 0 w H a Ol O !'M O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N W W v O (M O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M W E lD O OD O OD 00 co Op (n 00 co 0D w OD DD w OD 00 m m w 00 m 0 m M (Y) U) Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln M M M m m m m M M M Ln Ln M m m z 4 C O Ln O O O O O C' T V' Q c C' Cr v T C' o o CI' V' O H l0 W r O W W lD W l0 lD l0 lD lD l0 w lD l0 lD lD l0 l0 lD l0 l0 z r-+ c M r M M M M M N a) N a) N u-) N Ln N Ln M M N Ln r1 O O Ln Ln O O o o O o o O O O O O O O O o o O O Ln 0 u') r-I r-1 r-i H a) M M M M Ol M Or-il 0\ M r r-I 0) o) N U r-I r-I Ln l0 ui l0 Ui l0 Lr) lD N \D r� o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ln r-I r-I ri r-1 '-1 r-I r-I r-I C' Q' c Q' c C' V' c c C' r1 H V' V' •-i z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z (n H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H a z E-H H F H H E- (Y) FC U Cn > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Q Q Q Q Q LO a a a w w a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a .a a s .4 a • 0 F w ❑ w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w � [1: � C7 H U Ui in [n (n � � Vi Ui U Vi UJ Ui U cn Cn cn Cn Cn (n w < w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a z W o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W H ❑ > H z C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C� C� C7 C� C7 U U C� C7 C7 C� C7 U' U� C� < a cn Q a - cn H cn H u) a w a w a w a w oc w a w a w a w a w a w a w a w a w a w a w a w a w a w a w a w a< O co >-I z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z a ❑ H O a W H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H Gu z w 17 h x .Y. x x x x x `% x x .Y dG �% .`G `x `..4 x z 0 > o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Ln N O o o O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O o O O O 0 �+ O O ri H r1 H r i r-I r-4 ri r-1 r1 H r-i r-1 ri r1 r1 r1 r 4 .1 rj ri ri U E coAo cn >+ z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z H O W H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H . H H �U FD � x xx�xxxxxxx�xY�xxxxxx 019 013' z M C' to U) r N to m M O1 c• U-) � r r-1 O E- O z r-1 �!") 0 U7 U) Ln r1 r1 C) x U c c a m c c m a m m OD co W c� H ,-1 ri ,-+ -1 '-1 -+ r 1 .+ r 1 r 1 r 1 r-1 ri 1-4 ri IH a s F E-F H F H F F H H F H F F F Ln N c H Ol o O O O O o O .+ r m rn O 0 O o O m N o a Ol v r M 0 z w x F z O M N O O m c' Ln r a> N Ol O O N r r m N r 1-4 N N >+ < O Ol _4 O f'M V' M N r-1 C' (M rn o o Ln 0 o o r 0) m o O 0 O 0 co �o m R: H Q M M r a7 c c co `4 r M 01 r 1 m N Ol x (Y, O O N r r m r M fs N Ln R: a a I- r N U) W (� U F U 14 o CD H H 1-1 > N Q U -, 4 < �, x U a l< a Q a z " z a Q z o I> 0 0 H 0 H Qx H 0 z 0 H 0 H 0 H 0 H 0 m F. 0 z 0 E. 0 F 0 < H 0 W" O F ZZP OE-4 a " H H a o H H H w H H F H F w w H w H w F H O a H cn H x W a 0 a O s O < w a O H U 0x O W cx O w 0 a < a O a H s O cn w or 0 a << s 1x 0 < a 7 > z a U PZQ rz F-1 z On z H U) n z Da L% z (DC) Q z cn n z U cn n z z U n z H a n z U cn U U) n z a s H co w n w > n <, F w w > w Z H w > H U W w > H cn z w > w a W > x U w > n z w > (n co w > a a W > n z n z w > W W Fa' w w z f.4 H g O a Q a o in o cn << . a z z U 0 W W O r -i O O r Cl C OD > z H I n > z H m x O r �T o o r O N F M o O O r-1 OD r--q N M m (D m (Y) �o U-) w U') M r Lr) (`') H H x z �' a• U O Ln n •--i ri m U-) N O to �o lO w N M Na M a z < w w m I a 0 o F w OG W to M Lr) N N m O m Ln o 0 O N m U) O O O O O O N M U) O O O o O O r v N O O O O o O O O O O z m O Ln O Ol O r (Y) Ol O r rl) M O U) o U) M o ('') O 0) O r IT .1 O F z O �o ri Lr) ko M 0 �o in I'o 1-1 o N O �o M Lr) r Q' LO �o to U) �o ri O r r Lr) r cr in � o I-r U) �o O r 0 O U N •--1 M N N -T c W r 1 M IT c IT -4 U < •--I 0 r-1 f-1 o r-1 r-1 O r-1 r-1 O Iq O r-4 -4 O '-1 r-1 O r-1 1-4 O c}• .--1 0 r-A O r1 r-1 O .--i r-1 O r-1 4 0 ri .-1 0 r-i 0 z cn 0 z cn w x " H a F-1 H 1% H w Cn w H Cl) U as a, �> O o >> n r� n W W z H U E, < cn H O U 0 U a f-1 w w .7 w F-1 W a w U O U) F-1 H w H U H U FF-1 0 % 0 z I H cn 0 cn 0 o > Q U cn a cn z zu H v W < E H u Q 3 Q 3 Q w a uw z H 0 U 0 0 H z w o w a a 0 x N w a a w U o U aw z a z a .a w s a w � Q a a a w s w a U a w CO w `n x < U)w w n w n 00 n n a< U)z `� 0 z x z x a < a z h U a cn o 3 z a z s F z O w 0 W > 0 o 0 O 0 o 0 N 0 N 0 Ln 0 r1 0 to o U) O O o to 0 U) 0 0 O U U < H H U r-1 z H x -1 z H x -1 a Q a O < W a O cn W a O z �+ a O U O a O a O a O cn O a r 1 O a 0 O a o O s -1 O U 1-4 O nU 000 014 z Q O r-1 -4 r-1 OD Ln m Ln cD l0 .--i l0 N ,oH M l0 Cr to Ln lD N (`') .-- I vx r-1 Ln r1 l0 l0 -4 OD l0 r-1 r H OD r-i Q) r.q a 0 H z O r-I o ao OD OD o m o OD OD OD co v c c r 4 r-1 r-1 r-1 ri r l r1 r-I (' < ri r-1 .-L H r-4 ri r-i r-1 ri r 1 r-i r--1 r-1 ri r-1 ri ri IH '-I Q Cq H H H H H H H H E- H H H H H H H H H H H a a N O O OD T Ln N (j) r 00 o O O O r+ O O O O O O c7 H O O 0 Ln r-1 M T M Ln 0 Ln O O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 z H w z Lf) O V C r O r1 Ol 1 O r O O O N aD Ln LP) O Ln x :D r O O) r1 m r r Ln M Ln %D O O r r1 (N r r OD Ln >+ O I M ('M Ln Ln O lD (`') r N M U) %r O) 0 OD N N lD N < ri -4 N r-1 ri r-1 r1 a M O O M O O H OD O O H Ln O N rn Ln rz o rn r o 0 M r o N �o 0 r H a a a a a r-+ w m (`') H Ln M r1 E U U U U U H H H H H m x cz z z z z z z z x x x x x z H H H H H H H 17 U U U U U U) x x x E x x x w O w w w w w a a o a < < < < < a a a a a < Q Z KC M< < cn U) < < H H H H H z H H o ff H H H H H H H W H H z z Hp U z z z z z O 0 0 w 0 (n cn cn (n (n z 0 0 0 0 o > x x x x x w H H W H W H H H H H H H H H rz H H H H H m 0 U 0 0 U U H O fz U) c/) U x x x x x H Cu a H w a Z rz > Z H o ff O U O H o a a a a a a a 0 U o H H o cn O U H H H H H > W o Mc) H 0 x x x E E x x a o 0 C) U U o M U U U U U z U z rz z W z H H H H H H H H Z fz z W W z W z W W W W W H U) W H W O w H W H W h h w z W W > U) > a> U U U U U U U m> U) > 0 0> 0> z 0 0 0 0 0 o z w O O O O O O O rz z cz a Z s x a O U cz a a a a a a a a a w W O w Ln > I > r 1 r-i e 1 r 1 . r-1 r-1 Ln O I I I I I I z z x N N N N N N N r N M Ol r i r-1 r-1 ri r-1 r-1 H C] H a 1' C' v IT C V' yr 'V' O) (3) Ln O o O O O 0 H z M m M M M M M M r-1 H r O O O O O O H x N N N N N N N N k.0 I'D M N N N N N N a z a < m W 0o rz o o w H OG N O o 0 0 0 O O O O N M M 0 r-1 O 0 0 0 O W (3) O O O O O O O O O m U) Ln lD Cl) O O O O O W Ln O O O O O O O O O Ln Ln Ln lD lD O O O O O rn M r r r r r r r r m m rn Ln H M M Ln Ln Ln z O lD �10 w lD w lD w w O O O O (M N O O O O O lD N N N N N N N N �D %D lD lD lD w \D lD w w lD H z N O O O O O O O O H N lD N M M N H N N Ln 0 O O O O O O O O O Ln O Ln r 1 Ln Ln Ln Ln r-i O O O N o O O O O o O O N N lD r rI v v a r r r U U r 1 r1 o Ln o o o Ln o o Q O O 4 r-i N N M (n V ri O O O O O O O Cl O O z z z z z z z z H H H H H H H H V1 U U U U U U M > > a a a a a. a O H . . H H H O W W W W W W W W H U U U U U U O Vl U) Cn U) U) Cn U) U) Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ln N U cn cn cn U) to a) a a a a a 14 a a a H H cn cn cn cn cn cn < FC r.> FC < < < N H H H H H H H H 3 I U) W U U U U U U U U O Q W H z z z z z z z z z U U x W H W z << Q Q< Q< Q Z O O O z z z z z z z W 0 z z z z z z z z E a s U 0 0 0 0 0 0 W H E x H " H H 1-1 H H H 01 w w w w w w w w Q Q a a a a z a a w Q z z r:7 W W W W W < z z H H F-1 1--1 " H H H H H Y. a FC O Iz z z z z z z z z > z z x U U U U U U 3 U)a H ry 2 w a s z z z z z z z z 0 > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ln 0 0 0 r-1 H 4 r-, 4 ,-a D O O -1 .--1 r1 r 1 ,-j r-I r-1 ,-, r r-1 r-1 r-1 O 0 Cl O O 0 O >+ r i (M 0 O O 0 O O 0 O r 1 O O O r-i r-1 r-4 r-1 r-1 H U H W z z z z z z z z z z 3 3 x U U U U U U U H W O Q < W H H H H H H Q U x x z z z z z z z z x z z z z z z z z z 023. 015 z O .-1 N M c' Ln 1.0 1- m Ol O r-1 (N M v' Ln l0 I` O O) O H N M v' Ln lD (- N N N N N N N N N N M rM M cM M M M M rl) M c' tx O F z O V' C' a' v' C' Q' C' V' V' cT IT Q' IT IT V' C' -T OD ri W F r-+ ri H r-I r-I r-I . q H r-i ri r-1 r1 r-4 r i r-1 H - .-1 r-I r-i r-i H r-i r 1 H r-i r-i C7 < H r-1 r-1 r-i r i r1 r1 ,--4 r-1 H r-4 H r-1 H r I r 1 r 1 H ,-i r-1 -1 r-+ a s F F F F F F E+ F E-I F F F F F F F F F F F F F F E-F F F F F Ln N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r- IT O) O1 O O M O O O O a' F Z F O Ln O Ln Ln O O O O O O O O O O O O r1 l0 r) lD N r- r-i !- O O I� w Z Ln CV O N N O Ln Ln O O O O O m 10 OD v' O t` lD M N OD Ln O O O Gl x Y+ O O M Ln H N IT M r-1 N M co V' M N CT CO I` H O r-1 OD r-I OD r-4 OD r-1 N CO M L �O (r) OD r-I r- Ln C' Ln OD M c' O O O -+ a r� O N O O Ln I- O a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a m rn z o 0 Q< Q<<< Q< Q<< v H H N U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U r1 CG I-4 H H H " H H H H " " F-i H . H H H r-I [rj x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x U) U U U U U U U U U U U U U U u U U z w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w < F F F F+ F F F F F F F F F H F H F O z Z Z z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z F F Z F H H F O x x x£ x z x x x x£ E x x x x x O O F O O W H F F Z E-F E F a a E E E E E E E E E E O O H MM U O H E F F F F E-F F F F F F F F F F F F F O W W W W W W W O O H H O U .7 z U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U n H H H H H H H a a C) C) 'J Z U w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w z a a a a a a a z g z F F Z m 1"1 U) h h 17 17 h h 17 h 17 h �J �J ~J 1" D 17 h w a a a a a a a W 2; w Z z W F w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0> a a a as a a a> H ::)=)> (n o a Cz w cz x rz Cz rz x a a x x a a Cz a a z z z z z a z O O z ri) w w a a a a a a a a a4 a a a as a a a a cn cn cn cn U) U) co w Cr+ U W \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N M M M O v M H CZ r-1 r-I r 4 r-I r1 r1 r l r-1 4 r-1 r-i r-I r1 r-j r-I H r-I G' Ln 00 Ln O w r-I ri r-i r-i r-1 r-i `-i r-1 r-I r-I H 1 r-1 r1 rH r-i H r-I O Ol r- a -4 Ln I > CQ I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I 1` C N M Ir m r- m z z E r-f r-1 -1 r-i 1--1 r-1 H r-I r1 r-I r-i r-1 H r-i r i r-I ri 1- Ln M m M l0 O 1n N N H C] H D O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N M N N M O 1- Ln H z O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OD CO Q H x N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N r r-1 -4 I-H r I r I r I M r I ri � Z a a aQ w ao a 1 O O w F Cx O O O N O N O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O M O m N W O O O M O m O O O O O O O O O M O O O O O O O O OD O rr Ol W O O O Ln O Ln O O O O O O O O O Ln O O O O O O O O Ln O lO in m Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln V' Ln Ln Ln Ln V' Ln G7l Ln Ln H r-1 rH r-I r-1 r-I r-i O1 m m m Z O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O F to l0 l0 LA to �10 lD Q1 l0 lD %D t0 rn lD �.o lD k.0 r 1` r I` r I` 1` lD t.0 to lD z r- m C' Ln k0 m M O N M Ln l0 OD N I- Ln V' r-i r-I r-i c' r-I r-I r-i rM v' r- N D OD O r-i r-i r1 M 1- CO Cn I- 1` I` O Cr OD r-I H Ln Ln Ln O Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln O O U l0 1` I- I` r- to lD to l0 l0 to lO to tO to r- r-I r-i N r-i l`M (') M M v M N U r I r-i r I ri r i r 1 r I r1 H r I ri r� ri r 1 r1 r I r-1 H I r i r 1 i r 1 I r-I -4 r-1 ri Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U z z z Z z z z z Z z z z Z z z z Z U U H H H H H H H H F-1 H H H I- A h-I . H H jS] z •z H H O U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U z O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U U U U U U U w (n U) Ln m w m w w w w cn U) w m w m m m cn w z z z z z z z U w W a U) U) U) U) m U) m U) U) w m m U) U) U) U) m H H H H H H H FC FC a FC rc %� FC a w H H U) F F F E-+ F F F C7 >> H I z W W Lb W Lb Ltj Lb b z, Ltj Lj} Lri Ljj lj W Lb O O O O O O O Fs a a a a a a a a a a cn w w o4 W F z z Z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z W W W W W W W U) U) U) a z O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o n o n o 0 o w a CO H v) U) U) U) m U) U) m U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) U) x cz < z rx x Cz a s Cz a s rz a Cz a s rz a a a w w w w w w w 0 0 >i 01 w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w U U U U U U U z w < CL' x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x F-I 1--I H H H H H o Q x a< O U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U w w w w w w w U a m H " F-i " H H H h-I H H" H H" HP-4 F-I 1-4 E-. U, [y 4: FJ4 w a F Gu z W z z z z z z z z z z Z z z z z z z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O a z O .7 ri r-I r-i r-I ri r-1 r1 r-i r--1 ri H r� r-1 -1 r-I r A r-I Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln O O O Ln O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O 4 r-I r-1 r-1 r-i r 4 r-I ri r l r l r-i r-1 r-I H r-t r1 r-1 O (D O O O Cl CD r i -1 -1 H O F U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U w w w w w w w H F F L U H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H (x.i (z, G., (s4 jy [s.L [y a � � < U z z z z Z z z Z z z z z z z Z z Z O O O O O O O O O O CFj�' 2 2 016 z < cz O r -7 m m m m 0 1- 0 u1 r 1 11) 1-1 Ir N u-) M Ln In Ln Ln 110 u-) H Z O �+ � -4 N � x U m m m a m a a d w C) a m H H H H H r-1 H E-1 H H E- H E+ E- H N a• E• z H O O a) a) O O O O m In O r4 O Lr) O O Lr) m O O M a� LJO N O O W m z M Ol m Q1 M l0 N O V' O In C N l0 ri (Y) Ol N In cT r-i in M O 1- c m M l0 >1 a 0 Q -1 r-1 N r-1 IT I'O O I� Ol 01 O O O O m O O Ln Ol O O M �!") N m (D rn M N o C' o to O F-4 cr M N Lr) c n o 3 c M r1 U 01 N W H v H O co z x cz z O z 0 a a r>r x < a < a Q a a> ❑ z O Ga a < a Q a a rt+ a Q H H a H H z O E-/ O z O H O r-4 H O H O H O O O W H O z 0 H 0 E- O cn E- O x H E-F O U E+ O r>r H W U H H a' O H H H H W x H a O H U > H ❑ a a H H H H EE+ x U H r!r a H >. H U H O a H H U a O a H x O o x a 0 H U a O w w O x H v, a O a, " w O cn W a O w x cz 0 w a w O U z a 0 u > z a U ❑ a ❑ z a U ❑ z m ❑ z ❑ a ❑ z 0 z ❑ a z w a FC w 0 ❑ z Ix U ❑ z H a ❑ z U ❑ z a ❑ Z w CD ❑ z z H H cn w H m> w cn m> W z H> w H cn w > H 3> W H H H rrr a> w cn m> w a a> w z Q> w H ❑> w a w> w x a ❑ z H a Coil• w z H O H w a z r.>; cn D U) a a Cl W E W Q a w U H w ❑ O O > z I > z W m lD o O N m O rn M In CT M 1-4 a in m M M -+ O N H ❑ H ❑ x H z t` t` N -1 O I` N r-i m N r-1 c O LO N O (`') M N m c M O O O Q < a z w m m I a O o H w a W m N 61 Un O O O O O O (N m In 0) IT O e--1 m O O O O O O O O O O O O Ln O m Ln CT m O O O CS r-1 In O) CT (Y) r` r .-i M a) Ql M 01 z O �o Ln I'o M O � ri O C v Ln O O O O O H z (M M M N r 1` M � M � N � N r- M N � r1 r to � r-1 a 0 U Ln N to r1 In r 1 O N O LO In r 1 ul l'n Ln M O ri In N In Q O M In M �n M U F!r .•-� O r-1 .-� O r1 .-+ O ri .-� O r•1 r-1 O Lr) r-1 O 14 r-1 O r-1 .� O r-1 ri O r1 .--1 O r--1 r-i O '--I r1 O 1-4 r-1 O r-1 r-1 O H a a 0 a E+ z 0 M 0 a a w a u z En U a x z H a a a w o U w >y x w z z 0 H o H H I < tF-+ 0L a W z W a z a a 0 z H u z H 0 z H H U U x a' W a m H Z H < a I..,H < H W coH HHH H I --I m a a W U H z O U E- H Q a cz a x 0 x ❑ < a a N cz a a a a a Z a U) xa I a c. U a� a o ❑ U Cn H Gu z w a a a z a H H H H oG a a a z n 0 > N 0 Ln 0 -1 0 O 0 O 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 Lf) o If) Cl N CD O o O 0 N 0 U < > f H v .--1 a w O x a 0 x w r 1 H a ' 4 < a O H a O H a, O H a, a O m a O a a O Cn � .--1 cJ4 z r 4 (� a O > m023 017 SO CC) a) r O ri N M V' Ln lD r w r W m O .--1 N M Ln 1.0 v' r Ln Ln Ln LD '-D ',D �,D %D lD lD \0 ri ri r1 N N N N N N (N N C4 O H z r-1 O r-, U -7 � �T �T IT •a IT a• a -q 1 -q � -7 -r -7 � a r1 r1 r1 ri ri -1 r-1 ,-+ ,-1 ri r1 r--1 4 ,-+ . A , q ri -1 r1 r-1 �. 1-4 r/ r4 ri ri ,--1 .1 r1 '-4 .--1 r1 -4 -1 -4 r1 r1 r1 ri .-1 r1 r-1 r1 1-4 E co H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H F1 H E 4 H H E-F a1 a Ln CV •• O o O N ri M IT O O co O O m 0) O o O O O O 0 cr O d' E+ O O O r1 a' M lD m 0 w U') O OD -1 110 OD m lD r OD N LO O z H 41 z O N c' r O r r N r1 .-1 N I M 00 O E n Ln m r Ln N Ln r m r-1 0) M O -i r i 0 ri Ln O N O C N N >I O lD l0 r-1 m lD r C' OD (Y) 11 OD O O O �D cr OD OD o 110 o r1 Q r 1 O M t�D co OD Ln M .-i o lD OD O O M (M cN r 1 C4 lD -1 r i 0) N —1 r1 r-i O O O tD o �r O O O 1-4 O w (M O E cn o 00 ao lD cr O r r N N 110 M U OD r O N m r N cn r ri H U U U U U U U U U c U U a > > > > > > > > > > > O cn cn cq cq to to cn to u] cn cn a cn H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H 9 a a a -1 9 z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z 4 .4 a U < W w < H FC W w w w w w w w W W w w w W w w < < Q > z H H H H - H E E E E E i E E E E E E E E E E H a] cn H HE- cn O O a F4 0 E o W W W w w w w W W W W W W W W W 0 W W O z 0 W" H EJWH a H U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U H W W H H H J4 U H x x w a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a w w Q U H a a cn cn a Qw a O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a a E a w 0 H O O O [4 44 [4 Cz.i 114 44 W 44 W W W W 44 44 44 44 O C7 C7 O O x > a 0 a 9 M x 0 z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z 0 z z 0 .7 U z U z FC FC z H z w w w w W w W W w w w W w w w w z " H z Q Z H U1 w E E 14 4 w w `N4 `.4 W z W z W > F-1 H> <> 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3> 0 0> U> < z z W Q Q < O O H 14 cn a x a a a a a a a a a a .4 a a a a a co w a w w U w ri ri Ln Ln Ln o Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln r-1 -1 -1 r-, ri .1 r-1 O H a O O N N N N N N N N N Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln r-1 O W O O M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M O 00 O) > I > CQ N N O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O N Ol z z E r r1 ri r-1 r1 ri r-1 .1 4 4 r1 ri ,-1 ri r1 r1 r1 1--1 .1 0 %.0 H H p U' C4 On 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 1 H z W lD N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N r-i r-1 (z r-1 C] H x cf) M O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O O Q O �c z a � rn w CQ a 1 O o [4 H a M M lD m N o 0 m 00 Ln 1-1 lD m OD o N m Ln r--L d• KT Ol r w 00 00 OD Ln r r r %D lD �o r w Ln r r w lD lD r r r ri v aQ Ln Ln Ln Ln 0 Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln E O rn m Ln rn rn m rn m m m m 0) rn m rn 0) m 01% m 0) 0) ri Ln z O O O O O O O O o o O O 0 O O O O O O O O CV 0 H �D lD lD tD �D lD l0 lD �D �,D l0 la7 "D lD w L.D lD w lD -10 w w tD z M M r-i ri r1 ri r-i r-1 ri r1 r1 ri ri r-1 r-1 r--I r1 .--+ r1 r1 r1 V' d' M Ln Ln Ln O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Ln Ln O M M N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M V m U U r-1 r-I r--1 r-I r1 ri ri r1 r-1 ri ri r-i r-i ri ri r1 r1 r1 ri r-i r1 r-i r-i O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ri r1 r1 .--I r-1 H r-I r-1 r-1 r1 ri r1 ri r-1 r1 r1 r-1 r-1 r--1 r1 r-1 r-i r1 W cn cn cn cf) co cn to cf) cf) CO cn m cn cn cn to cn cn z C.] U W C4 44 W 14 44 44 W 44 L4 W C4 W 14 44 W Cc1 44 O U x x 11 C4 [4 W 44 C4 W W W C4 44 14 [4 44 44 44 E14 W 44 H H H H > H H 1-i H H H H " H H H F-I H H H H H H a s a a a a a a a 1x a a a a x a a a a a s < a << w w H w W w cn x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x a cn M x x cn cn (n Cf) U) cn cn co U) cn cn CO cn cn cn cn U) cn O O x CL o > >1 H >1 >+ >+ >1 >1 >1 >1 >+ >1 >+ >+ >1 >1 >1 >1 >1 >+ >1 cn z Ln H H 1-7 H H H H H H H H H H CI H H H H H H H z H w z z C z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z a Q O O W O O O a a 5 O O O O O O O O O O W O O x O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O H W I U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U z >1 >1 Fi W H w W H W W w w W w w W w w W w W w W W W W H 0 �7 z 0 C] z 0 0 0 2 0 O 0 0 0 0 C] 0 w a 0 M 0 z z CQ H H 1--1 .0 Fi H " hi F-1 H H H F-I " 1-i F-I H F-i FA 1-4 H H :D W < =) cn cn O M to M M M M cn M M cn to Cn U) (n u) cn Cn cn O >4 01 a s U a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a s U z < a w w w W W w w W w w W w w w w W W W W W o 121 < �4 O Ca > F-1 > H > F-1 > H > H > F-I > H > H > 1-i > H > 1-i > F1 > H > H > H > H > Fi > F-I > H > hi > F-1 > H x H w w a s a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a s a � z O > O O ri O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O M 07 OD OD O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O -4 -4 Ln O O >I O O O r1 ri ri ri r1 r-1 r1 r-i ri ri ri r1 r-1 ri ri ri -1 ri ri r1 U H > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >C U H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H hi < U a s a a a C4 a a a a a a a a a a a a 024 018 z w m O '-1 N tM N Cr to a Ln l0 r m O ri M N (n H O F O • z N N M M M M r r r M M M M M c �-+ I�r .-+ U T v c c c co m ao wr cr c v c v rr ao r-I W C7 H Q r-1 H -4 -A -4 .-1 -4 11 1-4 H r-1 .-+ r-1 r-1 r-1 r-i 1-4 -1 r-1 '-1 .-4 rl r-1 r l r-I r-1 H r-I 1-4 H •-4 1-1 -4 '--1 ra H r-4 Q a a u) F F+ F E+ E+ F E-F F E+ E� E• F E-+ E+ E- N •• z w H z O O Lo O O o O O 0 O O 0 00 M 1D v' O rn O N O u) N Ln r o0 O O 0 u) N 1O O u7 r O (D u) O U-) N O O o O O 0 O O o l0 r r r r rn £ >+ o O O -1 Lr) M in r O N N N a) r- O lD 1,0 110 O (14 �r f`) u) rn N r-i r-1 cT N In r m M 0 r-I Q a ri H r-1 ri o O m M c O o N O U') o O 0 O �D r u) O N N �O O N 01 N N tD 01 CV r-1 OD O qzzr N O U-) r H Q E r m M V I U) D: U) U > U > U > U > a Q a Q H Q a w s Q U) w a Q E z F z E+ z a Q Cf) a Q a Q (� z H F a Q U) rx H w z O H M a4 M a4 M x M x H O F H O F Cz W H O F U) Q x H O U >> H U H Q>>> U U U H F O a H H O F O H Cz F O Q a U F U U U U a U F U) cn z Cn Cn U) F x U) F a. H F 3 E+ W D: H O a H w x w x w x w x Z 0 cn w a 0 V �- w O rz o rz 0 z w w 0 rz w w 0 cz w rz w cz W w U cz O Oc w cz 0 x U) rz O 0 z x 0 w > z Z U U U U U m z Ho .4 z um z z a 0 z F n < w H z < a E+ z E-1 a E+ M Q a M z W E 2 z z w o z "n x z a U H U) w z Q z Q z Q z Q> w a a> W O H> w a w> W a x 00 a E m a x a x a x m> W w w > M E> W U w> w H x U) ra a a a s a as a a D U) O E o w O U w 3 O U w 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 w 3 Lr) w x U w > W w U W H 0 a' V' M r M r N Ln w u-) u) in u7 In r O r O N O O > 1 z > z W CQ r m lD l0 m I'D If) m lD qT m lD If) u7 O M r1 M M u) O O .-i O O r-I r-1 O r-1 1--1 O r1 O O r-1 O O r-1 -4 O H r-I O r 4 0 r-1 M '-i 0) H O H H O z I r-1 I 1 1 4 I ri O r r-1 O r C• 1 r1 I r-1 I r-1 I r-4 I r-I I 1-1 I r-1 I r-1 O r-1 l0 M C] H x O O O O OD ul u) O O O O O O O O W r l Q 2 a Q w w m a O O rT F cz w r c r qT r a-7 r o O w r u) c• ,-1 o "D 0 ,-1 0 I'D 0 -I 0 w 0 ri 0 I'D 0 O O O o ,-1 o rn c GO In U') 0 Ln 0 1n l0 w \D k.0 �.o l0 \D 110 tlD O O lD l0 "J z u) O In O In O In 0 (`) O Ol O Ql H 01 o m O m O m O m 0 m O m O m O Ol c m V m Cl Q) H H l0 l0 �D l0 r l0 �D l0 �D lD �D l0 lD l0 �D l0 l0 I'D �D z O O U v In M C' u) M NT Ln M w Lo M N O N .-i O M ('M to v' N O to N O LO N O LO N O u) N O in N O Ln N O Ln N 0 N N in (M e-i O ' I N O u7 r-1 O Lr) U Q -1 O -1 O '--1 O .-1 O r-I O ri O r-1 O N O N O N O N o N O N O N O N O r-1 O r1 O N O 1-4 O ri r1 ri r-I ri r-1 r-1 u) u) u) u) u) Ln u) u) In u) H H H " D: U U U U U U U U O > a > s > Cz > D: O a z H z H z H z H z H z H z H z H O U U C ) cn cn cn cn a O U U) U) U) U) U) U) U) C/) a H O o C7 z C7 z C7 z U z F O z H x a x z x x x z x rz J4 z x z x x U) Q Q 3 cz w x a Q W ex W w W a W a x a a O 3 F O 3 H O 3 E-F O 3 F O 3 F O 3 H O 3 F O 3 F ru H Ga H H co H U W E I Q w z w z w z w z Q z E-1 H O Lz w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z Q Q W O F a z H 0 z H 0 z H 0 z H U z H ru U) U O F cn H U) F Cn E-1 H cn H Cn F F v) U z U z zW o � Q Q o >4 a z z z z F a O U O Cl) 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 x w x w x Q U) - Q a Q CMG O O x O X O x O x D: Q U a w F n E- a F a F a F m F z E-I z H o F n H z Q z Q a Cn C z Q cn Q Q cn Q U) Q x F O Cn O O O Ul O v) O u) O v) O w O U) O U) H U) H U) F r4 z 0 w > 0 0 0 0 o O o o O 1n O O> 4 O F U F1 Q U O r1 >C Q v) O r 1 X Q cn O r-I >C Q v) O r-i >C Q r-1 O Q u7 ri H 1-1 O U O O O z 0 O O m 0 O O D 0 O O z 0 O O m 0 O O m 0 O O D 0 O O z 0 M O : O o c z O N O Q F IT 0 Q H ^rr cn U) U) U) v) u) v) m m w m m U) cn U) v) 0 '`"�! 019 z < c c u) "r to c r �r w c m T 0 to l0 r r r H Jn N U')r m 17 Ln M Ln )r) ul a H 0 z H 0 H U-) � H x U cr c c OD OD cr cr OD IT c, cr c� Q a a 0:4 m r� H H H r H H H r-a H H r-1 H � E-F r-1 H H r-i H ra H r-4 H E-H N r Tn M v' O M Q' l0 U) M M O O l0 M O 00 O O co co r 00 O Ol O 0 O Ln z W E H z D U-) lfl N r-i CO H C' to CV N r 'r O lD l0 Q r C� CO O N l0 r O >+ < a O x r.0 m N I'D 0) (") O O l0 M 0 00 O O co m r OD lD O Ol cr C) (D lD r OD l0 lD C' OD M l0 c' Q' 10 Cr N V' r U r CO ri OD O N l0 z H U) cz H rz H a r.0 a r.0 a O s < a a a H a a a a aC U > z O << a a H 0 H O cn H O H O H O a 0 H 0 z 0 H 0 H O H O H O U) W H w W a W H H U) H rC H H a H a E+ a X H H Z H H O" w W a 0 cn w cn w cn w m w a 0 U) cn a O a a 0 a O z 0 a 0 a Q s O c.a a O U a O E- U a O w x > z fz U a U a U 0 z H a H a H a H a 0 z < a O z Q z 0 z U) 0 z U 0 z a ::)z 0 a w 0 z > U) O z O a 0 z U H U) w H x H x W > a a a a a a a a W > U) w > H W > z (7 W > H m W > a a w > H a W > H w > H Ul w > z rC U) 0 W > W > a U) n U) O U) n m O CA z co W a W U O U w > z H a a w w U w 0 r 0 O 0 —1 0 m N N O O > I z > z W W x lfl m m r o O O Lr) N M r N v, 0 l0 Ln m Ln O M r rI M 0 O I r M O C Ol 0) H 0 H 0 H z z C' M H M u') . H `,.(. 44 .-i U) Gu O m 0 ri Ol C7 m l0 0) l0 r M G' l0' l0 O O O M N l0 m H m lfl OD Ln N H x a �C m w m a I 0 O w H cz W 0.1 rn Q l0 rn cr l0 o O O 0 O O (D O O 0 0 O 0) r I N rn Q l0 M M OD r M to o lD lfl o O O c v Ln N 0) Ln r Q in M m M m .f1 m Ln 01 kn z H l0 H l0 O O O O 0 O O M O O O O H z H H r r-+ r r-I r H r r-i N O lD H r (M l0 N l0 M r N l0 (n lD N l0 v O O O .n O to O (V ur) N Ln N Ln N O O O Ln in V O N Ln r1 0 r i T) f`M Cl N un fM U („) �C o u) 0 u) 0 . 4 0 H 0 -1 0 -4 0 .-4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U O U a FC U U H M z C7 O C7 z H O U z x UO 0 0 x U x U Q H v) W U) W 0 U U z U O U) H a U LY. H `.4 cn U) aC a �C w H w H H U) U H a rC U z H H U) rC a to a W H O H O O H a cz H w U) a a z w a a z O 0 H z z < o U a z FC O U) a U) W W W W z z w z O z H H Q O O 3 < >+ > U) w a z > a FC a< z O - z r.0 - z Q a a Q<<< rl a . 7 a rl a H a z H a z - U) a >4 a a z H Qz w x W a H z z O 0 z a to 44 0 z H U) H U) H to H to H to H m O U) O U) O H cz H E-H H U) D rC > W 0 < > H z O 0 W > Ln v7 u) c o Ln 0 Ln 0 Ln 0 Ln Ln r o OD 0 H 0 H 0 0 0 0 Tn 0 o N an r O >+ U H U H 0 < H 0 < H 0 << H 0 H 0 Q H 0 < H 0 z O 0 z O 0 a O o a tz H H H r, x U) 0 a < 0 z < 0 z < FC U U) M v) cn U) to cn U) H H H O > > > 026 020 z 110 Oil r CO m O o -4 (N M Q' u') r un Lr) u-) I'o OD %.0 0x O H F z O c H �.D -i U v OD v c 17 cr OD C7 H H H H F E- F CL4 a N M O Ln l0 .-i O V O O O N Q H O H Lr) M m O lD N O O l0 z H W z H O c7• M .� C � v O � � N x O M 01 -1 N N N 01 rM O m >+ O .--i .-+ .-+ c' M N m Fy N a �G N N o l0 (`') OD N O v O O O 00 Ln O c 00 0 al O o 00 M m m O Q lD (M N F H N O F H � 2 a a O a a z F+ a F F F F > H H H H E-F U) H a 0 0 < 0 x 0 0 O a 0 0 0 0 0 W 11 F H H < H H H w H F QL H oa H x H H W F rW 0: IX 13: (n w m m m z O z fY. H Z cr oL w z O H O a 0 rn O W O W W w O O O U O O x 0 a r) o o, o H o H H H a a o 0 ::) n rz C) U o z H U (n z w o w z w 0 .--1 z w a w z W a a, a w a w z H W < z w cn W z w x H z W w H z w z z w W ' O > \ > Ll4 r' a W w > F > a > cn r' a > < > I C] H N a D n O W H O U)> g U) U) to U) Ix F H U w o w CL H o H a N � Q, O W M N (N O C -I I > CO Ln m m a) Or M Ln Ol E4 z z E M cT OD r r 1 Ln N CU H p I- 4 : r 1-4 O O O -i 1 I + z Ln 00 0 0 0 rn r ,-, p C] N 01 O O O O O H < z w < w w m a O O Gu H (1 O O O Ln O o O Q1 N O r W O O O .4 O O O cw Q) O a (A O O O O 0 0 0 l0 in o Ln E O M (M M M [y) m .-4 Ql Ln z O o O o 0 o Ln -a 0 0 0 F r r r r r r 110 �o �o r �o z N .--i N (M N N M H N -1 c' O O Ln O in O O O O O in O N r I N m N N '-4 Ln N v M U Q O O o O O O o o O o 0 to rl W a H a+ U a 0� z W O �-+ U U U �) 0 U) >+ z H z H z H (� O a < 'n w 3 cn to U) Gu H a a < 0 0 0 w a z w 1 H co H H H a Q H z O U U)H w H O O v) C7 H a a P W 0� z W W - O >+ 0 O aao cn a F vFi c7 a 0 o n `00 z a a a w z o U a z In H Ul w > > O 3 3 3 3 3 X z 0 > 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n al O .-+ 1-4 -1 Ln , 4 0 0 O 0 >+ o ,-+ o 0 0 0 0 0 —1 U H O U) z a a a W z 0 to O U H H H 3 FCCU > > > 3 3 3 3 3 x 027 021 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP5005 CHECK REGISTER 4:11PM 11/09/01 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.*** 47291 11/09/01 COA080 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER 500.00 47292 11/09/01 IMPO10 IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DIST 18833.26 47293 11/09/01 MAN010 PHYLLIS MANLEY 70.66 47294 11/09/01 STUO10 WILLIAM STUBBLEFIELD 490.00 47295 11/09/01 VER200 VERIZON 3419.13 CHECK TOTAL 23,313.05 028 R22- z ['M H (N M a' Ln lD r m m O r-i (N c' U-) lD r m 0) Q. r-1 r-I H CL O H Z O rn O x E Q C4 H PPPPHPHHPPPP F H PHPP a a rn 0 •• O m M N M r r c' Ln m --i .-1 1,0 w O r r- r N Ln c H O O m M lD r m O O c H r M lD O N O O r O z H W z O N lD N r-1 1D c H O1 c L� r O O -i O O N Ln m Ln N to r m N M M N H >+ 0 Un lD N M vT .-i m N lD .--r H c M M Ln ri H m M a M N O lD lD O M O N lD O < O M F o o rn �R: O m O r m H �C U) m g m M O O O H a U � F U) F z W w w w z U) H U U U U U U U U U U U U H < H F E E H a o U) 0 > > > > > > > > > > > > o a 0 0 0 W H W H OG H Z H z z H OF 0 0> a O a U U U U U U U U U U U U C4 > z a > Z 0 H CY., O H H H H H H H H H H H H O 00 U O m F H m O > Z a o a s Ds x LY. tz D: OG Cz a rz a o Cl x n << n z U � z H H F F H E-i F F F F F F z m z rz z W 0 u w z H M a W U U U U U U U U U U U U w r4 F w z H H z W W U) > w w w w w w w w w w w w> H> U) > 0 rz a 0> o z a a a a .a a a a a .a a s w z x a rz x U) H W W w w w w w W W w w w z H a H H a W [*a H U w rn H 0 0; m m m m m m m m m m m M a 0 W M O a a z a O D O O m O Ln N N lD M > 1 > W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -3' H o o r w z z E N H . H . H H H H MMNT W H o H:D In rz a a a a D: rz cz rz cx a o a• .� c i �-+ z �.D < < < < < < < Q < < < o lD r tD �D O Ll o > > > > > > > > > > > U-) Ln r Ln Ln H H x Q z a m w m a 0 0 w E-H R: M O m N M Ln lD m N c m N O 1n N O N N O W 1n O .- q ('n lD l0 w .-i M 110 r-1 (M O M Ol O M ( ) O Cq Un O lD lD lD %.D lD lD lD lD lD l0 O 1-4 Ln O I'D �10 O m r r r r r r r r r r r r H rn U-) H r-r Ln z O N N N N N N N N N N N N CV O fM M M M �D lD lD lD lD w lD lD lD lD lD lD lD ri lD lD lD lD lD F z N rr) c' c• cT c• c' c' v, -.7 V. r O M M d• c' (` ) O H to Ln u-) Ln 1n to un in Ln to to Ln O to Ln Ln Ln 0 r c. vT c7 c yr c vT c c v c M O N H c c U U H r� O o 0 0 CD 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 0 o O O o 0 V' r-I r-i rH -4 ri H r-4 4 .-1 r-1 1-1 r-i ri r-i H -4 H H H F F F H H H H F F Cn (n u) u)(n u)(o m m m w m LL H H . . H H H H H H H H H 3 ry) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W O H H H H H H . . H H H H H O >+ H H H H H F F H H F H F Cu 1n w Q Q a a Q w a a 0 0 c7 c� c� c� c7 0 > a (•C �4 H . H H H H H . H . a a x a a a a x x cz a a x a cn > x rz D; C>~ x a x x a a a a z H H H H H H H H H H . H [- a z a `� a a a a a a a a a a a a o 0 0 0 >+ a NNNN a U w w w w w w w w w w w w a a H H H H a FCC 0 < as a s as a a a a a a a a, > , 4 w D: a s a 0 o E E E E E E E E E E E E x H WWWW V1 z U Hi H F-i " F-1 H H H H H F-I H a 3 > > > > H Lu W z O > O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M m r i r•4 ri r l r-1 r-1 r-1 H ri r l r l H r-1 r-i O O O o 0 >+ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N (N N O F Q a a a a a a a a a a a a z O a a w fz U h1 O E E E E E E E E E E E E < F w W w W > > > 029 023 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.*** 47281 11/08/01 CAL040 CALIFORNIA VISION SERVICE 47282 11/08/01 CAN050 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE CO 47283 11/08/01 LAQ050 LA QUINTA CITY EMPLOYEES 47284 11/08/01 PRIO50 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL 47285 11/08/01 RAM010 MICHELLE RAMBO 47286 11/08/01 RIV040 RIVERSIDE CNTY DEPT CHILD 47287 11/08/01 SOU002 SOUL OF CHINA 47288 11/08/01 SUP100 SUPPORT PAYMENT CLEARING- 47289 11/08/01 UNIO05 UNITED WAY OF THE DESERT 47290 11/08/01 UNU050 UNUM LIFE INS CHECK TOTAL 3:OOPM 11/08/01 PAGE 1 PAYMENT AMOUNT 1083.00 561.48 403.00 48490.82 13.00 426.50 335.38 150.00 174.00 2067.79 53,704.97 nr^j 1.1 024 z O Ol '-•+ r co lC' N Ln M c r-i Q H -1 a o F z O OD 0 � � .-� x U rn rn rn rn rn rn rn C7 rn rn rn W F m rn rn m rn rn rn rn am m U Q m m am m rn rn rn W rn rn rn r� m F F F F F F F F F F F a a OD Ln 0 OD CD v w 0 o OD o o rn r N F O Q' O r O O Ln M O O r Q) Z F w z 1` 1- M O O M l0 1n O c r C 2: O OD lD O N r Ln r l0 O >+ O O Ln C' r r C' M r-i r-i O r ri M � N a M O OD O N O O OD O O m 0 v O OD O Ln M O O r r� r� 0 r4 o M ❑ L� a o c r a OD l0 ❑ O Ql 1-4 N ry) D cn r lC! Q O Ln c c' > v' M U) H '-i O F -� 0 H >+ N O Q a a I Q F • 1 3 W x x F cn ❑ z U W W H H W W U U z z F a a o+ a z z a w a a s Zs x a Ha a >• Q Q Q Q Q Q =) Q Q Q W Q Q Q z Q Q Q z F F .1 F z z F ❑ F C7 H z F C7 H O F F a O O 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 z 0 1 0 1 0 cn 0 W H CO F E. • F co U) F • F • F H F • F • F z F U F z �4 z z Q $-1 ❑ �4 s4 H 1-4 a H Z co z 4-J Q1 1-4 H D. D: JJ D: Z J.J z 4-1 w o ff O z 0 co O O W O O a 0 rn 0 m 0 0 0 > ❑ H ❑ •r-I ❑ x a ❑ ❑ •ri ❑ H ❑ •rl ❑ •ri ❑ F ❑ z U o z z ❑ z F Q z U z ❑ z u z ❑ z ❑ z a z H v) H G] G] W w a F W W w Z W w W w W w > Z > Q Z > a > Qz > ❑ > a > a > ❑ > I cn > 4 a x❑ .a a U a a c/) ❑ W Ga H U W Q O O Q H ❑ H 1 O a 0 W v 0 0 c > i > m rn r r r to w z z:E: r•4 M o 0 rn m H ❑ H O l0 •-+ ri co I H Z .-i t.f') M M M O ❑ CD 07 z z o E-H H .Y, Q Z a Q m w m a I 0 o w F c� 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O 0 0 0 w O O o 0 0 0 0 o O O O m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 x :Z) Ln c- M .-a M M r1 r .-c Ln rn z rl) c'M N M (M N N M N N m N N N N N N N lD N N N F z o 0 0 0 0 0 0 -+ O o O O o O o O 0 o O O o O O O o 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 U U r-1 .-1 —1 .-+ 1-4 r-i Q O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ri ri ' i r 1 r 1 r i e i r 1 r 1-4 '-I W ❑ I U O to W CD H H U w H z a > w x H w U W U O Q W z a ❑ M a a O z W U w O 0 ❑ LO Q Q E-H F a O z Q H Q F F F m H Q G] Ls, cn ' O I W U E U H � H Q Q w a x Q w F H H Q a s w U a Q w a z z a F Q Q w ❑ 3 w m H f .. Z a a a H 44 Q❑ O Q H F-i H a o R ❑ a >4 o+ r4 ❑ o U U w a o w Q a H Q a z z x w a a F E a Q O a z H H U > a H 7 ❑ Q Q Q !Z (Z H H O O Z z U) z U U .a a s a u) co z ❑ H Cu w z 0 > 0 0 0 0 0 0 o N O Ln O z c Ln Ln Ln cn '-+ c o o O Ln O >+ O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 r-1 O 0 O F a z o1 �-+ H > a H ❑ U H Q Q Q a O: H O z z Q U U U a a s a a v) cn O O 1 3 n 025 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP5005 CHECK REGISTER 2:24PM 11/06/01 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.*** 47274 11/06/01 HOR100 DODIE HORVITZ 31.86 47275 11/06/01 JAZ100 JAZZY J'S CATERING 200.00 47276 11/06/01 JFK050 JFK MEMORIAL HOSPITAL 4875.00 47277 11/06/01 LAQ040 LA QUINTA CHAMBER COMMERC 198.00 47278 11/06/01 TRE100 JUAN TREVINO 300.00 47279 11/06/01 VER050 FREDRICO VERDUGO 300.00 47280 11/06/01 WEI050 MARK WEISS 35.00 CHECK TOTAL mmmgimfl 032 026 z r+ N M -qr Lr) 1,0 (r 00 M o .-1 N c Q IH a o F 7- 0 lD O G] F C7 Q W W W W W W W W W W w W W rC 00 F H H H F+ H H H H F+ H H H a a 0 0 O o 0 0 0 O 0 0 o O 0 0 �o N E. OD O O O O O O O O O O O O co Z H W z r+ O In cN Co 0 Co 00 l0 00 O rn x O M O r r H '-i r1 -1 ('M r-1 O O M (M >+ 0 N OD - M M C' a Ln O O O o O 0 00 O O O O O O cn o Ln OD o o �n a M O r Ol O O M < U) N 00 ri (M M H H c O z F U) W H x w z ^ay z Ell a s U a a a a a w F O z z z z z z z 0 H O H O H O W H z E-4 U H H D D m D n D m H w F w F H H U H 0 < a a a a a a a Lu Lu W H a H (z C7 04 N z Z O z O 04 w z O H O z O z O U) w cn cn v) W O O O x 0 > 0 H 0 W 0 - - - - - - 0 !z 0 Cz 0 0 z U m z a z D z a x x cz rz a a z W z W z x z H cn m w w w a W O O o 0 0 0 O w (-)W U w U W w H > H > Lu > >1 >-4 >+ >• >+ > U > U > z > I 0 W Q z Q Q O O O v) a U H cn v) a 0 W L*4 H U w �C H 0 fz a o w rn > I > m 0 w z z x r w 1-1 " O M I H z N O 0 .-+ H " x < z a < w m a I O O Lu H a r1 O O O O O O O O O 01 m N W N O O O O O O O O O co 00 N W 00 O O O O O O O O O Ln Ln 00 � Lr) r M r r r r r r r Cn Ol to z O M O M M M m m M M O O O k.o r w �.o k.0 �.o �.o %.0 H z ri H N N H H H r1 I H M M M 0 1r) Ln O O Ln O an al 0 u-) Ln Ln O O N N N .--1 r1 N N M U U ri r--1 r-1 r-1 r-1 r 4 r-1 r-♦ r-i r-1 r-I rC O O O O O O O O O O O O O r-4 r-1 H '-i r1 r-1 r-I r-I r-1 r-1 a a a a a a a H O O O O O O O M C7 H O H U) W W W W W W W O Ln cz O 00 W 00 Oa W 00 CA CD a4 H Q a x x x x x x x o a I H U U U U U U U U z W (� > H H > V) W H a U) > U) a z O O H H F H F H H w O H M H x h x z z z z z z z a U W < 'J W H H H H F-1 H H [- H 3 >a a W m D m D 0 D D cz a O N O+ OI O+ 01 a Oi O+ 0 x w za 0 0 Lu < FC a a a� cn z 0 i-D a a a a a a a 1-0 Ls. H Cu W z O > 0 0 O O O O O 0 O O O O 0 O O O u-) c IT IT c c "T c O u-) ur) O >. ri r+ O 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 H O 0 O F a N J4 a a a a W Z H U H O < < KC < a w W 3 033 027 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AP5005 CHECK REGISTER 1:50PM 10/31/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE 1 CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE VENDOR NO. NAME ***NO CHECKS WERE USED FOR PRINT ALIGNMENT.*** PAYMENT AMOUNT 47242 10/31/01 ABE001 JACQUES ABELS 150.00 47243 10/31/01 BECO10 DEBORAH BECHARD 50.00 47244 10/31/01 BOB100 BILL BOBBITT 50.00 47245 10/31/01 BOU100 MICHELE BOUDREAU 50.00 47246 10/31/01 BUT010 RICHARD BUTLER 150.00 47247- 10/31/01 CUN100 DENNIS CUNNINGHAM 50.00 47248 10/31/01 DAV010 MIKE DAVIS 50.00 47249 10/31/01 DIA100 DENISE DIAMOND 50.00 47250 10/31/01 ELRO10 EL RANCHITO 15000.00 47251 10/31/01 FIL100 GIA FILICE 50.00 47252 10/31/01 HOR100 DODIE HORVITZ 65.84 47253 10/31/01 IMP010 IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DIST 1717.68 47254 10/31/01 IRWO20 BARBARA IRWIN 50.00 47255 10/31/01 KIR010 TOM KIRK 150.00 47256 10/31/01 LEW010 TOM LEWIS 50.00 47257 10/31/01 LOU100 ELSE LOUDON 50.00 47258 10/31/01 MAH100 CYRILLE P MAHFOUD 50.00 47259 10/31/01 MIT150 MICHAEL MITCHELL 50.00 47260 10/31/01 MOU100 DONALD J MOULIN 50.00 47261 10/31/01 OLA100 MILTON OLANDER 50.00 47262 10/31/01 OSBO50 LEE M OSBORNE CPA 50.00 47263 10/31/01 PUE050 MARIA L PUENTE 50.00 47264 10/31/01 REB050 JOAN REBICH 50.00 47265 10/31/01 REY050 ELAINE REYNOLDS 50.00 47266 10/31/01 RIV030 RIVERSIDE COUNTY CLERK 10.00 47267 10/31/01 ROB150 STEVE ROBBINS 150.00 47268 10/31/01 SHA040 ROSITA SHAMIS 50.00 47269 10/31/01 SHA050 ARCHIE SHARP 50.00 47270 10/31/01 STJO10 VICTORIA ST JOHNS 50.00 47271 10/31/01 TYL050 ROBERT T TYLER 150.00 47272 10/31/01 VER200 VERIZON 72.24 47273 10/31/01 WRI050 ROBERT S WRIGHT 50.00 CHECK TOTAL 18,715.76 034 028 z < l0 M N 00 C' N ul r Ln N M M N M O a E-+ o z -1 (`") O U U C7 C� C7 C� U' C7 (� U C� x < FC W H W H W F W H W F W H W F W F W F W E-H W F W F Ll, a4 r M •• .--� F z w E+ z O O 0 O O 0 O O 0 O O 0 O O 0 O O o O O O O O o O O 0 O O o � 00 u� N l0 r x >+ Q O O x Ln 1n Ln 1.n u) 1n 1n 1r) o 0 1n u� r a < r-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O o o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 O O o m 0 1n r+ o U 1n z H co w o 1r) 0 0 Ln z o Ln -1 H cn w o 1n U z 0 Un CD z o a) E w > o 0 o cz < O o Ln w x Cf) 1n �o F Q E F Q E-H F O Ln 00 < z Q z < H O a F x O U U cf) O U F U cn O U 0 U W cn H W 3 E< a a U Q Q z a Q a U< E< a Q z< a U a Q to a Q E H< a > Q< a o Q a Q U > z 0 x 00 H > F coo < 140 H > H C/) O x 00 F < 40 H > cn F O F a F o W rz &4 o < F 0 -- (.90 H Un W �+ a U H H -1 F F O F H F < H H F F 0 a H a r- + O H U z a 0 F a H O U G] a 0 H Z H O o z Cz 0 U W Cz o FI H tZ O a < Gz 0 o a cz 0 W E a o a 0 U 1-1 > z [z U H z Q z z Q Q z F H Q z z Q a z H z Q z F H Q z z O Q z cz Q Q z a, Q z F cn Q z a W Q z cz F H cn w z w > E W E > x U W > E w E > z < w > x U W > x x w > E+ a W > a4 H W > w > W > z z G] > U w cn Q a LL 0 U cz o U a 114 x < 0 U 0 U w U z H < tT] a w W Cu U W H Q z r-4 O r-1 O O O O O O O O M O > I z > z W co x O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N o N cT O M H C.� H Q H O z E-1 U O H U O F U O F U O F U o F U O F U O F U O F U 0 M o H aG Q z w < m w w a 0 0 w F rz w 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O o O 1-4 N 0 O E O O O O O O O 00 O z m O m O Ol O m O O\ O Ol O Ql O Ql O N m Ql O to O r N H 1.n to an LC) in Ln Ln Ln l0 Ln l0 l0 O 0 Ln O Lr) N O C O C 1n N U-) N O m Ln r1 1n N O N U U Q H 0 r 4 1-4 O r-1 1-1 0 r-1 .-i O r-I o r-1 O .-I O ri 0 r 4 Ln O Q' ri O r-1 ri 0 r-i 0 -1 H H Q M O Z O o U') < cn a < O w a a w Cx7 z Q z N H H u H I < a W fYl x U W F E-a H Q 0 a F o H z z cn O 0 H w H > 0�4 H W H Cat] H Q cn !xl x CA CQ O W W CQ Q Q U F-1 < H Q H U U a tz x ><+ 01 < a a a a 0 W a W x < x H z Q w U) H 2 a 1-4 H H H w w a 0 Q U Q m w a FH U H U hi z W x H z w a < H Q O w E F [:, z G.7 h Q m x fz Q x Q W C7 Q H z 0 a > r1 o o .--I O o o o 0 r-1 o 0 O ,-1 o o 0 1-1 0 o 0 O 0 ri 0 >+ U H U H 0 W as O U w ri !Y1 o r 1 Q 0 O H 0 r 1 z 0 O > ri < H O Cz a a H u: o a4 �C U r.� CQ co W co U Q Q W L*., x "v{ 3 029 z o ao 0 o N m rn m r4 H %D .--+ < H -1 m N (`') N N M r-I N N a o H z H 0 N x O C7 C7 C7 C� r� m H H H E•+ E•+ H E• H H E• E- C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o H o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z H G] z o o O 0 0 0 0 o O o O o =) Ln Un u) In Irn Ln In In Ln 1n O -+ Q � a co O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 kD 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. O o 0 0 1-: o o rz o o a o o rz o 04 o Cz o 0 0 1-4 z a-) Ln < u-) C7 Ln F:4 Ln Z U') < In < Ln < In z Ln U ur) 0 r- 0 o z o 0 0 0 0 O z z FIC > C7 cz E a > cz a cz > x rz z O x o a O o o a 2 E w H co O cn w U) U) co w 0 0 U) H U H U) H 1-A H Cf) U U a w a a > a a > a w a > a > a > a w a a Q rz r� ❑ FC U) r> ❑ Q a rC ❑ ❑ r> ❑ r> cz z E- a H E• E• rC H a F+ Q H rC H < H a H > H H O 0 o O O o rz o O o 0 0 0 0 U) o a W H H a H U E• H H < H H H a H H H H E- H H a H H tz ❑ 0z ❑ H ❑ H ❑ z ❑ H ❑ C� ❑ H ❑ H ❑ E-F ❑ fz ❑ z ❑ m z U z o z z z U) z a z U) z O z cn z cn z cn z O z z Z D H m w H W z W W w H w w w H w w w w w L.] 47 E-+ W E W E- w > U) > < > > > a > > > v> > > > > > > > U) > E > a ❑ H a z z H z z z H o Ui x a H U H x H F- 1 H x u U w 44 U W 11 ❑ m O O O O o O O H o o O O O w O O O o O o o O O O O O > I > CQ N N N N N N N O N N N N z z E N H ❑ H H H E- H E-H H H H H H H E- �+ Z U U U U U U U U U U U U ❑ O O O O O O O O O O O O H x < z a < ca w ao W I o 0 w H rz o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w o O 0 0 0 o O o o O o 0 ao 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 o O x D rn rn rn rn m rn m rn rn rn rn rn z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 In 1n In Ln In In In Ln Ln In Ln Lrn H z .� O o In u-) Ln o Lrn 1n Urn o In Ln 0 v r- N '1 r I r I .1 N N U < o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r-1 -1 11 H r-1 r-I -1 H r-i r-I 1-1 H ('M O ❑ Q o D a a u) o a z U cn a c... W H a w ❑ z x x a w w H a H h wz z x o a w x z rz 0 H x o a E a m a H w H a 0 ac Q o w a o a w < 0 x H w a a w ❑ z rz w >� a x a a < a O E Q z < a QQ w H x Q Ey H z H a r> O z cn a U z a w a 2 a z <w o w u o H Lu W a w z O > 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 o O o O N 4 H O 0 Ln Ln U') Ln O } o O O r-1 H .1 H o O O O U H 3 W. 3 0 x H 0 as w w >i U H rz H w O < H o a cn 0 w < U H x a a E E E 0 0 a a z c r N M Ln lD N Q ri N r-1 N a o H z 0 (M 1-1 M O U CD U 0 C7 < W W W w W 43 W W W a a CQ F H H H H E-E-H H H r M •• O O O O O O N N O �O -+ F O O O O O 0 m vT 0 r z H W z o 0 0 0 0 o r a o �n O ri Ln In Ln Ifn LO V' N Ln r-+ r gO a a m O o o O O o o c r� o O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O N O a In r-i In U Ln z In 0 Ln Ln r z In 1-4 z O z r-I o H OH H H Q z z Z H O w O H W W U w a a s a au a a a w a Q < < m < a E- H E E- a H a 0 0 � 0 00 a o o coo 00 w o O W H H Q H U H Q H a H H U H 0 H a H a H QHi rx iz CD a a x U Z H Z U Qx > E rx U cl. O H O w 0 z 0 < O H O Ho z 0 U) O H O > fZ 0 LZ C] Ho Cz o !L 0 z O H 0 a 0 (z 0 z U z z z z o z O z a z z z W< z O z H m W z w z w H W H W E W z W z z w FIW O > > a > > co > E > < > O 0 > U) > I G] Ov Cl)a W a U x a a w x n H U w < H o rz o 0 0 0 o v c� O a O • W o 0 0 0 0 �D o > I > m N N N N N l0 l0 N w z z E rn rn Op H H =) H H H H H Ln Ln H H z U U U U U r r U O C] x O O O O O r r O H < z a < W W m a I o 0 w F' a In o 0 0 0 0 o rn o w -+ O O O O 0 0 r-1 0 co O O o 0 0 i o E o m rn rn rn rn rn Lr) r rn z o 0 0 0 0 0 M N o H �O Ln U-) in Ln Ln lD l0 Ln z N r-i IH ri r-1 -4 M Q' r-1 M in 0 In O �n 0 in �n . O O U (V v c c U < O O O O o O 0 0 (D r-1 r-1 ri r-1 r-i —4 H —4 H x a w a M U O U) o z In E °a z O rz x < o m (f) h W 0 z H a a H a H >+ !z Q ao U) H g P4 z 0 O U) U) Q F cn W H H z H z z oa H H a w o a° a a cL w > H x H w H H w O > W U)U U 0] zcz a C) H F O cz H O W W O m H w z w a m a Q > a > > a z 0 > O 0 0 0 O O o 0 0 a M In c In ,-1 In O O In O �H 0 r-1 O O O O (14 N O U H > pq Q < E a a s H U H H ai > g 037 031. A/P - AP6002 CHECKS TO BE VOIDED 08:47AM 11/13/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE 1 CHECK BK INVOICE VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER ID DATE AMT. PAID NUMBER NAME 46007 DEF 05/16/01 237.80 L00010 LOCK SHOP INC TOTAL VOIDED 237.80 INVOICE DESCRIPTION KEYS/LOCKS 038 032 A/P - AP6002 CHECKS TO BE VOIDED 08:50AM 11/13/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE 1 CHECK BK INVOICE VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER ID DATE AMT. PAID NUMBER NAME 47174 DEF 10/18/01 425.00 JAZ100 JAllY J'S CATERING TOTAL VOIDED 425.00 INVOICE DESCRIPTION CULTURAL ARTS SYMPOSIUM 039 033 A/P - AP6002 CHECKS TO BE VOIDED 2:48PM 11/09/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE 1 CHECK BK INVOICE VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER ID DATE AMT. PAID NUMBER NAME 47034 DEF 10/09/01 367.50 STUO10 WILLIAM STUBBLEFIELD 47034 DEF 10/09/01 49.00 STUO10 WILLIAM STUBBLEFIELD 47034 DEF 10/09/01 73.50 STUO10 WILLIAM STUBBLEFIELD TOTAL VOIDED 490.00 INVOICE DESCRIPTION INSTRUCTOR INSTRUCTOR INSTRUCTOR A/P - AP6002 CHECKS TO BE VOIDED 3:25PM 11/09/01 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK ID: DEF PAGE 1 CHECK BK INVOICE VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER ID DATE AMT. PAID NUMBER NAME 47206 DEF 10/19/01 144.00 REG043 REGENTS UC RIVERSIDE TOTAL VOIDED 144.00 INVOICE DESCRIPTION EFFECTIVE PRIN CODE ENF CLASS 041. 035, COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 Transmittal of Treasurer's Report dated September 30, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Transmittal of Treasurer's Report dated September 30, 2001 for the City of La Quinta. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: I certify that this report accurately reflects all pooled investments and is in compliance with California Government Code Section 53645 as amended 1 /1 /86; and is in conformity with City Code 3.08.010 to 3.08.070 Investment of Money and Funds. I hereby certify that sufficient investment liquidity and anticipated revenues are available to meet next month's estimated expenditures. spect'folly submitteA: Jobri M. Falconbr, Finance Director Approved for Submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachment: Treasurer's Report, City of La Quinta 042., ATTACHMENT 1 MEMORANDUM TO: La Quinta City Council FROM: John M. Falconer, Finance Director/Treasurer SUBJECT: Treasurer's Report for September 30, 2001 DATE: October 26, 2001 Attached is the Treasurer's Report for the month ending September 30, 2001. The report is submitted to the City Council each month after a reconciliation of accounts is accomplished by the Finance Dept. The following table summarizes the changes in investment types for the month: Investment Beginning_Purchased Notes Sold/Matured Other Ending Change _ Cash $11,449,801 (1) ($8,146,852) $3,302,949 ($8,146,852) LAIF $15,027,030 5,000,000 0 20,027,030 5,000,000 US Treasuries (2) $51,995,326 (67,534) 51,927,792 (67,534) US Gov't Agencies (2) $12,936,265 8,000,000 (5,000,000) (4,670) 15,931,595 2,995,330 Commercial Paper (2) $0 0 0 Mutual Funds $22,008,907 1 11,045,005 10,963,902 11,045,005 Total $113 417 329 $13 000 000 24 191 857 $72 204 102 153 268 $11 2641061l I certify that this report accurately reflects all pooled investments and is in compliance with the California Government Code; and is in conformity with the City Investment Policy. As Treasurer of the City of La Quinta, I hereby certify that sufficient investment liquidity and anticipated revenues are available to meet the pools expenditure requirements for the next six months. the City of La Quinta used the Bureau of the Public Debt, U.S. Bank Monthly Statement and the Bank of New York Monthly Custodian Report to determine the fair market value of investments at month end. John' Falconer' Fina a Director/Treasurer /// . �/V/ - /Dato' Footnote (1) The amount reported represents the net increase (decrease) of deposits and withdrawals from the previous month. (2) The amount reported in the other column represents the amortization of premium/discount for the month on US Treasury, Commercial Paper and Agency investments. 043 a63 E 7 E CD w O C () N N C E M a) > C_ w O N a o E o d a) :3 cr C N r N N N c O CL M � V E m y a a) m QE y � — U 3 m � d N O NV a) �c U a1 2 L Q. H N c c c c c c c c 0)Z U Z Z Z Z Z Z Z W .............. c O c�U-) O O (D y bLO9 m m j i 0 d y « 0 N U U c c C O C)U ors Q yw U) U o LL o m ` o a C .0 fN y (n C C a) T m C m m _ �- N m N ca E Y cc X m m a) m a) N m a) N > N o O) a) >, N ca N C C M ■- C m 7 j V N U L N C y C IV;N C 'T C C C C C N Q> m a N a >> o n o 0 0 0 0 0 a) cl a_ o y O N o O E •E •E •E •E `� 3�LoMcv)0') \ in o O �-0 O N> N O OO O y 0 69 69 EA 69 69 O 0 = C_ f`4— an d C) CDO C 0 O C N C M v v E Q e» a`) 0pp o 0 N O CD O -aZ O ^ 0 a (n > n 9 9 M O o o e j 00 00 O o O O O o ao e co e 0 A 0 0 00 0 e 0 oo N O 0 O t� 00 00 Ci a0 O O O L6 M M L ti> ffi 64 6H C C C C C aE \ \ o o 0 0 0 0 \ \ \ Q 7 O O O E E E E E N Z x N a 7 L D CO co CO M coN 6R 6R 6F9 69 69 N N C C lL a > o ti 0 O O 0 o m 0 0 0 0 0 c 00000CD 66666 O M O IT Q 0 1 N Q Z o O O O O 0 0 0 0. O o C c e M O o O M c O LL N O (D 61* 0 CD C; M O �j 0 0 O 0 Oi ci 0 O O Q Q V) M M� vi 69 69 69 v E o 0 0 0 0 7 E ° o c _01 _ —_ —_ c o 0 o Q LL•X u� 0 (DEEEEE M '. N z m a0 to m co Cl) LO Q i 643,606A69V!i N C :2 �2 V N �c C C O T� E O = 0 Q U 0 0 N .0 w N d a U dam = z (D'Z s `O N c > O _ .. C Z �Q O U a) p a C N C E (� -N aCVvcN C n 0 m NN a) m .0 OO O 0 CO C •O U a0a cNm LLmO N m0 O> NO. U OQ0 CLE C � cV-� mN0 oLL a) pfL c 0 CD m E a) 0) z yam o c c L le 3 N E Q O 02M rnM c m O d C v c m w O y 'C 7 .N E f0 C m m OL N c N U f0 O C O C O r C N o2 m-6-0 m m a -- O m m y c C H O N' (/i N C 'C J m - J a) 7 N E E m fp c oc Z o mm a) f4 >c N E E c p U EcEE a) •' C N ` L E Z S J LL= E C N y m y U C c m > �E�amcmm o L °) O U rn ErnN m E o Y ~ n () 0 a) a) a) �C'e Q > c> tK c) a) oc m0 0 XOLLLL(nLLLL E c O O m >u mO H c) � � i i i i WQ C H 0 0 0 0 Cl) O co O) (DNOM 't M M M C y UQ i 4)mc O V —_ $? N a..LLa� 0 O 0 m c c c E E Eell m W W W c 0 c c c C C C X QQQIA 044 m V U 4 I' M Y vezzzzz m m t00000 17 Y Y Y Y Y �R mmmmm RZ,000001�1 =OOAU OI 9�X Ch N } Pf A 1A O r 10 10 (O 4n Pl W p 'C = �J8 hee�1 d V 2< O O b � N N O L _ a>258617%25OO a> on LLkae 0 0 yq� N N yN� T� N M 8 C T p�iomlo�al �� polo O� Q 1�01N �If�1A �N^ CA c'; .��C «O �olXgof° i>Zz 2z 2> p 0- 0 N QD C� N.CX �zzz PA AA EI CO C 4V a Ip �� C 0 jam[[ 0 y1 N10A (NpN Q 2<< OO r �hQl ja rluu << A t0 r G C N N < C Ob o n n Y M o n e $ >br3�8n < en en el f N to N Yf UI < y a L ..yyyGC hNhh4 O �4010O PlN C� > 1'1 In 10 M 10 10 ♦ V P) �zz �.. zzzzz z �HHHH � Nin a� Vl CAV/ N! V) _ N > > > > > > N Vl (A 9 C a LL C b 10 N« ~ 4 2 z z z z� _ 0 N 'A0 0 0 0 0 0 < Z LL LL H 6 Y Y Y Y Y 'U c 0 0 �~ 55 � » �ci8 mmmmm �Ep a O C LL < O O r N N �NNNa 9�CC Q: 4: �� p ,Y, mpfG• NO 0�---------.- to N .► {{Opp ' 1°f 01 C4pp OR 1�1pp IO�IO h CIA tip tQ N pf L N N J �i' �j00000000000 g««««a<ao �zzzzzzzzzzz < C l�n mQ nj H! Pf N � O O O O O O O O O O O Y 1�1I1 h N li Nliatnvial'nal'na aaI.4[�8A �o�F 4Y� Y�Y YLL 'C m m N m VImN �� N jyNONln Ot/1�N0� U U0. a c c o �4) U6 5 U � O O • O Q Q 00 =ZZ 00 00 C7 L 7 Co to 2 Z Z v� LO O N N -W CD Cl Q N N mZ p N 0) 00 o _ r o 00 •� o C 0 C °- O O cri C6 Sri � c N O N 6 V C C C QI LL N °o d06a r N 0Qg rn F- CD a) _ c m 0) N 6/5 O Cc = Z t (D o rn 4) U- LL. O O C c0 •� O s U 0 rn m N O Z t ` � c Co (D 0 N (D rnU (Dtncn o� c 0 c c Z C 0 v)Z �E E v�E C EE-0� 0 E O— N > > > cU�oou-c > > �ru'C/)MU) >:° c Z U FO- C N in (� d M Q � �2Z co O M O Q Cl O p •0 Z � ; O _ eCL L0 CD ti 0oin CD .`� C) CD a� nV-N c O N 0 C CD'N LL. C O > r Cc Z cc ��c CL F' 0 y CD Co v� Cc Cc O U. O V v cu U 0M CD '-,� •�0N-.c� O N Z a> _ 'c CC a •- � s '� m ' _ rnaaiOH c. V� 0Z > EZcu cnE�c E C od E v0j c 4 d E O O N > > cU4)o�c > N m Y O c:3 ms.Ecnv? _z0a»21- 0 0 NO I,.- ccoo M O LO N I�ow�M �Ov-Ntn qct00 T- cMC—tiN ,r-- M O •- e- N Irm, to �3 0 N N ti v C N O N p �o -o a. C N WE OC m a c 4dc-0cC0CNW O 0 `O rn N 0 c d •c _ o E 0 Q WaaJQ� 046 aR at g ae N ae « aR a n A « h << O y 7 eZ000000 Y O'11�p OCDN 10700!O rO 17 �Pf Pl It 1; O y O 01Oh p l0'! rkin, oapo,�A. 010�. 0�8A 4 Y yj ri 14Q OH O rkN j�pOpN pOp�� p A eY YYY�pp,1 zZZZ 41 4f N N (/1 EMU fq LO �EE�EE�EE�EE� a L L L b i p p p p p 61zzzzz- 88050=� Ummmmm U 7 cq Y � � to N cn to 7 Yo Y eZo0 m c' N :f LL40 y��♦Y� Ih 40 O 0, M in en 'Iteg„C-4 asassagas Wig^ co 'NONI+f Yf' •'- t� r') C, �A f�(ApphOaO� M m A 4Kp%A O M7 01 0, YI Na "gig f 10 CI m ' N c c c I c c< c c 111 41 N •7CN 41gMN4N4 CO C V82SVSVo�?g a pp p LL R • � , C <ymml/1 mYl mf/lmy�� ]Hy>Hpl>tl)jyj]� p 2€ t p wa p p o p MC90 1 pFU � yuf�Otf;0 �Up�O, gi ^gM f �•p LL i g 5 t N U. A LL ew N ng N N ul FEl LL < 8 A I t s 047 p '�� `p Z 0 u 7 UIx N m MLO N V AryMa(M+f A (O U') N �f�OeYfN 'fa (n in N N COD (M9 O M al i� (n M (O a N OD O to H N - � O- R O N av ON D - Ma NaOpnA rl:OdNI n0C6 0 O MA NpA r-OO aa))r- (AN�N�a a Ln M a a O vi 04 to NM a?A U) rZ rn C) (o rn < M co M ►d. (ham OON�N (n�MN10 GGONMOM)Oa O rn M O f0' M O LL O C7 MO�(nNM M r- M O y0a mprn ^MLn N�r` in MNO�Oo M(; ran A A 0 M ENO mM O0(OOOQ (a �NO(W)OD Ln < le cz Oi LL (n (D O NAM MOD OD��10 M R O M or NpA (n MAOO Ma a cn Ne--��r.-N P n �= A O ODIQ r` (o d�N OD of O pptC)OOr O a 7 M (n wNWcr)V Mq N co N (O r` Cl) (+j M co OD w M aD (o O (0 0 m 1.- OA 0 � t4ON(MCu NM co MLo(l N w t- N O r-- (V ^ O C! (m,1NN tnh0)Ma - N 0(V �nj O O (n�NCM')(00 7N(O C6 M U9 M M - LL O Cl) c0')(MA(am M N O 0 mCh pClth N U) N(OnMNN _ CD NNO� N U M 0 ^ M d04a M�O�A (ONR((jco p(Mn h n 0�� OU. (pp0^f�01 O N (^n(n cn N —7 cc N on cq N O y � N ^ M O m co (n T N T (n rn N O a co N O a (p O M V OM N r.- co ar (+> (rm e� (+f M LLO 0M0 cri OD (O O �NM �NI OD M et r, M(n m N t0 co t0 ryOa O�OO�D AWN^�O w� CV (� «� �{ V ar-OD ISM M�P^OnD(OD aj a; r--01 MO-CCOO a (O I N 00 A QC ('7RN ^ N z N (O W m -: vi vi N (09 �. � N N C L cm d E y O L ~ N C C � a m N N u E x c w m T C C m 4m V! C` x L N A A Q m Fm- h U CM M�d"—O N C 0 y U) Q c U c 7 m c �-. x>y c y y N N LL a C O V jaa0a Z C ar j C m y N d A U c C W 'a C c d> O (0 f/% w d tT L L d X d L EL Z CI t C N ai2 m m ar-(n0Ir m m N w(nwoUOF- 0 z U C w z a) a) O O O Vi ll� N N L N m U V N 0 0 rn C N E C N O a E 0 N m Q 0 (n LL rn U m u C U 0 O zCD N L y U c c O x W 04 CITY OF LA QUINTA BALANCE SHEET 09/30/01 ASSETS: CITY CITY RDA RDA FA FIXED LONG TERM FIXED LONG TERM FINANCING LONG TERM GRAND CITY ASSETS DEBT RDA ASSETS DEBT AUTHORITY DEBT TOTAL POOLED CASH 8,970,693.80 13,372,466.48 103,252.57 22,446,412.85 LQRP INVESTMENT IN POOLED CASH 805,000.00 805,000.00 INVESTMENT T-BILLINOTES & OTHER 33,480,000.00 33,480,000,00 AUTO MALL CASH 28,241.61 28,241.61 LQRP CASH 49,324.61 49,324.61 BOND REDEMPTION CASH 180,441.16 1,558.71 181,999,87 BOND RESERVE CASH BOND PROJECT CASH 44,546,358.69 546,541.77 45.092,900 46 BOND ESCROW CASH PETTY CASH 1,000.00 1,000.00 CASH & INVESTMENT TOTAL 42,479,9 5.41 58,95 ,59 .94 651, 53.05 102,084,879.40 INVESTMENT IN LAND HELD FOR RESALE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE 41,913.63 518,028.48 559,942.11 PREMIUM/DISCOUNT ON INVESTMENT (73,050.52) 141,439.30 68,388.78 LQRP-ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE 93,220.01 93,220.01 INTEREST RECEIVABLE LOAN/NOTES RECEIVABLE 13,488,354.64 13,488,354.64 DUE FROM OTHER AGENCIES 373,434.01 373,434.01 DUE FROM OTHER AGENCIES - CVAG 2,299,096.69 2,299,096,69 CVAG ALLOWANCE (2,299,096.69) (2,299,096.69) DUE FROM OTHER GOVERNMENTS 0.37 0.37 DUE FROM OTHER FUNDS 1,040,973.94 651,038.04 1,692,011.98 DUE FROM RDA 8,497,550.20 8,497,550.20 INTEREST ADVANCE -DUE FROM RDA 3,170,571.63 3,170,571.63 ADVANCES TO OTHER FUNDS 28,241.61 28,241.61 NSF CHECKS RECEIVABLE 3,326.01 3,326,01 ACCRUED REVENUE 833.40 833.40 FIXED ASSETS 20,711,742.00 20,711,742.00 ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION 711,534.48 711,534.48 TRAVEL ADVANCES 4,459.00 4,459.00 EMPLOYEE ADVANCES PREPAID EXPENSES RECEIVABLE TOTAL 13,798,954.36 20,711,742.00 14,892,913.87 49,403,610.23 WORKER COMPENSATION DEPOSIT RENT DEPOSITS UTILITY DEPOSITS 75.00 75.00 MISC. DEPOSITS 2,100.00 2,100.00 DEPOSITS TOTAL 2,175.00 2,175.00 GENERAL FIXED ASSETS 9,988,279.05 9,988,279.05 ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION AMOUNT AVAILABLE TO RETIRE L/T DEBT 3,395,117.03 3,395,117.03 AMOUNT TO BE PROVIDED FOR L/T DEBT 951,847.65 80,866,860.97 7,750,000.00 89,568,708.62 TOTAL OTHER ASSETS 951,847.65 9,988,279.05 84,261,978.00 7,750,000.00 102,952,104.70 TOTAL ASSETS 56,281,064.77 20,711,742.00 951,847.65 73,846,504.81 9,988,279.05 84,261,978.00 651,353.05 7,750,000.00 254 442 769.33 LIABILITIES: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 13,741.33 13,741.33 DUE TO OTHER AGENCIES 607,764.53 730,884.56 1,338,649.09 DUE TO OTHER FUNDS 273,804.01 1,702,796.22 1,976,600.23 INTEREST ADVANCE -DUE TO CITY 11,383,537.00 11,383,537.00 ACCRUED EXPENSES 16,468.50 16,468.50 PAYROLL LIABILITIES 38,282.64 38,282.64 STRONG MOTION INSTRUMENTS 5,741.76 5.741.76 FRINGE TOED LIZARD FEES 78,981.50 78,981.50 SUSPENSE (365.31) (365.31) DUE TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA 28,241.61 28,241.61 PAYABLES TOTAL 1,046,192.07 13,833,686.28 14,879,878.35 ENGINEERING TRUST DEPOSITS SO. COAST AIR QUALITY DEPOSITS LQRP DEPOSITS 14,409.00 14,409.00 DEVELOPER DEPOSITS 880,798.73 880,798.73 MISC. DEPOSITS 439,198.65 439,198.65 AGENCY FUND DEPOSITS 1,421,796.51 1,421,796.51 TOTAL DEPOSITS 2,741,793.89 14,409.00 2,756,202.89 DEFERRED REVENUE 387,604.00 11,378,904.00 11,766,508.00 OTHER LIABILITIES TOTAL 387,604.00 11,378,904.00 11,766,50&00 COMPENSATED ABSENCES PAYABLE 373,536.65 373,536.65 DUE TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA 578,311.00 189,725.50 768,036.50 DUE TO COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 10,989,847.00 10,989,847.00 DUE TO C.V. UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST. 8,747,405.50 8,747,405.50 DUE TO DESERT SANDS SCHOOL DIST. BONDS PAYABLE 64,335,000.00 7,750,000.00 72,085,000.00 TOTAL LONG TERM DEBT 951,847.65 84,261,978.00 7,750,000.00 92,963,825.65 TOTAL LIABILITIES 4,175,589.96 951,847.65 25,226,999.28 84,261,978.00 7,750,000.00 122,366,414.89 EQUITY -FUND BALANCE 52,105,474.81 20,711,742.00 48,619,505.53 9,988,279.05 651,353.05 132,076,354.44 TOTAL LIABILITY & EQUITY 56,281,064.77 20,711,742.00 951,847.65 73,846,504.81 9,988,279.05 84,261,978.00 651,353.05 7,750,000.00 254,442,769.33 CASH & INVESTMENT TOTAL 102,084,879.40 PREMIUM/DISCOUNT ON INVESTMENT 68,388.78 TOTAL 102.153.268.18 (A 6t,9d T 0 0 4ht 4 4 Q" COUNCILIRDA MEETING DATE: ITEM TITLE: November 20, 2001 Transmittal of Revenue and Expenditure Report dated September 30, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: Receive and File BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: J? STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Transmittal of the September 30, 2001 Statement of Revenue and Expenditures for the City of La Quinta. espot,Yully submi Wd: Jahn M. Falconer, 'Finance Director Ap rov d for submission b Thomas P. Genovese City Manager Attachments: 1. Revenue and Expenditures, September 30, 2001 050 ATTACHMENT CITY OF LA QUINTA REVENUES - ALL FUNDS 07/01/2001 - 9/30/2001 FUNDS BUDGET RECEIVED RECEIVED General $14,195,633.00 $2,475,204.23 17.4% Library 106,600.00 79,707.11 74.8% Gas Tax Revenue 421,600.00 93,625.70 22.2% Cmaq/lstea 287,423.00 0.00 0.0% Federal Assistance 409,000.00 68.20 0.0% Assessment District 2000-1 0.00 5,039.40 0.0% Slesf (Cops) Revenue 2,200.00 390.85 17.8% Local Law Enforcement 28,300.00 47.40 0.2% Lighting & Landscaping 781,400.00 0.00 0.0% Quimby 16,500.00 130,326.76 789.9% Infrastructure 1,397,518.00 28,119.71 2.0% Village Parking 100.00 0.00 0.0% South Coast Air Quality 24,481.00 7,571.43 30.9% LQ Public Safety Officer 2,200.00 2,092.95 95.1 % Interest Allocation 0.00 (0.00) 0.0% Capital Improvement 48,791,499.07 3,411,581.96 7.0% Lq Norte Capital Improvement 0.00 455.73 0.0% Urban Forestry 11,000.00 0.00 0.0% Equipment Replacement 363,180.00 321,649.49 88.6% Information Technology 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 100.0% Arts In Public Places 132,900.00 39,728.16 29.9% Transportation 307,100.00 199,831.78 65.1 % Parks & Recreation 221,500.00 105,624.14 47.7% Civic Center 323,100.00 155,530.08 48.1% Library Development 167,900.00 62,636.68 37.3% Community Center 58,600.00 28,183.99 48.1 % Street Facility 10,500.00 6,241.27 59.4% Park Facility 3,200.00 1,585.57 49.5% La Quinta Financing Authority 688,130.00 486,917.16 70.8% RDA Project Area No. 1 77,568,366.00 58,159,453.85 75.0% RDA Project Area No. 2 9,434,622.00 269,047.36 2.9% Total $156,754,552.07 $67,070,660.96 42.8% osi 61 CITY OF LA QUINTA EXPENDITURES - ALL FUNDS 09/01/2001 - 9/30/2001 FUNDS BUDGET EXPENDITURES ENCUMBERED REMAINING BUDGET % EXPENDED General $14,718,110.27 $3,413,854.51 $0.00 $11,304,255.76 23.2% Library 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Gas Tax 594,378.00 105,399.99 0.00 488,978.01 17.7% Cmaq/lstea 287,423.00 0.00 0.00 287,423.00 0.0% Federal Assistance 31,813.99 0.00 0.00 31,813.99 0.0% Proposed Assessment District 682,553.47 0.00 0.00 682,553.47 0.0% Slesf (Cops) Revenue 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Local Law Enforcement 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Lighting & Landscaping 781,400.00 195,350.01 0.00 586,049.99 25.0% Quimby 317,381.29 0.00 0.00 317,381.29 0.0% Infrastructure 4,486,415.30 1,129,133.15 0.00 3,357,282.15 25.2% Village Parking (1,892.85) 0.00 0.00 (1,892.85) 0.0% South Coast Air Quality 0.00 2,384.75 0.00 (2,384.75) 0.0% Lq Public Safety Officer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Interest Allocation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Capital Improvement 48,791,499.07 3,411,581.96 0.00 45,379,917.11 7.0% Lq Norte Capital Improvement 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Urban Forestry 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Equipment Replacement 380,209.00 22,888.26 0.00 357,320.74 6.0% Arts In Public Places 685,516.41 315.00 0.00 685,201.41 0.0% Transportation 2,809,819.03 (18,482.26) 0.00 2,828,301.29 -0.7% Parks & Recreation 2,060,000.00 0.00 0.00 2,060,000.00 0.0% Civic Center 204,660.00 51,165.00 0.00 153,495.00 25.0% Library Development 523,324.44 2,805.00 0.00 520,519.44 0.5% Community Center 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Street Facility 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Park Facility 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Information Technology 476,372.00 95,207.29 0.00 381,164.71 20.0% La Quinta Financing Authority 1,209,498.78 481,682.50 0.00 727,816.28 39.8% RDA Project Area No. 1 45,734,335.21 25,544,971.86 0.00 20,189,363.35 55.9% RDA Project Area No. 2 15,724,053.44 2,197,588.90 0.00 13,526,464.54 14.0% Total $140 496 869.85 $36 635 845.92 $0.00 $103 861 023.93 26.1% 059 064 CITY OF LA QUINTA GENERAL FUND REVENUES DETAIL TAXES: Property Tax No Low Property Tax Distribution Document Transfer Tax Sales Tax Transient Occupancy Tax Franchise Tax TOTAL TAXES LICENSE & PERMITS: Business License Animal License Building Permits Plumbing Permits Electrical Permits Mechanical Permits Misc. Permits TOTAL LICENSES & PERMITS FEES: Sale of Maps & Publications Community Services Fees Bldg & Safety Fees Community Development Fees Public Works Fees TOTAL FEES INTERGOVERNMENTAL Motor Vehicle In -Lieu Motor Vehicle Code Fines Parking Violations Misc. Fines AB939 State of California Grant CSA152 Assessment TOTAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL INTEREST MISCELLANEOUS Miscellaneous Revenue Cash Over/(Short) TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS TRANSFER IN TOTAL GENERAL FUND 07/01/2001 - 9/30/2001 REMAINING % BUDGET RECEIVED BUDGET RECEIVED 520,600.00 979.71 519,620.29 0.190% 450,600.00 2,267.95 448,332.05 0.500% 380,000.00 77,780.24 302,219.76 20.470% 3,217,500.00 679,811.38 2,537,688.62 21.130% 315951000.00 2131753.75 313811246.25 5.950% 537,500.00 6,884.96 530,615.04 1.280% 8,701,200.00 981,477.99 7,719,722.01 11.280% 152,000.00 43,900.80 108,099.20 28.880% 12,400.00 2,707.25 9,692.75 21.830% 412,500.00 328,485.20 84,014.80 79.630% 89,400.00 54,048.03 35,351.97 60.460% 68,000.00 54,745.14 13,254.86 80.510% 37,000.00 29,451.42 7,548.58 79.600% 48,300.00 11,080.36 37,219.64 22.940% 819,600.00 524,418.20 295,181.80 63.980% 2,150.00 152.40 1,997.60 7.090% 157,825.00 29,725.12 128,099.88 18.830% 357,950.00 217,904.11 140,045.89 60.880% 222,000.00 62,292.16 159,707.84 28.060% 468,550.00 195,989.11 272,560.89 41.830% 1,208,475.00 506,062.90 702,412.10 41.880% 1,257,600.00 271,973.44 985,626.56 21.630% 50,300.00 3,696.11 46,603.89 7.350% 25,000.00 9,700.00 15,300.00 38.800% 5,000.00 1,561.00 3,439.00 31.220% 159, 900.00 19, 985.66 139, 914.34 12.500 % 47,000.00 0.00 47,000.00 0.000% 126,700.00 0.00 126,700.00 0.000% 1,671,500.00 306,916.21 1,364,583.79 18.360% 1,585,600.00 150,533.33 1,435,066.67 9.490% 27,700.00 5,793.96 21,906.04 20.920% 0.00 1.64 (1.64) 0.000% 27,700.00 5,795.60 21,904.40 20.920% 181,558.00 0.00 181,558.00 0.000% 14,195,633.00 2,475,204.23 11,720,428.77 17.440% 053 Uba CITY OF LA QUINTA ALL OTHER FUNDS REVENUE DETAIL LIBRARY: County of Riverside Interest TOTAL LIBRARY GAS TAX REVENUE: Section 2105 Section 2106 Section 2107 Section 2107.5 Traffic Congestion Relief Interest TOTAL GAS TAX CMAQIISTEA CMAQ/ISTEA Grant Interest TOTAL CMAQ/ISTEA FEDERAL ASSISTANCE REVENUE: CDBG Grant Interest TOTAL FEDERAL ASSISTANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2000-1 Interest Assessment Bond Proceeds Prepayments -sewer assessments Transfer in TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT SLESF (COPS) REVENUE: SLESF (Cops) Funding Interest TOTAL SLESF (COPS) LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT REVENUE: LLEBG Funding Interest Transfer in TOTAL LLEBG LIGHTING & LANDSCAPING REVENUE: Assessment Developer Interest TOTAL LIGHTING & LANDSCAPING QUIMBY REVENUE: Quimby Fees Interest TOTAL QUIMBY REMAINING % BUDGET RECEIVED BUDGET RECEIVED 75,000.00 75,000.00 0.00 100.000% 31,600.00 4,707.11 26,892.89 14.900% 106,600.00 79,707.11 26,892.89 74.770% 135,600.00 28,802.83 106,797.17 21.240% 98,200.00 19,938.83 78,261.17 20.300% 175,100.00 36,294.55 138,805.45 20.730% 5,000.00 6,000.00 (1,000.00) 120.000% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000% 7,700.00 2,589.49 5,110.51 33.630% 421,600.00 93,625.70 327,974.30 22.210% 287,423.00 0.00 287,423.00 0.000% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 287,423.00 0.00 287,423.00 0.000% 409,000.00 0.00 409,000.00 0.000% 68.20 (68.20) 0.000% 409,000.00 68.20 408,931.80 0.020% 5,039.40 (5,039.40) 0.000% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 0.00 5,039.40 (5,039.40) 0.000% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 2,200.00 390.85 1,809.15 17.770% 2,200.00 390.85 1,809.15 17.770% 28,000.00 0.00 28,000.00 0.000% 300.00 47.40 252.60 15.800% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 28,300.00 47.40 28,252.60 0.170% 781,400.00 0.00 781,400.00 0.000% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 781 400.00 0.00 781,400.00 0.000% 126,375.00 (126,375.00) 0.000% 16,500.00 3,951.76 12,548.24 23.950% 16,500.00 130,326.76 (113,826.76) 789.860% 054 v�C) CITY OF LA QUINTA ALL OTHER FUNDS REVENUE DETAIL REMAINING % (continued) BUDGET RECEIVED BUDGET RECEIVED INFRASTRUCTURE REVENUE: Infrastructure Fee 0.00 0.00 0.000% Interest 11,000.00 28,119.71 (17,119.71) 255.630% Transfer in 1,386,518.00 0.00 1,386,518.00 0.000% TOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE 1,397,518.00 28 119.71 1,369,398.29 2.010% VILLAGE PARKING REVENUE: Interest 100.00 0.00 100.00 0.000% TOTAL VILLAGE PARKING 100.00 0.00 100.00 0.000% SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY REVENUE: S.C.A.Q. Contribution 21,881.00 7,154.27 14,726.73 32.700% Interest 2,600.00 417.16 2,182.84 16.040% TOTAL SCAQ 24,481.00 7,571.43 16,909.57 30.930% LQ PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER FUND Transfer In 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 100.000% Interest 200.00 92.95 107.05 46.480% TOTAL LQ PUBLIC SAFETY 2,200.00 2,092.95 107.05 95.130% INTEREST ALLOCATION FUND: Pooled Cash Allocated Interest (0.00) 0.00 0.000% Transfer In 0.00 0.00 0.000% TOTAL INTEREST ALLOCATION 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 0.000% CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND: CVAG 13,655,958.18 895,623.02 12,760,335.16 6.560% CVWD 1,709,906.00 0.00 1,709,906.00 0.000% County of Riverside 0.00 0.00 0.000% State of Ca- Office Emer. Services 0.00 0.00 0.000% JPIA 25,000.00 25,000.00 0.00 100.000% I I D 0.00 0.00 0.000% DSUSD 544.00 0.00 544.00 0.000% State of California 530,600.00 0.00 530,600.00 0.000% SB300 Funding 19,365.74 0.00 19,365.74 0.000% Surface Transportation 12,000,118.00 0.00 12,000,118.00 0.000% SB821-Bicycle Path Grant 32,400.00 0.00 32,400.00 0.000% APP Contribution 0.00 0.00 0.000% Developer Agreement Funding 182,142.84 59,149.77 122,993.07 32.470% Transfers in From Other Funds 20,635,464.31 2,431,809.17 18,203,655.14 11.780% TOTAL CIP REVENUE 48,791,499.07 3,411,581.96 45,379,917.11 6.990% LQ NORTE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND: Prepayment 0.00 0.00 0.000% Bond Proceeds 0.00 0.00 0.000% Interest 455.73 (455.73) 0.000% TOTAL LQ NORTE CIP 0.00 455.73 (455.73) 0.000% URBAN FORESTRY Grant Revenue 11,000.00 0.00 11,000.00 0.000% Interest 0.00 0.00 0.000% TOTAL URBAN FORESTRY 11,000.00 0.00 11,000.00 0.000% CITY OF LA QUINTA ALL OTHER FUNDS REVENUE DETAIL (continued) EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND: Equipment Charges Capital Contribution Interest Transfers In TOTAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FUND: Charges for services Capital Contribution Interest Transfers In TOTAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES REVENUE: Arts in Public Places Arts in Public Places Credits Applied Interest TOTAL ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES TRANSPORTATION Developer fees Interest Transfer in TOTAL TRANSPORTATION PARKS & RECREATION Developer fees Interest Transfer in TOTAL PARKS & RECREATION CIVIC CENTER Developer fees Interest Transfer in TOTAL CIVIC CENTER LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT Developer fees Interest Transfer in TOTAL LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY CENTER Developer fees Interest TOTAL COMMUNITY CENTER REMAINING % BUDGET RECEIVED BUDGET RECEIVED 304,980.00 304,982.00 (2.00) 100.000% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 58,200.00 16,667.49 41,532.51 28.640% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 363180.00 321,649.49 41,530.51 88.560% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 100.000% 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 0.00 100.000% 111,300.00 34,453.00 76,847.00 30.960% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 21,600.00 5,275.16 16,324.84 24.420% 132,900.00 39,728.16 93,171.84 29.890% 284,000.00 173,380.75 110,619.25 61.050% 23,100.00 26,451.03 (3,351.03) 114.510% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 307,100.00 199,831.78 107,268.22 65.070% 201,000.00 97,612.00 103,388.00 48.560% 20,500.00 8,012.14 12,487.86 39.080% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 221,500.00 105,624.14 115,875.86 47.690% 284,500.00 146,088.48 138,411.52 51.350% 38,600.00 9,441.60 29,158.40 24.460% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 323,100.00 155,530.08 167,569.92 48.140% 150,000.00 57,549.00 92,451.00 38.370% 17,900.00 5,087.68 12,812.32 28.420% 0.00 0.00 0.000% 167,900.00 62,636.68 105,263.32 37.310% 53,500.00 26,053.00 27,447.00 48.700% 5,100.00 2,130.99 2,969.01 41.780% 58,600.00 28,183.99 30,416.01 48.100% 056 CITY OF LA QUINTA ALL OTHER FUNDS REVENUE DETAIL (continued) STREET FACILITY Developer fees Interest TOTAL STREET FACILITY PARK FACILITY Developer fees Interest TOTAL PARK FACILITY REMAINING % BUDGET RECEIVED BUDGET RECEIVED 9,500.00 5,769.47 3,730.53 60.730% 1,000.00 471.80 528.20 47.180% 10 500.00 6,241.27 4,258.73 59.440% 3,000.00 1,461.00 1,539.00 48.700% 200.00 124.57 75.43 62.290% 3,200.00 1,585.57 1,614.43 49.550% 057 'iU9 09/01/2001 - 9/30/2001 GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT REMAINING % BUDGET EXPENDITURES ENCUMBERED BUDGET EXPENDED GENERAL GOVERNMENT: LEGISLATIVE 582,800.00 54,803.59 0.00 527,996.41 9.4% CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE 613,200.00 120,100.90 0.00 493,099.10 19.6% ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 910,000.00 178,185.49 0.00 731,814.51 19.6% PERSONNEURISK MGT 572,872.00 320,830.99 0.00 252,041.01 56.0% TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT 2,678,872.00 673,920.97 0.00 2,004,951.03 25.2% FINANCE: CITY CLERK FISCAL SERVICES 542,515.00 134,462.34 0.00 408,052.66 24.8% CENTRAL SERVICES 311,205.00 66,573.97 0.00 244,631.03 21.4% TOTAL FINANCE 853,720.00 201,036.31 0.00 652,683.69 23.5% 361,650.00 79,036.73 282,613.27 21.9% COMMUNITY SERVICES SENIOR CENTER 257,600.00 48,730.07 0.00 208,869.93 18.9% PARKS & RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 797,058.00 127,417.04 0.00 669,640.96 16.0% PARKS & RECREATION PROGRAMS 90,800.00 12,210.99 0.00 78,589.01 13.4% TOTAL COMMUNITY SERVICES 1,145,458.00 188,358.10 0.00 957,099.90 16.4% POLICE 3,972,185.00 49,338.52 0.00 3,922,846.48 1.2% BUILDING & SAFETY: BUILDING & SAFETY - ADMIN 179,700.00 41,249.43 0.00 138,450.57 23.0% CODE COMPLIANCE 478,484.00 99,458.36 0.00 379,025.64 20.8% ANIMAL CONTROL 166,043.00 36,743.58 0.00 129,299.42 22.1% BUILDING 618,488.00 153,341.29 0.00 465,146.71 24.8% EMERGENCY SERVICES 96,524.00 25,614.19 0.00 70,909.81 26.5% FIRE 27,278.00 731.25 0.00 26,546.75 2.7% CIVIC CENTER BUILDING -OPERATIONS 1,088,751.00 667,966.53 0.00 420,784.47 61.4% TOTAL BUILDING & SAFETY 2,655,268.00 1,025,104.63 0.00 1,630,163.37 38.6% COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - ADMIN 469,000.00 82,394.66 0.00 386,605.34 17.6% CURRENT PLANNING 689,807.00 124,365.64 0.00 565,441.36 18.0% TOTAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1,158,807.00 206,760.30 0.00 952,046.70 17.8% PUBLIC WORKS: PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION 202,200.00 55,783.48 0.00 146,416.52 27.6% DEVELOPMENT & TRAFFIC 634,668.00 180,904.77 0.00 453,763.23 28.5% MAINT/OPERATIONS - STREETS 1,655,935.00 166,112.36 0.00 1,489,822.64 10.0% MAINT/OPERATIONS - LTG/LANDSCAPING 1,359,699.00 258,125.17 0.00 1,101,573.83 19.0% CAPITAL PROJECTS 387,420.00 55,194.37 0.00 332,225.63 14.2% TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS 4,239,922.00 716,120.15 0.00 3,523,801.85 16.9% TRANSFERS OUT GENERAL FUND REIMBURSEMENTS NET GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES 1,656,965.27 1,076,057.78 (4,004,737.00) (801,878.98) 0.00 580,907.49 64.9% 0.00 (3,202,858.02) 20.0% 14 718 110.27 3,413,854.51 0.00 11 304 255.76 23.2% 058 a CITY OF LA QUINTA OTHER CITY FUNDS EXPENDITURE SUMMARY LIBRARY FUND: PROJECT EXPENDITURES GAS TAX REIMBURSE GENERAL FUND TRANSFER OUT REIMBURSE GEI QUIMBY FUND: TRANSFER OUT FEDERAL ASSISTANCE FUND: TRANSFER OUT 09/01/2001 - 9/30/2001 REMAINING % BUDGET EXPENDITURES ENCUMBERED BUDGET EXPENDED 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% 421,600.00 105,399.99 0.00 316,200.01 25.0% 172,778.00 0.00 0.00 172,778.00 0.0% TOTAL GAS TAX 594 378.00 105 399.99 0.00 488,978.01 17.7% 317 381.29 0.00 0.00 317,381.29 0.0% 31,813.99 0.00 0.00 31,813.99 0.0% SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY FUND PROJECT EXPENDITURES 2,384.75 0.00 (2,384.75) 0.0% TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TOTAL SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY 0.00 2,384.75 0.00 (2,384.75) 0.0% CMAQ/ISTEA TRANSFER OUT 287 423.00 0.00 0.00 287,423.00 0.0% VILLAGE Parking TRANSFER OUT (1,892.85) 0.00 0.00 (1,892.85) 0.0% LA QUINTA PUBLIC SAFETY CONTRIBUTIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% LLEBG FUND TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% SLESF (COPS) TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% LIGHTING & LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DIST: REIMBURSE GENERAL FUND 781,400.00 195,350.01 0.00 586,049.99 25.0% TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TOTAL LTG/LANDSCAPING FUND 781 400.00 195 350.01 0.00 586,049.99 25.0% INFRASTRUCTURE FUND CONSTRUCTION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% REIMBURSE GENERAL FUND 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TRANSFER OUT 4,486,415.30 1,129,133.15 0.00 3,357,282.15 25.2% TOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE 4,486,415.30 1,129,133.15 0.00 3,357,282.15 25.2% ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2000-1 COSTS OF ISSUANCE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TRANSFER TO AGENCY FUND 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TRANSFER OUT 682,553.47 0.00 0.00 682,553.47 0.0% TOTAL AD 2000-1 682 553.47 0.00 0.00 682,553.47 0.0% CITY OF LA QUINTA 09/01/2001 - 9/30/2001 OTHER CITY FUNDS REMAINING %. EXPENDITURE SUMMARY BUDGET EXPENDITURES ENCUMBERED BUDGET EXPENDED TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TRANSFER OUT 2,809,819.03 (18,482.26) 0.00 2,828,301.29 -0.7% TOTAL TRANSPORTATION 2,809,819.03 (18,482.26) 0.00 2,828,301.29 -0.7% PARKS & RECREATION PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TRANSFER OUT 2,060,000.00 0.00 0.00 2,060,000.00 0.0% TOTAL PARKS & RECREATION 2,060,000.00 0.00 0.00 2,060,000.00 0.0% CIVIC CENTER PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% REIMBURSE GENERAL FUND 204,660.00 51,165.00 0.00 153,495.00 25.0% TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TOTAL CIVIC CENTER 204,660.00 51,165.00 0.00 153,495.00 25.0% LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TRANSFER OUT 523,324.44 2,805.00 0.00 520,519.44 0.5% TOTAL LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT 523,324.44 2,805.00 0.00 520,519.44 0.5% COMMUNITY CENTER PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TOTAL COMMUNITY CENTER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% STREET FACILITY PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TOTAL STREET FACILITY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% PARK FACILITY PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% TOTAL PARK FACILITY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND PROJECT EXPENDITURES 47,591,622.69 3,310,916.98 0.00 44,280,705.71 7.0% PROJECT REIMBURSEMENTS TO GEN FUND 1,199,876.38 100,664.98 0.00 1,099,211.40 8.4% TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 48 791 499.07 3,411,581.96 0.00 45 379 917.11 7.0% ART IN PUBLIC PLACES FUND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES-APP 2,000.00 1,100.00 0.00 900.00 55.0% OPERATING EXPENSES-APP 5,000.00 (785.00) 0.00 5,785.00 -15.7% ART PURCHASES 261,340.70 0.00 0.00 261,340.70 0.0% TRANSFER OUT 417,175.71 0.00 0.00 417,175.71 0.0% TOTAL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES 685,516.41 315.00 0.00 685,201.41 0.0% LQ NORTE (97-1) CIP FUND PROJECT EXPENSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% URBAN FORESTRY GRANT TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% VILLAGE PARKING TRANSFER OUT (1,892.85) 0.00 0.00 (1,892.85) 0.0% INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FUND OPERATING EXPENSES 476,372.00 95,207.29 381,164.71 20.0% EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND OPERATING EXPENSES 380,209.00 22,888.26 357,320.74 6.0% 060 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: Denial of Claim for Damages Filed by Janilee Saw - Date of Loss: October 15, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: November 20, 2001 CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Deny the Claim for Damages filed by Janilee Saw, with a reported date of loss of October 15, 2001. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The total amount of the claim was $200.00. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: A claim was filed by Janilee Saw, with a reported date of loss of October 15, 2001 (Attachment 1). It was forwarded to Carl Warren & Co., the City's claims administrator. Carl Warren & Co. recommended that the City Council deny the claim (Attachment 2). Correspondence was sent to Ms. Saw on October 22, 2001 by Carl Warren & Co. outlining their recommendation to the City (Attachment 3). FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 2. Deny the Claim for Damages filed by Janilee Saw, with a reported date of loss of October 15, 2001; or Accept the claim, or some portion thereof; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. 061 Respectfully submitted, Mark Weiss, Assistant City Manager Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1 . Janilee Saw Claim for Damages 2. Letter from Carl Warren & Co. 3. Letter from Carl Warren & Co. to Ms. Saw 062 11� FORM # 1 (FRONT) A TT A /1 . ■ . ..... iflo cN rit_t wi i M; CLAIM FOR DAMAGES '`` 1 H V h IVI t IV I -I CITY CLERK'S OFFICE P.O. _BQX I50-4 TO PERSON OR PROPERTY LA QUINTA, CAL. 92253 _ RECEIVED INSTRUCTIONS 1. Claims for death, injury to person or to personal property must be filed not later than six Q C T 16 AN Q months after the occurrence. (Gov. Code Sea 911.2.) 2. Claims for damages to real property must be filed not later than 1 year after the occurrence. CITY 0' L (Gov. Code Sea 911.2.) 3. Read entire claim form before filing. j* G U I N T A CITY C L F S OFFICE 4. See page 2 for diagram upon which to locate place of accident. 5. This claim form must be signed on page 2 at bottom. & Attach separate sheets, if necessary, to give full details. SIGN EACH SHEET. TO: Name of city] Date of Birth of Claim t Name of Claimant Occupation of Claiman O G t City d State Home Address of Claimant Home tel eph9,ne Numbe 27 — 3 r ` c� Business Address of Claimant �. City and State Business Tele hone bier '1 ' % 7 ;~ C--i Give address and telephone number to which you desire notices or communications to be sent Claimant's Social Security No. regarding this claim: - # �!� 5 d '56�e -53� When did DAIII r INJURY occur? 00 rt` r Names of any city employees involved in INJURY or DAMAGE Date Time If claim Is for Equitable Indemnity, give date claim t served with the complaint: y, _ 6 6 Date U 1 Where did DAMAGE or INJURY occur? Describe fully, and locate on diagram on reverse side of this sheet. where apompriate, give street names and address and measurements from landmarks: 1 , V k4 �rk� -A M � n Describe in detail how the DAMAGE of INJURY occurred. r r Why do you claim the city is responsible? Describe in detail each INJURY or DAMAGE SEE PAGE 2 (OVER) THIS CLAIM MU 5451 SIGNED ON REVERSE Slbt .004 FORM # 1 ( BACK) The amount claimed, as of the date of presentation of this claim, is computed as follows: Damages incurred to date (exact): �- �G I Estimated pective damages as far as known: Damage to property ................. Future enses for medical n h 9 p p y p and hospital care .... $ Expenses for medical and hospital care ......... $ �- uture ss of earnings ....................... $ Loss Of earnings ............................ $ Other prospective special damages ............ $ Special damages for ........................ $ Prospective general damages ................. $ Total estimate prospective damages .......... $ General damages ...........................$ Total damages incurred to date .............. $ Total amount claimed as of date of presentation of this claim: $ Was damage and/or injury investigated by police? If so, what city? Were paramedics or ambulance called? If so, name city or ambulance If injured, state date, time, name and address of doctor of your first visit WITNESSES to DAMA r INJURY: List all persons and addresses of persons known t ave 'nformatjon: ` j 11 Name n Address ,� �� ( _ ( Phone / / Name Address Phone Name Address Phone DOCTORS and HOSPIT S: Hospital Address Date Hospitalized Doctor Address Date of Treatment Doctor Address Date of Treatment READ CAREFULLY For all accident claims place on following diagram names of streets, or your vehicle when you first saw City vehicle; location of City vehicle including North, East, South, and West; indicate place of accident by at time of accident by "A-1" and location of yourself or your vehicle at "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to street corners. the time of the accident by "B-1" and the point of impact by "X" If City Vehicle was involved, designate by letter "A" location of City NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper Vehicle when you first saw it, and by "B" location of yourself diagram signed by claimant. SIDEWALK CURB Signature of Claimant or person filing on his behalf giving relationship to Claimant: SIDEWALK Typed Name: Date: NOTE: CLAIMS MUST BE FILED WITH CITY CLERK (Gov. Code Sec. 915a). Presentation of a false claim is a felony (Pen. Code Sec. -n ) .005 it Y a Martinez Tree Service * Complete Tree Core * Pruning * Removal * Stump Grinding * Citrus * Ornamentals LIC 0 713455 * Palms P.O. BOX 405 GENE MARTINEZ COACHELLA, CA 92236 (760) 347-1961 ATTACHMENT 2 October 22, 2001 TO: The City of La Quinta ATTENTION: John Ruiz, Risk Manager RE: Claim Saw v La Quinta Claimant : Janilee Saw D/Event 10/ 16/01 Rec'd Y/Office 10/16/01 Our File S 133131 DBK We have reviewed the above captioned claim and request that you take the action indicated below: • CLAIM REJECTION: Send a standard rejection letter to the claimant. Please provide us with a copy of the notice sent, as requested above. If you have any questions please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, CARL N &COMPANY Be ah Been' "'- CC' CJPIA Attn: Executive Director CARL WARREN & CO. CLAIMS MANAGEMENT* CLAIMS ADJUSTERS 750 The City Drive • Ste 400. Orange, CA 92868 O 6 Mail: P.O. Box 25180 . Santa Ana, Ca 92799-5180 Phone: (714) 740-7999 . (800) 572-6900 . Fax: (714) 740-9412 007 Janilee Saw 53-445 Herre La Quinta, A 92253 RE: Principal : Member City Claimant D/Incident Our File Dear Ms. Saw: October 22, 2001 CJPIA La Quinta Janilee Saw 10/16/01 S 133131 DBK ATTACHMENT 3 As claim administrators for the self -insured City of La Quinta, we have made a careful examination of the circumstances surrounding the captioned occurrence and feel we have enough evidence to make a decision on your claim. After evaluating the facts, we have reached the conclusion that our principal is not responsible for this occurrence. We are sorry we are unable to recommend settlement of your claim to our principal. Our investigation reveals the contractor working in the area was actually working for the Boy's and Girls Club. You may contact them direct with your claim. This letter does not affect the notice that will be sent to you by the City of La Quinta regarding disposition of your claim. Very truly yours, CARL WARREN & CO. Deborah Been cc: City of La Quinta cc: CJPIA CARL WARREN & CO. CLAIMS MANAGEMENT•CLAIMS ADJUSTERS 067 750 The City Drive . Suite 400. Orange, CA 92868 Mail: P.O. Box 25180 . Santa Ana, Ca 92799-5180 Phone: (714) 740-7999. (800) 572-6900 . Fax: (714) 740-9412 008 i.pdro, 1ro%eo< T 0 0 4hf 4 4 Q" COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 ITEM TITLE: Authorization for Overnight Travel for the Community Services Director, Senior Center Supervisor, and one Community Services Commissioner to Attend the California Parks and Recreation Society Conference in Los Angeles, California, April 3-6, 2002 RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: 5 STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Approve authorization for overnight travel for the Community Services Director, Senior Center Supervisor, and one Community Services Commissioner to attend the California Parks and Recreation Society Conference in Los Angeles, California, April 3-6, 2002. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The costs associated with conference attendance for the Community Services Director, Senior Center Supervisor and one Community Services Commissioner will be funded through the Community Services Administration Travel, Training and Meetings Account # 101-251-637-000. The estimated expenditures are as follows: • Registration • Meals • Lodging • Travel TOTAL: CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. $239 $200 $400 150 $989 per person BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: The annual conference of the California Parks and Recreation Society (CPRS) gathers parks and recreation professionals and commissioners from all areas of the State of California to network and share information on issues of common interest. Staff and commissioners receive information on current federal, state and county policies, marketing strategies and programming trends. The request for overnight travel is being considered in advance in an effort to take advantage of the pre -registration special which would save the City of La Quinta up to $20 per person (Attachment 1) as well as enabling staff to make reservations for lodging at a reduced rate. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Approve authorization for overnight travel for the Community Services Director, Senior Center Supervisor, and one Community Services Commissioner to attend the California Parks and Recreation Society Conference in Los Angeles, California, April 3-6, 2002; or 2. Do not approve the authorization for overnight travel; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. sp tfull I submitted, Z sp V Dodie Horvitz, munity Services Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1. 2002 CPRS Conference Registration Form 069 S:\Community Services\CCReports\CC.162.CPRS Overnight.wpd 3 CD 9 CD eo en 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 v- v- c7- d a. & m Ca O CD a m CL CD CD CD _CD a a M N ^ `•G c7- 1 cr, CD CD a -moo • • CD N -o. � C N .y ❑ -• CD a_ ❑ pa pa C. CD CD N CD ❑ ❑ cy- CD o a a TI a x z �v a O S O N a CD im CD B c- C9 1 ATTACHMENT 1 70MP c i1111t P �+C c cr 2 9L to 0 V• m °3 wj .w 96 c- i•OC w� fM �r w� N s *� � r '� �- S S Gi T rn Q Q f1 W a s •� Q '� c VY N � az r,00-<aa��r,r,�r-,--�-, � •�•`• ❑� o � * � a � � � h Via_ � a CD eb sm s —� ca C � < a.- ea► CD Co � Q rigo a a r� `a m g g o H �, a 6� T' s� -. CD CD Co C0 e% Ca Imp Mo 4A a_ a_ •a o- a o o Ca c: ca o a_ o_ a a c _ W " < Co Co \ CD a r� "'► O co "! O C C9 C9 ® 1 ❑ — a_ 3 �• �• C C N �• y �� 7 Ca ^a �. S" a �C d p v. H C9 C CC• n C 0• cx- CD '� p �C � ....' p � � a_ � a",. T Cs L4` 7r p i• N � C N cm- O D CD > O 1'7'7 0? c o N c.CD crcr v+ a co o a x Co �P W W CD w O S Co fi N a o• c cts C2 Z x g/ `fit C "'' ^ CD `^C CDCa- C CD CD Ca a: = a o CD ..: CD ^ N 'O CDi a vp _a CDCD co 3 � co a '� cr- CD ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ w ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ CD o a_ +� cl-a • p '0 t/7 Vf t!>N t/9N tAN Vf t/>N t!'fNNN C W ,�i` CP -t V V7 V7 Cd9 V7 IV O� V7 r W V �' OD V7 67 r W ..� %^ O O V7 O V7 V7 O V7 O V O N 0 0 0 0 Cp r N V7 V O W 6n W O T N N W. \ Dr _ r * 1 O V7 %^ O �O A p C 000❑0000❑000❑❑❑❑ O O ❑ 0 ❑ � CD acc } to t/f Vf A^ to tR A^ v*- 4n A^ V3. N 4^ t/! A^ L^ � � �' �' t/> t/f ? t/> C% f.^ W VIP� � N O OO O% C. O% O% N V O% r .A w O" V9 un W W O N c* .A CCD DG� O O CT O O W � IV CD 'Q ................................................................ a o OOOOOOOO❑OOOO'OOO ❑ ❑ ❑ O 0 ❑ O CD N N 4^ t^ A^ 4^ A^ tH t/> N H N> A^ 4a 0.^ t/s ,� eR 4^ Vf 4^ 4.^ 4^ -n a '^ C W cpT a tT 0% N V o% -+ C4 co %O 07 C% -� R ib► O O% O 0- V7 N O- O V V7 a O O IV N. -� W V+ O V td9 W �O W V'C T N n7 V7 s S T a_ O V7 O V7 ,` �O %c �O _ CD Occouc0❑0❑O0❑❑❑L) O ❑ ❑❑❑ N co Cr N N N N t!f N t/f t/Y t!f N N t/> N t/Y t/? N N N t!1 f n t/> 4^ C C �+ r V co V ca IV %0 co r ,p r r r V CT O V1 W CJY W V7 O W r V7 O cc N 167 O vi +�'i'i 6n V7 W V V7 A O 4b. :.'•� V �` N N �.n O O Cr V O %c -40 %O W W W ;�Q 9 +a' WOOD �J rrrr pCW�� 41 C cr, L) 0 :7 0 L) :E dc EX. -1 sm. a LA cc cv. 936 CD wo CD eb 06 " CD " a 31 CCM tn 06 -= a w -W Ia CDcn CD ,.c -4 06 1j, CD Wb 4A CD 16n ca 46— CD -0 " eb CD -.4 C "CV -ft -0 S.20 --ft -0 CD 5 CD -0 -.4 CD 40 �CD ws C qft Wl to ca. = a -0 Xp C tot to CD — eb CD — Cc =- — &A —• — sw xw eb tA CD "a % co ca 40 al -.1 M --a Z wl c wl 4-11, � = = — 320 1 — Cl so = cc - - `< Q cy. vi = CD I R m NCH CD CD — 40- z cb 40 CD C2 cr- CD 96 CD Cl :0 .4 • C. I-- a ce CD aCD C= 4.:z ca . -C -40 CD Rr tA WA I CC* 40 C= rpq cv.. co vs 12 CD Cc ca wr 25- =6 CD z cz CD CD Ca cc a ca cy- & CP CD 1 9D C2- = %rl ga CD M cm m ae in C Co m m 9A O O va CD Ce. C, co -M CD 'ZZ Z!t rw z O CD I. C2 CO c64 a - CD ao O CD CD CD a.CD CD C'D CL..r ca- C2 CO —a CD S C= — IA IAA CD CD e-N 4. L=7 Zip CD -3 1.4 J2CD cy- CD C2 CD tD C2- o ca- ob O CD mc C=D im =CD cv- 9D C2 O CD CD C, — L77 cx— CD to t2 CD 9 S!, 071 v AGENDA CATEGORY: COUNCIL,/RDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 ITEM TITLE: Acceptance of Cove Oasis/Lake Cahuilla Trailhead Improvements, Project No. 98-18 BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: lO STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Accept Project No. 98-18, Cove Oasis/Lake Cahuilla Trailhead Improvements as 100% complete; and Authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion with the Office of the County Recorder; and Authorize staff to release retention in the amount of $17,862.00, 35 days after the Notice of Completion is recorded. Approved funds for this project are provided by Redevelopment Agency Project Area No. 1 CIP funds in the amount of $250,217. The following table illustrates project expenditures versus available funding: Design (all Phases) Technical Services (inspection/testing/survey) Construction Phase 1 (including contingency) Administration Budaet Amount Actual Amount Expended to Date $60,130 $74,930 $1 1,330 $7,838 $171,447 $142,000 $7 310 $6,757 Total $250,217 $231,525 Budget Amount $250,217 $250,217 Difference $0 $18,692 072 TAPWDEPT\COUNCIL\2001\01 1 120e.wpd The following represents a final construction contract accounting: Base Construction Contract $ 146,157 Approved CCO's 1 through 3 $ 7,311 Final Contract Amount $ 153,468 Less Amount Paid to Date $0 35,606) Amount of Retention to be Released $ 17,862 Adequate funds totaling $ 18,692 are available to pay the contractor retention. Since Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Funds were used for this project, the project was bid with prevailing wage requirements. Therefore, there are no Charter City implications. On May 19, 1998, the City Council adopted the Fiscal Year 1998/1999 through Fiscal Year 2002/2003 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Improvements to the Cove Oasis/Lake Cahuilla Trailhead were identified to receive funding during Fiscal Year 1998/1999. This project includes the development of the Cove Oasis Area (south of Tecate) as a future park, and the installation of trailhead improvements. On July 20, 2000, the City received two bids to construct Project 98-18, Cove Oasis/Lake Cahuilla Trailhead Improvements. On August 1, 2000 the City Council formally acted to appropriate an additional $50,217.55 from RDA Project Area No. 1 Funds toward the Cove Oasis/Lake Cahuilla Trailhead improvements, approve the revised project budget, and award a contract in the amount of $146,157.00 to Seto Construction, Inc. to construct Project No. 98-18, Cove Oasis/Lake Cahuilla Trailhead Improvements as defined within the base bid area. On September 19, 2000 a Notice to Proceed was issued to Seto Construction with a project start date of October 2, 2000. The project consisted of a 90 consecutive calendar day completion period with a contract completion date of December 30, 2000. 073 002 TAPWDEPT\C0UNCIL\2001 \01 1120e.wpd The entire project was completed prior to the contract completion date, except for the Primary Trailhead sign. The sign could not be installed by the contract completion date due to approval procedures, and changes to the sign directed by the City Council. While awaiting submittals for the sign, the sign manufacturer declared bankruptcy. Subsequently, another sign manufacturing company acquired the original sign manufacturing company, including their assets and outstanding projects. Additionally, it took some time for establishment and resumption of the previous company's projects. The sign has now been completed and on October 31, 2001 staff met with the contractor at the site to view the sign and installation procedures (see photographs, Attachment 1). During the site meeting, the former Public Works Director directed the contractor to install a "Lexan Plexiglass" protective cover to the outside frame of the sign. Thus, in the event of vandalism or degradation of the Plexiglass, it can be removed and replaced by the City's maintenance contractor or staff. This will reduce the damage to the sign if vandalism occurs. Due to unforseen events which were beyond the control of the contractor, including the bankruptcy of the original sign manufacturer in the Project Specifications, and delays in the approval of the sign, staff recommends that the City does not assess any liquidated damages to the contractor. The project's construction effort is now deemed to be 100% complete and is in compliance with the plans and specifications. Prior to filing the Notice of Completion, staff must receive authorization from the City Council to approve this project as 100% complete and authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion. The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Accept Project No. 98-18, Cove Oasis/Lake Cahuilla Trailhead Improvements as 100% complete; authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion with the Office of the County Recorder; and authorize staff to release retention in the amount of $17,862.00, 35 days after the Notice of Completion is recorded; or 2. Do not accept Project No. 98-18, Cove Oasis/Lake Cahuilla Trailhead Improvements as 100% complete; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. 074 0 ID TAMDEMCOUNCI02001 \011 120e.wpd Respectfully submitted, Steven D. Spe r Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer Approved for submission by: r--- Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachment: 1. Photos of Installed Sign as witnessed by City Staff 075 0 =0 4 TAMDEMCOUNCIL\2001 \01 1120e.wpd ATTACHMENT COVE OASIS/LAKE CAHUILLA TRAILHEAD SIGN 10/31/01 077 066 COUNCILIRDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 ITEM TITLE: Adoption of a Resolution Granting Conditional Approval of a Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Tract Map 29457-2, Rancho La Quinta, T.D. Desert Development. AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council granting conditional approval of a Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Tract Map 29457-2, Rancho La Quinta, T.D. Desert Development. ►ono "M None. Tract Map 29457-2 is located west of Jefferson Avenue, south of 48th Avenue and north of 50th Avenue. This is a subdivision of a portion of Property "B" of Parcel Merger No. 2000-370, Recorded March 15, 2000, as Document No. 095134, Official Records of Riverside County, California, in Section 32, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Meridian, (Attachment 1). It consists of seventy eight (78) numbered residential lots, three (3) numbered golf course lots and seven (7) lettered lots, containing 151.049 Acres more or less, (Attachment 2). The developer has requested the City Council's conditional approval of the Final Map which will allow 30 days for completion of its processing. As of November 8, 2001, City staff has not received approval of the Final Map from the City's Acting Surveyor; however, it is expected that a technically correct map will be submitted within the time allowed with its conditional approval. A Subdivision Improvement Agreement (Attachment 3) has been executed by the developer; however, the associated securities have not been received. As a result, City staff has prepared the attached Resolution which provides for078 conditional approval of the Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement. The TAMDEMCOUNCIL\2001 \01 1120b.wpd approval is contingent upon receipt, within 30 days (December 20, 2001), of a technically correct Final Map suitable for recording by the County Recorder with all required signatures except for the City Clerk. Once these items are received, the City Clerk will affix the City Seal to the Final Map and offer the Final Map for recording by the County Recorder. If any of the required items are not received by City staff within the specified time frame, the Final Map will be considered disapproved and will be rescheduled for City Council consideration only after all required items have been received. The developer has demonstrated to City staff that sufficient progress has been made with the documents required for conditional final map approval. The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council granting conditional approval of a Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Tract Map 29457-2, Rancho La Quinta, T.D. Desert Development; or 2. Do not adopt a Resolution of the City Council granting conditional approval of a Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Tract Map 29457-2, Rancho La Quinta, T.D. Desert Development; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respe tfully submitted, Steven D. Sp Interim Public orks Director/City Engineer Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Tract Map 3. Subdivision Improvement Agreement 079 "") -1 -0� T:\PWDEPT\C0UNC1L\2001\01 1 120b.wpd RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL FINAL MAP APPROVAL OF TRACT MAP 29457-2, AND AUTHORIZING A TIME EXTENSION FOR SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF THE CONDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS TO VALIDATE THE APPROVAL WHEREAS, the City Council conducts only two regular meetings per month and the time interval between these meetings occasionally creates an undue hardship for business enterprises and individuals seeking approval of subdivision maps, and WHEREAS, the City Council as a matter of policy allows a subdivider to have city staff present the map for approval consideration when the requisite items necessary for final map approval are nearly, but not completely, finished thus yielding to the subdivider additional production time for preparation of those items, and WHEREAS, the subdivider has demonstrated to city staff and the City Council that it has made sufficient progress with items required for final map approval, and it is reasonable to expect the subdivider to satisfactorily complete the items, including city staff review time, within thirty (30) days without adversely impacting other ongoing work commitments of city staff, and WHEREAS, Section 66458(b) of the Subdivision Map Act grants the City Council broad authority to authorize time extensions regarding final map approval, or disapproval, upon receiving it for consideration, and WHEREAS, the City Council relies on professional city staff to review all required items for conformance with relevant requirements, and it is therefore appropriate for the City Council to approve the final map subject to review and confirmation of the required items by professional city staff, within a reasonable period of time as specified by the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La auinta, California, as follows: Section 1. The final map for Tract Map 29457-2, is conditionally approved provided the subdivider submits all required items on or before December 20, 2001. 080 003 Resolution No. 2001- Tract Map 29457-2 Adopted: November 20, 2001 Page 2 Section 2. The City Council's approval of the final map shall not be considered valid until the City Engineer has signed the map indicating that it conforms with the tentative map, the Subdivision Map Act and all ordinances of the City. Section 3. The City Engineer shall withhold his signature from the map until the subdivider has completed the following requirements to the City Engineer's satisfaction. A. Produced a technically correct drawing of the map area that is suitable for recording by the County Recorder B. Has obtained all requisite signatures on the map title page, except for the City Clerk's signature. C. Has submitted security in the amount indicated in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. Section 4. The City Clerk shall withhold affixing the City Seal to the map title page, along with her attesting signature, until the City Engineer has signed the map. Section 5. The time extension for satisfying the requirements of the conditional approval for this final map shall expire when City offices close for regular business on December 20, 2001. If the subdivider has not satisfied the requirements in Section 3, herein, by the expiration deadline, the final map shall be considered disapproved. Disapproval does not deny any rights the subdivider may have under the Map Act to resubmit the final map for approval, or disapproval. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 20th day of November, 2001, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JOHN J. PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California 004 Resolution No. 2001- Tract Map 29457-2 Adopted: November 20, 2001 Page 3 ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California (City Seal) APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON , City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 082 Ou0 ATTACHMENT 1 EI SEA DRIVE N VICINITY MAP NTS 083 0 0- 7 ATTACHMENT 2 � tee;, • � "-o t_ o p�077 Z '� J S�' aid �P �'j3•" W 1 "I W R W Csir Yp/W Jt py ~mo t• y�� Y E-Di ffi G► %,W u uu V V a iIr, .mW cn fn Z WW E• g�°�; W ��jW W� Z u ffimy W x { n a y py�iy Y 7 L f4 WO W W WO E"• WZ 2y5W� • � 3 W� o W R O 00 N HS frn^ gW.. _a`i : •+� _ VI Imo• N7 W I a� w WIN � � �� x � w w N z W ZD 5 a gl § F a _ W V N V y. 99 u VI 1<J ow Wii 3 U�uu U 'Y M> o m z a ° cn z �n F cn za W Q a. �.° •`� as m �� g �" �3 $ � 00 z WV z m S A. 4 n: z Hp n I uN� O � W W �?t a.. N n o Woad z _m Via'° zap 1� x 1J �x�y1 y�( yp¢g1 Jut > ^ i m O O�W �<„ • jV �pp� ¢ YWI yy Wp nW� MZ �V •'-� 0. F O w V lip � j M`�G�x° �QV y WtHiggi S �Wyl Z nq ca- as F piw 2; Ea- 8 y ;4 FIo b W CQ G 3 U W g� �` E' ^1p 3 _ W �� " ..�u .3 N F6 ��,.,. C, O UZOi tV W $NW VW I C Q < Z r O Wdu Cs. 1,1 < �m`s m� CC Q 1,WN �v `� E.W. lu O EW., g Ix \ Ci Zm W Wig 2 i za p`yyO�•r�N;;cL (� a.•wf •.w V Tr SO IW 2 =~ Y L SF L °>•�O• aU LLl^. m 4'^ W W�WC iJi 9 aV iWF"�I Ow OVri ¢f<mC _yi� WN C<'Y UBin(W� nm3-�8��{'�{y`ud� •Z��. r Y'1 �"8YOY�(j 22 W V z maz cn U a W O <C U N W N Di spv o _ W pad Yry y a�1WO 1ZJ19 N< W ON 1� �'J70 y �Oyyy��7 z 4Po i•' $� oZ°~ 1� z y �'r4'J, g s 'y'WY� N V VZ< ' 11Zyy�7, < �R•'N_ ` 4�.1 VR W W Os C-' k'6iu(uo W W •~Y' ~ NV 3W i1y�. O� y °<O p 7 s 31,a =Cf°y�e•��X � 3� rzi2 aF g i y�1 4 �,•�<°� l_y , a o �9 y1rz W fi `W u rW F,ft 1,n k OPW ! nT 3-& aw i< G ;y �N��iz•1 uVuV77 HOP allidyzn �V13(¢ ��JN �•. �G VI i�+R p�� SjQW�O •� 2£it 1hibi�"-.'�� 3e Was W 6 y� O 9 H W�� % -2 g NR U V V r W 7j a OW x E"• gig., E 59. •� 3 S N�ca z° '"'a�v_�° z - `Z $y�f' 8 cirY �si�y'Wz(7�. °�G��Q 41 n W°1�yRY "i �l •. uW�W us of ?F u�NQ1$� Z� W=`< 4t•1 1,g V 1�j� Z � Li <£ y •a( <� y `W 6 5<�C 1Aymt� ygS" y� ya2 li yuuyII < CF zE V Yl gp ZFQ� ¢�<ruWJy�i � 12 4, 11 Z _iliyW$�z° nF'�<ZuzzW yJi�n dy3��jWQiS vyi �y �g E• i�o y O Q {1v�Wpz Oz WWO WL ° W�<=0770� yy W J � FS� �o i:N �yy N Q < 2� IM Z' 4 oW G a 4 U yy��O FF�y Z 3 VYI 33.�.1. 3V 3• ;• 1%NV 3��.NW W N 1 mt m C Z VI V Od. 3��m � WN � nr m O ATTACHMENT 2 FUO m IN �I�I IRI W Ln o r I i LTIaZ WQIl l3f Q RSM ~ W Q � zZ LaaaLs sw.uv U 9 g �g Q Q O � W O O � m 0 o vi d zx oW -- — - --- ---- -- — - rr w tr o� Z is KV Z "� ��•W ��W Fd OVLL � �• aG. C 3aN ia� �Z g°�� d � UO y U' -rc'-' .00ti=.l 31V35 Z �7 tea�/ /�l- v, a o g�i > I d�a duo i.lrow dp E �• �C ts� o a CS esY F ( 44� SLMI'1 A110 V 314I1 1,1011035 3NIla31N30 4 z W m t9 '^ < t6'C99Z> (r • � Z N N �__ r .MC99Z M.s0.CO.00 N 1_ O�QN� j0 u��J� T ,CS'LHSZ M.W.ZOM N ____--___-____--- _ _�______ _________ `L W W O m N « rPPM 0' l9l » aC) c�F o w --T-- T----------------------------------------- �;------------v�ivirio v►��o ui�---T----77.s 9� ii I.n ►-j atj CQ a 133aJ,S NOSHadjaf >I F .F.FO Z C ZI �W RI-- O Z W O Q+' a1 r' �i �6 d0; U WG7 CO ® /J 9 •yam ° W o « .u•Lnl / / / (4 ® 4•� >- .91'4C91 M .ZC.00.00 N /I gi is `•4 trr °' A� ,par �` � z R ,.; ' Y I � I J 'r•s N S 133MS 33S C L33HS 33S s ® ` S e RIM �- N �7 ' Li 1- 6- R �"i •1 G r 9q � � � tom} ¢� �h� N• 7 �c <ti y ffOp W Go 7a �� vess• s= �CP ® ® j _= o a zx• 9sgg *aaa=pa w iii �s N lii siyi .,1�')ii ,y, u O = Y 3 ,pSF g$ < 1© \ ® ® Nu^� LT�•� �� i \`h ' ® I dll e.F'i IN Wm� gg $„ 9 9 ^sN ��98Eaa�l W Z �j5p1 11 t `� \ ci aLI ag O 38�� Jrt o •o; S w o gW r`11.. �� ® y 1a� = ", ;Igo<z® ®~ A ® eaSLs m 51�Cz w � is a� 0 0 0 • ® Sys- ® ® hi ^ v ® =I ATTACHMENT 2 rn fn MSO'EV W3) .555��,,,,,, S.E N N OS'SHt MAE,9>.69 N t7 E n U 0 EE ZO °Q cJ I ^ m a`z Am 1 .r �z m pW w rn N y� m �o F- �npp rf R m m rn N m O o rn N m ¢f N o IOO H m If to m N N f0 Imo Y m !p � = N J o OI O n m N m N m ftl n I(1 N m IO m m m T m m Ilf m 10 m m m m m e N N N O N a 1n N Ifl to m a N Imo n N ON1 �(7 QI N . Imp m o o jo 0 nNO0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o0o 0 o 0 0 d e rf+ m m m Itn fn n m N c N l0n n a f m m In m 1n n O a N v v y < o a tOn 1] Ian fmn m 'f f .� v O e O a iu n f O •v o •m ¢ f e Pp 6 Y7 o c o c e N J �1 z z .. a z f 1 lVI�VVI � rl . � tag of 1 6.01' 93�- s99 . A6 ui 35'E >I N7 A! O Q - t seA.sz lf_ ul k^ w ^ I 10 inl M+ o n N .33 . 3 EE - - ZI 10 ? N e$J22 { N N JI J O E )81.735 � Im o � I N726NP) 1f% o m N gg• AO• - - � g sl I� $ In a m 06 E LB3.0� N a NI 7N ZA176M Pl m in io - Icn m m N S •• co zi �� 99.20 � 31 a �J �56.3g•E N.7A 52•NlP 0 M Ol� C ccC12 ao ooz a Z 1-1 a. Wax � z�� x ao 0 w a � w Ax � LC✓ any z o�oo0. IS F ^, 2az� 0: F z W z0 Z WSE:i�= F e oz�''aSz f' N n N f f OI N N N O m °'1 O1 O• n 0 N O N N b In n IA N N m m f a O N f N m m n f 10 N n f m m N m m N m 10 v c~il l m M f m .• m V m V^i OIO f m O o 1I1 m N m O! m 0. N m NI C� f lU N o 1[I n = ip If7 IL7 .. m 147 I N N 2 m N In W!o�� g m 3 O m m h In m Ip m e w l m m m m f e m m m m e f n m m M m 0 m N a m m m Ip � v to N i� cy Rl m n m m f m N 0 O Ip m f N N If7 N N e O f m I(7 pp^ N I(1 t{pp f N ^ w n CO m c m •• N m I I r. - I Ic�'199.99 N N I ty 7 4.5 0CC• Ng1P) � 3 � m � ` N g7.OA• o m d Sg1.93 35. E 39 M (P) 1.4 ) 9 09 ^ � J ` N 9 - - - I N) ^^ WQ o m N 7°• E O • allot iv �" m A cc Cc 9s (� s99. 35•E `� 'n T VN to 56 f� �" v 1 .• N 7 e6 E 1A1CQ - - Mn m L N Q5-33 Q f n ) s93.s3 0 v�Q 56. 7• tz w V4a A ri o n 1_9_- v m w?z z c ooa d ao.Ne �3 U U z F+� o xo d S. 5 U OGy m aaa II =Ow- wuy - <aa W a d U 4 Qg O rl �np n m tCO1 m ni^ 1n m m O I N 10 m O N rwu a mlm m OI Ip N N a ^ f IIpp N m m m Ip N N tp N ?+ Icf u'1 'n N N r- N CA' m N n fIN IIN N .+ m •+ m r f0 NIm O N Ip N n w m N e 01 O 0 � O m In u7 m N v LL7 10 O a I[1 7 RI N m m IOq IlO Ip m j m 1O 11! Ip m 10 10(1 m m IOC! U, Ip m p In i(1 m m 100 tt fl°l m ri Ip 3 N e� a � If1 I!1 1f1 10 v LL1 o v a V7 v N T O! N m O Of N I m f 1 0 0 0 N O O m N Y e 1(1 0 n l io a r n m ft1 v !mO T; m N O N In 1C1 t0 N e e m 117 f 2 I N m YI ' ID I W pi ^I - r aom, v E i e ai rrfOSa!at ci ¢ N -7 E p) O � J ul ak! in in 7'nN97-9•�3.ElP) m m m BS 5= - 6'1 N 0 - - ,g9. Hof u cu ,� 39•E i ! En N 76 nli ml z I$ la a e ate¢ � - WN► I y02.43 1 I- _9d92) 1-«uB' S>9Z» E6' 5►92- M.25. b2 6B N ---------- - 1 f N gA3a 5 5 M 1P1 PPC _ _ N Q - - VH WEG NOISSIN ti34N1VW32! - - - - - - - e -- N 73f05 CAI i133tl15 31VnItld1 16.5' - dc� E l9 ' OV 6E6' 0 I,g II 101I 16.5' / e f c j A• 56, 35 CL S. O m In v m I c{ � � 1%•� � t `cR o ANC'. o r•� \�' 7. r TA *co I ?I ic-7 0 N (T7 I e\�'3 Z a CO m < N i IL u jpp�n �nr..' < n m In ° po o co z g l� w 0 V N CV BB. i sA2.29 Af'CO•S� £� n ��jLO H \_ / ATTACHMENT 2 77 az // // 9 (dI.6T.'�E.61TNN I I I `® lS'65 i.j-00.05E-tl M.008 680 N 4` I w OW NJ / opi 92' 6E ►5' OS Ln NI m m rn F cn \ / ,��P? / I `• m 1 I mN m cmi Qa t0W / o ? vl 0I .. .. a co z �6 eta / h�h'i / / t F CD = = W \J dAN y I N �1 \ ?��./ 1 !n !n t0 a p. •°� ¢ °�� h n v0i cu ♦^mM. v1 Z �`Q® oC. �� iti! z z z z z ida� vp to W �Q / �. SS.b o- mI m vl� ,hZ ti I 6q7 4(f Z -1 0 1 1 ��y� / nj • SE•26 l Z SIA 71 h I � B6 i L- - •S'et 92 3.L0.00.►0 N / a7o S'8i ( 31dAItld) 0-- -.'D.. ,Lori / m B6'ig2 3.L0,00•►0 N 85 L62 J.0.00.►0 N m ¢I 1 /11 � Ol OI • , d Q J W zi N ? y DICE �` b W 1v to N C ry N its h� min Y4, i �$ IN ?! W) w c0 tl \ D O C(i• O f � ' / 2 'j OW Cu 6 Bsg-7 0 ® �! cotm ,9y . p9 ►l\ ' 0 1 11, e Cwi z66 ,,, • 0.95.:►.p v 96'0S r�•OS 99 p'�. �� Sd i9. 1v y W OC a evBSi 3.22.6E.►Ot NCID a R 0. C. Q $ 8 R ol::: o : $ F P. 3 R :° � 8 : 8 "0, 8 r0 F9 C 210 56'*k mr �� IN YI n N P c N G BR�$S ry -d d 0, �e� F.RIB NRoN•i18R-ioN yi'4p �2'�� c I I W V fOp s'S N A• 35 N I• 9� by a 'N N g �1�•� ; r' tom` ��i//�� WUa,• U Ei s l' R N 51 ? m 3 $ R : nn .NN 6R " �I 8 ^ " �o°a, gvt, � M9 ,g 19� �� E�� m Im dL1 d a Z 7 01 d;, Nm. z w�coF �RRB R88R8R88S888RRR88R 2 N2°�,.�� AM(�il s I • = m !1)in N N m W/ 4 O O,e5 � �2' N k4r�A \ g ? I CID M I Fzz�IRR:R�YlnmrcEoS8R7RR cc1��,ti�2�q)a�� j12�m�fv. o d' �•Nlal-\ la ra I m C7 PItsRPR �3AIS :C2� t,- � O"70.'WA�"' ��{{btu�iRon''�N"�,' ��'(u'i'n� t: w76�i.. �eS�2. �9 �56� � � " 6.C® 23'33"W '72• I rZ+ a W W C �i /r2 �q,> • .yh ..Y�% w �s N 13' z zj a o O 0.z��Z �sa0� yo oh-S d y 5.w(w_ 1o� t�.� FC 3.9t. .th Q00 �' Pr^n a n 04'29.5 21 JAM .a 0<„<„6f� 90�a"IN `. �0a00 \T�sb ASV iul ^ N33,W t80• I in in M 99 5Et ,3.23• EFGw / •• (In( 0 183.10 U iL U I a ml !o h o y to L! n 3 23 33•� 53 47".ElP1, I Z z<� d ? /o h\ Y♦ 1r ¢1 �j m n W 182.83 lal V I `1 U � C m a w ry n t3.23 33 .. fA (D T'' �n i° O W - (D°�N u, V E lal- I 1 m a �"' f/nUp•09 Zl N 3 33"W W.- ®I exa e2 N.'%9 p8 '� V phi wI T0.0►.10 .166.50 tcmn 66 09 `v�u ,9'9i o E0'BS VAaTES �9i ^+� In i Q zi p� O vD .E9rE`�2'!v 92. 1OE; -d inN 13' 23 • 3 3 w o 1 0I 0 z, 1 lal n n n l m N 3.,a3-3,3'vi 39 p7+E �j J J J Nam- I I t o f N M ®� o mm 1 71:151.-064T.70 t 9E'bLi 3.L2.9E.10 N w C� I �i ICU, i2'6Li 3.42.9E.T0 N t c c ra l q I 12; • 'I U. i9 95 1 E-1 sn Iri ,�p6,I o r► .26 I Q m D N �•• n •mn m •• • n^. =nNN • ,�� f (b)3' �►7 0 �` 08 ne I'.'$•�'.•oo:+dn'$o e�mm�o �$ m gnome '24' �•pS of RIC10ICl4".YvA^^Iv:=88 :8S{a� nRm N ,e� 2 66'sf^9pN'\1 I C 22 2 ^ m n N n R o 3 Y p 8 e o 4 a 8 R 8: 8 .4 R n R o 1° R IS, 2 o$ u e y I U O n m• T O ese�a^v:5;535;Ssccs�9R�:c��w �s�m�Rc:ai �`� (� tld I I cf 2:OT q_ �tld V �I g�grBRRRR8R�g it g998R g8 g88 g8888.4, 88 8 it.9 S ggg888 it 8 RRf R R R888 p0 o,> Cu dp s` �f:t L N::111�Sf'iSniri nMnMni� %=Nm= n.•nnnnn 000p m Y . 1.ryry mw �p mp �y _ Y1 . m p p m m � cn ��(�(\\\� •� h y�O/ �,o �Q�•, � � O O n In Np O .1 Innd yON t q N w w Np k O i O N �m CN Op •mO• • �1 YOO, N Ifl T t O V ' S Sp O•O-Sp �� ' O N • f� h wl N O R O i N m • � �' � � � i ♦ 9 � � 8 w w %) n � � � � w ',1f1) t� 0 � {S�I�O� b- 16b16v 1.bmR: bT 1674� T eke=•�ob�i�3i°e o"' --- - �' 12� _ 'Oa IIWO H 14.5t9fi . a • _ _ (13381S 311411:1d) 14 ATTACHMENT 2 C W (n Lav zz a d � W O:E W (n W W a� Ls a: CA om � E ° N z wa ww wz < T�a1 Z < �w C pCrCQ O N�CTWy� Gp` � zUa 0. V w U � z ( O0 � U� U PI ��y z6. o �+ g Z F bzc w W a EZ5 z � oa�aiz OLr CO cn o ►� CO z ztz�e- °oIt: i \ rya °� U `/ �'7 U fa -c z F N oUz E zwz`o ¢ E�.�U G7 w �- caa (( < C <aa W a d U m O O ON fu O 0m V w .+ {mp Y DI CD H 0 N Q'" w m N m O ^ n 0) ^ m m m m N^ \p Y1 = n w N v �O m 01 O m N ID m m r (II m r 10 m 0 m N + m LL7 O m N N r m ^I OI r n 1(1 wm 00 O 0 tt) m O 00 O O If] 1f7 1[1 CIO 0 0 0 0 In 6' O'O In. to O O In O e R m Q m C ^ o v N m a 1,i m 1I1 uI 0 IA m C 0 m m 0 m m m o m m QI Q R w V it N P Ol N LL7 N 7 ILf 1l1 Q r m O n QI 10 C m m• m O QI Itt m al O N N N YI m O •' O m f0'1 Iml O .N'• � f, f.l O v N m i0 N fz N •+ ^ m .+ 1n m N .+ m r e .I z i° in ° m in o' N o - in oI� .'• �i wi m o n r m m m m m Iril mImm l•i N ^m �• O m m O O m N O N O O n m 0 0 m O v r 0 N 0 Y N n N 0 0 •+ b r tD O N m Olm O C 0) m m III n R N m III m m n J n n r r r m m X r n R to .• m N N m O N II7 m O N m m O N 0m N 0 m- 0 0 m 0 III O III O m f. m m a b v a n m m m m ^I f r m� V O � � � iV .•. W N N m m w 8 III m 0 O N ;n ini, N O w O O O v N m ,.. IF a m o . w O I'n io in In in iu In o iu m o m m iII in a N in m O m N m OCU Z 2 z z H m o m io m m m urf m N m o m ry IQa III omi a o m m I1O•I m H I a _ Io < w o m m N Q o m m v N N m a rtl m m m N m uI m o n N n n v o r I[I C N m n n n yy� 7 II(�7 I C Yi iocl Co N C i[1 m o pp 47 m If) s e 1� < O -y' N O 2 z C OI m O .�. N Z z s Q c N f f m N O Z Z s N f N n Z .n. N N f n Q n• O R 10.I m pp 1I7 YI o IO N 10•f w . e= Ion R O 0 1.I I' N uI a m N O II7 1.9 Y7 (Dy V CQ O UA 0 t0. t\ ry �( � O nj r •p W �.6`(`C!(�y •19�,L\ I' Sb 1 r; .. s�/ < O fln n o � •Sca �q, I � � N' � m f �rlur�ul� N uitoo't" 05 55�tl d tF Q m V I/ 2 _ _ (tll M.05.6Z.59 N \� Ionuj ^ A uj a r7 ci t9'Z9T M.50. 6Y.69 N o �' W E W d N a `�1 60� 194 60 W in O < �n E•• 33•N v Al NQ a OS•55-tl(ti)3.61.2Z.Y► N ® g Imp gt.q_q MIRI ^ a N ® 0�'bEZua M. Z: ,,>Z .6( N` - N lei/ © '� EZ'96T M.50.6►.69 N W 'o� v \ lH Q.g3 •? _l o Q m \\Np3.e9�4µ(p00.Oq W R too u�++ no�f OI m 9 N g P2"33'� 2 n m Ioo ® � IID � zIn � H B�• o � . m w /(0M.6E.6 J L N N ry � / 9T'£6[ M.S0.6►.89 N z tmv o ___ __ T8i ®.- rm (tl)M,EE,SV.'it N I �i 'vt'9Li M.SO.6Y.89 N a m' /Itl) M.92.9Y.LL N t( j y t Y6' YB[ M.90.6►.99 N < c ZE'S8t M.50.6►.89 N pq N O IOW l O' CIE (tl) M,ZE.9►.9L Nam, m 10" ® 1t� 2 w Q d Q 6¢ V (tl) N.00.9Z.LB N __` t `3 /(tl)M-.OS.BY.08_ N LB'YBt M.50.6►.89 N / ES'S8[ M.50.6Y.99 N N ` m (tl)�. c M.9L.L0.28 N m © to c �/ Itl) M.82. LO.LB N O _ _ (!!) M.OG • EE .L8 / )M,6T.ES.EB N qI �\ • 1P. 29'S8T M.S0.6>.89 N o ( 9L'961 M.90.6►.89 Nm w c'o• c 19'26S M.50.6►.89 N \ �NsI�I�ba��s� N 67•� �w� (tl) M. tE.00.LB N 1N .5•er lu lS V 5U' ¢T 5a I W N to z I.1 1. N 73.08' 25' _ ,09 43 B6.31 h ss ?0. 0 N y S° Pp 66 6 6 y M ti On 0A !9' p �p °St C� •Of CV Al ¢I u NI O h \ mI \ •S � n pet :�1 O'bi 'Y\u1Oi v mi � nI 2 =go YS ��MI` P t°•°F d ® m H e •� Nc h b b e `�• � ��• •NO w m 00 0 P2 'FO. °!t S� !s �•!, W I \ `mi ti =( 0 N 73.15'03'W lj�in .S %1 75.89 \ �j c\j N dt t.0 l ( LJ v / !9 ` q, to (T) ^ � m LD in W (Intl m m o D � 939 � o • / � pP1�►• p5 93� O a GB �l r 1y ATTACHMENT 3 CITY OF LA QUINTA SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT Tract 29457-2 THIS SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement') is made and entered into this day of , 20 , by and between T.D. Desert Development Limited Partnership, a Delaware Limited Partnership, hereinafter referred to as "Subdivider," and the City of La Quinta, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "City." RECITALS: A. Subdivider has prepared and filed a final map or parcel map (the "Map') of a unit of land in the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, which unit of land is known as Tract No. 29457-2 (the 'Tract') pursuant to the provisions of Section 66410, et sec. of the California Government Code (the "Subdivision Map Act'). B. Prior to approval of the Map, Subdivider is required to install or agree to install certain public and private improvements (the "Improvements'). C. The Improvements have not been installed and accepted at this time. D. It is therefore necessary that Subdivider and City enter into an agreement for the installation of the Improvements as provided in Section 66462 of the Subdivision Map Act. NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. Improvement Plans. Prior to submittal of the Map for approval by the City Council, Subdivider shall furnish original improvement plans meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. 2. Improvements. Subdivider shall construct the public and private street, drainage, utility, landscaping, and other improvements required to be constructed or agreed to be constructed under this Agreement as listed in Exhibit "A", and shall bear the full cost thereof. The methods, standards, specifications, sequence, and scheduling of construction shall be as approved by the City Engineer. 3. Improvement Security. A. One class of security to be provided by Subdivider, hereinafter referred to as "performance security," shall assure the faithful performance of this Agreement including construction of the Improvements, payment of Subdivider's fair share of Improvements which have been or will be constructed by others ("Participatory Improvements', and payment of plan check and permit fees. A second class of security to be provided by Subdivider, hereinafter referred to as "payment security," shall assure the payment of the cost of labor, equipment and materials supplied to construct the Improvements. A third class of security to be provided by Subdivider, hereinafter referred to as "warranty security," shall serve as a guarantee and warranty of the Improvements for a period of one year following the completion and acceptance of the Improvements. Subdivider shall furnish performance and payment security prior to and as a condition of City Council approval of the Map. Subdivider shall provide warranty security after Improvements are complete and accepted by the City Council and prior to or concurrently with the final release of performance security. Warranty security shall not be required for Monumentation or Participatory Improvements. However, the City may utilize Monumentation Security for performance of or payment for the work in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. As part of the obligation secured by each of the performance security, payment security and warranty security, and in addition to the face amount of each such security, each such security shall include and assure the payment of costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing the obligations thereby secured. B. Improvement security shall conform with Section 66499 of the California Government Code and one or more of the following: S TAPMEMAgroements - SIA\29457-2.wpd Page 1 of 6 ATTACHMENT 3 1) A cash deposit with City or a responsible escrow agent or trust company, at City's option. 2) Surety bonds, of the form specified in subsection 66499.2 of the California Government Code, issued by a surety or sureties listed in the U.S. Department of Treasury Circular 570 (latest version). 3) Certificates of deposit, in City's name, from one or more financial institutions subject to regulation by the state or federal government and having a financial quality rating of "A" or better and a commitment reliability rating of "R-2" or better on the Investment Data Exchange (of the Los Angeles County Treasurer's office). 4) Irrevocable letters of credit, issued by one or more financial institutions meeting the requirements of Paragraph (3), pledging that the funds necessary to carry out the completion of the Improvements are on deposit, guaranteed for payment, and constitute a trust fund which is not subject to levy or attachment by any creditor of the depositor until released by City. Letters of credit shall guarantee that all or any portion of the funds available pursuant to the letters of credit will be paid upon the written demand of City and that such written demand need not present documentation of any type as a condition of payment, including proof of loss. The duration of any such letter of credit shall be for a period of not less than one year. from the execution of the agreement with which it is provided and shall state, on its face, that the letter of credit will be automatically renewed until such time that City authorizes its expiration or until sixty (60) days after City receives notice from the financial institution of intent to allow expiration of the letter of credit. 5) A lien upon the subdivided property, if City finds that it would not be in the public interest to require the installation of the Improvements sooner than two (2) years after recordation of the final map or parcel map for which the Improvements are required. The lien shall provide a collateral value of three (3) times the estimated cost of the Improvements and shall include the power of sale of the real property, all buildings and improvements thereon, or that may be erected upon or made thereto, together with all hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging, or in any wise appertaining, and the reservations, remainders, rents, issues, and profits thereof. The collateral value of the property shall be established at Subdivider's expense through an appraisal approved by City. 6) An instrument of credit from an agency of the state, federal or local government, when any agency of the state, federal, or local government provides at least Twenty Percent (20%) of the financing for the Improvements. 7) When Subdivider is a non-profit organization, security may be negotiable bonds, of the kind approved for securing deposits of public moneys with City or in favor of City, as specified in Section 16430 of the California Government Code, deposited, at City's option, with City or a responsible escrow agent or trust company. C. All securities shall be furnished in accordance with the provisions of Exhibit A. The amount of the performance security shall equal One Hundred Percent (100%) of the estimated cost of constructing the Improvements, including payment of plan check and permit fees, as estimated by the City Engineer or a duly authorized representative of the City Engineer. The amount of Payment security shall equal the amount of the amount of performance security, except as otherwise set forth in Exhibit A, and shall be furnished as a separate security. Warranty security shall equal Ten Percent (10%) of the amount of performance security except as otherwise set forth in Exhibit A. D. At the time of submittal of security, Subdivider shall pay to City administrative fees applicable to the form of security provided. Administrative fees shall apply to the subdivision (final map, parcel map or waiver of parcel map) rather than to individual security instruments. The fees shall be paid separately for each different form and/or source (surety or financial institution) of security initially submitted and for substitution of securities but shall not be required for submittal of warranty security if the warranty security is of the same form and from the same source as the performance security it replaces. Administrative fees for security shall be as follows: 1) For certificates of deposit, bonds and letters of credit as described in Paragraphs 2), 3) and 4) of SECTION 3.B., which require the establishment of evidence of the reliability of the surety or financial institution, the administrative fee shall be One Hundred Fifty Dollars ($150.00). (� 0 01 TAPMEMAgreements - SIA\29457-2.wpd Page 2 of 6 ATTACHMENT 3 2) For liens on real property as described in Paragraph 5) of SECTION 3.B., for which City will prepare lien agreements and subordination agreements, administer valuation of the real property and administer the agreements over the life of the lien, all of which require legal assistance and financial advice, Subdivider shall pay to City an administration fee of One Half of One Percent (0.5%) of the estimated cost of the improvements secured but not less than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) nor more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00). 3) For other forms of security listed in Section 3 B, above, there will be no administrative fee. E. Participatory Improvements, if any, are identified in Exhibit A. Security for Participatory Improvements shall remain in place until the Participatory Improvements are constructed and actual costs are known and paid by Subdivider, or until Subdivider pays to City the estimated cost of the Participatory Improvements, and shall guarantee the reimbursement by Subdivider of Subdivider's share of the cost of the Participatory Improvements. Payment security and warranty security shall not be required for Participatory Improvements. Upon written demand from City, Subdivider shall deposit cash with City in lieu of or in replacement of security guaranteeing Participatory Improvements. If Subdivider fails to deposit said cash within 30 days of the date of the written demand from City, City may present a written demand to Subdividers Surety for payment of said cash and Subdividers Surety shall pay to City the lesser of: 1) the amount demanded, or 2) the amount of the security. F. Security shall not expire, be reduced or become wholly or partially invalid for any reason, including non-payment of premiums, modifications of this Agreement and/or expiration of the time for performance stated in this Agreement, without express authorization from City unless the surety provides City with sixty (60) days written notice by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested. G. Security shall be released in the following manner: 1) Performance security shall be released upon the final completion and acceptance or approval, by the City Council of the Improvements subject to the provisions of paragraph B. 2) The City Engineer may authorize partial reduction of performance security as work progresses, upon application by Subdivider. However, no such reduction shall be for an amount less than Ten Percent (10%) of the total performance security provided for the faithful performance of the act or work. In no event shall security be reduced below that required to guarantee the completion of the act or work or obligation secured, plus Ten Percent (10%). The City Engineer shall not allow more than two partial reductions of security furnished for any improvement agreement. 3) Participatory Improvement security shall be released upon payment by Subdivider of Subdivider's share of the cost or estimated cost of the Participatory Improvements. 4) If City receives no notice of recorded claims of lien, labor and materials security shall be released in full 90 days after final acceptance and/or approval by the City Council, of the Improvements. If City receives notice of any recorded lien, the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act shall apply. 5) Warranty security not utilized during the warranty period shall be released one year after final acceptance or approval by the City Council of all Tract Improvements. However, if at the end of the one-year warranty period, there are one or more outstanding requests by City for performance of worts or provision of materials under the terms of the warranty, warranty security shall be retained until the outstanding requests are satisfied or until Subdivider has made other arrangements satisfactory to the City Engineer. 4. Permits Required. Prior to commencing any phase of work, Subdivider shall obtain all permits required for that phase of work and pay all required fees. Work performed under a permit or permits shall comply with all provisions of the required permits. 5. Off -site Improvements. When the construction of one or more of the Improvements requires or necessitates the acquisition of real property not owned by Subdivider or City, Subdivider shall use its best efforts purchase such real property at a reasonable price. In the event that Subdivider is unsuccessful, despite its best efforts, to acquire such real property at a reasonable price, Subdivider may request in writing that City attempt TAPWDEPT\Agreements - SIA\29457-2.wpd Pape 3 of 6 ATTACHMENT 3 to acquire such real property. City may, but is not required to, agree to attempt to acquire such real property on behalf of Subdivider. If City so agrees, City and Subdivider shall enter a separate written agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. Said separate agreement shall provide that Subdivider advance to City One Hundred Fifty Percent (150%) of the appraised fair market value of the real property. Any unexpended portion of said advance shall be refunded to Subdivider. Any additional funds required for acquisition of the real property shall be paid by Subdivider to City upon the conveyance of said real property to Subdivider. In no event shall the failure of Subdivider or City to acquire such real property excuse, waive, or otherwise terminate Subdivider's obligation to construct the applicable improvement pursuant to this Agreement or the Conditions of Approval. 6. Completion of Improvements. Subdivider shall begin construction of the Improvements within ninety (90) days and shall complete construction within twelve (12) months after the approval of this Agreement. Portions of the Improvements may be completed at a later date, as determined by the City Engineer or as set forth in Exhibit A. Failure by Subdivider to begin or complete construction of the Improvements within the specified time periods shall constitute cause for City, in its sole discretion and when it deems necessary, to declare Subdivider in default of this agreement, to revise improvement security requirements as necessary to ensure completion of the improvements, and/or to require modifications in the standards or sequencing of the Improvements in response to changes in standards or conditions affecting or affected by the Improvements. Said failure shall not otherwise affect the validity of this agreement or Subdivider's obligations hereunder. 7. Force Majeure. In the event that Subdivider is unable to perform within the time limits herein due to strikes, act of God, or other events beyond Subdivider's control, the time limits for obligations affected by such events will be extended by the period of such events. 8. Time Extension. Subdivider may make application in writing to the City Council for an extension of time for completion of the Improvements. The City Council, in its sole and absolute discretion, may approve or deny the request or conditionally approve the extension with additions or revisions to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. As a condition of the time extension, Subdivider shall furnish securities, similar in form and substance to those required in SECTION 3 hereinabove, to cover the period of extension. The value of the securities shall be sufficient to ensure the performance of and payment for Improvements that remain incomplete at the time of the extension, and to provide warranty security on completed Improvements. 9. Survey Monuments. Before final approval of street improvements, Subdivider shall place survey monuments in accordance with the provisions of Sections 66495, et sec. of the Subdivision Map Act and of the La Quinta Municipal Code. Subdivider shall provide the City Engineer written proof that the monuments have been set, evidence of payment and receipt thereof by the engineer or surveyor setting the monuments, and intersection monument tie -outs for monuments set in public streets. 10. Final Acceptance of Improvements. At the completion of construction and prior to acceptance of the Improvements by City, Subdivider shall submit a request for final approval by City. The request shall be accompanied by any required certifications from Subdivider's engineers or surveyors, approval letters from other agencies having jurisdiction over and approval authority for improvements required by this Agreement or the Conditions of Approval, and any required construction quality documentation not previously submitted. Upon receipt of said request, the City Engineer or a duly -authorized representative will review the required documentation and will inspect the Improvements. If the Improvements are determined to be in accordance with applicable City standards and specifications, and as provided herein, obligations required by the Conditions of Approval and this Agreement have been satisfied, and Subdivider has provided revised plans as required in Paragraph 11, hereinafter, the City Engineer shall recommend acceptance of the Improvements by the City Council. 11. Revisions to Plans. When the Improvements have been inspected and approved by the City Engineer, Subdivider shall make any necessary revisions to the original plans held by City so the plans depict the actual Improvements constructed. When necessary revisions have been made, each separate sheet of the plans shall be clearly marked with the words "As -Built," "As -Constructed," or "Record Drawing," the marking shall be stamped by an engineer or surveyor, as appropriate for the improvements thereon, who is licensed to practice in CaliformIg and the plans shall be resubmitted to the City Engineer. ` TAPWDEFRAgreements - SIA\29457-2.wpd Page 4 of 6 ATTACHMENT 3 12. Improvement Warranty. Subdivider hereby guarantees the Improvements to City for a period of one (1) year, beginning on the date of final acceptance of the Improvements by the City Council, against any defective work or labor done, or defective materials furnished, and shall repair or replace such defective work or materials. 13. Release of Security. City shall retain and release securities in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of this agreement. Prior to the release of payment security, the City Engineer may require Subdivider to provide a title report or other evidence sufficient to show claims of lien, if any, that may affect the amount of payment security released. 14. City Right to Cure. If Subdivider fails to perform any obligation hereunder and such obligation has not been performed within sixty (60) days after written notice of default from City, then City may perform the obligation, and Subdivider shall pay the entire cost of such performance by City including costs of suit and reasonable attorney's fees incurred by City in enforcing such obligation. In cases of emergency or compelling public interest, as determined by the City Engineer, the requirement for written notice of default and/or the passage of sixty (60) days shall be deemed waived and all other provisions of this Article shall remain in effect. 15. Indemnification. Subdivider hereby binds itself, its officers, employees, agents, representatives, executors, administrators, guarantors, heirs, and assigns, and agrees to indemnify, defend and hold City and its officers, employees, agents, representatives, and assigns harmless from and against any losses, claims, demands, actions, or causes of action of any nature whatsoever, arising out of or in any way connected with Subdivider's performance herein under, including costs of suit and reasonable attorneys' fees. 16. No Modification of Conditions. This Agreement shall in no respect act to modify or amend any provision of the Conditions of Approval. In the event that any requirement or condition of this Agreement is inconsistent with or fails to include one or more provisions of the Conditions of Approval, which document(s) is (are) incorporated herein by reference, the provisions in the Conditions of Approval shall remain in effect and shall control. 17. Severabilb. In the event that any provision or provisions of this Agreement are held unenforceable, all provisions not so held shall remain in full force and effect. 18. General Provisions A. All notices pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally delivered or sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the parties at their respective addresses indicated hereon. Notices personally delivered shall be effective upon delivery. Notices mailed as provided herein and sent postage prepaid shall be effective upon the date of delivery or refusal indicated on the return receipt. Either party may change its address for notices hereunder by notice to the other given in the manner provided in this subparagraph. B. The terms, conditions, covenants, and agreements set forth herein shall apply to and bind the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors of the parties hereto. C. Neither party to this Agreement relies upon any warranty or representation not contained in this Agreement. D. This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted with respect to the laws of the State of California. E. In the event of any dispute between the parties with respect to this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to prompt payment of its reasonable attorneys' fees from the non -prevailing party. F. Any failure or delay by either party in asserting any of its rights and remedies as- to any default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any such rights or remedies provided for hereunder. 993 01 TAPWDEPT Agreements - SIA\29457-2.wpd Page 5 of 6 ATTACHMENT 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first written above. CITY: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager ATTEST: City Clerk SUBDIVIDER: By: Title By: Title: Reviewed and Approved: City Engineer Approved as to Form: City Attorney Date City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 760/777-7075 T.D. Desert Development Limited Partnership, a Delaware Limited Partnership, By: T.T.D. Desert Development Corporation, a Delaware Corporation ITS: General Partner, 79285 Rancho La Quinta Drive La Quinta, CA 92253 (760) 777-7747 I � -9 - Q Date Date Date Date 01 TAPMEMAgreements - SIA\29457-2.wpd Page 6 of 6 ATTACEMIENT 3 Exhibit A SECURITY - TRACT 29457-2 Except as otherwise provided herein, Subdivider shall furnish performance security and labor & materials security prior to agendization of the Map for approval by the City Council. Improvements designated as 'Participatory' have been or will be constructed by others. Security for Participatory Improvements shall remain in place indefinitely until called upon or released by City. Monumentation security shall guarantee performance of or payment for the work and shall be utilized or released as specified in Chapter 4, Article 9 of the Subdivision Map Act. The "Engineering & Plans" security will be released when the City has possession of complete, approved, original plans, signed and sealed by a design professional(s), for all required improvements. The "No -Plan Contingency", which may be utilized for any listed item or for other cost found necessary in the design or construction of the required improvements, may be released in whole or part by the City Engineer, at any time after construction plans are complete and the scope and nature of improvements are fully known. These releases shall be separate from and in addition to the reductions discussed below. As elements of the work are completed, Subdivider may request a maximum of two partial releases of performance security. Partial releases shall be for not less than ten percent (10%) of the total performance security for the tract and shall not reduce total performance security below the amount necessary to complete the Improvements plus ten percent (10%) of the original amount. Partial releases of performance security will be evaluated and may be granted, in whole or in part, by the City Engineer. Requests for partial releases, setting forth in detail the amount of work completed and the value thereof, shall be made in writing to the City Engineer. Labor & materials security shall remain in place until 90 days after all required tract improvements are complete and accepted by the City Council. Improvement Description Performance Labor & Materials Deferred Improvements (78 Lots) $376,350 $376,350 Grading, On Site 57,700 57,700 Streets, On Site (Inc. Sidewalks) 344,080 344,080 Domestic Water, On Site 154,025 154,025 Sanitary Sewer, On Site 158,465 158,465 Dry Utilities, On Site 145,800 145,800 Monumentation 10,000 0 Construction Subtotal: $1,236,420 $1,236,420 Engineering & Plans (20% of Construction) 247,280 $1,483,700 No -Plans Contingency (35% of Project) 519,300 Total: $2,003,000 095 01-9 4 AGENDA CATEGORY: COUNCIL,/RDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 ITEM TITLE: Adoption of a Resolution Granting Conditional Approval of a Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Tract Map 30125-2, Sedona Homes, Inc. BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: ap STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council granting conditional approval of a Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Tract Map 30125-2, Sedona Homes, Inc., a California Corporation. None. None. Tract Map 30125-2 is located east of Eisenhower Drive, south of 50t" Avenue and north of Calle Tampico. This is a subdivision of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map No. 30146, as filed in Book 199, Pages 55 and 56 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside County, California, (Attachment 1). It consists of twenty three (23) numbered residential lots and six (6) lettered lots, containing 6.048 Acres more or less, (Attachment 2). The developer has requested the City Council's conditional approval of the Final Map which will allow 30 days for completion of its processing. As of November 8, 2001, City staff has not received approval of the Final Map from the City's Acting Surveyor; however, it is expected that a technically correct map will be submitted within the time allowed with its conditional approval. A Subdivision Improvement Agreement (Attachment 3) has been executed by the developer; however, the associated securities have not been received. 096 TAPWDEPT\COUNCIL\2001 \01 1120c.wpd As a result, City staff has prepared the attached Resolution which provides for conditional approval of the Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement. The approval is contingent upon receipt, within 30 days (December 20, 2001), of a technically correct Final Map suitable for recording by the County Recorder with all required signatures except for the City Clerk. Once these items are received, the City Clerk will affix the City Seal to the Final Map and offer the Final Map for recording by the County Recorder. If any of the required items are not received by City staff within the specified time frame, the Final Map will be considered disapproved and will be rescheduled for City Council consideration only after all required items have been received. The developer has demonstrated to City staff that sufficient progress has been made with the documents required for conditional final map approval. The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council granting conditional approval of a Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Tract Map 30125-2, Sedona Homes, Inc., a California Corporation; or 2. Do not adopt a Resolution of the City Council granting conditional approval of a Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Tract Map 30125-2, Sedona Homes, Inc., a California Corporation; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, Steven D.".� Interim Pub Attachments: er Works Director/City Engineer Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager 1 . Vicinity Map 2. Tract Map 3. Subdivision Improvement Agreement n� o TAMDEMCOUNCIL\2001 \01 1120c.wpd RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL FINAL MAP APPROVAL OF TRACT MAP 30125-2, AND AUTHORIZING A TIME EXTENSION FOR SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF THE CONDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS TO VALIDATE THE APPROVAL WHEREAS, the City Council conducts only two regular meetings per month and the time interval between these meetings occasionally creates an undue hardship for business enterprises and individuals seeking approval of subdivision maps, and WHEREAS, the City Council as a matter of policy allows a subdivider to have city staff present the map for approval consideration when the requisite items necessary for final map approval are nearly, but not completely, finished thus yielding to the subdivider additional production time for preparation of those items, and WHEREAS, the subdivider has demonstrated to city staff and the City Council that it has made sufficient progress with items required for final map approval, and it is reasonable to expect the subdivider to satisfactorily complete the items, including city staff review time, within thirty (30) days without adversely impacting other ongoing work commitments of city staff, and WHEREAS, Section 66458(b) of the Subdivision Map Act grants the City Council broad authority to authorize time extensions regarding final map approval, or disapproval, upon receiving it for consideration, and WHEREAS, the City Council relies on professional city staff to review all required items for conformance with relevant requirements, and it is therefore appropriate for the City Council to approve the final map subject to review and confirmation of the required items by professional city staff, within a reasonable period of time as specified by the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: Section 1. The final map for Tract Map 30125-2, is conditionally approved provided the subdivider submits all required items on or before December 20, 2001. 008 0 J Resolution No. 2001- Tract Map 30125-2 Adopted: November 20, 2001 Page 2 Section 2. The City Council's approval of the final map shall not be considered valid until the City Engineer has signed the map indicating that it conforms with the tentative map, the Subdivision Map Act and all ordinances of the City. Section 3. The City Engineer shall withhold his signature from the map until the subdivider has completed the following requirements to the City Engineer's satisfaction. A. Produced a technically correct drawing of the map area that is suitable for recording by the County Recorder B. Has obtained all requisite signatures on the map title page, except for the City Clerk's signature. C. Has submitted security in the amount indicated in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. Section 4. The City Clerk shall withhold affixing the City Seal to the map title page, along with her attesting signature, until the City Engineer has signed the map. Section 5. The time extension for satisfying the requirements of the conditional approval for this final map shall expire when City offices close for regular business on December 20, 2001. If the subdivider has not satisfied the requirements in Section 3, herein, by the expiration deadline, the final map shall be considered disapproved. Disapproval does not deny any rights the subdivider may have under the Map Act to resubmit the final map for approval, or disapproval. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 20th day of November, 2001, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JOHN J. PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California 099 J '',-# 4 Resolution No. 2001- Tract Map 30125-2 Adopted: November 20, 2001 Page 3 ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California (City Seal) APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON , City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 100 0 TRACT NO. 30125-; TTACHMENT 1 AVENIDA FERNANDO ■ LA QUINTA > Z HOTEL GOLF & o 0 W TENNIS RESORT ck: ci::: W m O p Q Z N W W Q AVENUE 50 PROJECT SITE Q 0 W VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE o z W a M O K i E 79-799 Old Avenue 52 Lo Quinto, CA 92253 DOKICN- Vok�AMp�CO lot.: 760-771-4013 S C H u L T Z FAX: 760-771-4073 t' I J PLANNERS ENGINEERS SURVEYORS I: 51700 MAPPING 30125-2 VICINITY 9-26-01 ATTACHMENT 2 IO 1.�i <�� 2FN N FV12 or O N 1C U. HZ W� a n<{dy <Za �Q7aNa 1 O �myj ��~i1X Vf 00pp<a� ` � WO na` _�� F =zy N I� I� �^ tit <Qro -mc)sZ A 0� >V�j��" 1 p VI z j �.IZ N1J O'-¢p �Cll FV'�C m9K ►•J� K>cc S v�z"Y<� S xr W�'1`O �- 3^G'^W c` m�+GF W '�JfF� c W i > m � � �= Iy �y� S`z� 400y7=yl� moo k' `f'CS d' G«� 2 w 0 m � � ��u� < W &�WF 3i�z �<OW~ < OZCi &� O<CD k2s W ID Z� V 5 O W= yy�� W S.: p'F WC o yJ `~s yJ �Zm U aONO �gHg��OL4< dm 5 2z 15 = WW< m UZ < VZ tp ~ �.i �i--gzg �" H F q WJ 05 �rc j rc=z �- `d' Z. �U KZW 1 <&m < 3 WiM1.� UWj FiWUSIa�TSy WO& H{Z �z WU FC Y V G7 �m N w W 2F Y2 y� F�o� W F�,f� C� 0 z C<< y rc;0 O W< F w IL F- Z�In �J'i x O Odm ` p� u J-�^'c�{ U '�Z <m m�`Jk' mw�wN< N< �i��•»{{ r U IN 8 U �2�a3 J2 X W� w20 < 20Fn5� b Wr F y1n b F wk' _ )C wWZ WF 7 d VI < > W O < r S < x m a a2ZV 0 3a _$X o i Wbl �!8 i� X_ < < JJ 0 N ZZ p m J Z 7 W > �j �04 ^) '• •� �`3W0W `IF/17 3 � � � <��g�� Zt�7 N" oX o0O N `� � Z k,�w[7C"� so<rS�i��•7e,�� o� {�y�/�i's� 3 W 12 l _ w d * Hi' S W W w 2 W < 2 O d d� U J �Yd<o�i a= <p�y zt 2L^ 3 ,.�,,11� N W 8� n p p 20 no < aF�L3 5 W <Z 880dO N < <Q- N 1� lT `1 2 F 1.r1 N uiC-�yy<�1 CS Kp <aV D�,W7rc ; Vl <R/1 JO N <m �y <OKWXb ` N «4.9 gyp[ -c §W ��~C� U 3 <75�� _ W W U� �NONW V 7• mFyd.1< � W ; {¢YmJ z W W 4W Z Cv<ONy W F r WWr _W�NZt�< O ZS O W< ZSFOO Z 1~/1 07 i T7i2 N � H 7 01n CD0022 S�Zc 0 V1W2 Om �Na ` `� I2 OQ�� <5 Oy��=y7�Zj{jF Zoe _ �'aVl !W~1<yQ�=} �ZZjju zy�3F m OU1r � K� �O�V`WVI �m�i�z Y10 �2 7'"• 1�yF�B � W O OW V F a F A � b O` C <w7mpi C9 Z<Zmi W �yZ1 'O~ m 10 J 6 W Z K Od Z C-J ~ �¢ ~ =O� << V U6 0 l 4 yY/ O O K CL f NW a 0�W d' > Ow H~S�NU<WZW dN 14J <VI F H ¢cr W yy�Il O Oyw+<< Oj<J=<2<k+ '�22 O Ciji U 1 S W ymGm1>.!�� 0Cc �d'4< r;U� Umm myHJJ = U I < UO (N OOyyZp��1 3 K Z Q� K K��N K �OX W N �F� = W F K W ` t�'$ifIn K N<O Au. c O �•J IN THE CRY OF LA OUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CAUFORNIA TRACT NO. 30125-2 BEING A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30146, AS HIED IN BOOK 199, PAGES 55 AND 56 OF PARCEL. MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MDS CONSULTING AUGUST, 2001 GARY W. OOKKCI 1-14693 31 _ TRr7 . NO. 3041 F0. I* I.P., TARCE 21775, M. 1' I.P., TAGGED RCE I1775• _ �+ GGED D 1 A 9 189 R PM PE R EB /7_3N1 u r — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — FLUSH, PER PMB 189/9-31 AND FLUSH.$1 . SEE SHEET NO. 3 ��, 66/3 ^i-65 CITY OF LA OUIITA TES. ACC. AS EC. w�T.Y LOF LA O A 1 ACC. AS v�+ 0 1'9 Ir 8 I^ b FOUND 1' I.P., TAGGED RCE 21775, I FD. I' I.P„ TAGGED RCE 21775, so.ti 2. FLUSH, PER PUB 189/9-31 AND FLUSH, PER PMB 189/9-31 AND gp�" 1 ; FL H. I.P., TAGGED RCE 1 A CRY Of U OUINTA TIES. CITY OF LA OUNTA TIES, ACC. AS B.C. 77•49'02=" I Y RUSH, PER PMB 169/29-31 AND Cl AVENUE 50 RS 66/2, 27, ACC. AS SEC. CDR. CONST CTION CIL AVENUE 5 _ b 0O = OW T � H FO. RAMSET NAIL N TOP OF M 89'S3'J4v - _ _ - 61420') I- _ - _ ci= Irt7' r 1t-- �� WALL PER PMB 189/29-31. I.P., TAGGED _ �'� r RCE 862, PER RS. U/24-27. 7� 1 2-'' � � I I ACC. AS NE CM SEC. 1 I-L6 — _23 � I) TREND. 1�37'67-1 3S I 3�' ,� %� _ — I MS. 132/50-2 II SEE DETAIL 'A' Q I r 33 I �� 36 33 G� 2-7 ON SIM NO. 3—\ G 1 �I— — — C/ _ _ _ / _ 4J IN 7703.45'WI _ `I-� 32 �(� / 2S \ f / 1 IN 8W46'.WW 170 z�' JQ �7- -j- T ,�`( _ 37 rt X 1 ; `%/1129W I.84'1/ / Ti �C�R\�-� 31 -y�� 20Vp 17 I //�/ 3 ti 1r31 \/� L �/ / // / \J\\��- ' '/ TR.T7�. 17�-2 (116.00') MS. 132/63-64 (N 8TF46.34'TI) D t!V:— — — — — ZI SEE SHEET 0- 4-�// 12/ r / 14 / I I F NI PARCEL 2 �// / I 1B 23 w1 PARCEL MAP IND. 20146 � � II ' I o N i \ 21 I zl�I N 20 ico - CD ° `4�f 19 I 0 Li] I 4 18 h —I)7.°�vrr N as -4- -17 14�D N 16 15 Ihto7 W1 %4 W-qj s a w I IiA 5 �CpU'Pl PARCErl 3t4 13 em s+ [E I TL (B PAR rl_ AP WJ. 301 E63 12 t>, I 6 co 10 P Ms.1J�/�05 W I a C0 �y'>' g E 671/'S9 M 134.99' * j I i i } I I 8 74��E Sp.96') I i �bli SHEET 2 OF 4 SHEETS CURVE TABLE NO DELTA RADIUS ARC LGT TAN 1 09' 173'29' 40JV 51.07' 29.697 2 115'15'W 659M 175.4r 98221 SCALE 1'=100' 3 130'5M 79.00' 42b3' 21.851 SURVEYOR'S NOTES ■ — INDICATES FOUND F LP. TAGGED L.S. 4693, FLUSH, PER P.M.B. 199/55-56, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. • — MOTES FOUND F I.P. TAGGED L.S. 4693, FLUSH, PER P.M.B. 189/29-31. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. A — MOTES FOUND F I.P. TAGGED L.S. 4693, FLUSH. PER TRACT NO. 30125-1. M.B. —/ --. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 0— INDICATES SET f I.P. TAGGED LS. 4693, FLUSH, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 1' IRON PIPE TAGGED L.S. 4693, FLUSH; OR LEAD TACK TAGGED L.S. 4693 N CONCRETE TO BE SET AT ALL LOT CORNERS; OR F LOT CORNER FALLS ON FACE OF CURB. LEAD AND TACK TAGGED L.S. 4693 N TOP OF CURB ON A 0.25' OFFSET, TO BE SET AT ALL FRONT LOT CORNERS, EXCEPT AT B.C.S, E.C.'S, P.R.C.S THAT ABUT A STREET WHICH ARE NOT LOT CORNERS MARKING SIDE LOT LIES. AND TO BE SET AT ALL CENTERLINE NTERSECTUM B.C.S. E.C.'S AND ALL OTHER CENTERLINE POINTS OF CONTROL, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ALL MONUMENTS SHOWN 'SEY SHALL BE SET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MONLNENTATKN AGREEMENT FOR THIS MAP, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ( ) — INDICATES RECORD DATA PER PARCEL MAP NO. 29334. P.M.B. 189/29-31. I I — INDICATES RECORD DATA PER PARCEL MAP NO. 30146. P.M.B. 199/55-56. (1 — MOTES RECORD DATA PER TRACT NO. 30125-1, M.B. —/ _ -7"1 INDICATES ACCESS RIGHTS RESTRICTED, PER P.M. 30146. P.M.B. 199/55-56. THIS TRACT MAP CONTAINS 6.048 ACRES. THIS TRACT MAR CONTAINS 23 NUMBERED PARCELS AND 6 LETTERED PARCELS. BASIS OF BEARINGS THE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE EAST LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1 AS SHOWN AS NORTH OOOO'4(r WEST. ON TRACT NO. 14496-1 AS RILED N BOOK 119, PAGES 9 THROUGH 15. OF MAPS N THE OFFICE OF THE COUNP! RECORDER OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. EASEMENTS COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, HOLDER OF EASEMENTS FOR PUBLIC ROADS AND RIGHTS OF WAY, PRIVATE EASEMENTS AND ROM OF WAY, MR NtRI WING AM DOMESTIC WATER PURPOSES. (NOT PLORABLE) SIGNATURE OMISSIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 66436 OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, THE SIGNATURES OF THE FOLLOWING DOERS OF EASEMENTS AND/OR OTHER INTERESTS HAVE BEEN OWTTED; COACHELU VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, HOLDER OF EASEMENTS FOR PUBLIC ROADS AND MGHTS OF WAY, PRIVATE EASEMENTS AND MWM OF WAY, FOR IRRIGNINIG AND DOMESTIC WATER PURPOSES. (NOT PLOTTABLE) -I _ — (N — _ _ _ _ _ _ p / EE SHEET N0. 4 C,v.�/.D. C/L CALLE TAMPICO OLEANDER RESERVOIR EVACUATION CHANNEL I too 50 0 100 200 300 _ — J -- ---- — M89'S4'45'V 1326N6---- ---- - - - I0-29-01 y n N ATTACHMENT 2 EASEMENIS O- NDICATES A 10'OD FOOT EASEMENT FOR LIC PUBUTUTY PURPOSES DEDICATED TO NIPERK WRIGATION 06110CT. p- EJ55EME11f TO C.V.W.O. FOR MMESTIC WATER AND SAMTATION PURPOSES. ®- NDKATES A ,o.OD FOOT EASEMENT FOR PU&IC UTUTY PURPOSES DCDCATED 10 CITY OF LA a(NTA SCALE r -40' C Ct 3 W W IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA. COUNTY OF RVERSIDE. STATE OF CALIFORNIA SHEET 3 OF 4 SHEETS TRACT NO. 30125-2 BEING A SUBOMSKIN OF PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30146. AS FILED IN BOOK 199. PAGES SS AND 56 OF PARCEL MAPS• IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY. CALIFORMA TFZ NO. 3D41 MDS CONSULTING AUGUST. 2001 GARY W. pOKICH L.S.4693 MB. FOUND r I.P. TAGGED ACE 31"5. F"S" PER(� '� " AND m a LA ouNu TM C/L AVENUE 50 �a�1 CONSTRUCTION CIL AVENUE 50 >R — LOT G I � g 'k I � I tee I I I 30 41 I 40 42 LOT A �` I - — — — — — - I I ! RAC r NO. 3012-5- 1 M.S. I------- -i_ ---- r— --`-1 �� LOT B ��LOT L I I I � L REDO COURT_-, �� 4 43/T % �'� J` \�� IN "WAN Imm LOT M 4e Lwa1% tivl � �2 R/ PA' 3 �� J`y s • i \ / N W40' 1 I i ,6S / / / $ .. PARCEL MAP 3014B i "• � �'� Ion � Nx9M 4 2 P.M.B. ADO/66-66 PAR. 2 i b Ill N 4 I �iI L / %t �. w 1 Ir w O' ��' ; 43 T.IP �--I Ir j /- ".4814 N •4 LW 4 I e�•+e'14•vT .+4,��►i wt LOT M MW a 4r40'34•W nun LOT / UNIT 7 au':+'vl / Da57 ACT ^ DETIAIL "BB"*' I �`>� 1 QED OT TO j y �, I '• PAR. 3 i i I PAR. 2! A'' V S m / I a I ( I 1 LOT AI o.114 AL PAR. 3 / Q3 I� < 23 �y, I i• I � �� I / T a a, I / I I I LOT F 10 AL I' I 011� 11s ar is p I I a " " � 1^ g ";—��,. ` DETAIL A Z J. PARCEL 3 ' _.1 --' 0. 'Ir �j I "• sEt oETUL Y a PARCEL MAP 2B 334 S r, LErt mm I P.M.B. -ED/20-31 ,ssl,ss 1 23 a I CURVE TABLE 31• � ,O I LTA RADIUS ARC L6T TAN a IV11 PAR 2 2 C3r41'M• Lim 6u7 Sum 1` + 22 M 3 31•SY36' ON 3w 2056• 4 2D3Fnr NOW 4w 234T i '� ��ir L� s4T4r a• 7 3nr47 " 44J7 2ZW %` T A I 27'16%r 11S11' SLlr NW e 5•4ne 04M Wr Iff `% '�� 0114. A /-- C/L CALLE TAMPIC0 DLOT-o.2S1 A C:, 40 20 1 40 00 a PAR. 3 �y 21 PARCEL MAP 30146 m 20 PAO D/66-66 4 `t SEE SHEET 4*,. ��0 ATTACHMENT 2 tin r y i I 0\ 1 W W Klea= 9--mom -' ^e y�y��', �u �v�yyl Yy�fI .=51=v0i`G�y p. b Vf VI LNnm �m---i FI m.-INN r t � � t- t�� SE;: b� � S,, _ lv ��^r+ u•I �b.'i b Aid ' rr�_P+=m`r°��tICJi$�inbg�i�'I�g.17liiyl�i Q _N.•I�N.01�mP,o,,,�N__I�_^,m.0. RI �iNNNN 8 `ry' 11 8E; � 8 R< o � � �!�. g, St �i i •7\,� r+ � �.ZD ? lie s N\bd 9 © © ❑. r � to g 5l i W u S_ r ! I It I11 ^ �? <k l ✓ � � � � � � � pra N/ g rL / D Z' O Q / 00) '� 7A n\ � 6 Gi / \ ` 1d a I is 1 u 40Y ` LLJ `� /• • r21 I 8 • � � Cia �. N r lIO) S. " co rLs/ Ig o m `� cr S, '} q1� LLl rrQ-V � Ham' .►o/ �,� 0 � z •' lJ • / V .ii '0 1 An g1.91IA Va J7d-In yh EL N u L� /� Q, ti • ��-oz_ec_Ae xis 11.1 'A/ tiso.9r Q04 b ` • / /a �II� so iA r � _ N �----- —'�sya� ^ —`� \\ l,gf5�9 ^bZ�\�\ � (-£—(3Z/Ci£f- •Q•{�'d _ •� csz•o � 1� £ £ £Z dVVY -13 �?��d 4 £ f332j`dd N _J LIJ Z U O U w ry 0 LIJ U) W Of El Y r ATTACE[NMNT 3 CITY OF LA QUINTA SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT Tract 30125-2 THIS SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement') is made and entered into this day of , 20 , by and between Sedona Homes, Inc., a California Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Subdivider," and the City of La Quinta, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "City." RECITALS: A. Subdivider has prepared and filed a final map or parcel map (the "Map') of a unit of land in the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, which unit of land is known as Tract No. 30125-2 (the "Tract') pursuant to the provisions of Section 66410, et sec. of the California Government Code (the "Subdivision Map Act'). B. Prior to approval of the Map, Subdivider is required to install or agree to install certain public and private improvements (the "Improvements'). C. The Improvements have not been installed and accepted at this time. D. It is therefore necessary that Subdivider and City enter into an agreement for the installation of the Improvements as provided in Section 66462 of the Subdivision Map Act. NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. Improvement Plans. Prior to submittal of the Map for approval by the City Council, Subdivider shall furnish original improvement plans meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. 2. Improvements. Subdivider shall construct the public and private street, drainage, utility, landscaping, and other improvements required to be constructed or agreed to be constructed under this Agreement as listed in Exhibit "A", and shall bear the full cost thereof. The methods, standards, specifications, sequence, and scheduling of construction shall be as approved by the City Engineer. 3. Improvement Security. A. One class of security to be provided by Subdivider, hereinafter referred to as "performance security," shall assure the faithful performance of this Agreement including construction of the Improvements, payment of Subdivider's fair share of Improvements which have been or will be constructed by others ("Participatory Improvements', and payment of plan check and permit fees. A second class of security to be provided by Subdivider, hereinafter referred to as "payment security," shall assure the payment of the cost of labor, equipment and materials supplied to construct the Improvements. A third class of security to be provided by Subdivider, hereinafter referred to as "warranty security," shall serve as a guarantee and warranty of the Improvements for a period of one year following the completion and acceptance of the Improvements. Subdivider shall fumish performance and payment security prior to and as a condition of City Council approval of the Map. Subdivider shall provide warranty security after Improvements are complete and accepted by the City Council and prior to or concurrently with the final release of performance security. Warranty security shall not be required for Monumentation or Participatory Improvements. However, the City may utilize Monumentation Security for performance of or payment for the work in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. As part of the obligation secured by each of the performance security, payment security and warranty security, and in addition to the face amount of each such security, each such security shall include and assure the payment of costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing the obligations thereby secured. B. Improvement security shall conform with Section 66499 of the California Government Code and one or more of the following: 1) A cash deposit with City or a responsible escrow agent or trust company, at City's optioli. n 6 �1" T:\PWDEPT\Agreements - SIA\30125-2.wpd ''" Page 1 of 6 ATTACHMENT 3 2) Surety bonds, of the form specified in subsection 66499.2 of the California Government Code, issued by a surety or sureties listed in the U.S. Department of Treasury Circular 570 (latest version). 3) Certificates of deposit, in City's name, from one or more financial institutions subject to regulation by the state or federal government and having a financial quality rating of "A" or better and a commitment reliability rating of "R-2" or better on the Investment Data Exchange (of the Los Angeles County Treasurer's office). 4) Irrevocable letters of credit, issued by one or more financial institutions meeting the requirements of Paragraph (3), pledging that the funds necessary to carry out the completion of the Improvements are on deposit, guaranteed for payment, and constitute a trust fund which is not subject to levy or attachment by any creditor of the depositor until released by City. Letters of credit shall guarantee that all or any portion of the funds available pursuant to the letters of credit will be paid upon the written demand of City and that such written demand need not present documentation of any type as a condition of payment, including proof of loss. The duration of any such letter of credit shall be for a period of not less than one year from the execution of the agreement with which it is provided and shall state, on its face, that the letter of credit will be automatically renewed until such time that City authorizes its expiration or until sixty (60) days after City receives notice from the financial institution of intent to allow expiration of the letter of credit. 5) A lien upon the subdivided property, if City finds that it would not be in the public interest to require the installation of the Improvements sooner than two (2) years after recordation of the final map or parcel map for which the Improvements are required. The lien shall provide a collateral value of three (3) times the estimated cost of the Improvements and shall include the power of sale of the real property, all buildings and improvements thereon, or that may be erected upon or made thereto, together with all hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging, or in any wise appertaining, and the reservations, remainders, rents, issues, and profits thereof. The collateral value of the property shall be established at Subdividers expense through an appraisal approved by City. 6) An instrument of credit from an agency of the state, federal or local government, when any agency of the state, federal, or local government provides at least Twenty Percent (20%) of the financing for the Improvements. 7) When Subdivider is a non-profit organization, security may be negotiable bonds, of the kind approved for securing deposits of public moneys with City or in favor of City, as specified in Section 16430 of the California Government Code, deposited, at City's option, with City or a responsible escrow agent or trust company. C. All securities shall be furnished in accordance with the provisions of Exhibit A. The amount of the performance security shall equal One Hundred Percent (100%) of the estimated cost of constructing the Improvements, including payment of plan check and permit fees, as estimated by the City Engineer or a duly authorized representative of the City Engineer. The amount of Payment security shall equal the amount of the amount of performance security, except as otherwise set forth in Exhibit A, and shall be furnished as a separate security. Warranty security shall equal Ten Percent (10%) of the amount of performance security except as otherwise set forth in Exhibit A. D. At the time of submittal of security, Subdivider shall pay to City administrative fees applicable to the form of security provided. Administrative fees shall apply to the subdivision (final map, parcel map or waiver of parcel map) rather than to individual security instruments. The fees shall be paid separately for each different form and/or source (surety or financial institution) of security initially submitted and for substitution of securities but shall not be required for submittal of warranty security if the warranty security is of the same form and from the same source as the performance security it replaces. Administrative fees for security shall be as follows: 1) For certificates of deposit, bonds and letters of credit as described in Paragraphs 2), 3) and 4) of SECTION 3.B., which require the establishment of evidence of the reliability of the surety or financial institution, the administrative fee shall be One Hundred Fifty Dollars ($150.00). 107 2) For liens on real property as described in Paragraph 5) of SECTION 3.13., for which City will prepare lien agreements and subordination agreements, administer valuation of the real property and administer T:\PWDEP-RAgreements - SIA\30125-2.wpd 0 1 1 Page 2 of 6 ATTACHMENT 3 the agreements over the life of the lien, all of which require legal assistance and financial advice, Subdivider shall pay to City an administration fee of One Half of One Percent (0.5%) of the estimated cost of the improvements secured but not less than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) nor more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00). 3) For other forms of security listed in Section 3 B, above, there will be no administrative fee. E. Participatory Improvements, if any, are identified in Exhibit A. Security for Participatory Improvements shall remain in place until the Participatory Improvements are constructed and actual costs are known and paid by Subdivider, or until Subdivider pays to City the estimated cost of the Participatory Improvements, and shall guarantee the reimbursement by Subdivider of Subdivider's share of the cost of the Participatory Improvements. Payment security and warranty security shall not be required for Participatory Improvements. Upon written demand from City, Subdivider shall deposit cash with City in lieu of or in replacement of security guaranteeing Participatory Improvements. If Subdivider fails to deposit said cash within 30 days of the date of the written demand from City, City may present a written demand to Subdividers Surety for payment of said cash and Subdividers Surety shall pay to City the lesser of: 1) the amount demanded, or 2) the amount of the security. F. Security shall not expire, be reduced or become wholly or partially invalid for any reason, including non-payment of premiums, modifications of this Agreement and/or expiration of the time for performance stated in this Agreement, without express authorization from City unless the surety provides City with sixty (60) days written notice by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested. G. Security shall be released in the following manner: 1) Performance security shall be released upon the final completion and acceptance or approval, by the City Council of the Improvements subject to the provisions of paragraph B. 2) The City Engineer may authorize partial reduction of performance security as work progresses, upon application by Subdivider. However, no such reduction shall be for an amount less than Ten Percent (10%) of the total performance security provided for the faithful performance of the act or work. In no event shall security be reduced below that required to guarantee the completion of the act or work or obligation secured, plus Ten Percent (10%). The City Engineer shall not allow more than two partial reductions of security furnished for any improvement agreement. 3) Participatory Improvement security shall be released upon payment by Subdivider of Subdividers share of the cost or estimated cost of the Participatory Improvements. 4) If City receives no notice of recorded claims of lien, labor and materials security shall be released in full 90 days after final acceptance and/or approval by the City Council, of the Improvements. If City receives notice of any recorded lien, the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act shall apply. 5) Warranty security not utilized during the warranty period shall be released one year after final acceptance or approval by the City Council of all Tract Improvements. However, if at the end of the one-year warranty period, there are one or more outstanding requests by City for performance of work or provision of materials under the terms of the warranty, warranty security shall be retained until the outstanding requests are satisfied or until Subdivider has made other arrangements satisfactory to the City Engineer. 4. Permits Required. Prior to commencing any phase of work, Subdivider shall obtain all permits required for that phase of work and pay all required fees. Work performed under a permit or permits shall comply with all provisions of the required permits. 5. Off -site Improvements. When the construction of one or more of the Improvements requires or necessitates the acquisition of real property not owned, by Subdivider or City, Subdivider shall use its best efforts purchase such real property at a reasonable price. In the event that Subdivider is unsuccessful, despite- its best efforts, to acquire such real property at a reasonable price, Subdivider may request in writing that City attempt to acquire such real property. City may, but is not required to, agree to attempt to acquire such real property on behalf of Subdivider. If City so agrees, City and Subdivider shall enter a separate written agreetin a form TAPWDEMAgreements - SIA130125-2.wpd G 4 Page 3 of 6 ATTACHMENT 3 acceptable to the City Attorney. Said separate agreement shall provide that Subdivider advance to City One Hundred Fifty Percent (150%) of the appraised fair market value of the real property. Any unexpended portion of said advance shall be refunded to Subdivider. Any additional funds required for acquisition of the real property shall be paid by Subdivider to City upon the conveyance of said real property to Subdivider. In no event shall the failure of Subdivider or City to acquire such real property excuse, waive, or otherwise terminate Subdivider's obligation to construct the applicable improvement pursuant to this Agreement or the Conditions of Approval. 6. Completion of Improvements. Subdivider shall begin construction of the Improvements within ninety (90) days and shall complete construction within twelve (12) months after the approval of this Agreement. Portions of the Improvements may be completed at a later date, as determined by the City Engineer or as set forth in Exhibit A. Failure by Subdivider to begin or complete construction of the Improvements within the specified time periods shall constitute cause for City, in its sole discretion and when it deems necessary, to declare Subdivider in default of this agreement, to revise improvement security requirements as necessary to ensure completion of the improvements, and/or to require modifications in the standards or sequencing of the Improvements in response to changes in standards or conditions affecting or affected by the Improvements. Said failure shall not otherwise affect the validity of this agreement or Subdivider's obligations hereunder. 7. Force Majeure. In the event that Subdivider is unable to perform within the time limits herein due to strikes, act of God, or other events beyond Subdivider's control, the time limits for obligations affected by such events will be extended by the period of such events. 8. Time Extension. Subdivider may make application in writing to the City Council for an extension of time for completion of the Improvements. The City Council, in its sole and absolute discretion, may approve or deny the request or conditionally approve the extension with additions or revisions to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. As a condition of the time extension, Subdivider shall furnish securities, similar in form and substance to those required in SECTION 3 hereinabove, to cover the period of extension. The value of the securities shall be sufficient to ensure the performance of and payment for Improvements that remain incomplete at the time of the extension, and to provide warranty security on completed Improvements. 9. Survey Monuments. Before final approval of street improvements, Subdivider shall place survey monuments in accordance with the provisions of Sections 66495, et sec. of the Subdivision Map Act and of the La Quinta Municipal Code. Subdivider shall provide the City Engineer written proof that the monuments have been set, evidence of payment and receipt thereof by the engineer or surveyor setting the monuments, and intersection monument tie -outs for monuments set in public streets. 10. Final Acceptance of Improvements. At the completion of construction and prior to acceptance of the Improvements by City, Subdivider shall submit a request for final approval by City. The request shall be accompanied by any required certifications from Subdivider's engineers or surveyors, approval letters from other agencies having jurisdiction over and approval authority for improvements required by this Agreement or the Conditions of Approval, and any required construction quality documentation not previously submitted. Upon receipt of said request, the City Engineer or a duly -authorized representative will review the required documentation and will inspect the Improvements. If the Improvements are determined to be in accordance with applicable City standards and specifications, and as provided herein, obligations required by the Conditions of Approval and this Agreement have been satisfied, and Subdivider has provided revised plans as required in Paragraph 11, hereinafter, the City Engineer shall recommend acceptance of the Improvements by the City Council. 11. Revisions to Plans. When the Improvements have been inspected and approved by the City Engineer, Subdivider shall make any necessary revisions to the original plans held by City so the plans depict the actual Improvements constructed. When necessary revisions have been made, each separate sheet of the plans shall be clearly marked with the words "As -Built," "As -Constructed," or'Record Drawing," the marking shall be stamped by an engineer or surveyor, as appropriate for the improvements thereon, who is licensed to practice in California, and the plans shall be resubmitted to the City Engineer. 109 TAPWDEMAgreemente. - SIA130125-2.wpd 0 15 Page 4 of 6 ATTACIMENT 3 12. Improvement Warranty. Subdivider hereby guarantees the Improvements to City for a period of one (1) year, beginning on the date of final acceptance of the Improvements by the City Council, against any defective work or labor done, or defective materials fumished, and shall repair or replace such defective work or materials. 13. Release of Security. City shall retain and release securities in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of this agreement. Prior to the release of payment security, the City Engineer may require Subdivider to provide a title report or other evidence sufficient to show claims of lien, if any, that may affect the amount of payment security released. 14. City Right to Cure. If Subdivider fails to perform any obligation hereunder and such obligation has not been performed within sixty (60) days after written notice of default from City, then City may perform the obligation, and Subdivider shall pay the entire cost of such performance by City including costs of suit and reasonable attorney's fees incurred by City in enforcing such obligation. In cases of emergency or compelling public interest, as determined by the City Engineer, the requirement for written notice of default and/or the passage of sixty (60) days shall be deemed waived and all other provisions of this Article shall remain in effect. 15. Indemnification. Subdivider hereby binds itself, its officers, employees, agents, representatives, executors, administrators, guarantors, heirs, and assigns, and agrees to indemnify, defend and hold City and its officers, employees, agents, representatives, and assigns harmless from and against any losses, claims, demands, actions, or causes of action of any nature whatsoever, arising out of or in any way connected with Subdivider's performance herein under, including costs of suit and reasonable attorneys' fees. 16. No Modification of Conditions. This Agreement shall in no respect act to modify or amend any provision of the Conditions of Approval. In the event that any requirement or condition of this Agreement is inconsistent with or fails to include one or more provisions of the Conditions of Approval, which document(s) is (are) incorporated herein by reference, the provisions in the Conditions of Approval shall remain in effect and shall control. 17. Severabilibt. In the event that any provision or provisions of this Agreement are held unenforceable, all provisions not so held shall remain in full force and effect. 18. General Provisions A. All notices pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally delivered or sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the parties at their respective addresses indicated hereon. Notices personally delivered shall be effective upon delivery. Notices mailed as provided herein and sent postage prepaid shall be effective upon the date of delivery or refusal indicated on the return receipt. Either party may change its address for notices hereunder by notice to the other given in the manner provided in this subparagraph. B. The terms, conditions, covenants, and agreements set forth herein shall apply to and bind the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors of the parties hereto. C. Neither party to this Agreement relies upon any warranty or representation not contained in this Agreement. D. This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted with respect to the laws of the State of California. E. In the event of any dispute between the parties with respect to this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to prompt payment of its reasonable attorneys' fees from the non -prevailing party. F. Any failure or delay by either party in asserting any of its rights and remedies as to any default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any such rights or remedies provided for hereunder. 016 T:\PWDEPT\Agreemertts - SIA\30125-2.wpd Page 5 of 6 ATTACHMENT 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first written above. CITY: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager ATTEST: City Clerk SUBDIVIDER: By: Title: l� By: Title: Reviewed and Approved: City Engineer Approved as to Form: City Attorney Date City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 760/777-7075 Sedona Homes, Inc., a California Corporation 75-564-A Country Club Drive Suite 150/137 Palm Desert, CA 92211 (760) 772-8224 %/— Date Date Date Date III 01 11, TAMDEPT\Agreements - SIA\30125-2.wpd Page 6 of 6 ATTACHMENT 3 Exhibit A SECURITY - TRACT 30125-2 Except as otherwise provided herein, Subdivider shall furnish performance security and labor & materials security prior to agendization of the Map for approval by the City Council. Improvements designated as "Participatory" have been or will be constructed by others. Security for Participatory Improvements shall remain in place indefinitely until called upon or released by City. Monumentation security shall guarantee performance of or payment for the work and shall be utilized or released as specified in Chapter 4, Article 9 of the Subdivision Map Act. The "Engineering & Plans" security will be released when the City has possession of complete, approved, original plans, signed and sealed by a design professional(s), for all required improvements. The "No -Plan Contingency", which may be utilized for any listed item or for other cost found necessary in the design or construction of the required improvements, may be released in whole or part by the City Engineer, at any time after construction plans are complete and the scope and nature of improvements are fully known. These releases shall be separate from and in addition to the reductions discussed below. As elements of the work are completed, Subdivider may request a maximum of two partial releases of performance security. Partial releases shall be for not less than ten percent (10%) of the total performance security for the tract and shall not reduce total performance security below the amount necessary to complete the Improvements plus ten percent (10%) of the original amount. Partial releases of performance security will be evaluated and may be granted, in whole or in part, by the City Engineer. Requests for partial releases, setting forth in detail the amount of work completed and the value thereof, shall be made in writing to the City Engineer. Labor & materials security shall remain in place until 90 days after all required tract improvements are complete and accepted by the City Council. Improvement Description Performance Labor & Materials Grading $100,110 $100,110 Streets, On Site 143,430 143,430 Storm Drainage 23,320 23,320 Domestic Water 90,200 90,200 Sanitary Sewer 78,110 78,110 Dry Utilities (Elect.) 57,500 57,500 Monumentation 5.000 0 Construction Subtotal: $497,670 $492,670 Engineering & Plans (20% of Construction) 99,530 $597,200 No -Plans Contingency (35% of Project) 209,020 Total: $806,220 112 01.93 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 Approval of a Contract to Retain Roy F. Stephenson, P.E. of Berryman & Henigar as Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Approve a contract to retain Roy F. Stephenson, P.E. of Berryman & Henigar as Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer. Appropriate up to $50,000 from the General Fund Reserve. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The cost stated in the proposal (Attachment 1) for the services of Mr. Stephenson and the firm of Berryman & Henigar is $150 per hour. At this rate for a three month period, the estimated cost of the contract is $50,000. The funds for the contract would come from the General Fund Reserve. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: The City is currently engaged in the process of filling the Public Works Director/City Engineer position. It is anticipated that it will take approximately three to four months to fill the position. During this period it is necessary to fill this position on an interim basis. The Interim Director will provide direction and continuity of existing projects until a new Director is appointed. Consideration was given to candidates from consultant referrals and Public Service Skills Inc. Mr. Stephenson has an extensive background in the field of civil engineering with a number of public agencies throughout California (Attachment 2). He is registered as a Professional Engineer with the State of California. 113 The proposal submitted by Mr. Stephenson indicated that he would be the designated staff person from Berryman & Henigar and would provide his services as the Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer on a scheduled basis of 24 hours per week. He would work from Tuesday through Thursday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Mr. Stephenson would also attend two City Council meetings per month at no extra charge. The duration of this contract is 90 days with an option to extend the term for two 30-day periods at the discretion of the City Manager. If the contract is approved by the City Council, Mr. Stephenson could begin working for the City on December 4, 2001. These terms and conditions have been incorporated into the contract (Attachment 3) for Mr. Stephenson's services. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Approve the contract to retain Roy F. Stephenson, P.E. of Berryman & Henigar as Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer; or 2. Do not approve the contract to retain Roy F. Stephenson, P.E. of Berryman & Henigar as Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1. Proposal for Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer Services 2. Resume of Roy F. Stephenson 3. Contract for Services of Berryman & Henigar 114 002 ATTACHMENT 1 November 13, 2001 Mr. Thomas P. Genovese City Manager City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Proposal for Interim Public Works Director / City Engineer Services Dear Mr. Genovese: This is a response to your request for a proposal to provide Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer Services to the City of La Quinta. I am designated as the Berryman & Henigar staff member to provide these services. I will provide these services at City Hall, 24 hours per week at a rate of $150 per hour on Tuesday through Thursday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. I will attend two City Council meetings per month at no additional charge. I am prepared to start work Tuesday, December 4t", 2001. The term of this assignment is 90 days with the City's option to extend the term for two 30-day periods at the discretion of the City Manager. Berryman & Henigar looks forward to providing this service to the City of La Quinta and is confident of performing these duties in a manner that meets your needs. Sincerely Berryman & Henigar Roy F. Stephenson, P.E. Director of Governmental Consulting 2001 East First Street, Santa Ana, California 92705-4020 1 (714) 568-7300 ♦ Fax (714) 836-5906 ♦ www.bhiinc.com 1 (� (� An Equal Opportunity Employer 004 f 4 Nov 14 01 03:22p PLACENTIA 7145284640 p.2 STEPHENSON CONSULTING, INC. ATTACHMENT 2 P'Esr Roy F. Stephenson, P.E. Mr. Stephenson has over 43 years of increasing responsibilities in all levels of civil engineering design and management for public agencies from both a private and public perspective. Prior to forming Stephenson Consulting, he co-founded BSI Consultants as Executive Vice President of a major 300-person firm with annual sales of $30 million. He has served as Public Works Director/City Engineer for more than ten cities since 1972 as both a contract and public employee. Mr. Stephenson is a recognized leader in the development of organizations that blend the public and private sector into cost-efficient operations. He is also known as a strategic thinker and communicator, enabling hum to find effective solutions to a wide variety of community issues. Mr. Stephenson is experienced in the formation of Assessment Districts, Redevelopment Agencies, Fee Programs, Capital Improvement Programs, Special Districts and Joint Power Authorities. He has demonstrated the ability to develop straterAes that successfully compete for funding programs, having assisted cities in receiving more than $100 million in competitive and noncompetitive environments. Mr. Stephenson has actively participated in the master planning and implementation of major community facilities including parks, gymnasiums, city halls, community centers, golf courses and a U.S. Presidential library. Mr. Stephenson has extensive experience in the creation and processing of land development projects, including residential, commercial and industrial, on both a large and small scale. He created standards that have contributed to high quality projects within many Southern California communities. His intimate knowledge of the Subdivision Map Act, General Plan, Grading and Zoning Codes provides a strong foundation for working with the development industry. Mr. Stephenson has played -a key role in successfully creating and managing public works/engineering organizations for six newly incorporated cities. In response to a competitive service environment, he has developed performance standards to maximize the use of city staff together with the private sector in the most cost-effective, timely and high quality delivery of services. Mr. Stephenson has gained the respect of employees, citizens and the business• sector by providing leadership, coupled with high integrity, in providing professional service to all concerned. Furthermore, Mr. Stephenson provides Expert Witness testimony relating to governmental regulations, procedures and standard practices. PROFESSIONAL LICENSE PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS EDUCATION Registered Civil Engineer American Public Works Assoc. Civil Engineers Studies State of California American Society of Civil E1 Camino College RCE #20354 Engineers University of Calif., Los Angeles P.O. BOX 1130 • YORBA LINDA, CA 92885-1130 • PHONE: 714/402-4185 116 -14-81 15:17 RECEIVED FROM:7145284648 P.82 0 �J5 0 ATTACHMENT 3 City of La Qu i nta CONTRACT FOR SERVICES This Contract for Services ("AGREEMENT") is made and entered into this 41h day of December 2001, by and between Berryman and He.nigar, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor," and the CITY OF LA QUINTA, hereinafter referred to as "City." WHEREAS, the City is in need of special services and advice in engineering matters; and; WHEREAS, Contractor is specially trained, experienced and competent to provide the special services and advice required; and; WHEREAS, such services are needed on a limited basis; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1 . SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR: Contractor will provide the services of Roy F. Stephenson, P.E., to serve as the Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer. 2. The Contractor will commence providing services under this AGREEMENT on December 4, 2001. The AGREEMENT shall expire on March 4, 2002, unless terminated earlier pursuant to Paragraph 5, or unless extended pursuant to Paragraph 10. During the term of this AGREEMENT, Contractor shall diligently perform as required and will provide, through Mr. Stephenson, three 8-hour days per week (Tuesday -Thursday) at City Hall. Mr. Stephenson will attend two City Council meetings per month at no additional charge. The Contractor will not work additional hours without the express consent of the City Manager. The Contractor will perform said services as an independent contractor and not as an employee of the City. Contractor shall be under the control of the City as to the result to be accomplished and not as to the means or manner by which such result is to be accomplished. 3. The City will prepare and furnish to the Contractor upon request such information as is reasonably necessary for the performance of the Contractor to the AGREEMENT. 1 11'7 00s- 4. The City shall pay the Contractor at an hourly rate of $150. The total amount paid shall not exceed $50,000, which includes all expenses for services rendered pursuant to this AGREEMENT. Contractor shall not incur any additional expenses without the express written consent of the City Manager. 5. The City may, at any time, for any reason, terminate this AGREEMENT and compensate Contractor only for services rendered to the date of termination. Written notice by the City's City Manager shall be sufficient to stop further performance of services by the Contractor. The notice shall be deemed given when received or no later than three days after the day of mailing, whichever is sooner. 6. INSURANCE, INDEMNIFICATION AND BONDS. A. Insurance. The Contractor shall procure and maintain, at its cost, and submit concurrently with its execution of this Agreement, public liability and property damage insurance against all claims for injuries against persons or damages to property resulting from Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions, to the extent of the Contractor's negligence or wrongfulness, rising out of or related to Contractor's performance under this Agreement. Contractor shall also carry Workers' Compensation Insurance in accordance with State Workers' Compensation laws and professional errors and omissions liability insurance. Such insurance shall be kept in effect during the term of this Agreement and shall not be cancelable without thirty (30) days' written notice of proposed cancellation to the City. The insurance policy shall contain a severability of interest clause providing that the coverage shall be primary for losses arising out of Contractor's performance hereunder and neither the City nor its insurers shall be required to contribute to any such loss. A certificate evidencing the foregoing and naming the City and its officers and employees as additional insureds as to the Contractor's liability hereunder shall be delivered to and approved by the City prior to commencement of the services hereunder. The procuring of such insurance or the delivery of policies or certificates evidencing the same shall not be construed as a limitation of Contractor's obligation to indemnify the City, its Contractors or employees. The amount of insurance required hereunder shall be the following: $500,000 per individual; $1,000,000 per occurrence. B. Indemnification. The Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, representatives and agents, from and against any and all actions, suits, proceedings, claims, demands, losses, costs, and expenses, including legal costs and attorneys' fees, for injury to or death of person(s), for damage to property (including property owned by the City) and for errors and omissions committed by Contractor, its officers, employees and agents, arising directly or indirectly out of or related to Contractor's negligent or wrongful performance and to 2 118 007 the extent of the Contractor's negligent or wrongful performance under this Agreement, except to the extent of such loss as may be caused by the City's own negligence or wrongfulness or that of its officers or employees. C. Remedies. In addition to any other remedies the City may have, if Contractor fails to provide or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, at its sole option: 1) . Order the Contractor to stop work under this Agreement and/or withhold any payment(s) which become due to Contractor hereunder until Contractor demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof. 2). Terminate this Agreement. Exercise of any of the above remedies, however, is an alternative to any other remedies the City may have and are not the exclusive remedies for Contractor's failure to maintain or secure appropriate policies or endorsements. Nothing herein contained shall be construed as limiting in any way the extent to which Contractor may be held responsible for payments of damages to persons or property resulting from Contractor's or its subContractors' performance of work under this Agreement. 7. The AGREEMENT is not assignable without written consent of the parties hereto. 8. Contractor shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulations, and ordinances including workers' compensation. 9. Contractor, if an employee of another public agency, certifies that contractor will not receive salary or remuneration, other than vacation pay, as an employee of another public agency for the actual time in which services are actually being performed pursuant to this AGREEMENT. 10. The term of the AGREEMENT may be extended, at the City's option, for up to two additional 30-day time periods, by the City Manager. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this AGREEMENT to be executed. K CONTRACTOR: BERRYMAN & HENIGAR by: Roy F. Stephenson, P.E. address: 2001 East First St. Santa Ana, CA 92705-4020 Federal ID or Social Security No.: Date: 0 CITY: CITY OF LA QUINTA by: Thomas P. Genovese 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Date: December 4, 2001 Approved Date: 120 on9 AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: Approve, receive and file the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, 2001 (Attachment 1). FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: At the end of every fiscal year, the City prepares an audited financial report. This year the City prepared a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, in accordance with Government Accounting Standards Board No. 34, for the year ended June 30, 2001. Mr. Ken Ali-Iman, CPA and Auditing Partner of Conrad and Associates, is prepared to make a brief presentation of the report's highlights and answer any questions. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1 . Approve, receive and file the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, 2001; or 2. Do not approve, receive and file the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, 2001; or 121 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, Jo n M. Falconer F' ance Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese City Manager Attachment: 1. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, 2001 122 44V60 �0 0 CITY OF LA QUINTA La Quinta, California 1 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 1 Year Ended June 30, 2001 [1 1 1 1 I I I CITY OF LA QUINTA La Quinta, California ' Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year ended June 30, 2001 ' [1 Prepared by FINANCE DEPARTMENT JOHN M.FALCONER Director of Finance (This page intentionally left blank) ' CITY OF LA QUINTA ' Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year ended June 30, 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ' INTRODUCTORY SECTION Letter of Transmittal i ' List of Principal Officials x Organizational Chart xi Certificate of Award for Outstanding Financial Reporting (CSMFO) xii tCertificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting (GFOA) xiii ' FINANCIAL SECTION Independent Auditors' Report 1 Management's Discussion and Analysis (Required Supplementary Information) 3 Basic Financial Statements: e Government -wide Financial Statements: Statement of Net Assets 16 Statement of Activities 17 1 Fund Financial Statements: Governmental Funds: Balance Sheet 18 Reconciliation of the Balance Sheet of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Net Assets 20 ' Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 22 Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities 24 ' Proprietary Fund: Statement of Net Assets 25 Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Assets 26 Statement of Cash Flows 27 Fiduciary Funds: Statement of Fiduciary Assets and Liabilities — Agency Funds 28 CITY OF LA QUINTA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year ended June 30, 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS, (Continued) Page FINANCIAL SECTION, (Continued) Notes to the Basic Financial Statements 29 REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notes to Required Supplementary Information 71 Budgetary Comparison Schedules: General Fund 72 Low/Moderate Income Housing Project Area No. 2 Fund 74 SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES: Non -Major Governmental Funds: Combining Balance Sheet 76 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expe_ nditures and Changes in Fund Balance 80 Non -Major Special Revenue Funds: Budgetary Comparison Schedules: State Gas Tax Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 86 Federal Assistance Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 87 Lighting and Landscape Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 88 State Law Enforcement Block Grant (SLEBG): Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 89 Quimby Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 90 CITY OF LA QUINTA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year ended June 30, 2001 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS, (Continued) 1 page Public Safety Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 91 Village Parking Fund: ' Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 92 South Coast Air Quality Fund: ISchedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 93 ' Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG): Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 94 Low/Moderate Income Housing Project Area No. I Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 95 Low/Moderate Bond — Project Area No. 1 Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 96 Low/Moderate Bond — Project Area No. 2 Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 97 Major and Non -Major Debt Service Funds: Budgetary Comparison Schedules: Financing Authority Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 100 Redevelopment Agency Project Area No. I Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund 1 Balances — Budget and Actual 101 CITY OF LA QUINTA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year ended June 30, 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS, (Continued) Page Redevelopment Agency Project Area No. 2 Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 102 Major and Non -Major Capital Projects Funds: Budgetary Comparison Schedules: Infrastructure Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 104 Capital Improvement Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 105 Transportation Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 106 Parks and Recreation Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 107 Civic Center Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 108 Library Development Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 109 Community Center Fund:. Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 110 Street Facility Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual ill CITY OF LA QUINTA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year ended June 30, 2001 I TABLE OF CONTENTS, (Continued) 1 Page Park Facility Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 112 Assessment District 97-1 La Quinta Norte Construction Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 113 Assessment District 2001-1 Phase VI Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 114 Financing Authority Capital Projects Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 115 Redevelopment Agency Project Area No. 1 Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual 116 Redevelopment Agency Project Area No. 2 Fund: Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances — Budget and Actual Funds: 117 Agency Combining Balance Sheet 120 Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities 122 Capital Assets Used in the Operation of Governmental Funds: Schedule by Source 126 Schedule by Function and Activity 127 Schedule of Changes by Function and Activity 128 1 lJ LI CITY OF LA QUINTA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year ended June 30, 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS, (Continued) STATISTICAL SECTION General Fund Expenditures by Function General Fund Revenue by Source Property Tax Levies and Collections Schedule of Net Taxable Value Property Tax Rates - Direct and Overlapping Governments Special Assessment Billings and Collections Schedule of Direct and Overlapping Bonded Debt Computation of Legal Debt Margin Revenue Bond Coverage Demographic Statistics Property Value, Construction Activity, and Bank Deposits Principal Taxpayers Major Employers Schedule of Insurance in Force Miscellaneous Statistical Data General Fund Balance Trends Table No. Page 1 130 2 131 3 132 4 133 5 134 6 135 7 136 8 137 9 138 10 139 11 140 12 141 13 142 14 -143 15 144 16 145 I t k P.O. Box 1504 78-495 CALLS TAMPICO (760) 777-7000 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 FAX (760) 777-7101 November 20, 2001 Honorable Mayor, City Council, and City Manager City of La Quinta La Quinta, California FY 2000-01 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL The Fiscal year 2001 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) differs significantly from prior year CAFR reports. This year's CAFR incorporates the financial and reporting requirements of Government Accounting Standards Board Pronouncement No. 34 — The New Financial Reporting Model. The City has elected early implementation of this accounting pronouncement, which in its most elementary terms attempts to present the financial position and activities of a government organization on a basis comparable to a for- profit organization. We want to thank the City Council for their support in early implementation of this pronouncement; our Certified Public Accountants, Conrad & Associates, for their knowledge and expertise; our infrastructure consultants, Conrad Business Services for their valuation services; and other Departments, particularly the Public Works Department, for their infrastructure data. We are pleased to present the 2001 CAFR of the City of La Quinta to the City Council and the City Manager. This report includes financial statements of the: ® City of La Quinta; • La Quinta Redevelopment Agency; and, • La Quinta Financing Authority. Our independent auditors, Conrad & Associates have expressed their opinion as to the fairness of these financial statements. The completion of the independent audit is an important part of the total financial management program for the City of La Quinta. The information found in this report is provided by management to the Council and the public to assist those interested in understanding the fiscal condition of the City as of June 30, 2001. Responsibility for both the accuracy of the data, its completeness and its fairness of presentation, including all disclosures rests with the City. To the best of our knowledge and belief, the enclosed data is accurate in all material respects and is reported in a manner designed to present fairly the financial position and results of operations of the various funds of the City of La Quinta. All disclosures necessary to enable this reader to gain an understanding of the government's financial activities have been included. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and City Manager Document Structure The CAFR is presented in three sections: • Introductory; Financial; and, Statistical. The introductory section includes this transmittal letter, the City s organizational chart, a list of principal officials, and awards for excellence in financial reporting. The financial section consists of the audit opinion, management's discussion and analysis of the financial statements and footnotes, and required supplementary information. The statistical section includes selected financial and demographic information, generally on a multi -year basis. The following governmental agencies that provide services to the citizens of the City of La Quinta have been excluded from this report because the City does not have financial accountability over these agencies: State of California and its departments, County of Riverside and its departments, Coachella Valley Association of Governments, Riverside County Transportation Commission, Riverside County Waste Management District, Desert Sands Unified School District, County Superintendent of Schools, Coachella Valley Unified School District, Desert Community College District, Mosquito Abatement District, and Coachella Valley Water District, Sunline Transit, Pahn Springs Desert Resorts Convention and Visitors Authority, and the Desert Regional Resorts Airport Authority. Background The City of La Quints is located 120 miles east of Los Angeles in the eastern portion of Riverside County known as the Coachella Valley. The City motto is "The Gem of the Desert". The City is governed by a five member City Council under the Council/Manager form of government. The Mayor is directly elected by the citizens. The City was originally incorporated in 1982 as a general law City and it became a charter City in November 1996. Significant 10-year demographic data is as follows: • Population as of January 1, 2001 was 26,300, an increase of 135% from 1990. • Retail Sales of $235 million, a 580% increase from 1990; • Taxable Sales of $295 million, a 341 % increase from 1990; • Assessed Valuation of $3.194 billion, a 149% increase from 1990; and, • Hotel Room sales over $39.6 million, a 98% increase from 1990. The City area includes the beautiful La Quinta Hotel, several world class golf resorts, numerous single family and multi -dwelling units and light commercial industries. The City has a beautiful 10,000 sq. ft Senior Center for City residents. The Desert Sands Unified School District provides educational opportunities for school -age children in La Quinta. ii Honorable Mayor, City Council, and City Manager The City has been experiencing rapid growth in population. During 2000, the population grew 12.7%, making it one of the fastest growing cities in California. With this growth comes a demand on local government to meet the needs of its citizens. The total number of full time authorized positions for 2000-2001 is 72.75. In addition to the 26,300 permanent residents, approximately 12,600 seasonal residents spend three to six months in the City. Services Provided by the City City services can be divided into those services provided directly by City staff and those services contracted out or provided by other government agencies and organizations. Direct services provided by City staff in the following areas include: General Government City Clerk - Legislative - City Clerk - City Manager - Economic Development Community Services - Personnel - Administration Finance - Fiscal Services - Central Services Building and Safety - Administration - Code Compliance - Animal Control - Building - Emergency Services - Fire - Civic Center Building Public Works - Administration - Development/Traffic - Street & Landscape Maintenance - Capital Projects - Recreation - Senior Center Community Development - Administration - Planning - South Coast Air Quality - Redevelopment iii Honorable Mayor, City Council, and City Manager Services are also provided to the City and its citizens by contract and by the direct services of other government agencies and organizations. These services include police and fire protection through the County of Riverside, library services through the County of Riverside, visitor & tourist information through Palm Springs Desert Resorts Convention Visitors Authority, City promotion through the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce, water service through the Coachella Valley Water District, electricity service through the Imperial Irrigation District, refuse collection through Waste Management Company, public transit through Sunline Transit Agency, and cable service through Time Warner. Signiticant Events and Accomplishments During 2000-01 the City experienced many significant events and accomplishments that may not be readily evident from a review of the financial statements. Some of the more important of these items are: Real Estate Single family construction accounted for $258 million in building permits while multifamily construction totaled $12 million last year. La Quinta issued $1.26 billion worth of building permits during the last ten years, averaging over $126 million per year. In 2000, construction increased 21% to over $304 million, a record for annual construction in the City. Three auto dealers have opened at the Centre in La Quinta and an additional six -dealership pads, plus 400,000 square feet of retail, have been approved by the City. Several other large commercial projects are moving forward, including Jefferson Plaza, a 218,000 square foot retail center, Washington Square, a 775,000 square foot retail center, and La Quinta Court, a specialty shopping center on Highway 111 anchored by high -end grocery and restaurant services. Other large commercial projects include Point Happy, anchored by two restaurants under development, and approval for a 110,000 square foot shopping center. The La Quinta Corporate Center, including a 160-room hotel with restaurant, has been approved, and a new World Gym and light industrial buildings are under construction. The development of quality residential communities, including PGA West, Rancho La Quinta and the Traditions has increased the assessed valuation of the City. Several other large projects have been approved and are moving forward. Since 1990, assessed valuations have grown to $3.19 billion in 2000. In the last decade, assessed values have increased 149%, substantially higher than the region's growth rate of 53%. Housing La Quinta has housing that ranges from the affordable to luxury estates. The median home prices in La Quinta have been relatively stable and are significantly lower than other areas of the Coachella Valley mostly due to the reasonably priced land values and available housing inventory. iv ' Honorable Mayor, City Council, and City Manager ' The U.S. Census has established the median home price at $140,000, which is lower than averages for San Diego and Los Angeles Counties and the State of California. ' There were 1,381 housing units built during 2001, which brings the number of total units within the City to 13,522. The 13,522 units consist of 10,252 detached single family residences, 2326 attached single family residences, 697 multi family residences, and 247 mobile homes. Tourism La Quinta is well known for its many championship golf courses. The City is home to 16 championship courses, and many more are in the planning or development stages. In addition to quantity, La Quinta has some of the highest rated courses in the world of golf. Various golf tournaments, including the prestigious Bob Hope Chrysler Classic, are exposing La Quinta internationally as a quality destination and golf resort area. The nationally recognized La Quinta Arts Festival attracts many visitors from around the country each year to the City of La Quinta and the Coachella Valley. Hotel room sales in La Quinta enjoyed dramatic growth to a record $40 million in 2000. The La Quinta Hotel, the second largest destination resort in the Coachella Valley, was the largest contributor to this increase. The City increased funding for the Palm Springs Desert Resort Convention Bureau for tourism promotion and increased funding for marketing services. Capital Improvements The City completed over $12 million in capital improvements during 2000-01. Projects completed or nearing 1 completion include the Washington Street Bridge, Phase 1 Jefferson Street improvements, completion of various road median projects, City Entrance Monuments, and several park and recreation improvement projects. Several significant projects are continuing, including museum expansion, Village/Cove neighborhood improvements, Civic Center Campus development, and several park and recreation capital projects. The City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) continues to increase to meet the demands of growth, and totals $47.2 million for the 2001-2002 program. This major commitment in infrastructure will continue to provide for both the current and future growth that the City has experienced. Community Facilities The City completed the design phase of the museum expansion project. Phase I construction of the Community Park and design for a new library are also in process, and continue to enhance community facilities available to La Quinta residents. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and City Manager City Operations The following is a partial listing of the accomplishments made by City staff to the citizens of La Quinta for 2000-2001: Initiated a Geographic Information System (GIS) traffic analysis program, continued development of GIS data base for city-wide planning, and obtained aerial photos of City boundaries and planning areas for GIS ; Implemented an enhanced promotional program, including "City in Progress" ad campaign, supporting local businesses; Implemented an improved Optical Imaging system for document storage and record retrieval; Received several grant awards for public safety, tire recycling and bicycle lanes; Received awards in excellence for financial and budget reports; Implemented upgrades in management information services, including additional servers, enhanced security, and improvements in City web site; Completed on and off -site improvements, and Phase I of the Redevelopment Agency housing project on Avenue 48, and initiated the second housing project on Avenue 48; Continued update of General Plan and Housing Element, and completed the first draft of City's Design Standards for development and traffic. Future developments Include: continued commercial development along the Highway I I I corridor, redevelopment financed property development on Avenue 48 and completion of residential projects in the northern part of the City. Financial Information GASB 34 requires a separate "matter of fact" discussion of the City's financial condition that can be found in the required supplementary information section entitled "Management Discussion and Analysis (MDA)". The operating results for the City of La Quinta for FY 2000/01 were very good and our financial condition is the strongest since incorporation. The City will be faced with future funding challenges that will require a dedicated effort to fulftll our economic development plan to garner new and additional revenues. Management believes that the following items will impact future budgets of the City of La Quinta that will have to be addressed with future revenues or the use of our reserves: The need for additional police services — As the population grows the City will be faced with the need to add additional public safety officers. The need for additional fire services — Coupled with the growth in population and the desire by fire professionals to have three and four person crews, the City will need to address the need for additional fire service resources. The need for a third fire station — The City has two fire stations and the City has made a commitment to build and maintain a third fire station in the north part of the City. The need to fund additional landscaping costs — As a result of Proposition 218, the City has been limited on the vi I Honorable Mayor, City Council, ' and City Manager use of City -Wide Lighting and Landscape Assessment District funding. The City has continued to add additional ' street medians, has plans for a Civic Center Campus, and plans for an 18 acre lighted park that will require funds to maintain. The need to pay for the operations of additional public facilities — In the five year Capital Improvement Plan the City has plans to build a municipal library, expand the museum, and expand City Hall. The following paragraphs outline several of the major polices of the City and attempt to supplement and not supplant the MDA which can be found later in this report. ' Management of the City of La Quinta is responsible for establishing and maintaining a framework of internal controls designed to ensure that assets of the City are protected from loss, theft, or misuse and to ensure that adequate accounting data are compiled to allow for the preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. The framework of internal controls is designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that these objectives are met. The concept of reasonable assurance recognizes that: ' (1) the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits likely to be derived; and (2) the valuation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgments by management. Accounting Controls - The City of La Quinta's accounting system is designed upon the following principles: In the public sector, a city government maintains a variety of "funds" that provide the basis for separately recording the financial data related to a specific activity. A fund is an accounting entity with a complete set of self -balancing accounting records. Each fund has been established because of some restriction on the use of the resources received by that fund. In the private sector, a corporation may have many subsidiaries that make up the parent corporation. Likewise in the public sector, all of the funds make up the complete financial resources of the City of La Quinta. This report includes the transactions of all entities over which the City Council of the City of La Quinta has authority (as defined by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board). The City's accounting system operates on a modified accrual basis of accounting for all governmental and agency type funds. Governmental funds include the General, Special Revenue, Debt Service, and Capital Projects Funds. Under the modified accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recorded when received in cash or accrued when they are both measurable and collectible within the accounting period or soon enough after the end of the period to pay liabilities of the period. Expenditures, other than interest or long term debt, are recorded when liabilities are incurred. At year end, the City has prepared the required entries necessary to report the City financial position and activities on an accrual basis of accounting which recognizes revenues when earned and expenses when incurred. The City maintains one Internal Service Fund and no Enterprise Funds. These types of funds use the accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recorded when earned and expenses when incurred. ' In addition to maintaining funds to record accounting transactions, internal controls exist within the accounting system to ensure the safety of assets from misappropriation, unauthorized use or disposition, and to maintain the accuracy of financial record keeping. These internal controls must be established consistent with sound management practices based upon the cost/benefit of the controls imposed. The cost of a control should not be excessive to its derived benefit as viewed by City management. The internal controls in existence at the City ' of La Quinta are sufficient to ensure, in all material respects, both the safety of the City's assets and the accuracy of the financial record keeping system. vii Honorable Mayor, City Council, and City Manager Budgetary Controls - The City Manager submits a preliminary budget to the City Council before each fiscal year. Public hearings are then held prior to July 1 to receive public comment. A budget is required to be adopted before the beginning of the fiscal year. Amendments to the budget or budget transfers between funds require Council approval. Budget transfers within funds require City Manager approval. The City also maintains an encumbrance system as one budget technique. All fiscal year end appropriations and encumbrances lapse at year end unless specifically approved by the Council for inclusion in the following year's appropriations. Each Department receives a monthly budget -to -actual expenditure report. In addition, each department can access on-line budgetary data from the financial information system available throughout the City-wide computer network. The City Council is also given an Executive level Summary of Revenues and Expenditures on a monthly basis. Gann Limit - Appropriations Subject to the Limit - In 1979, Proposition 4, the "Gann" initiative, was passed by the voters of California. The purpose of this law was to limit government spending by putting a cap on the total proceeds of taxes that may be appropriated each year. This limit is increased each year through a formula that takes into consideration changes in the Consumer Price Index and state per -capita income. If a city reaches this limit, excess tax revenue must be returned to the State or citizens through a process of refunds, rebates, or other means that may be defined at that time. The Gann Limit for the City of La Quinta has increased steadily since 1979 and still provides the City with a comfortable operating margin. Risk Management - The California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) was formed in 1997 under a joint exercise of powers agreement between local governments for the purpose of jointly funding programs of insurance under Section 990 of the California Government Code. The Authority is governed by a Board of Directors, which is composed of one director from each member organization which maintains membership in the Liability program. The City of La Quinta joined the CJPIA in order to achieve long-term premium stability. Each member city must remain in the pool for three years. Each year, the self -insured pool undergoes a retrospective deposit computation based on current incurred loss valuations. Appropriate adjustments are then made over a three-year period. The likelihood of the need for excess premiums is remote given the claims history of the cities involved and the length of time necessary to settle large claims. Generally, individual claims in excess of the self -insured amount for workers compensation and general liability fall under the insurance policies purchased by the City. The CJPIA provides for liability insurance coverage with a maximum of $50,000,000 per claim. All reserves are invested and earnings are credited to members in proportion to their equity. At present, the CJPIA has invested reserves in excess of $100,000,000. City Retirement Costs - The City is a member of the California Public Employers Retirement System (PERS). Employer contribution rates are reviewed and adjusted annually to achieve full funding for retirement benefits by the year 2011. Cash Management - The City Council annually adopts an investment policy that is intended to provide the highest investment return with the maximum security while meeting the daily cash flow demands of the City and conforming to all state and local statutes governing the investment of public funds. At all times there was compliance with the City's investment policy, and safety and liquidity objectives were placed above rates of return considerations in making deposits and investments. Honorable Mayor, City Council, and City Manager Certificate of Award for Outstanding Financial Reporting The California Society of Municipal Finance Officers (CSMFO) and the Government Financial Officers Association (GFOA) both present an annual Certificate of Award for Outstanding Financial Reporting. We believe that our current report conforms to their program requirements and we are submitting this report to their ' organizations for consideration. If received, the Certificates are valid for one year only. The City has received the GFOA and CSMFO awards in prior years and are hopeful that these statements continue to receive these ' awards. Acknowledgments ' This report could not have been accomplished without the dedicated services of the Finance Department staff. Recognition is given to Amy Swan -Draper, Accounting Manager for her efforts in preparing the introductory ' and financial sections, Vianka Orrantia, Secretary for her report preparation skills and Sharon Christensen, Misaela Mendoza, Diane Martin and Pat Parker for their diligence in processing most of the transactions reported upon in the financial section of this report. Again, we also appreciate the City Manager and City Council for providing the resources necessary to prepare this report and for their role in preserving the Citys framework of internal controls and again wish to express our appreciate for the efforts of the Conrad & Associates, CPA's audit team, for their professionalism in conducting the annual audit for the City of La Quinta. Respe fully submitted, ohn M. Falcone no Finance Director and Treasurer 1 1 ' is City of La Quinta Directory of Officials June 30, 2001 CITY COUNCIL John Pefia, Mayor Stanley Sniff, Mayor Pro Tern Terry Henderson, Council Member Don Adolph, Council Member Ronald Perkins, Council Member ADMINISTRATION Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Mark Weiss, Assistant City Manager John M. Falconer, Finance Director Tom Hartung, Building & Safety Director Jerry Herman, Community Development Director Kathy Jenson, City Attorney Dodie Horvitz, Community Services Director June Greek, City Clerk Chris Vogt, Public Works Director/City Engineer r 1 1 p 1 1 1 1 C GI 1 1 1 1 i CS`d Sg c� . C �pc�N M166 Q U o h $- W _ C 9 U U D m Up O A 9 N N c U � am Bw N v C ON �Qc i Lo��Y9c N� c n'O �NLy&$j d n Ea n i ¢C � �OIU C_ LL .� OC`•NQ T>n U N S O m LL rc x U i i AEEOO m4 q$�qd$a�o �2•iC_q:- 3 UU� Ec �9n9rvs ^��p jQ dN �yi n f C C p6 d �N 3 'H 3 U g� :.d�' -�N EEry bN3p Y1N-g££ a -Ne- -tg� €pd Uc�Byc [b mm m'a4 'pmc a N �jG BVma¢V -C9�CpC, �33 CCV Ep9E mymm��uffi ouLL � pp °a`rnna `0 9 c�N 'cw Wcd�gn iww OZ 'ac�g8 Eo3 �3�yyyyy'mdA°33 y yy �lY�� C�� dc�u� E 5Sc Eal 1 xi U A t r b a a p" i O O N N E F, xii I 1 1 1 1 C 1 1 1 1 Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Presented to City of La Quinta, California For its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2000 A Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting is presented by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada to government units and public employee retirement systems whose comprehensive annual financial reports (CAFRs) achieve the highest standards in government accounting and financial reporting. cF ovok VID sn �s UD a Cor 4PTdent CMCAO YoExecut!XveQpDl(irfector. 1 (This page intentionally left blank) I 1 11 1 1 1 [1 CONRAD AND ASSOCIATES, L.L.P. The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of La Quinta La Quinta, California Independent Auditors' Report CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 1100 MAIN STREET, SUITE C IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614 (949) 474-2020 Fax (949) 263-5520 We have audited the accompanying basic financial statements of the City of La Quinta, California as of and for the year ended June 30, 2001, as listed in the accompanying table of contents. These basic financial statements are the responsibility of the management of the City of La Quinta, California. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these basic financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance, with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the basic financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the City of La Quinta, California as of June 30, 2001, and the results of its operations and the cash flows of its proprietary fund types for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. As discussed further in the notes to the basic financial statements, the accompanying financial statements reflect certain changes in the presentation of financial data required as a result of the implementation of GASB Statement No. 33 and 34 for the year ended June 30, 2001. The information identified in the accompanying table of contents as management's discussion and analysis and required supplementary information is not a required part of the basic financial statements but is supplementary information required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. We have applied certain limited procedures, which consisted principals of inquiries of management regarding the methods of measurement and presentation of the supplementary information. However, we did not audit the information and express no opinion on it. Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules listed in the table of contents are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements of the City of La Quinta, California. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements, and in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The scope of our audit did not include the statistical schedules listed in the table of contents and we do not express an opinion on them. MEMBERS OF AICPA AND CALIFORNIA SOCIETY OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS MEMBER OF AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS PRIVATE COMPANIES PRACTICE SECTION In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued a report dated August 17, 2001 on our consideration of the City's internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grants. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be read in conjunction with this report in considering the results of our audit. August 17, 2001 2 Management Discussion and Analvsis The Management Discussion and Analysis (MDA) is intended to provide the reader of the statements with a concise analysis of the financial results and financial position of the City of La Quinta. The New Reoortine Model ' The impact of the new reporting model on the financial statements constitutes the biggest change in the way governmental activities have previously been reported. We have to return to the original "blue book" in the mid 1980's to recall such a major change in the ' accounting and reporting of governmental activities. Overall, we believe that from a financial reporting standpoint, the preparation of this document was one of the most challenging for the governmental accounting profession. As will be discussed later in ' detail, most discussion on the new reporting model has focused on infrastructure reporting. While time consuming and tedious, to our surprise this area did not have the challenges involved that accounting for revenues under Government Accounting ' Standards Board (GASB) 33 and accounting for advances between the City and the Redevelopment Agency had. Two new statements have been presented entitled the Statement of Net Assets and Statement of Activities. The purpose of the Statement of Net Assets is to report on the financial and capital resources for all governmental funds in a single statement. The ' purpose of the Statement of Activities is to report on the activity of the government's operations and is presented in a format that reports the net (expense)/revenue of its various functions. ' In addition, the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet and Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances have been classified into major and non - major funds. These major and non -major funds are determined based upon criteria set forth by the GASB. The GASB believed that this major and non -major classification allows the reader to review the significant funds in one report rather than have the reader ' determine what is a major fund and what is non -major. Executive Summary The operating results for the City of La Quinta for FY 2000/01 were very good and our financial condition is the strongest since incorporation. ' As a fast growing municipality, the City of La Quinta has been able to add to its general reserves with both increases in develop related activities and on -going taxes and fees for ' FY 2000/01. The future challenge will be to insure that these reserves and the on -going taxes and fees will meet the demands for public services that a community at build out will require. 1 1-, 3 Background In this MDA section, the Finance Director departs from the past, which required a "just present the reader with the facts" approach and enters into the future with a requirement to "tell it like it is". The analysis also is required to convey the financial results with an element of subjectivity. This subjectivity is based upon the Finance Director's knowledge of the City's "business cycle" and the possible economic factors that may impact the City. The Government Accounting Standards Board is the rule making body that promulgates or sets the accounting rules: This rule making body is slowly but surely moving toward a standard of accounting based upon the full accrual basis of accounting, which is required for for -profit companies. To accomplish this move toward a full accrual basis of accounting, many of the government accounting software providers are incorporating features that will generate two separate sets of statements. One set is produced on the modified accrual basis of accounting and the other on the full accrual basis of accounting. The intent of this software is to capture the data throughout the year necessary to push a button at the end of the year and print out a statement based upon the modified accrual basis of accounting and another statement based upon the full accrual basis of accounting. The City accounting system is based upon the modified basis of accounting throughout the year. Once a year, at year-end, the City prepares memo entries to convert the modified basis of accounting throughout the year to the full accrual basis of accounting. This conversion is prepared on a spreadsheet program and is given to our outside auditors. No formal entries are entered into the accounting system to convert to the accrual basis of accounting. Management believes this less formal conversion process is simpler, more flexible and less costly for the City of La Quinta. You may be asking yourself how significant is the change in the two reporting methods? The following table summarizes the differences: Description Modified Accrual Accrual Change Assets 99,767,266 393,307,247 293,539,981 Liabilities 32,397,271 99,749,971 67,352,700 Revenues 59,900,606 52,338,164 (7,562,442) Expenditures 54,546,974 27,841,749 (26,705,225) Fund Balance/Net Assets 67,369,995 293,557,276 226,187,281 Revenues over expenditures 5,353,632 24,496,415 19,142,783 It is apparent that the change in accounting methods dramatically changes the way the reader of the financial statements interprets the financial condition and operations of the City. Management will attempt to present the reader with an analysis that is simpler to understand and draws distinctions between the two accounting methods where possible. 4 ' The GASB requires that governmental agencies provide two years worth of financial information so that the reader will be able to draw comparisons on the results of ' operations and the financial position from year to year. Recognizing the additional efforts required under this new reporting requirement, GASB has allowed municipalities the option of reporting only a single year's worth of information in the first year of ' implementation. The City of La Quinta has exercised this one-year option. Accordingly, since only one year's worth of data is presented, this year's MDA will not reflect prior years' data. Management will, therefore, limit its discussions of prior year's events to ' more historical terms and will not present charts with data. Assets ' The following chart lists a condensed Statement of Net Assets for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2001. In future years, this chart will contain a current to previous year tcomparison. CITY OF LA QUINTA ' Condensed Statement of Net Assets Governmental ' Activities 2001 Current and other assets $ 83,113,424 ' Capital assets 310,193,823 Total assets 393,307,247 Current and other liabilities 6,975,872 ' Long term liabilities 92,774,099 Total liabilities 99,749,971 Net assets ' Investment in capital assets, net of related debt 217,419,724 ' Restricted 45,438,930 Unrestricted 30,698,622 Total net assets $ 293,557,276 Employees The most important asset of the City of La Quinta is its employees. While not quantified on the books, the City has 72.75 authorized full time equivalent positions to provide the services required by the community. 1 1 5 Cash and Investments The City of La Quinta has cash and investments on hand to meet both immediate and long-term needs. The City Finance Director -serves as the Treasurer and is appointed by the City Manager. The City has a seven member Investment Advisory Board. It is appointed by the City Council and meets monthly to review the Treasurer's Report and provide valuable assistance to the Treasurer on current trends and topics in this area, as well as annually reviewing the Investment Policy. The City has a conservative investment policy, which is more restrictive than the policy limitations set forth in 53601 of the Government Code of the State of California. The Treasurer is required to prepare a monthly Treasurer's Report that certifies that he/she believes that the City has, to the best of its ability, the cash to meet its obligations for the next six months. During FY 00/01, the City has met this six- month liquidity requirement. In addition, the City has a two-year (730-day) limitation on the maximum maturity of our investments and has a buy/hold investment strategy, which does not promote actively selling securities before their maturity, except for liquidity purposes. During FY 00/01, the City did not sell an investment before maturity. Therefore, the financial statements do not report any gains or losses on investments. The following table lists the earnings rates and average maturity of the portfolio: Summary of FY 00/01 Interest Rates/Eamings Month 6 Month Benchmark (°/u) Average Maturity Days Pool Interest Rate (%) Fiscal Agent Interest Rate (°/u) Total Rate All Earnings (°/n) July 2000 6.28 220 6.37 6.17 6.31 August 6.38 232 6.43 6.11 6.35 September 6.26 231 6.34 5.92 6.25 October - 6.33 209 6.34 6.20 6.31 November 6.32 181 6.46 6.20 6.40 December 5.74 156 6.46 5.97 6.38 January 2001 5.03 124 6.36 5.03 6.04 February 4.66 110 6.31 5.06 6.08 March 4.27 101 5.95 4.82 5.79 April 3.79 80 5.86 4.10 5.53 May 3.55 76 5.20 3.60 4.96 June 2001 3.34 65 4.98 3.50 4.70 Average 1 5.16 1 19 6.09 1 5.22. 1 5.93 Ending cash balances -June 30, 2001 $73,532,907 Total Interest Earnings for the year $5,135,466 During FY 00/01, interest rates dropped throughout the year with an inverted yield curve. 1 The average maturity of the portfolio was shortened to take advantage of the higher 1 yields on shorter -term investments. The Treasurer exceeded the benchmark 6 month Treasury Bill rate in 9 of the 12 twelve months and overall for the year. Interest earned on all funds totaled $5.1 million and the total portfolio at year-end increased to $73.5 million. ' Receivables/Advances to Other Funds The City of La Quinta does not have large receivable balances. We do not have any enterprise activities such as a water or sewer department, which typically generate receivable balances. One of the interesting impacts of GASB 34 is the accounting for advances to and from other funds which will be discussed in greater depth under the Advances from other funds section of the MDA. The City has advanced funds to the City Redevelopment Agency to promote economic activities within its boundary areas. The advances have no specified due date and accrue interest at 10% per year. The intent is to repay these advances with interest before the expiration of the Redevelopment Project Area Plan in approximately thirty years. In addition, an outstanding advance from the General Fund to the Capital Projects Fund for Public Improvements near Adams St and Hwy 111 has been made. The outstanding balance as of June 30, 2001 is $ 12,024,009. Under GASB 34 these advances to and from other funds have been eliminated from the Statement of Net Assets. Capital Assets ' The most debated topic of the new reporting model is the recording of fixed assets including the City infrastructure assets and accumulated depreciation. The primary ' purpose of including infrastructure assets in the financial statements is to report the total amount of improvements and the amount that these assets have been depreciated. At year-end, General Fixed Assets were 28% depreciated, Internal Service assets were 5 1 % 1 depreciated and infrastructure improvements were 57.5% depreciated. The higher depreciation percentage indicates that the assets are older and will require accelerated future expenditures in the future to replace aging assets. Last year, the City recorded its fixed assets, except for internal service assets, in the General Fixed Asset Group of Accounts and did not depreciate these assets. This year, ' the assets have been included in the Statement of Net Assets and have been depreciated. The City has an internal service fund for the replacement of equipment and major capital items such as the roofs and air conditioners in the City Hall and Senior Center. In ' addition to the general fixed assets, such as buildings, parks, computers and internal service assets, the City has included its infrastructure assets in the Statement of Net Assets. Infrastructure assets included in the Statement of Net Assets were City ' maintained streets, street medians, curb and gutter, traffic signals, sidewalks, bridges, art- work, sound walls, bike paths, storm drains and retention basins. Infrastructure assets not included in the Statement of Net Assets were the construction costs of State Highway ' 111, private streets — generally behind gates, and public water, sewer, electricity, gas and cable utilities maintained by others. Infrastructure assets, except for land, have been depreciated to reflect a net infrastructure amount. In addition to the fixed assets and ' infrastructure assets, capital assets also include construction in progress. Under the 1 7 modified accrual basis of accounting, the costs of these construction projects have previously been expenditures and not reported in the Statement of Net Assets. Under the new reporting model, these costs have been reported in the Statement of Assets. Projects still in progress at year-end included the Phase 1 Jefferson Street project, Assessment District 2000-1 improvements including the Village, the Civic Center Project, and the Miraflores Housing and Apartment Project. The following chart details the fixed assets, infrastructure assets, and construction in progress as of the end of the fiscal year: CITY OF LA QUINTA Fixed Assets and Construction in Progress 2001 Accumulated Depreciated Type - Life years Total Depreciation Remaining Percent Fixed Assets Land N/A $14,904,131 N/A $14,904,131 General Fixed Assets 5.30 15,795,890 4,478,852 11,359,999 28.35% Internal Service Fixed Assets 3-15 1,451,036 739,501 711,535 50.96% 32,151,057 5,218,353 26,975,665 Right of Way (ROW) N/A 228,992,358 N/A 228,992,358 Art in Public Places N/A 1,018,163 N/A 1,018,163 Subtotal 230,010,521 N/A 230,010,521 Street Pavement 20-25 44,982,465 34,179,428 10,803,037 Curbs/Gutters 50 6,969,878 2,390,746 4,579,132 Sidewalks 20 5,080,051 4,210,166 869,885 Median 50 5,193,405 1,373,020 3,820,385 Parking Medians 50 21,301 8,094 13,207 Bridges 35 9,933,145 1,508,311 8,424,834 Traffic Signals 20 3,947,342 1,033,242 2,814,100 Bike Paths 20 642,304 199,797 442,507 Sound Wall 20 74,200 3,710 70,490 Retention Basin 10 957,019 730,456 226,563 Storm Drains 50 2,028,035 229,452 1,798,583 79,729,145 45,866,422 33,862,723 57.53% 309,739,666 45,866,422 263,873,244 Construction in Progress 19,387,875 $310,193,823 Total Liabilities ' The City of La Quinta has incurred both short and long term debt. Most readers are familiar with accounts payable, accrued salary, payroll taxes and developer deposits, while others may be familiar with advances from other funds and bonds payable. The ' City of La Quinta is current in meeting its short and long-term commitments and there is no known violation of any bond indenture covenant. In addition, all bonds have been insured and carry a "AAA" rating by a major rating agency. Subsequent to the balance sheet date of June 30, 2001, Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Project Area 1 issued $48 million of "AAA" insured Tax Allocation Bonds. At the RDA's request, they asked Standard and Poors to rate Project Area 1 on a stand-alone basis, which is without bond ' insurance, and are pleased that it received an "A" rating. Similar stand-alone ratings for the City of La Quinta, RDA Project Area 2 and the Financing Authority are not available. Advances From Other Fund The General Fund has advanced funds to both the Redevelopment Project Area 1 and 2 Debt Service Funds. The City created the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency (RDA) and ' its two project areas in accordance with State law to promote economic activities, remove blight and provide low and moderate housing to its residents using property taxes generated in each of the Project Areas. The Redevelopment Areas were created to keep ' property tax revenues generated in its boundaries for projects in the project areas and to be able to accelerate projects by issuing bonds and incurring other debt. Examples of the projects funded to date include flood control projects at the top of the Cove, and ' resurfacing of street, curb, and gutter in the Cove and Westward Ho areas. These types of projects could not have been accomplished without the use of advances and bonds. As of June 30, 2001, the City of La Quinta has advanced the RDA Project Debt Service Area 1 1 $4,973,326 and Debt Service Project Area 2 $6,961,249. The advances carry a 10% interest rate with no specified repayment date. Since the RDA Board is comprised of the City Council, GASB requires that the activities of the RDA be included with the activities of the City. In the past these advances were recorded in the General Long Term Debt Group of Accounts. Under the new reporting model these advances have been recorded as liabilities in the individual fund statements. As a result of this accounting change, both of these RDA Debt Service Area 1 and 2 funds have negative fund balances of $ (541,087) and $(6,258,943), respectfully. While ' it is preferable to have funds with positive balances, it should be noted that these negative balances were a result of the City advances. These advances have no specified re- payment date and it is not the intent of Management to request repayment of the advances in the near future. Rather, Management will seek future repayments from the debt service funds when fund balances are available, which would be sometime before the ' project areas expire — in approximately 30 years. Under GASB 34 these advances to and from other funds have been eliminated from the Statement of Net Assets. ' Lone Term Liabilities Long term liabilities consist of notes, bonds and pass -through agreements that have been ' separated into the amount due in the next year and the amount due beyond. 1 9 In order to accelerate capital or housing projects, the City and RDA have issued bonds. These bonds have also been insured to take advantage of lower debt service costs and provide the investor with an added comfort level. In addition, as with a home mortgage, we have refunded several of our bond issues to take advantage of lower interest rates, which in turn has resulted in lower debt service costs. The Statement of Net Assets has a long-term liability amount due within one year of $11,399,079 and an amount due in more than one year of $81,375,020. The $11.4 million in one-year debt service is more than the normal annual debt service. The $11.4 million debt service includes an advance pass through payment of $8.6 million to the County of Riverside for RDA Project Area 1. This payment was made earlier than required, at the sole option of the RDA, from bond proceeds of a $48 million RDA Tax Allocation Bond Issue executed after year-end. NET ASSETS AND INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS The objective of the Statement of Net Assets is to provide a consolidated summary of the City's assets, liabilities and net assets that reflects the City's fiscal worth and liquidity as a whole. Over time the increases or decreases in total net assets will reflect the health of the City. In order to report the unrestricted net assets of the City, the City must subtract from its assets related liabilities, net investments in capital assets and restricted net assets. Under the new reporting model, the total unrestricted net assets of the City of La Quinta, RDA and Financing Authority is $30,698,622 as reported in the Statement of Net Assets. As in the past, Management has elected, as detailed in the footnotes, to further restrict and designate general fixed balances that have not been reflected in the new Statement of Net Assets. Management believes that these restrictions and designations reflect the Council's desire to set aside funds to meet the requirements of a growing City and to be available for future projects. The total equity and other credits of the City is $293,557,276 of which $217,419,724 consists of capital assets, net of the related debt that was used in acquisition. $45,438,930 consists of restrictions placed upon special revenue, capital projects, and debt service funds leaving total unrestricted net assets of $30,698,622. The City has one internal service fund — Equipment Replacement Fund that primarily receives its revenues from charges for services from other City departments. Under the new reporting model, the assets and liabilities of this internal service fund have been included in the Statement of Net Assets. ACTIVITIES The objective of the Statement of Activities is to report the full cost of providing government services for that year. The format also permits the reader to ascertain the extent to which each function is either self-financing or draws from the general funds of the government. 10 The following chart lists a condensed Changes in Net Assets for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2001. In future years, this chart will contain a current to previous year comparison. 1 CITY OF LA QUINTA Changes in Net Assets 2001 Revenues Program revenues - Charges for services $ 5,337,970 Operating grants and 1,601,716 contributions Capital grants 14,375,463 General revenues Taxes 25,656,153 ' Investment income 3,578,206 Motor Vehicle in lieu 1,496,620 ' Other Total revenues 292,036 52,338,164 Expenses General government 3,146,699 ' Public safety 5,776,628 Community services 940,881 Planning and development 6,146,998 Public works 5,968,911 Interest 5,861,632 t Total expenses 27,841,749 ' Excess (deficiency) $ 24,496,415 The Statement of Activities starts with functional expenses, subtracts out functional ' revenues to arrive at a net number for each function, and then subtracts out all general revenues to arrive at the net change in net assets for the reporting period. ' The functional expenses for FY 00/01 were $27,841,749, and functional revenues of $21,315,149 were subtracted to arrive at a net cost of $6,526,600. The $6,526,600 is then subtracted from $31,023,015 in general revenues to arrive at a net change of $24,496,415. ' As mentioned earlier, this net change of $24,496,415 reported in the Statement of Activities compares to a net change of $5,353,632 under the modified accrual basis of ' accounting. The primary reasons for the differences between the two amounts are: 1) the net capitalization of $6.9 in infrastructure improvements, 2) a reduction in $4.5 million of long-term principal debt and 3) the revenue recognition of $7.5 million in deferred ' revenue. 1 11 General Fund Revenues La Quinta shared in the national and' state economic prosperity during FY 00/01. The City has been seen by homebuilders and by homebuyers as a suitable place to build and live. Homebuilders have seen La Quinta as a place to build homes because of the availability of land and labor which has resulted in greater than budgeted development fees and charges for services. Homebuyers have seen La Quinta as a place to buy because of lower interest rates and good home values which has resulted in greater property taxes, sales taxes and motor vehicle registration taxes. As a result of the increased population, and because of available land along the Highway 111 corridor, the City is experiencing retail growth that has added sales taxes to the City. The City is home to a world class destination resort which continues to generate transient occupancy taxes. Interest income has increased based upon a higher beginning fund balance and higher than expected revenues generated during the year. With this as background, the following chart reflects the major revenue categories of the General Fund: Revenues: Original Budget Final Budget Actual Favorable/ (Unfavorable) Taxes 97,559,790 17,559,790 $10,331,970 $2,772,1 00 Licenses and permits 802,900 802,900 2,057,423 1,254,523 Charges for services 877,425 884,703 1,998,589 1,113,886 Intergovernmental 1,511,350 1,626,705 2,164,891 538,186 Investment income 1,531,632 1,531,632 2,513,789 982,157 Miscellaneous 68,900 68,900 43,547 (25,353) Total revenues $12,351,997 1 $12,474,630 $19,110,209 $6,635,579 In summary, the revenues of the General Fund exceeded budget projections by $6.6 million. Of this $6.6 million, approximately $3 million is from development related sources generated from permits, fees for services and grant revenues. Other Revenues The Statement of Activities lists $15,324,183 in tax increment funds collected. As previously discussed, these funds are used for repayment of RDA debt and low and moderate housing. This year the two RDA Project Areas (1 and 2) property tax valuations have increased an average of 20% based upon new growth and higher County Tax Assessor's assessments on existing properties. In addition, far fewer assessment appeals at the County Assessor's office are outstanding. The Statement of Activities lists $22,739,303 in expenses for FY 00/01. Of this amount the three largest categories are $6.1 million in Planning and Development which includes the RDA, $5.8 million in interest debt service costs for outstanding debt, and $5.7 million in Public Safety, which includes the costs of the County of Riverside Sheriff's contract. The Statement of Activities does not include fire protection and library service costs. 12 tThe City contracts with the California Department of Forestry through the County of Riverside for fire services and with a private vendor for library services. Through an agreement with the County of Riverside, $1,779,228 for fire services and $826,510 for library services was withheld from our property tax increment payments. 1 1 [1 General Fund Expenses The following table lists the $11,668,362 in general fund expenditures included in the Statement of Activities. Expenditures Original Budget Final Budget Actual Favorable/ (Unfavorable) General government $3,190,858 $3,117,380 $3,063,640 $53,740 Public safety 5,248,032 5,958,325 5,636,154 322,171 Community services 932,599 998,249 817,460 180,789 Planning and development 839,500 1,181,365 733,579 447,786 Public works 1,741,861 1,964,891 1,417,529 547,362 Total expenditures $11,952,850 $13,220,210 $11,668,362 1 $1,551,848 The major increases in the original and final budget for public safety consisted of increases in the Building and Police divisions. The Building Division increases were additional contract building inspectors and plan check services to deal with the increased building activity in the City of La Quinta. Police services were increased for enhanced special projects, which were 100% offset by grant funding. The major increase between the original and final budget for planning and development consisted of funding for the general plan and housing element. And finally, the major increases in public works budgets consisted of increases in plan check contracts to service new developments and additional slurry seal projects for road repair. Major increases in actual costs for FY 00/01 can be attributed to higher legal costs, added ' police positions, additional building inspection contract services, additional building plan check contract services, and additional engineering plan check contract services. ' Major and Non -Major Funds The City has identified five major funds for FY 00/01— General Fund, Low & Moderate Income Housing Project Area 2 Fund, Debt Service RDA No.1 Fund, Debt Service RDA ' No.2 Fund, and Capital Projects Fund. GASB has set forth criteria for identifying major funds based upon the size of their balance statements or financial activity during the year. Major funds can change from year to year except for the General Fund, which is always t considered a major fund. In addition, management is given the latitude to identify any additional major funds, even though the funds may not meet the GASB criteria. The City ' of La Quinta has not identified a non -major fund to classify as major fund. The purpose of this major and non -major classification is to highlight for the reader those ' funds that have a material impact on the City financial statement which may warrant closer review by the reader. 1 13 Conclusion As was mentioned in the Executive Summary, Management is pleased to report that the City of La Quinta was able to add to its reserves for FY 00/01. We hope you find this financial report, based upon the GASB 34 reporting model, helpful in your evaluation of the financial position and the operations of the City of La Quinta. If you have any questions about this report, please feel free to give me a call, John Falconer, CPA at 760- 777-7150. 14 BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 1 1 1 ' 15 CITY OF LA QUINTA Statement of Net Assets June 30, 2001 Governmental Activities Assets: Cash and investments (note 2) $ 60,446,544 Accounts receivable 221,420 Taxes receivable 242,764 Prepaid items 274,580 Interest receivable 477,890 Notes receivable (note 4) 8,861,382 Due from other governments 2,328,315 Deposits 2,175 Restricted assets: Cash and investments with fiscal agent (note 2) 10,258,354 Capital assets (note 5): Land 13,981,170 Construction in progress 19,387,875 Other capital assets, net 276,824,778 Total assets 393,307,247 Liabilities: Accounts payable 3,170,751 Accrued salaries and benefits 197,842 Interest payable 1,479,973 Deposits payable 1,396,422 Due to other governments 730,884 Noncurrent liabilities (notes 6 to 13): Due within one year 11,469,079 Due in more than one year 81,305,020 Total liabilities 99,749,971 Net assets: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt 217,419,724 Restricted for: Public safety 72,249 Planning and development 29,498,191 Public works 12,442,770 Debt service 3,425,720 Unrestricted 30,698,622 Total net assets $ 293,557,276 See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements 16 CITY OF LA QUINTA Statement of Activities Year Ended June 30, 2001 Program Revenues Operating Capital Net Charges for Contributions Contributions Governmental Expenses Services and Grants and Grants Activities Governmental activities General government $ 3,146,699 214,601 - 10,000 Public safety 5,776,628 2,860,434 157,778 22,882 Community services 940,881 123,960 197,587 31,281 Planning and development 6,146,998 709,033 454,137 - Public works 5,968,911 1,429,942 792,214 14,311,300 Interest expense 5,861,632 - - Total governmental activities $ 27,841,749 5,337,970 1,601,716 14,375,463 General revenues: Taxes: Property taxes Tax increment Sales taxes Transient occupancy taxes Franchise taxes Othertaxes Investment income Motor vehicle in lieu Miscellaneous revenues Total general revenues Change in net assets Net assets at beginning of year Net assets at end of year 1 ' See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. (2,922,098) (2,735,534) (588,053) (4,983,828) 10,564,545 (5,861,632) (6,526,600) 1,162,534 15,324,183 3,778,583 4,249,753 625,790 515,310 3,578,206 1,496,620 292,036 31,023,015 24,496,415 269,060,861 $ 293,557,276 17 CITY OF LA QUINTA Governmental Funds - Balance Sheet June 30, 2001 Special Revenue Debt Service Funds Low/Moderate Income Redevelopment Redevelopmen Housing - Agency - Agency - General PA No. 2 PA No. 1 PA No. 2 Assets Cash and investments (note 2) $ 24,812,490 3,740,675 4,173,459 1,181,553 Cash with fiscal agent (note 2) - 199,964 2,143 Accounts receivable 72,221 - Taxes receivable 242,764 - Prepaid items 271,065 - Interest receivable 477,057 - Notes receivable (note 4) - 10,627,172 Due from other fiords (note 18) 781,340 - 100,000 - Due from other governments 669,912 12,149 159,715 48,595 Advances to other funds (note 18) 11,472,971 39,135 - - Deposits 2,175 - - Total assets $ 38,801,995 14,419,131 4,633,138 1,232,291 Liabilities and Fund Balances Liabilities: Accounts payable $ 1,714,868 24,644 - - Accrued salaries and benefits 172,981 16,469 Deferred revenue 113,800 10,627,172 Deposits payable 1,175,876 - Due to other funds (note 18) - - - _ Due to other governments - 200,899 529,985 Advances from other funds (note 18) - 4,973,326 6,961,249 Total liabilities 3,177,525 10,668,285 5,174,225 7,491,234 Fund Balances: Fund balances (deficits) (note 24): Reserved for: Debt service Bond projects - Prepaid items 271,065 Deposits 2175 - _ Advances to other funds 11,472,971 39,135 Notes receivable - _ Unreserved, reported in (note 25): General fund 23,878,259 - Special revenue funds - 3,711,711 Debt service funds (541,087) (6,258,943) Capital projects funds - - Total fund balances 35,624,470 3,750,846 (541,087 6,258 943 Total liabilities and fund balances $ 38,801,995 14,419,131 4,633,138 1,2321291 See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. 18 Capital Projects Other Capital Governmental Improvement Funds Totals 549,762 23,863,029 58,320,968 - 10,056,247 10,258,354 149,199 221,420 - 242,764 3,515 274,580 833 477,890 - 2,861,382 13,488,554 987,263 259,634 2,128,237 1,106,058 331,886 2,328,315 - 511,903 12,024,009 - 2,175 2,643,083 38,037,628 99,767,266 1,351,731 74,865 3,166,108 8,392 - 197,842 987,263 1,025,536 12,753,771 206,263 14,283 1,396,422 - 2,128,237 2,128,237 - - 730,884 89,434 - 12,024,009 2,643,083 3,242,921 32,397,273 9,909 9,909 10,054,701 10,054,701 3,515 274,580 - 2,175 511,903 12,024,009 2,861,382 2,861,382 - 23,878,259 2,641,284 6,352,995 (6,800,030) 18,712,013 18,712,013 34,794,707 67,369,993 2,643,083 38,037,628 99,767,266 19 CITY OF LA QUINTA Governmental Funds Reconcilation of the Balance Sheet of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Net Assets June 30, 2001 Fund balances of governmental funds Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of net assets are different because: Capital assets, net of depreciation, have not been included as financial resouces in governmental fund activity. Long term debt and compensated absences from the General Long Term Debt Account Group that have not been included in the governmental fund activity: Bonds payable Compensated absences Other long term liabilities Accrued interest payable for the current portion of interest due on bonds payable has not been reported in the governmental funds. Revenues that are measurable but not available. Amounts are recorded as deferred revenue under the modified accrual basis of accounting. $ 67,369,993 309,482,288 (72,085,000) (373,537) (20,315,562) (1,479,973) 8,126,599 Internal service funds are used by mangement to charge the costs of certain activities, such as equipment management, to individual funds. The assets and liabilities of the internal service funds must be added to the statement of net assets 2,832,468 Net assets of governmental activities $ 293,557,276 See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. 20 ' (This page intentionally left blank) 11 1 1 11 21 CITY OF LA QUINTA . Governmental Fund Types - Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Year Ended June 30, 2001 Special Revenue Debt Service Funds Low/Moderate Income Redevelopment Redevelopment Housing - Agency - Agency - General PA No. 2 PA No. 1 PA No. 2 Revenues: Taxes $ 10,331,970 1,517,600 14,948,451 6,070,400 Licenses and permits 2,057,423 - _ _ Charges for services 1,998,589 Developer fees _ Intergovernmental 2,164,891 - _ _ Investment income 2,513,789 185,625 575,845 84,159 Special assessments _ _ _ _ Rental income Gain (loss) on sale of land _ Miscellaneous 43,545 _ _ Total revenues 19,110,207 1,703,225 15,524,296 6,154,559 Expenditures: Current: General government 3,063,641 - _ _ Public safety 5,636,154 Community services 817,460 - _ _ Planning and development 733,579 837,605 237,341 98,580 Public works 1,417,528 _ _ _ Capital projects _ _ Debt service: Principal - 3,349,544 155,531 Interest - 4,228,397 1,229,894 Payments under pass -through obligations - - 6,231,592 4,717,789 Total expenditures 11,668,362 837,605 14,046,874 6,201,794 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures 7,441,845 865,620 1,477,422 47,235 Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in (note 22) 238,565 - 1,739,031 338,760 Transfers out (note 22) (828,438) 4( 92,139) 3,888,672 (1,230,180 Total other financing sources (uses) (589,873) 492,139 (2,149,641) 891,420 Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses 6,851,972 373,481 (672,219) (938,655) Fund balances at beginning of year, as restated (note 21) 28,772,498 3,377,365 131,132 (5,320,288) Fund balances at end of year $ 35,624,470 3,7502846 (541,087 6,258,943 See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements 22 Capital Projects Other Capital Governmental Improvement Funds Totals 3,737,113 36,605,534 - 2,057,423 _ - 1,998,589 276,149 2,316,249 2,592,398 6,414,543 820,906 9,400,340 - 1,534,501 4,893,919 - 782,610 782,610 - 1,067,076 1,067,076 - 406,461 406,461 - 52,711 96,256 6,690,692 10,717,627 59,900,606 - 211,983 3,275,624 5,636,154 - 817,460 4,437,659 6,344,764 - 1,196,400 2,613,928 14,388,395 67,919 14,456,314 745,345 260,000 4,510,420 65,683 418,955 5,942,929 - 10,949,381 15,199,423 6,592,916 54,546,974 (8,508,731) 4,124,711 5,353,632 8,508,731 7,086,428 17,911, 515 (11,472,086) (17,911,515) 8,508,731 (4,385,658) (260,947) 5,353,632 35,055,654 62,016,361 34,794,707 67,369,993 23 CITY OF LA QUINTA Reconcilation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities Year Ended June 30, 2001 Net changes in fund balances - total governmental funds Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of activities is different because: Governmental funds report capital outlay as expenditures. However, in the statement of activities, the cost of those assets is allocated over their estimated useful lives as depreciation expense. This is the amount by which capital outlays exceeded depreciation in the current period. Repayment of bond principal is an expenditure in the governmental funds, but the repayment reduces long-term liabilities in the statement of net assets. The statement of net assets includes accrued interest on long term debt. To record as an expense the net change in compensated absences in the statement of activities. Revenues that are measurable but not available. Amounts are not recorded as revenue under the modified accrual basis of accounting. $ 5,353,632 6,886,806 4,510,420 28,403 (51,545) 7,496,990 Internal service funds are used by management to charge the costs of certain activities, such as equipment management, to individual funds. The net revenues (expenses) of the internal service funds is reported with governmental activities. 271,709 Change in net assets of governmental activities $ 24,496,415 See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. 24 CITY OF LA QUINTA Proprietary Fund Statement of Net Assets June 30, 2001 Governmental Activities - Internal Service Fund - Equipment Replacement Assets Current assets: Cash and investments Property, plant and equipment, net Total assets Liabilities Current liabilities: Accounts payable Net Assets Invested in capital assets, net of related debt Unrestricted Total net assets See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. $ 2,125,576 711,534 2,837,110 4,643 711,534 2,120,933 $ 2,832,467 Mx CITY OF LA QUINTA Proprietary Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Assets Year ended June 30, 2001 Governmental Activities - Internal Service Fund - Equipment Replacement Operating revenues: Charges for services Miscellaneous Total operating revenues Operating expenses: Fuel and oil Maintenance and parts Depreciation Other operating expenses Total operating expenses Operating income (loss) Non -operating revenues (expenses): Investment income Total non -operating revenues (expenses) Income (loss) before transfers and capital contributions Capital contributions Changes in net assets Net assets at beginning of year, as restated Net assets at end of year See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. $ 364,748 10,000 374.748 34,057 104,237 106,760 295 245,349 129,399 119,427 119,427 248,826 22,882 271,708 2,560,759 $ 2,832,467 26 CITY OF LA QUINTA Proprietary Fund e Statement of Cash Flows Year ended June 30, 2001 Governmental Activities - Internal Service Fund - ' Equipment Replacement Cash flows from operating activities: Cash received from other customers $ 374,748 ' Cash payments to suppliers for goods and services (139,288) Net cash provided by (used for) operating activities 235,460 Cash flows from capital and related activities: Purchase of fixed assets (84,760) ' Net cash provided by (used for) capital and related activities (84,760) 1 Cash flows from investing activities: Interest received on investments 119,427 Net cash provided by (used for) investing activities 119,427 Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 270,127 ' Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year 1,855,449 Cash and cash equivalents at end of year $ 2,125,576 ' Reconciliation of operating income to net cash provided by ' operating activities: Operating income (loss) $ 129,399 Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to net cash provided by operating activities: Depreciation 106,760 Adjustments: Decrease (increase) in accounts payable (699) ' Net cash provided by (used for) operating activities $ 235,460 Noncash capital, financing and investing activities: Fixed assets contributed by other funds $ 22,882 ' See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. ' 27 CITY OF LA QUINTA Agency Funds Statement of Fiduciary Assets and Liabilities June 30, 2001 Assets Cash and investments (note 2) Total assets Liabilities Accounts payable Deposits payable Due to bondholders Total liabilities $ 2,828,009 $ 2,828,009 $ 8,500 704,858 2,114,651 $ 2,828,009 See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. 28 CITY OF LA QUINTA ' Notes to the Basic Financial Statements Year ended June 30, 2001 (1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies ' (a) Reporting Entity ' The City of La Quinta ("the City") was incorporated May 1, 1982 under the general laws of the State of California. In November 1996, the City became a charter City. The City operates under the Council - Manager form of government. ' The City provides many community services including public safety, highway and street maintenance, health and social services, cultural and leisure services, public improvements, planning and zoning services, and community development ' services. The accounting policies of the City conform to generally accepted accounting ' principles as applicable to governments. As required by generally accepted accounting principles, these financial statements present the government and its component units, which are entities for which the government is considered to be financially accountable. The City is considered to be financially accountable for an organization if the City appoints a voting majority of that organization's governing body and the City is able to impose its will on that organization or there is a potential for that organization to provide specific financial benefits to or ' impose specific financial burdens on the City. The City is also considered to be financially accountable if an organization is fiscally dependent (i.e., it is unable to adopt its budget, levy taxes, set rates or charges, or issue bonded debt without ' approval from the City). In certain cases, other organizations are included as component units if the nature and significance of their relationship with the City are such that their exclusion would cause the City's financial statements to be misleading or incomplete. ' All of the City's component units are considered to be blended component units. Blended component units, although legally separate entities, are, in substance, ' part of the government's operations and so data from these units are reported with the interfund data of the primary government. ' The following organizations are considered to be component units of the City: La Quinta Redevelopment Agency ' The La Quinta Redevelopment Agency (Agency) has established two redevelopment project areas pursuant to the State of California Health & Safety Code, Section 33000 entitled "Community Redevelopment Law". On November ' 29, 1983 and May 16, 1989, the City Council approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plans for the La Quinta Redevelopment Project Areas No. 1 and No. 2, respectively. These plans provide for the elimination of blight and deterioration, which was found to exist in the project areas. Although the Agency ' is legally separate, it is reported as if it were part of the City because the City ' 29 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (1) Summary of Significant Accounting Polices, (Continued) Council also serves as the governing board of the Agency. Separate financial statements of the Agency can be obtained at City Hall. City of La Quinta Public Financing Authority The La Quinta Public Financing Authority (Authority) was established pursuant to a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement dated November 19, 1991 between the City of La Quinta and the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency. The purpose of the Authority is to provide financing necessary for the construction of various public improvements through the issuance of debt. Although the Authority is legally separate, it is reported as if it were part of the City because the City Council also serves as the governing board of the Authority. Separate financial statements of the Authority are not prepared. (b) Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus The basic financial statements of the City are composed of the following: • Government -wide financial statements • Fund financial statements • Notes to the financial statements Financial reporting is based upon all GASB pronouncements, as well as the FASB Statements and Interpretations, APB Opinions, and Accounting Research Bulletins that were issued on or before November 30, 1989 that do not conflict with or contradict GASB pronouncements. FASB Pronouncements issued after November 30, 1989 are not followed in the preparation of the accompanying financial statements. Government -wide Financial Statements Government -wide financial statements display information about the reporting government as a whole, except for its fiduciary activities. These statements include separate columns for the governmental and business -type activities of the primary government (including its blended component units), as well as its discreetly presented component units. The City of La Quinta has no business -type activities or discretely presented component units. Eliminations have been made in the Statement of Activities so that certain allocated expenses are recorded only once (by function to which they were allocated). However, general governmental expenses have not been allocated as indirect expenses to the various functions of the City. 30 CITY OF LA QUINTA ' Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (1) Summary of Significant Accounting Polices, (Continued) ' Government -wide financial statements are presented using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Under the economic resources measurement focus, all (both current and long-term) ' economic resources and obligations of the reporting government are reported in the government -wide financial statements. Basis of accounting refers to when revenues and expenditures are recognized in the accounts and reported in the financial statements. Under the accrual basis of accounting, revenues, expenses, gains, losses, assets, and liabilities resulting from exchange and exchange -like transactions are recognized when the exchange takes place. Revenues, expenses, gains, losses, assets, and liabilities resulting from nonexchange transaction are ' recognized in accordance with the requirements of GASB Statement No. 33. Program revenues include charges for services, special assessments, and ' payments made by parties outside of the reporting government's citizenry if that money is restricted to a particular program. Program revenues are netted with program expenses in the statement of activities to present the net cost of each program. ' Amounts paid to acquire capital assets are capitalized as assets in the government - wide financial statements, rather than reported as an expenditure. Proceeds of long-term debt are recorded as a liability in the government -wide financial statements, rather than as an other financing source. Amounts paid to reduce long- term indebtedness of the reporting government are reported as a reduction of the related liability, rather than as an expenditure. Fund Financial Statements ' The underlying accounting system of the City is organized and operated on the basis of separate funds, each of which is considered to be a separate accounting entity. The operations of each fund are accounted for with a separate set of self - balancing accounts that comprise its assets, liabilities, fund equity, revenues and expenditures or expenses, as appropriate. Governmental resources are allocated to and accounted for in individual funds based upon the purposes for which they are to be spent and the means by which spending activities are controlled. ' Fund financial statements for the primary government's governmental, proprietary, and fiduciary funds are presented after the government -wide financial ' statements. These statements display information about major funds individually and nonmajor funds in the aggregate for governmental and enterprise funds. Fiduciary statements include financial information for fiduciary funds and similar ' component units. Fiduciary funds of the City primarily represent assets held by the City in a custodial capacity for other individuals or organizations. 31 ' CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (1) Summary of Significant Accounting Polices, (Continued) Governmental Funds In the fund financial statements, governmental funds are presented using the modified -accrual basis of accounting. Their revenues are recognized when they become measurable and available as net current assets. Measurable means that the amounts can be estimated, or otherwise determined. Available means that the amounts were collected during the reporting period or soon enough thereafter to be available to finance the expenditures accrued for the reporting period. The City uses a thirty day availability period. Revenue recognition is subject to the measurable and availability criteria for the governmental funds in the fund financial statements. Exchange transactions are recognized as revenues in the period in which they are earned (i.e., the related goods or services are provided). Locally imposed derived tax revenues are recognized as revenues in the period in which the underlying exchange transaction on which they are based takes place. Imposed non -exchange transactions are recognized as revenues in the period for which they were imposed. If the period of use is not specified, they are recognized as revenues when an enforceable legal claim to the revenues arises or when they are received, whichever occurs first. Government -mandated and voluntary non -exchange transactions are recognized as revenues when all applicable eligibility requirements have been met. In the fund financial statements, governmental funds are presented using the current financial resources measurement focus. This means that only current assets and current liabilities are generally included on their balance sheets. The reported fund balance (net current assets) is considered to. be a measure of "available spendable resources." Governmental fund operating statements present increases (revenues and other financing sources) and decreases (expenditures and other financing uses) in net current assets. Accordingly, they are said to present a summary of sources and uses of "available spendable resources" during a period. Non -current portions of long-term receivables due to governmental funds are reported on their balance sheets in spite of their spending measurement focus. Special reporting treatments are used to indicate, however, that they should not be considered "available spendable resources," since they do not represent net current assets. Recognition of governmental fund type revenues represented by noncurrent receivables are deferred until they become current receivables. Noncurrent portions of other long-term receivables are offset by fund balance reserve accounts. Because of their spending measurement focus, expenditure recognition for governmental fund types excludes amounts represented by noncurrent liabilities. Since they do not affect net current assets, such long-term amounts are not recognized as governmental fund type expenditures or fund liabilities. 32 CITY OF LA QUINTA ' Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) ' (1) Summary of Significant Accounting Polices, (Continued) Amounts expended to acquire capital assets are recorded as expenditures in the year that resources were expended, rather than as fund assets. The proceeds of long-term debt are recorded as an other financing sources rather than as a fund liability. Amounts paid to reduce long-term indebtedness are reported as fund expenditures. When both restricted and unrestricted resources are combined in a fund, expenses are considered to be paid first from restricted resources, and then from unrestricted resources. Proorietary Funds ' The City's internal service funds are proprietary funds. In the fund financial statements, proprietary funds are presented using the accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recognized when they are earned and expenses are recognized when the related goods or services are delivered. In the fund financial statements, t proprietary funds are presented using the economic resources measurement focus. This means that all assets and all liabilities (whether current or noncurrent) associated with their activity are included on their balance sheets. Proprietary ' fund type operating statements present increases (revenues) and decreases (expenses) in total net assets. ' Amounts paid to acquire capital assets are capitalized as assets in the internal service fund financial statements, rather than reported as an expenditure. Proceeds of long-term debt are recorded as a liability in the internal service fund financial statements, rather than as an other financing source. Amounts paid to reduce long- term indebtedness of the internal service fund are reported as a reduction of the related liability, rather than as an expenditure. Fiduciary Funds The City's fiduciary funds are agency funds. Agency funds are custodial in nature. Assets equal liabilities. Agency funds use the accrual basis of accounting. 1 (c) Major Funds Internal Service Funds and Fiduciary Fund Types ' The City's major funds are as follows: General Fund — The primary fund of the City is used to account for all revenue and expenditures of the City not legally restricted as to use. A broad range of municipal activities are provided through this fund including City Manager, City Attorney, Finance, City Clerk, Community Development, Police Services, Public Works, Building and Safety, and Community Services. 33 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (1) Summary of Significant Accounting Polices, (Continued) Low/Moderate Income Housing — Project Area No. 2 Fund — This special revenue fund is used to account for the required 20% set aside of property tax increments that is legally restricted for increasing or improving housing for low and moderate income households. Redevelopment Agency Debt Service — Project Area No. 1 Fund — This debt service fund is used to account for the accumulation of resources for the payment of debt service for bond principal and interest and trustee fees for Project Area No. 1. Redevelopment Agency Debt Service — Project Area No. 2 Fund — This debt service fund is used to account for the accumulation of resources for the payment of debt service for bond principal and interest and trustee fees for Project Area No. 2. Capital Improvement Fund — This capital projects fund is used to account for the planning, design and construction of various capital projects throughout the City of La Quinta and the Redevelopment Agency. Other fund types of the City are as follows: Internal Service Fund — This fund accounts for equipment and vehicle maintenance and replacement services provided to other departments on a cost - reimbursement basis. Agency Funds — These funds account for assets held by the City as an agency for assessment district bondholders and for Arts in Public Places donations. (d) Investments For financial reporting purposes, investments are adjusted to their fair value whenever the difference between fair market. value and the carrying amount is material. Changes in fair value that occur during a fiscal year are recognized as investment income reported for that fiscal year. Investment income includes interest earnings, changes in fair value, and any gains or losses realized upon the liquidation or sale of investments. The City pools cash and investments of all funds, except for assets held by fiscal agents. Each fund's share in this pool is displayed in the accompanying financial statements as cash and investments. Investment income earned by the pooled investments is allocated to the various funds based on each fund's average cash and investment balance. 34 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (1) Summary of Significant Accounting Polices, (Continued) (e) Cash Equivalents For purposes of the statement of cash flows, cash equivalents are defined as short- term, highly liquid investments that are both readily convertible to known amounts of cash or so near their maturity that they present insignificant risk of changes in value because of changes in interest rates. Cash equivalents also ' represent the proprietary funds' share in the cash and investment pool of the City of La Quinta. Cash equivalents have an original maturity date of three months or less from the date of purchase. For purposes of the statement of cash flows, the entire balance of cash and investments on the combined balance sheet for the internal service fund is considered cash and cash equivalents. (f) Capital Assets ' Capital assets (including infrastructure) are recorded at cost where historical records are available and at an estimated historical cost where no historical records exist. Contributed fixed assets are valued at their estimated fair market ' value at the date of the contribution. Generally, fixed asset purchases in excess of $500 are capitalized if they have an expected useful life of three years or more. ' Capital assets include public domain (infrastructure) general fixed assets consisting of certain improvements including roads, streets, sidewalks, medians, and storm drains. ' Capital assets used in operations are depreciated over their estimated useful lives using the straight-line method in the government —wide financial statements and in the fund financial statements of the internal service funds. Depreciation is charged ' as an expense against operations and accumulated depreciation is reported on the respective balance sheet. ' The following schedule summarizes fixed asset useful lives: Buildings and improvements 10-30 years ' Equipment and furniture 3-20 years Vehicles 5-10 years Infrastructure 10-50 years (g) Employee Leave Benefits Sick time is vested on a percentage based on number of years employed at the City. Maximum accumulation of sick and vacation is 30 and 40 days, respectively. Upon termination or retirement, permanent employees are entitled to receive ' compensation at their current base salary for all unused vacation leave. If an ' 35 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements ' (Continued) (1) Summary of Significant Accounting Polices (Continued) ' employee terminates with a minimum of two years service, the employee is ' entitled to receive 25% of the value of his unused sick leave. The percentage increases by 25% for each five-year period until the employee is entitled to 75% of the value of his unused sick leave. This will occur upon the completion of ten , years of continuous employment. (h) Postemployment Benefits The City does not provide postemployment benefits (other than pension benefits) ' to its employees. 1 U-1 (This page intentionally left blank) [1 1 1 t 37 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) L1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) (i) Explanation of Differences between Governmental Funds Balance Sheet and the Statement of Net Assets Increases Decreases Balance "Total fund balances" of the City's governmental funds of $67,369,993 differs from "net assets" of governmental activities of $293,557,276 reported in the statement of net assets. This difference is primarily a result from the long-term economic focus of the statement of net assets versus the current financial resources focus of the governmental fund balance sheets. $ 67,369,993 Capital Related Items When capital assets (land, buildings, equipment) that are to be used in governmental activities are purchased or constructed, the cost of those assets are reported as expenditures in governmental funds. However, the statement of net assets includes those capital assets among the assets of the City as a whole: Infrastructure Construction in progress Cost of capital assets Accumulated depreciation Long -Term Liabilities Long-term liabilities applicable to the City's governmental activities are not due and payable in the current period and accordingly are not reported as fund liabilities. All liabilities, both current and long term are reported in the statement of net assets. Balances at June 30, 2001 were: Compensated absences Bonds payable Other long term liabilities Interest Payable Accrued liabilities in the statement of net assets differs from the amount reported in the governmental funds due to accrued interest on bonds payable. KE 309,739,666 19,387,875 30,700,021 - (50,345,274) 359,827,562 (50,345,274) - (373,537) - (72,085,000) _ (20,315,562) (92,774,099) (1,479,973) CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies. (Continued) (i) Explanation of Differences between Governmental Funds Balance Sheet and the Statement of Net Assets. (Continued) 1 Increases Deferred Revenue ' Because the focus of governmental funds is on short term financing, some assets will not be available to pay for current period expenditures. Those assets are offset by deferred revenue in governmental funds, and thus are not included in fund balances. 8,126,599 Internal Service Fund Internal service funds are used by management to charge the costs of certain activities, such as equipment management, to individual funds. The assets and liabilities of the internal service funds is included in governmental activities in the statement of net assets. 2,832,468 Reclassifications and Eliminations ' Interfund balances must generally be eliminated in the governmental statements, except for residual amounts due between ' governmental activities. Amounts involving fiduciary funds should be reported as external transactions. Any allocations must reduce the expenses of the function from which the expenses are being allocated, so that expenses are reported only once - in the function in which they are allocated. Net change Net assets of governmental activities I [] 39 Decreases Balance 370,786,629 (144,599,346) 226,187,283 $ 293,557,276 CITY OF IA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) (i) Explanation of Differences between Govemmental Funds Balance Sheet and the Statement of Net Assets (Continued) Assets: Cash and investments Cash with fiscal agent Accounts receivable Taxes receivable Prepaid items Interest receivable Notes receivable Due from other funds Due from other governments Advances to other funds Deposits Capital assets, net Total assets Liabilities: Accounts payable Accrued salaries and benefits Interest payable Deferred revenue Deposits payable Due to other funds Due to other governments Advances from other funds Long term liabilities Total liabilities Fund balances/net assets Total liabilities and fund balances/net assets Total Other Governmental Capital Accumulated Funds Infrastructure Assets Depreciation $ 58,320,968 - _ _ 10,258,354 - - _ 221,420 - _ _ 242,764 - _ _ 274,580 - _ 477,890 - _ _ 13,488,554 _ - _ 2,128,237 - _ _ 2,328,315 - _ _ 12,024,009 - _ _ 2,175 - 329,127,541 30,700,021 (50,345,274) $ 99,767,266 329,127,541 30,700,021 (50,345,274) $ 3,166,108 197,842 12,753,771 - _ _ 1,396,422 _ _ _ 2,128,237 - _ 730,884 _ _ 12,024,009 - _ _ 32,397,273 - _ 67,369,993 329,127,541 30,700,021 (50,345,274) $ 99,767,266 3292127,541 30,700,021 (50,345,274) 40 Long-term Certain Internal Reclassifications Statement of Debt Interest Compensated Deferred Service and Net Assets Transactions Payable Absences Revenue Fund Eliminations Totals 2,125,576 - 60,446,544 10,258,354 - - 221,420 ' 2, 764 - - 27474,580580 - - 477,890 (4,627,172) - - 8,861,382 - (2,128,237) - 2,328,315 - (12,024,009) - 2,175 711,535 310,193,823823 4,627,172 2,837,111 (14,152,246) 393,307,247 4,643 - 3,170,751 ' - 1, 842 1,479,973 1,47979,973973 (12,753,771) 1,396,422 - (2,128,237) - 730,884 - - (12,024,009) - 92,400,562 - 373,537 92,774,099 92,400,562 1,479,973 373,537 (12,753,771) 4,643 (14,152,246) 99,749,971 1 (92,400,562) (1,479,973) (373,537) 8,126,599 2,832,468 - 293,557,276 - 4,627,172 2,837,111 (14,152,246) 393,307,247 1 1 1 1 41 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) (j) Exolanation of Differences between Governmental Funds Operating Statements and the Statement of Activities Increases Decreases Balance The "net changes in fund balances" for governmental funds of $5,353,632 differs from the "changes in net assets" for the governmental activities of $24,496,415 reported in the statement of activities. The differences arise primarily from the long term economic focus of the statement of activities versus the current financial resources focus of the governmental funds. The effects of the differences is illustrated below. $ 5,353,632 Capital Related Items When capital assets (land, buildings, equipment) that are to be used in governmental activities are purchased or constructed, the cost of those assets are reported as expenditures in governmental funds. However, in the statement of activities, the cost of those assets is allocated over their estimated useful lives and reported as depreciation expense. As a result, fund balance increases by the amount of financial resources expended, whereas net assets decrease by the amounts of depreciation expense charged for the year. Capital outlay 10,925,802 Depreciation expense 4 038 996 10,925,802 4,0( 38,996) Long -Term Liabilities Some expenses reported in the statement of activities do not require the use of current financial resources and therefore are not reported as expenditures in governmental funds. Net change in compensated absences (51,545) Repayment of bond principal and other long term liabilities is ' reported as an expenditure in governmental funds and, thus, has the effect of reducing fund balance because current financial resources have been used. For the City as a whole, however, the principal ' payments reduce the liabilities in the statement of net assets and do not result in an expense in the statement of activities. Principal payments made 4,510,420 42 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) ' (1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) 0) Explanation of Differences between Governmental Funds ' Operating Statements and the Statement of Activities, (Continued) I 1 1 Increases Decreases Balance Accrued Interest Beginning fund balance in the statement of activities has been restated to reflect the retroactive recording of accrued interest on bonds payable. 28,403 Deferred Revenue Because the focus of governmental funds is on short term financing, some assets will not be available to pay for current period expenditures. Those assets are offset by deferred revenue in governmental funds, and thus are not included as revenues. 7,496,990 Intemal Service Fund Intemal service funds are used by management to charge the costs of certain activities, such as equipment management, to individual funds. The adjustments for internal service funds "closes" those funds by charging additional amounts to participating governmental activities to completely cover the internal service f ind's costs for the year. 271,709 Reclassifications and Eliminations Interf ind balances must generally be eliminated in the governmental statements, except for residual amounts due between governmental activities. Amounts involving fiduciary funds should be reported as external transactions. Any allocations must reduce the expenses of the function from which the expenses are being allocated, so that expenses are reported only once - in the function in which they are allocated. 1 Net change Net assets of governmental activities 23,233,324 (4,090,541) 19,142,783 $24,496,415 1 43 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (1) Summary of Significant Accountin¢Policies. (Continue d) 0) Explanation of Differences between Governmental Funds Operating Statements and the Statement of Activities (Continued) Revenues: Taxes Licenses and permits - Charges for services Developer fees Intergovernmental Investment income Special assessments Rental income Gain (loss) on sale of land Miscellaneous Total revenues Expenditures: Current: General government Public safety Community services Planning and development Public works Capital projects Debt service: Principal Interest Payments under pass -through obligations Total expenditures Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Net change in fund balances/net assets Fund balances/net assets, beginning of year, as restated Fund balances/net assets, end of year Total Other Governmental Capital Funds Infrastructure Assets $ 36,605,534 2,057,423 1,998,589 - 2,592,398 432,164 9,400,340 (2,524,799) 4,893,919 782,610. (25,889) 1,067,076 406,461 (217,994) 96,256 _ 59,900,606 (2,118,524) (217,984)' Long-term Accumulated Debt Depreciation Transactions 3,275,624 - - 57,674 5,636,154 - - 504,536 817,460 - - 129,758 6,344,764 - - 5,858 2,613,928 - - 3,341,170 14,456,314 (12,875,014) (334,402) - 4,510,420 (4,510,420) ' 5,942,929 (52,894) 10,949,381 ' 54,546,974 (12,927,908) (334,402) 4,038,996 (4,510,420) 17,911,515 ' (17,911,515) 5,353,632 10,809,384 116,418 (4,038,996) 4,510,420 , 62,016,361 318,318,157 30,583,603 (46,306,278) (96,910,982) ' $ 67,369,993 329,127,541 30,700,021 50,345 274 (92,400,562) ' Internal Reclassifications Statement Interest Compensated Deferred Service and of Activities Payable Absences Revenue Funds Eliminations Totals (10,949,381) 25,656,153 2,057,423 1,998,589 - 6,000,000 - 9,024,562 - 127,969 10,000 7,013,510 - - 122,123 119,428 - 5,135,470 - - - - - 756,721 - - - - (678,955) 388,121 - 188,477 - 22,882 119,138 6,250,092 152,310 (11,628,336) 52,338,164 14,104 - 2,984 (203,687) 3,146,699 - 42,592 - (135,073) (271,581) 5,776,628 - (6,337) - - - 940,881 - 63 - - (203,687) 6,146,998 1,123 - 12,690 5,968,911 - - (1,246,898) - - - (28,403) 5,861,632 - - (10,949,381) - (28,403) 51,545 1,2( 46,898) 1( 19,399) (11,628,336) 27,841,749 (17,911,515) 17,911,515 28,403 (51,545) 7,496,990 271,709 24,496,415 (1,508,376 ) (321,992) 629,609 2,560,759 269,060,861 1,4( 79,973) 373,537 8,126,599 2,832,468 - 293,557,276 45 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (2) Cash and Investments Cash and investments are reported as follows: Statement of Net Assets: Cash and investments Cash and investments with fiscal agent Statement of Fiduciary Net Assets: Cash and investments Total $ 60,446,544 10,258,354 2,828,009 $ 73.532.907 Cash and investments held by the City at June 30, 2001 consisted of the following: Petty cash Demand deposits Investments Total $ 739 3,410,330 70,121,838 $ 73.532.907 The City and its component units are authorized by its investment policy to invest in the following types of investments: Investment Type Maximum % Government pools 15% U.S. government and agency securities 75% Commercial Paper 30% Mutual Funds 20% Certificates of Deposit 60% Under the California Government Code, a financial institution is required to secure deposits made by state or local governmental units by pledging securities held in the form of an undivided collateral pool. The market value of the pledged securities in the collateral pool must equal at least 110% of the total amount deposited by the public agencies. California law also allows financial institutions to secure City deposits by pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of 150% of the secured public deposits. Deposits of cities and other state or local governments are classified in three categories to give an indication of the level of credit risk assumed by the City, as follows: 46 iCITY OF LA QUINTA ' Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) ' (2) Cash and Investments, (Continued) Category I - includes deposits that are insured or collateralized with securities held by the City or its agent in the City's name. Category 2 - includes deposits collateralized with securities held by the pledging financial institution's trust department or agent in the City's name. Category 2 also includes ' deposits collateralized by an interest in an undivided collateral pool held by an authorized Agent or Depository and subject to certain regulatory requirements under State law. Category 3 - includes deposits collateralized with securities held by the pledging financial ' institution, or by its trust department or agent but not in the City's name. Category 3 also includes any uncollateralized deposits. ' Category Bank Book Form of Deposit 1 2 3 Balance Balance Deposits held by the City: Demand deposits 100 000 239,081 4,809.341 5.148,422 3,410,330 Investments of cities in securities are classified in three categories to give an indication of ' the level of custodial risk assumed by the entity. Category I - includes investments that are insured or registered or for which the securities are held by the City or the City's custodial agent (which must be a different institution other than the party through which the City purchased the securities) in the City's name. Investments held "in the City's name" include securities held in a separate custodial or fiduciary account and identified as owned by the City in the custodian's ' internal accounting records. Category 2 - includes uninsured and unregistered investments for which the securities ' are held in the City's name by the dealer's agent (or by the trust department of the dealer if the dealer was a financial institution and another department of the institution purchased the securities for the City). ' Category 3 - includes uninsured and unregistered investments for which the securities are held by the dealer's trust department or agent, but not in the City's name. Category 3 also includes all securities held by the broker -dealer agent of the City (the party that ' purchased the securities for the City) regardless of whether or not the securities are being held in the City's name. 47 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (2) Cash and Investments, (Continued) Category Carrying 1 2 3 Value Investments held by the City: U.S. Treasury Notes $ 20,178,344 - - 20,178,344 U.S. Treasury Bills 9,908,717 - - 9,908,717 Government Agency Securities 15,077,379 - 15,077,379 Commercial Paper 5,979,666 - 5,979,666 $ 51.144.106 c 51,144,106 Investments held by the City not subject to categorization: Investment in State of California Local Agency Investment Fund 8,719,382 Investments held by fiscal agent not subject to categorization: Investment in mutual funds: First American Treasury Obligation Fund 10,258,350 $ 70.121.838 Investments are adjusted at year-end to fair value, except when the difference between fair value and book value is immaterial. The City is a voluntary participant in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) that is regulated by California Government Code Section 16429 under the oversight of the Treasurer of the State of California. The fair value of the City's investment in this pool is reported in the accompanying financial statements at amounts based upon the City's pro- rata share of the fair value provided by LAIF for the entire LAIF portfolio (in relation to the amortized cost of that portfolio). The balance available for withdrawal is based on the accounting records maintained by LAIF, which are recorded on an amortized cost basis. Included in LAIF's investment portfolio are collateralized mortgage obligations, mortgage -backed securities, other asset -backed securities, loans to certain state funds, and floating rate securities issued by federal agencies, government -sponsored enterprises, and corporations. (3) Property Taxes Under California law, property taxes are assessed and collected by the counties up to 1% of assessed value, plus other increases approved by the voters. The property taxes are recorded initially in a pool, and are then allocated to the cities based on complex formulas. Accordingly, the City of La Quinta accrues only those taxes that are received from the County within sixty days after year-end. 48 CITY OF LA QUINTA ' Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (3) Property Taxes, (Continued) Lien date January 1 Levy date July 1 Due dates November 1 and February 1 Collection dates December 10 and April 10 ' The La Quinta Redevelopment Agency's primary source of revenue comes from property taxes. Property taxes allocated to the Agency are computed in the following manner: (a) The assessed valuation of all property within the project area is determined on the date of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan. (b) Property taxes related to the incremental increase in assessed values after the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan are allocated to the Agency; all taxes on the "frozen" assessed valuation of the property are allocated to the City and other districts. The Agency has no power to levy and collect taxes and any legislative property tax shift might reduce the amount of tax revenues that would otherwise be available to pay the principal of, and interest on, debt. Broadened property tax exemptions could have a similar effect. Conversely, any increase in the tax rate or assessed valuation, or any reduction or elimination of present exemptions would increase the amount of tax revenues that would be available to pay principal and interest on debt. 1 49 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) Outstanding (4) Notes Receivable Balance at June 30, 2001 In September 1994, the Redevelopment Agency sold certain real property to LINC Housing for $2,112,847. The property was used to construct single-family homes and rental units to increase the City's supply of low and moderate income housing. The note bears interest at 6% per annum and is due in full on June 15, 2029. $ 2,797,297 In October 2000, the Redevelopment Agency entered into an agreement with DC&TC, LLC to provide for the construction of certain infrastructure related to the development of affordable housing within Project Area No. 2. A promissory note in the amount of $4,627,172 was entered into with the Developer. The note bears no interest and is payable on October 25, 2010. The balance of the note is reduced by one - fifty -ninth (1/59) upon the close of each escrow for the units sold within the specifications of the Affordable Housing Agreement. 4,627,172 In December 2000, the Redevelopment Agency entered into an agreement with DC&TC, LLC to receive $6,000,000 as a reimbursement for Agency costs incurred for the construction of infrastructure related to the development of senior apartments. Payments are due to the Agency in the amount of annual positive cash flow generated by the rental of the units. All unpaid principal and interest on the note are due fifty-five years after the completion of the project. Interest on the note accrues at 3% per annum. 6,000,000 Other notes receivable 64.085 Total per fund financial statements 13,488,554 Less amounts not recorded in governmental statements (4,627,162) Total per governmental financial statements 8.861.382 50 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) ' (5) Capital Assets ' Capital asset activity for the year ended June 30, 2001 is as follows: Balance at ' June 30, 2000, Balance at as restated Additions Deletions June 30, 2001 Buildings and improvements $ 15,544,136 77,553 (13,334) 15,608,355 ' Equipment and furniture 1,574,663 196,869 (93,768) 1,677,764 Vehicles 827,006 123,980 (67,218) 883,768 Infrastructure 304,381,322 5,358,344 - 309,739,666 Total cost of ' depreciable assets 322,327,127 5,756,746 174,320 327,909,553 Less accumulated depreciation: Buildings and improvements 3,213,150 497,171 _ 3,710,321 Equipment and furniture 787,525 175,070 962,595 Vehicles 509,079 63,816 (44,336) 528,559 ' Infrastructure 42,473,602 3,409,698 - 45,883,300 Total accumulated depreciation 46,983,356 4,145,755 44,336 51,084,775 Net depreciable assets 275,343,771 1,610,991 (129,984) 276,824,778 ' Capital assets not depreciated: Land 14,024,130 45,040 (88,000) 13,981,170 ' Construction in progress 13,936,835 10,809,384 (5,358,344) 19,387,875 Capital assets, net $ 303,304,736 12,465,415 5,576,328 310,193,823 ' Depreciation expense was charged in the following functions in the Statement of Activities: General government $ 57,674 ' Public safety 571,198 Community services 129,758 Planning and development 5,858 ' Public works 3,381,267 $ 4,145,755 51 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (6) General Long -Term Debt Changes in general long-term debt for the year ended June 30, 2001 were as follows: City: Compensated absences payable Due to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments Developer Agreements Payable RDA Project Area No. 1: Tax allocation bonds Housing tax allocation bonds Pass -through agreements payable: Due to County of Riverside Coachella Valley Unified School District RDA Project Area No. 2: Tax allocation bonds Housing tax allocation bonds Due to County of Riverside Financing Authority: Revenue bonds Total Amounts Balance at Balance at due within June 30, 2000 Additions Deletions June 30, 2001 one year $321,992 51,545 - 373,537 70,000 628,311 - (50,000) 578,311 50,000 695,345 (695,345) 37,765,000 (1,140,000) 36,625,000 1,195,000 16,904,618 (279,469) 16,625,149 291,277 9,899,104 - (1,259,258) 8,639,846 8,639,946 9,418,222 - (670,817) 8,747,405 684,233 6,670,000 - (80,000) 6,590,000 85,000 4,570,382 - (75,531) 4,494,851 78,723 2,350,000 - - 2,350,000 100,000 8,010,000 (260,00 0) 7,750.000 275,000 U3?,9-7-4 =SL 4 _ 4455IM29� A-- 099 U.4_b9,419 7) Due to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments The City of La Quinta entered into an Interchange Reimbursement Agreement with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) to finance capital improvements at the Washington Street I-10 interchange. The City will reimburse CVAG $828,311 over a period of seventeen years beginning July 31, 1996. The annual payments to CVAG range from $28,311 to $50,000. At June 30, 2001, the balance was $578,311. 52 ' CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) ' (8) Tax Allocation Bonds As of June 30, 2001, the following issuances of Tax Allocation Bonds were outstanding: Series 1994 Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds, Series 1994, were issued by the Agency on May 5, ' 1994, in the amount of $26,665,000 to refund the outstanding aggregate principal amount of the Agency's Tax Allocation Bonds, Series 1989 and 1990. The remaining proceeds were used to finance certain capital improvements within the La Quinta Redevelopment Project Area No. 1. ' Interest rates on the bonds range from 3.80% to 8% and are payable semi-annually on March 1 and September 1 of each year until maturity. The interest on and principal of the bonds are payable solely from pledged tax increment revenues. The bonds are not subject to redemption prior to maturity. There are certain limitations regarding the issuance of parity debt as further described in the official statement. A portion of the proceeds was ' used to obtain a surety agreement to satisfy the bond reserve requirement. The principal balance of outstanding bonds at June 30, 2001 is $20,865,000. Series 1998, Project Area No. 1 Tax allocation refunding bonds, Series 1998, in the amount of $15,760,000 were issued by the Agency to refund the outstanding aggregate principal amount of the Agency's Tax ' Allocation Bonds, Series 1991. The remaining proceeds were used to finance certain capital improvements within the La Quinta Redevelopment Project Area No. 1. The unexpended balance of proceeds at June 30, 2001 is $5,357,019. Interest rates on the bonds range from 5.20% to 5.25% and are payable semi-annually on March I and September I of each year until maturity. The interest and principal of the bonds are payable from pledged tax increment revenues on a parity with the Agency's tpreviously issued Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds, Series 1994. Term Bonds maturing September 1, 2028 are subject to mandatory sinking fund ' redemption, in part by lot, on September 1, 2013 and on each September 1 thereafter, through September 1, 2028, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof plus accrued interest. There are certain limitations regarding the issuance of parity debt as further described in the official statement. A portion of the proceeds was used to obtain a surety ' agreement to satisfy the bond reserve requirement. The principal balance of outstanding bonds at June 30, 2001 is $15,760,000. 1 53 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) 8) Tax Allocation Bonds. (Continued Series 1998. Proiect Area No. 2 Tax allocation refunding bonds, Series 1998, in the amount of $6,750,000 were issued by the Agency to refund the outstanding aggregate principal amount of the Agency's Tax Allocation Bonds, Series 1992. The remaining proceeds were used to finance certain capital improvements within the La Quinta Redevelopment Project Area No. 2. The unexpended balance of proceeds at June 30, 2001 is $214,396. Interest rates on the bonds range from 3.75% to 5.28% and are payable semi-annually on March 1 and September 1 of each year until maturity. The interest and principal of the bonds are payable solely from pledged tax increment revenues of Project Area No. 2. Term Bonds maturing September 1, 2028 and September 1, 2033 are subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption, in part by lot, on September 1, 2009 and September 1, 2019, respectively, and on each September 1 thereafter at a price equal to the principal amount thereof plus accrued interest. There are certain limitations regarding the issuance of parity debt as further described in the official statement. A portion of the proceeds was used to obtain a surety agreement to satisfy the bond reserve requirement. The principal balance of outstanding bonds at June 30, 2001 is $6,590,000. 9) 1995 Housing Tax Allocation Bonds (TABS La Quinta Redevelopment Project Areas No. 1 and 2 1995 Housing Tax Allocation Bonds were issued, by the Agency on July 1, 1995, in the amount of $22,455,000 to increase, improve and/or preserve the supply of low and moderate income housing in the City. Interest is payable semi-annually on March 1 and September I of each year commencing March 1, 1996. Interest payments range from 4% to 6% per annum. The interest and principal of the bonds are payable from pledged tax increment revenues of both project areas. Term Bonds maturing on September 1, 2025 are subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption, in part by lot, on September 1, 2011 and on each September 1 thereafter, through September 1, 2025, at a price equal to the principal amount plus accrued interest. A portion of the proceeds was used to obtain a surety agreement to satisfy the bond reserve requirement. There are certain limitations regarding the issuance of parity debt as further described in the official statement. The principal balance of outstanding bonds at June 30, 2001 is $21,120,000. 54 ICITY OF LA QUINTA ' Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (10)_ 1996 Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds ' On November 15, 1996, the Authority issued $8,790,000 of 1996 Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds to defease the remaining 1991 Local Agency Revenue Bonds in the e amount of $8,200,000 and to provide funds for construction of remaining improvements to the La Quinta Civic Center site. The unexpended balance of proceeds at June 30, 2001 is $542,000. t The bonds consist of $3,630,000 of serial bonds and $5,160,000 of term bonds. The serial bonds will accrue interest at rates between 3.70% and 5.30% and principal amounts mature between October 1, 1997 to October 1, 2008 in amounts ranging from $285,000 ' to $380,000. The term bonds accrue interest at a rate of 5.55% and mature on October 1, 2018. ' A surety agreement has been purchased to satisfy the bond reserve requirement. There are certain limitations regarding the issuance of parity debt as further described in the official statement. The amount of principal outstanding on the 1996 Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds at June 30, 2001 is $7,750,000. (11) Due to County of Riverside ' Project Area No. 1 1 Based on an agreement amended December 21, 1993 between the Agency, the City of La Quinta, and the County of Riverside (County), the Agency will pay to the County $10,517,138 from tax increment revenue relating to Project Area No. 1. This agreement is in consideration of the tax revenues lost by the County as a result of the formation of 1 Project Area No. 1. The tax increment is to be paid to the County over a payment schedule through June 30, 2006 in annual amounts ranging from $386,764 to $2,190,473. Unpaid balances accrue interest at 5.5% per annum. The balance at June 30, 2001 is $8,639,846. Project Area No. 2 ' 'Based on an agreement dated July 5, 1989 between the Agency and the County, until the tax increment reaches $5,000,000 annually in Project Area No. 2, the Agency will pay to the County 50% of the County portion of tax increment. At the County's option, the ' County's pass -through portion can be retained by the Agency to finance new County facilities or land costs that benefit the County and serve the La Quinta population. Per the agreement, the Agency must repay all amounts withheld from the County. The tax increment is to be paid to the County in amounts ranging from $100,000 to $250,000 over a payment schedule through June 30, 2015. Interest does not accrue on this obligation. The balance at June 30, 2001 is $2,350,000. 1 55 1 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (12) Notes Payable to Coachella Valley Unified School District An agreement was entered into in 1991 between the Agency, the City of La Quinta and the Coachella Valley Unified School District (District), which provides for the payment to the District a portion of tax increment revenue associated with properties within District confines. Such payments are subordinate to other indebtedness of the Agency incurred in furtherance of the Redevelopment Plan for Project Area No. 1. This tax increment is paid to the District over a payment schedule through August 1, 2012, in amounts ranging from $474,517 to $834,076, for a total amount of $15,284,042. Tax increment payments outstanding at June 30, 2001 totaled $8,747,405. The District agrees to use such funds to provide classroom and other construction costs, site acquisition, school busses, and expansion or rehabilitation of current facilities. (13) Debt Service Requirements to Maturity The minimum annual requirements (including sinking fund requirements) to amortize the long-term debt of the City as of June 30, 2001 are as follows: 56 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (13) Debt Service Requirements to Maturity, (Continued) 1996 Pass -through Agreements Lease 1995 1998 1998 Revenue Coachella County Ending Housing 1994 TABS TABS Refunding Valley of ' June 30 CVAG TABS TABS P.A. No. I P.A. No. 2 Bonds USD Riverside Total 2001-02 $50,000 1,590,690 2,620,315 819,520 419,249 682,178 684,233 8,739,846 15,606,031 2002-03 50,000 1,592,820 2,620,855 819,520 420,747 679,435 697,918 100,000 6,981,295 ' 2003-04 50,000 1,588,538 2,599,465 819,520 417,080 680,830 711,877 100,000 6,967,310 2004-05 50,000 1,587,990 2,612,140 819,520 418,264 681,220 726,114 100,000 6,995,248 2005-06 50,000 1,590,890 2,597,700 819,520 419,167 680,575 740,636 100,000 6,998,488 ' 2006-07 50,000 1,645,502 2,593,456 819,520 419,785 678,865 755,449 100,000 7,062,577 2007-08 50,000 1,646,470 2,590,816 819,520 420,135 675,880 770,558 150,000 7,123,379 2008-09 50,000 1,645,125 2,584,232 819,520 420,184 676,450 785,968 200,000 7,181,479 ' 2009-10 50,000 1,641,540 2,578,160 819,520 419,550 675,280 801,688 200,000 7,185,738 2010-11 50,000 1,640,840 2,571,868 819,520 418,272 672,525 817,722 200,000 7,190,747 2011-12 50,000 1,641,650 2,569,442 819,520 416,738 673,521 834,076 250,000 7,254,947 2012-13 28,311 1,638,750 2,560,155 819,520 419,819 673,130 421,166 250,000 6,810,851 ' 2013-14 1,638,300 1,457,490 417,516 671,351 250,000 4,434,657 2014-15 - 1,635,150 - 1,457,520 414,956 673,046 - 250,000 4,430,672 2015-16 - 1,634,1511 - 1,415,730 417,012 673,076 - - 4,179,168 2016-17 1,630,150 1,456,990 418,556 671,441 4,177,137 2017-18 1,632,850 1,451,300 414,716 668,141 4,167,007 2018-19 - 1,627,100 - 1,453,530 415,491 668,038 - - 4,164,159 2019-20 - 1,627,750 - 1,453,420 415,631 - - - 3,496,801 ' 2020-21 1,624,500 1,450,970 415,131 3,490,601 2021-22 - 1,622,200 - 1,451,050 414,106 - - - 3,487,356 2022-23 - 1,620,550 - 1,448,530 417,425 - - - 3,486,505 ' 2023-24 1,619,250 1,448,280 415,088 3,482,618 2024-25 - 1,613,150 - 1,445,170 417,094 - - - 3,475,414 2025-26 - 1,611,950 - 1,444,070 413,444 - - - 3,469,464 ' 2026-27 - - - 1,439,850 414,137 - - - 1,853,987 2027-28 1,437,380 414,044 1,851,424 2028-29 - - - 1,436,400 413,162 - - - 1,849,562 2029-30 411,494 411,494 ' 2030-31 - - - - 413,906 - - - 413,906 2031-32 - - - - 410,400 - - - 410,400 2033-34 - - - 410,500 - - - 410,975 ' 2033-34 410,500 500 410.500 Principal and interest 578,311 40,587,855 31,098,604 33,021,920 13,733,774 12,154,982 8,747,405 10,989,846 150,912,697 Less: ' Interest (19,467,855) (10.233,604)(17,261,920) (7,143.774) (4.404,982) (58.512.135) Total principal 578.3]1 21 120 00 0.82_65.000 I S 7 0 00 km _7X_Q 000 �.747.405 10 9W 846 22 400 562 57 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (14) Debt Without Governmental Commitment The City of La Quinta sold Improvement Bonds issued pursuant to the California State Improvement Act of 1915. The Bonds are payable from the annual installments collected on the regular property tax bills sent to owners of property having unpaid assessments levied against land benefited by the projects. The Bonds are neither general obligations of the City nor any other political subdivision and the full faith and credit of the City is not pledged for repayment thereof. The City is not liable for repayment of the debt, but is only acting as agent for the property owners in collecting the assessments and forwarding the collections to bondholders. The Bonds do not constitute an obligation of the City; therefore, they are not included in the general long-term debt account group in the accompanying financial statements. The following is a summary of Improvement Bonds outstanding at June 30, 2001: Amount Outstanding Proceeds Maturity Date Interest Rate at June 30, 2001 Assessment District No. 88-1 $ 855,984 9/2/04 5.50%-7.25% $ 185,000 Assessment District No. 89-2 1,153,974 9/2/04 6.65%-6.75% 320,000 Assessment District No. 90-1 1,227,155 9/2/05 6.50%7.00% 415,000 Assessment District No. 91-1 2,240,866 9/2/06 6.70%-6.80% 930,000 Assessment District No.92-1 1,880,891 9/2/08 5.00%-5.40% 1,090,000 Assessment District No.97-1 705,262 9/2/18 4.10°/r5.20% 720,000 Assessment District No. 2001-1 2,285,000 9/2115 5.00%6.60% 2,195,000 (15) Defined Benefit Pension Plan Plan Description The City of La Quinta contributes to the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), an agent multiple -employer public employee defined benefit pension plan. PERS provides retirement and disability benefits, annual cost -of -living adjustments, and death benefits to plan members and beneficiaries. PERS acts as a common investment and administrative agent for participating public entities within the State of California. Benefit provisions and all other requirements are established by state statute and city ordinance. Copies of PERS' annual financial report may be obtained from their executive office: 400 P Street, Sacramento, California 95814. Funding Policy Participants are required to contribute 7% of their annual covered salary. The City makes the contributions required of City employees on their behalf and for their account. The City is required to contribute at an actuarially determined rate. For the year ended June 30, 2001, the rate was 4.116% of annual covered payroll. The contribution requirements of plan members and the City are established and may be amended by PERS. 58 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (15) Defined Benefit Pension Plan, (Continued) Annual Pension Cost For 2001, the City's annual pension cost (employer contribution) in the amount of $70,752 was equal to the City's required and actual contributions. The required contribution was determined as part of the June 30, 1998, actuarial valuation using the entry age normal actuarial cost method. The actuarial assumptions included (a) 8.25% investment rate of return (net of administrative expenses), (b) projected annual salary increases that vary by duration of service, and (c) 2% per year cost -of -living adjustments. Both (a) and (b) included an inflation component of 3.5%. The actuarial value of PERS ' assets was determined using techniques that smooth the effects of short-term volatility in the market value of investments over a four-year period (smoothed market value). Any unfunded actuarial accrued liability is amortized as a level percentage of projected payroll on a closed basis. PERS combines the prior service unfunded liability and the current service unfunded liability into a single initial unfunded liability. The single funding horizon for the unfunded liability is June 30, 2011. Miscellaneous Employees Three -Year Trend Information Annual Pension Percentage of Net Pension Fiscal Year Cost APC APC Contributed Obligation 6/30/99 $219,350 100% -0- 6/30/00 128,123 100% -0- ' 6/30/01 70,752 100% -0- Required Supplementary Information ($ amount in thousands) Entry Age Normal Actuarial Unfunded Annual UAAL Accrued Value Liability/ Covered Asa%of Valuation Date Liability of Assets (Excess Assets) Funded Status Payroll Payroll 1 06/30/98 $4,389,078 5,957,276 (1,568,198) 135.7% 3,075,703 (50.987%) 06/30/99 4,989,981 7,206,658 (2,216,677) 144.4% 3,087,175 (71.803%) ' 06/30/00 5,704,327 8,340,014 (2,635,687) 146.2% 3,146,845 (83.756%) l] 1 59 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (16) Claims Payable/Self Insurance The City is a member of the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (Authority). The Authority is composed of 84 California public entities and is organized under a joint powers agreement pursuant to California Government Code Section 6500, et seq. The purpose of the Authority is to arrange and administer programs for the pooling of self - insured losses, to. purchase excess insurance or reinsurance, and to arrange for group - purchased insurance for property and other coverages. The Authority's pool began covering claims of its members in 1978. Each member government has a representative on the Board of Directors. The Board operates through a 9-member Executive Committee. General Liability Each member government pays a primary deposit to cover estimated losses for a fiscal year (claims year). Six months after the close of a fiscal year, outstanding claims are valued. A retrospective deposit computation is then made for each open claims year. Costs are spread to members as follows: the first $20,000 of each occurrence is charged directly to the city; costs from $20,001 to $500,000 are pooled based on a members share of costs under $20,000; costs from $500,001 of $5,000,000 are pooled based on payroll. Costs to covered claims above $5,000,000 are currently paid by reinsurance. The protection for the City is $50,000,OOO per occurrence and $50,000,000 annual aggregate. Workers Compensation The City also participates in the workers compensation pool administered by the Authority. Pool deposits and retrospective adjustments are valued in a manner similar to the General Liability pool. The City of La Quinta is charged for the first $20,000 of each claim. Costs above that level are pooled to $50,000. Costs from $50,001 to $100,000 per claim are pooled based on the City's losses under its retention level. Costs between $100,001 and $500,000 per claim are pooled based on payroll. Costs in excess of $500,000 are paid by excess insurance purchased by the Authority. The excess insurance provides coverage to statutory limits. During the past three fiscal years none of the above programs of protection have had settlements or judgments that exceeded pooled or insured coverage. There have been no significant reductions in pooled or insured liability coverage from coverage provided for the prior year. (17) Contingencies Various claims and suits have been filed against the City in the normal course of operations. Although the outcome of these lawsuits is not presently determinable, in the opinion of management, the resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the financial position of the City. CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) ' (18) Due From and To Other Funds Current interfund receivables and payables balances at June 30, 2001 are as follows: ' Due From ' Non -major Governmental Due To Funds General fund $ 781,340 RDA Debt Service PA No. 1 100,000 Capital Improvement 987,263 Non -major governmental funds 259,634 Totals 2 128 237 tNoncurrent interfund receivable and payable balances at June 30, 2001 are as follows: Advances To ' RDA RDA Debt Service - Debt Service - Capital ' Advances From PA No. 1 PA No. 2 Improvement Totals General fund $4,461,423 6,922,114 89,434 11,472,971 Low/Moderate Income Housing PA No. 2 39,135 39,135 Non -major governmental funds 511,903 - 511,903 ' Totals 4 973 326 6,961,249 89.434 12.024.009 ' As of June 30, 2001 the amount due to the General Fund from RDA Debt Service 1 was $4,461,423 and from RDA Debt Service 2 was $6,922,114. These outstanding advances consist of monies loaned to the Redevelopment Agency with no required repayment date and accrue an interest of 10%. (19) Proposition218 ' Recent developments, including the voters' enactment of Proposition 218 in November 1996, have affected the manner in which local governments may impose, extend or increase certain taxes, assessments and property -related fees. The more significant changes, which may affect local government revenue streams, are as follows: 1 ' 61 CITY OF LA QUINTA ' Notes to the Basic Financial Statements ' (Continued) (19) Proposition 218, (Continued) 1. If there is a majority protest against an assessment, the assessment cannot be , imposed. This means that increasing an assessment requires majority voter approval. , 2. Certain fees are defined as property -related. Some property -related fees require voter approval at an election; others allow for a majority protest but do not require ' an election. Property -related fees must comply with certain substantive provisions of Proposition 218, which generally limit the amount of fees. 3. Any local tax, assessment, fee or charge is subject to reduction or repeal by initiative. Uncertainty exists as to the scope and impact of these developments on local government , revenue streams. Future legislation and litigation may resolve some of these uncertainties. (20) . Construction Commitments The following material construction commitments existed at June 30, 2001: Expenditures as of Remaining Project Name June 30, 2001 Commitments Municipal Library $ 1,676 523,324 Phase VI-D — Sagebrush, Bottlebrush, Saquaro 1,064,660 542,941 Miraflores Single Family Homes 4,953,379 596,466 Civic Center Campus Improvements 221,735 836,289 Citywide Street/Sidewalk Improvements 52,221 864,046 Phase VI-C Westward Ho 1,112,098 1,127,525 18 Acre Park Site at Westward Ho 32,879 2,692,121 Phase VI — Village Commercial Area 4,349,937 3,685,069 Miraflores Senior Apartments 1,126,580 3,983,244 Phase 2 — Jefferson Street Improvements 3,631 4,878,369 CVAG/Jefferson Phase I 9,212,275 6,975,658 62 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (21) Restatement of Fund Balances ' Fund balances have been restated at June 30, 2000 as follows: Non -major ' General Debt Service Debt Service Governmental Fund PA No. 1 PA No. 2 Funds Fund balances at June 30, 2000, as previously reported $ 28,677,398 4,186,971 972,543 35,685,563 To reflect additional sales tax e revenues earned in the prior year 95,100 - - ' To record the effect of removing advances from other funds from the long-term debt ' account group and recording the liability in the fund responsible for repayment (4,055,839) (6,292,831) - To adjust deferred revenue for interest earned in prior years but not yet received - (629,909 Fund balances (deficit) at June 30, 2000, as restated 28 772.498 _ 131,132 5 3(, 20.28_8) 3�5O 5 5 654 (22) Interfund Transfers Interfund transfers were as follows for the year ended June 30, 2001: Transfers From ' Low/Moderate RDA Debt RDA Debt Non -major General Income Housing Service - Service - Governmental Transfers To Fund PA No. 2 PA No. 1 PA No. 2 Funds Totals General fund $ - - - - 238,565 238,565 ' RDA DS PA # 1 1,739,031 1,739,031 RDA DS PA #2 - 338,760 - - - 338,760 Capital Improvement 828,438 153,379 - - 7,526,914 8,508,731 ' Nonmajor governmental 3,888,672 1,230,180 1,967,576 7,086,428 Totals 3,888,612 1,230,13 1] 472 6 1 1 63 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (22) Interfund Transfers, (Continued) The following lists the major transfers in and transfers out included in the financial statements: Transfers from Maior Funds $3,888,672 was transferred from the RDA Debt Service — PA No. 1 Fund to the RDA Capital Projects — PA No. 1 Fund which represents funds available for future year capital projects within the Project Area. $1,230,180 was transferred from the RDA Debt Service — PA No. 2 Fund to the RDA Capital Projects — PA No. 2 fund which represents funds available for future year capital projects within the Project Area. Transfers from Non -Mai or Funds $1,891,080 was transferred from the Infrastructure Fund to the Transportation Fund to complete construction projects funded by Developer Impact fees. $2,439,169 was transferred from the RDA Capital Projects — PA No. 1 Fund to the Capital Improvement Fund to pay for infrastructure improvements to the La Quinta Village Area. $1,253,427 was transferred from the RDA Low Moderate Income Housing — PA No. 1 Fund to the RDA Debt Service — PA No. 1 Fund in accordance with the provisions of the 1995 Bond issue. (23) Subsequent Events On August 1, 2001, the Redevelopment Agency Project Area No. 1 issued $48,000,000 of tax allocation bonds to finance certain redevelopment projects benefiting the project area. Interest rates on the bonds range from 5.00% to 5.10% and are payable semi- annually on March 1 and September 1 of each year until maturity. The interest and principal of the bonds are payable from pledged tax increment revenues on a parity with the Agency's previously issued 1994 and 1998 tax allocation bonds. Principal payments are due in annual installments ranging from $1,565,000 to $3,805,000. The final maturity date of the bonds is September 1, 2031. 64 ICITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) e (24) Fund Deficits The following funds had deficit balances at June 30, 2001: ' Special Revenue Funds: Federal Assistance ($273,804) Debt Service Funds: RDA PA No. 1 (541,087) RDA PA No. 2 (6,258,943) ' Federal Assistance Fund — In accordance with Government Accounting Standards Board Pronouncement No. 33, revenues that are measurable and earned, but not available, must be deferred. $273,804 of deferred revenue was recorded for federal reimbursement revenues that were not collected within the available timeframe. RDA Debt Service — PA No. 1 — In accordance with Government Accounting Standards Board Pronouncement No. 34, the financial statements contain a restatement of fund ' balance to reflect the outstanding advance of $4,973,326 which in prior years had been accounted for in the General Long Term Debt Account Group. These outstanding advances consist of monies loaned to the Redevelopment Agency with no required ' repayment date and accrue an interest of 10% and are subordinated to other debt service payments. ' RDA Debt Service — PA No. 2 — In accordance with Government Accounting Standards Board Pronouncement No. 34, the financial statements contain a restatement of fund balance to reflect the outstanding advance of $6,691,249 which in prior years had been accounted for in the General Long Term Debt Account Group. These outstanding i advances consist of monies loaned to the Redevelopment Agency with no required repayment date and accrue an interest of 10% and are subordinated to other debt service payments. (25) Unreserved Fund Balances Unreserved fund balances at June 30, 2001 consisted of the following: 1 Special Revenue Debt Service Low/Moderate Redevelopment Redevelopment Other General Income Housing Agency Agency Governmental ' Fund PA No. I PA No. 1 PA No. 2 Funds Totals Designated for: Emergency reserve $9,119,765 9,119,765 Cash Flows 1,800,000 - - - - 1,800,000 ' Operations/projects/ - transfers 12,958,494 3,711,711 22,344,871 39,015,076 Undesignated 541087 (6, 258,943) 58,943) (991,574 )(7,791,604) Total unreserved fund balance (deficit)_ $2 83' 78'2;i2 _(541�87) (6 25g,943) 2.1,3,}y?,91 4_ 2}7 65 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (26) Expenditures in Excess of Appropriations Expenditures for the year ended June 30, 2001 exceeded the appropriations of the following funds/departments: Budget Actual Variance General Funds: Legislative $ 585,850 690,118 (104,268) Economic development 866,350 890,901 (24,551) Fiscal services 264,342 295,671 (31,329) Building and safety administration 153,082 160,081 (6,999) Civic center building 495,560 526,590 (31,030) Public works administration 63,683 154,870 (91,187) Capital projects administration (318,244) (83,350) (234,894) Special revenue funds: South Coast Air Quality 5,700 10,699 (4,999) Debt services funds: Redevelopment Agency Project Area No. 1 13,883,908 14,046,874 (162,966) Redevelopment Agency Project Area No. 2 5,872,505 6,201,794 (329,289) Capital projects funds: Civic Center Fund 203,700 211,983 (8,283) A.D. 2000-1 Phase VI Fund - 25,889 (25,889) (27) Changes in Accounting Principle During the year ended June 30, 2001, the City of La Quinta implemented GASB Statements No. 33 and 34. GASB Statement No. 34 changed the financial reporting model of local governmental units. As a result of GASB Statement No. 34, fund financial statements are required to be presented with a focus on the major funds of that local government. Previously, financial reporting for local governments had focused on reporting by fund type. The modified accrual basis of accounting and the current financial resources measurement focus is used in the fund financial statements for the governmental funds of the City. GASB Statement No. 34 also requires the presentation of government -wide financial statements. Previously, government -wide financial statements were not required. Government -wide financial statements are presented using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. The economic resources measurement focus requires that all (both current and long-term) assets and liabilities of the City be reported in the government -wide financial statements. The effect of the application of the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of 66 I CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued) (27) Changes in Accounting Principle, (Continued) accounting on the net assets of the City as of July 1, 2000 is set forth in note 21 to the basic financial statements. ' GASB Statement No. 33 formalized revenue recognition principles for the nonexchange transactions of local governmental units. GASB Statement No. 33 had minimal effects on 1 the financial statements of the City, which was already following the principles set forth by GASB Statement No. 33. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 11 1 1 67 (This page intentionally left blank) 68 I 1 1 1 1 ' REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 1 1 I 1 69 GENERAL FUND GENERAL FUND - The primary fund of the City used to account for all revenue and expenditures of the City not legally restricted as to use. A broad range of municipal activities are provided through this fund including City Manager, City Attorney, Finance, City Clerk, Community Development, Police Services, Public Works, Building and Safety, and Community Services. SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special revenue funds are used to account for specific revenues (other than major capital projects) and the related expenditures that are legally required to be accounted for in a separate fund. The following fund has been classified as a major fund. The budget -actual comparison for this fund has been presented in the accompanying financial statements as required supplementary information: ment Agency, Low and Moderate Income Housing P.A. No. 2 Fund — To account for ' d 20% set aside of property tax increments that is legally restricted for increasing or housing for low and moderate income households. 1 70 ' 1 CITY OF LA QUINTA Notes to Required Supplementary Information ' Year ended June 30, 2001 1 (1) Budgets and Budgetary Accounting The City adopts an annual budget prepared on the modified accrual basis of accounting 1 for its governmental funds and on the accrual basis of accounting for its proprietary funds. The City Manager or his designee is authorized to transfer budgeted amounts between the accounts of any department. Revisions that alter the total appropriations of 1 any department or fund are approved by City Council. Additional appropriations in the amount of $10,011,868 were made during the year. Prior year appropriations lapse unless they are approved for carryover into the following fiscal year. Expenditures may not legally exceed appropriations at the department level. Reserves for encumbrances are not 1 recorded by the City of La Quinta. 1 (2) Expenditures in Excess of Appropriations Expenditures for the year ended June 30, 2001 exceeded the appropriations of the following funds/departments: 1 Budget Actual Variance General Fund: Legislative $ 585,850 690,118 (104,268) 1 Economic development 866,350 890,901 (24,551) Fiscal services 264,342 295,671 (31,329) Building and safety administration Civic center building 153,082 495,560 160,081 526,590 (6,999) (31,030) Public works administration 63,683 154,870 (91,187) Capital projects administration (318,244) (83,350) (234,894) 1 1 1 71 CITY OF LA QUINTA General Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Original Revenues Final Actual Variance with Final Budget 2000 ' Positive (Negative) Actual Taxes S 7,559,790 7,559,790 10,331,970 2,772,180 8,888,825 Licenses and permits 802,900 802,900 2,057,423 1,254,523 2,493,360 Charges for services 877,425 884,703 1,998,589 1,113,886 1,922,097 Intergovernmental 1,511,350 1,476,705 2,164,891 688,186 2,388,749 Investment income 1,531,632 1,519,000 2,513,789 994,789 1,868,073 Miscellaneous 68,900 68,900 43,545 (25,355) 106,371 Total revenues 12,351,997 12,311,998 19,110,207 6,798,209 17,667,475 Expenditures: General government: Legislative 482,500 585,850 690,118 (104,268) 405,857 City manager 319,075 253,211 253,211 246,023 Economic development 866,350 866,350 890,901 (24,551) 814,903 Personnel 465,355 364,167 265,766 98,401 249,713 Fiscal services 332,828 264,342 295,671 (31,329) 311,476 Central services 472,715 475,465 407,638 67,827 552,696 City clerk 252,035 287,995 260,336 27,659 233,936 Total general government 3,190,858 3,097,380 3,063,641 33,739 2,814,604 Public safety: Police 3,467,100 3,774,313 3,650,632 123,681 3,084,646 Building and safety administrative 139,250 153,082 160,081 (6,999) 191,787 Code compliance 489,925 509,925 415,552 94,373 358,775 Animal control 191,905 198,155 139,803 58,352 133,602 Building 447,271 776,871 717,419 59,452 592,238 Emergency services 21,521 23,141 20,671 2,470 43,654 Fire 20,000 27,278 5,406 21,872 9,261 Civic center building 471,060 495,560 526,590 (31,030) 578,848 Total public safety 5,248,032 5,958,325 5,636,154 322,171 4,992,811 Community services: Senior center 242,190 249,190 219,143 30,047 222,931 Parks and recreation administration 601,709 658,959 534,836 124,123 490,471 Parks and recreation programs 88,700 90,100 63,481 26.619 55.126 Total community services 932,599 998,249 817,460 180,789 768,528 (Continued) 72 ' CITY OF LA QUINTA General Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual (Continued) Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (Negative) Actual Planning and development: Community development ' administration 355,700 381,865 280,049 101,816 266,430 Current planning 483,800 799,500 453,530 345,970 482,519 ' Total planning and development 839,500 1,181,365 733,579 447,786 748,949 ' Public works: Public works administration 133,765 63,683 154,870 (91,187) 110,008 Development and traffic 559,687 772,787 706,364 66,423 754,425 Maintenanceloperations - St. 476,963 770,113 96,345 673,768 517,252 ' Maintenance/operations -L & L 569,352 676,552 543,299 133,253 341,750 Capital projects administration 2,094 (318,244) (83,350) (234,894) (18,439) Total public works 1,741,861 1,964,891 1,417,528 547,363 1,704,996 ' Total expenditures 11,952,850 13,200,210 11,668,362 1,531,848 11,029,888 Excess (deficiency) of revenues ' over(under)expenditures 399,147 (888,212) 7,441,845 8,330,057 6,637,587 Other financing sources (uses): ' Transfers in 98,700 475,300 238,565 (236,735) 79,510 Transfers out (328,180) (1,555,785) (828,438) 727,347 (1,359,255) Total other financing sources (uses) (229,480) (1,080,485) (589,873) 490,612 (1,279,745) Excess (deficiency) of revenues ' and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses 169,667 (1,968,697) 6,851,972 8,820,669 5,357,842 ' Fund balance at beginning of year, as restated 28,772,498 28,772,498 28,772,498 - 23,319,556 ' Fund balance at end of year $ 28,942,165 26,803,801 35,624,470 8,820,669 28,677,398 1 73 CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Revenue Funds Low/Moderate Income Housing Project Area No. 2 Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Taxes Investment income Total revenues Expenditures: Current: Planning and development Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures Other financing sources (uses): Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 1,219,165 1,410,644 1,517,600 106,956 1,254,407 60,800 60,800 185,625 124,825 151,458 1,279,965 1,471,444 1,703,225 231,781 1,405,865 2,152,482 3,012,672 837,605 2,175,067 532,773 2,152,482 3,012,672 837,605 2,175,067 532,773 (872,517) (1,541,228) 865,620 2,406,848 873,092 (338,760) (1,941,399) 492,139 1,449,260 (338,760) (1,941,399) (492,139) 1,449,260 (1,211,277) (3,482,627) 373,481 3,377,365 3,377,365 3,377,365 $ 2,166,088 105,262 3,750,846 3,856,108 3,856,108 (338,842) 338,842 534,250 2,843,115 3,377,365 74 r I 1 1 1 [] 1 ' SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES 1 1 t 1 1 75 CITY OF LA QUINTA Non -Major Governmental Funds Combining Balance Sheet June 30, 2001 Special Revenue Funds Lighting State Federal and Public Village Gas Tax Assistance Landscape SLESF Quimby Safety Parking Assets Cash and investments $ 351,659 105,414 54,140 505,277 11,543 Cash with fiscal agent - _ - - - Accounts receivable - Prepaid items - Interest receivable - Notes receivable - Due from other funds - Due from other governments 273,804 18,153 Advances to other funds - - Total assets $ 351,659 273,804 123,567 54,140 505,277 11,543 Liabilities and Fund Balances Liabilities: Accounts payable $ - - - Deferred revenue 273,804 Deposits payable _ Due to other funds 273,804 Total liabilities 547,608 Fund balances: Reserved for: Debt service - Bond projects Prepaid items Advances to other funds Notes receivable Unreserved, reported in: Special revenue funds 351,659 (273,804) 123,567 54,140 505,277 11,543 Capital projects funds - - Total fund balances 351,659 (273,804 123,567 54,140 505,277 11,543 Total liabilities and fund balances $ 351,659 273,804 1231567 54,140 505,277 11,543 i'6� t ' Debt Special Revenue Funds Service Fund Low/ ' Moderate Low/ Low/ Income Moderate Moderate South Coast Air Quality LLEBG Housing- PA No. 1 Bond- PA No. I Bond- PA No. 2 Financing Authority ' 56,063 6,566 2,985,890 - 340,862 8,363 1,550,700 2,390,586 1,546 88,299 - - - - 833 2,861,382 - ' 39,929 - 511,903 56,063 6,566 6,487,403 1,551,533 2,731,448 9,909 2,253 - 14,102 751,732 - _ 14,283 - - - 718,603 148,567 t2,253 780,117 718,603 148,567 - - - - - 9,909 = 1,550,700 2,390,586 - 511,903 - - 2,861,382 - 53,810 6,566 2,334,001 (717,770) 192,295 ' 53,810 6,566 5,707,286 832,930 2,582,881 9,909 ' 56,063 6,566 6,487,403 1,551,533 2,731,448 9,909 (Continued) 77 CITY OF LA QUINTA Non -Major Governmental Funds Combining Balance Sheet (Continued) Capital Projects Funds Parks & Civic Library Community Infastructure Transportation Recreation Center Development Center , Assets Cash and investments 5,026,077 3,519,560 1,035,979 1,233,222 662,901 275,447 ' Cash with fiscal agent - - - - - - Accounts receivable - - - - - - Prepaid items - - - - - - Interest receivable - - - - - - Notes receivable - - - - - - Due from other funds - - - - - - Due from other governments - - - - - - Advances to other funds - Total assets 5,026,077 3,519,560 1,035,979 1,233,222 662,901 275,447 Liabilities and Fund Balances Liabilities: Accounts payable 42,030 Deferred revenue - Deposits payable Due to other funds 476,237 Total liabilities 518,267 Fund balances: Reserved for: Debt service - Bond projects Prepaid items - Advances to other funds - Notes receivable - Unreserved, reported in: Special revenue funds - - _ - Capital projects funds 4,507,810 3,519,560 1,035,979 1,233,222 662,901 275,447 Total fund balances 4,507,810 3,519,560 1,035,979 1,233,222 662,901 275,447 Total liabilities and fund balances 52026,077 3,519,560 12035,979 1,233,222 662,901 275,447 78 0 Capital Projects Funds fA.D.97-1 Financing Redevelopment Redevelopment Street Park LQ Norte A.D. 2000-1 Authority Agency Agency ' Facility Facility Construction Phase VI Projects PA No.I PA No.2 Totals 61,191 16,149 63,129 1,209,088 94,209 2,955,712 3,284,588 23,863,029 ' 542,000 5,357,019 214,396 10,056,247 - - 60,900 149,199 3,- - 3,515 t 833 833 - - - 2,861,382 ' 259,634 - - 259,634 - - - 331,886 - - - - - - 511,903 ' 61,191 16,149 63,129 1,468,722 636,209 8,316,246 3,559,884 38,037,628 - - - _ - 11,689 4,791 74,865 ],025,536 14,283 511,026 - 2,128,237 511,026 11,689 4,791 3,242,921 1 - - - - 9,909 542,000 5,357,019 214,396 10,054,701 3,515 3,515 - - 511,903 - 2,861,382 - - - - 2,641,284 61,191 16,149 63,129 957,696 94,209 2,944,023 3,340,697 18,712,013 ' 61,191 16,149 63,129 957,696 636,209 8,304,557 3,555,093 34,794,707 61,191 16,149 63,129 1,468,722 636,209 8,316,246 3,559,884 38,037,628 1 79 CITY OF LA QUINTA Non -Major Governmental Funds Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Year ended June 30, 2001 Special Revenue Funds - Lighting Gas Federal and Public Village Tax Assistance Landscape SLESF Quimby Safety Parkin Revenues: Taxes S - - - - - - - Developer fees - - 3,750 - - - - Intergovernmental 629,332 15,830 - 100,028 - - - Investment income 17,142 - 1,495 5,946 31,282 633 1,009 Special assessments - - 782,610 - - - - Rental income - - - - - - - Gain (loss) on sale of land - - - - - - - Miscellaneous Total revenues 646,474 15,830 787,855 105,974 31,282 633 1,009 Expenditures: Current: General government - - - - - - - Planning and development - - - - - - - Public works 418,400 778,000 Capital outlay - - - - - - Debt service: Principal - - - - - - - Interest Total expenditures 418,400 778,000 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures 228,074 15,830 9,855 105,974 31,282 633 1,009 Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in - - - - - 2,000 - Transfers out (289,634) 125,565 100,783 31,129 Total other financing sources (uses) 289,634 (125,565 10( 0,783) 2,000 (31,12 9) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses 228,074 (273,804) 9,855 (19,591) (69,501) 2,633 (30,120) Fund balances (deficits) at beginning of year, as restated 123,585 - 113,712 73,731 574,778 8,910 30,120 Fund balances (deficit) at end of year S 351,659 273,804 123,567 54,140 505,277 11,543 80 1 Debt ' Special Revenue Funds Service Low/ ' Moderate Income Low/ Moderate Low/ Moderate South Coast Housing- Bond- Bond- Financing Air Quaility LLEBG PA No. 1 PA No. I PA No. 2 Authority - - 3,737,113 - - 45,848 25,944 49,772 - - - - 2,656 2,032 96,383 268,391 74,163 1,514 - - 388,121 - - 678,955 - 406,461 - - - _ 25,096 27,615 28,600 51,804 4,699,022 268,391 74,163 708,084 1 ' 10,699 - 3,265,008 - - 9,133 - - - - - 260,000 - - - - 418,955 10,699 - 3,265,008 688,088 17,901 51,804 1,434,014 268,391 74,163 19,996 (45,400 ) 1,739,031 (1,177,00 0) _ - (45,400 ) 1,739,031 1,1( 77,000) - ' 17,901 6,404 (305,017) (908,609) 74,163 19,996 35,909 162 6,012,303 1,741,539 2,508,718 (10,087) 53,810 6,566 5,707,286 832,930 2,582,881 9,909 (Continued) 1 81 CITY OF LA QUINTA' Non -Major Governmental Funds Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances (Continued) Capital Projects Funds Parks & Civic Library Community Street Inf tstructure Transportation Recreation Center Development Center Facility Revenues: Taxes - - - - - - - Developer fees 823,412 413,975 637,564 242,803 110,033 27,696 Intergovernmental - - - - - - - Investment income 210,806 184,044 50,586 61,369 86,245 13,457 2,833 Special assessments - - - - - - - Rental income - - - - - - - Gain (loss) on sale of land - - - - - - - Miscellaneous Total revenues 210,806 1,007,456 464,561 698,933 329,048 123,490 30,529 Expenditures: Current: General government - - - 211,983 - - - Planning and development - - - - - - - - Public works Capital outlay 42,030 Debt service: Principal - - - - - - - Interest Total expenditures 42,030 211,983 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures 168,776 1,007,456 464,561 486,950 329,048 123,490 30,529 Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in - 1,891,080 - - - - - Transfers out 2,253,879 1( 80,903) 1,676 - Total other financing sources (uses) (2,253,87 1,710,177 (1,676) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses (2,085,103) 2,717,633 464,561 486,950 327,372 123,490 30,529 Fund balances (deficits) at begirming of year, as restated 6,592,913 801,927 571,418 746,272 335,529 151,957 30,662 Fund balances (deficit) at end of year 4,507,810 3,519,560 1,035,979 1,233,222 662,901 275,447 61,191 82 Capital Proiects Funds A.D.97-1 Financing Redevelopment Redevelopment Park LQ Norte A.D. 2000-1 Authority Agency Agency Facility Construction Phase VI Projects PA No.I PA No.2 Totals 3,737,113 6,168 - - - - 5,000 2,316,249 820,906 793 3,475 135,651 48,514 67,250 166,832 1,534,501 - _ _ _ _ - 782,610 1,067,076 406,461 52,711 6,961 3,475 135,651 48,514 67,250 171,832 10,717,627 211,983 830,458 322,361 4,437,659 - 1,196,400 25,889 - - - 67,919 - 260,000 - 418,955 25,889 830,458 322,361 6,592,916 6,961 3,475 109,762 48,514 (763,208 ) 1( 50,529) 4,124,711 - - 74,496 - 3,888,672 1,230,180 7,086,428 (1,580,002) - 2,7( 88,179) 1,158,905 (11,472,086) (1,505,506) - 1,100,493 71,275 (4,385,658) 6,961 3,475 (1,395,744) 48,514 337,285 (79,254) (260,947) 9,188 59,654 2,353,440 587,695 7,967,272 3,634,347 35,055,654 16,149 63,129 957,696 636,209 8,304,557 3,555,093 34,794,707 83 (This page intentionally left blank) 84 NON -MAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special revenue funds are used to account for specific revenues (other than expendable trusts and major capital projects) and the related expenditures that are legally required to be accounted for in a separate fund. The City of La Quinta has the following Special Revenue Funds: State Gas Tax Fund - To account for gasoline allocations made by the State of California. These revenues are restricted by the State to expenditures for street -related purposes only. Federal Assistance Fund - To account for revenues from the Community Development Block Grants received from the Federal Government and the expenditures of those resources. assessments levied on real landscape maintenance and To account for special from City-wide lighting and State Law Enforcement Block Grant (SLEBG) Fund - To account for state funded "Citizens for Public Safety" (COPS) program activities, as per Assembly Bill 3229, which supplements frontline police services such as anti -gang community crime prevention. ' Quimby Fund - To account for the accumulation of developer fees received under the provisions of the Quimby Act for park development and improvements. Capital projects to be funded from this source will be budgeted and expended in a separate capital projects fund. ' La Quinta Public Safety Officer Fund - To account for contributions to be distributed to public safety officers disabled or killed in the line of duty. ' Village Parking Fund - To account for the accumulation of resources provided through developer fees to facilitate parking and traffic flow in that area of the City known as "The Village". Capital projects funded from this source will be budgeted in a separate capital projects fund. ' South Coast Air Quality Fund - To account for contributions from the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Use of such contributions is limited to reduction and control of airborne pollutants. ' Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) Fund - To account for Federal Bureau of Justice Block Grant program, which may ufor the purpose of reducing crime and improving ' public safety. Redevelopment Agency, Low and Moderate Income Housing P.A. No. 1 Fund - To account for the required 20% set aside of property tax increments that is legally restricted for increasing or ' improving housing for low and moderate income households. . _ ______ . ___. __A r,r,.a --- *e R...,A F,,,,A P A Nn 1 and No. 2 Funds - To II programs. 1 85 CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Revenue Funds State Gas Tax Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Intergovernmental Investment income Total revenues Expenditures: Current: Public works Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 413,900 586,678 629,332 42,654 406,326 4,500 4,500 17,142 12,642 5,332 418,400 591,178 646,474 55,296 411,658 418,400 418,400 418,400 - 395,400 418,400 418,400 418,400 - 395,400 172,778 228,074 55,296 16,258 123,585 123,585 123,585 - 107,327 $ 1232585 296,363 351,659 552296 123,585 86 CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Revenue Funds Federal Assistance Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Intergovernmental Investment income Total revenues Other financing sources (uses): Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Budget Original Final $ 340,400 340,000 340,400 340,000 Variance with Final Budget Actual Positive (negative) 15,830 (324,170) 15,830 130,000 289,634 130,000 289,634 340,400 210,000 $ 340,400 210,000 (273,804) 273,804 324,170 159,634 159,634 (483,804) 483,804 2000 Actual 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 87 CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Revenue Funds Lighting and Landscape Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Developer fees Investment income Special assessments Total revenues Expenditures: Current: Public works Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures Other financing sources (uses): Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ - - 3,750 3,750 34,840 4,300 4,300 1,495 (2,805) - 773,700 773,700 782,610 8,910 785,794 778,000 778,000 787,855 9,855 820,634 778,000 778,000 778,000 - 764,400 778,000 778,000 778,000 - 764,400 - - 9,855 9,855 56,234 - (12,705 ) - - 12,705 - - 9,855 9,855 43,529 113,712 113,712 113,712 - 70,183 $ 113,712 113,712 123,567 9,855 113,712 88 CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Revenue Funds SLEBG Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual Revenues: Intergovernmental $ 48,400 173,759 100,028 (73,731) 48,372 Investment income 1,500 1,500 5,946 4,446 4,411 Total revenues 49,900 175,259 105,974 69,285 52,783 Other financing sources (uses) Transfers out 30,100 173,759 125,565 48,194 39,910 Total other financing sources (uses) 30,100 173,759 125,565 48,194 39,910 Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses 19,800 1,500 (19,591) (21,091) 12,873 Fund balances at beginning of year 73,731 73,731 73,731 - 60,858 Fund balances at end of year $ 93,531 75,231 54,140 (21,091 73,731 m CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Revenue Funds Quimby Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Developer fees Investment income Total revenues Other financing sources (uses): Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Variance with • Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual I $ 55,000 55,000 - (55,000) 370,640 ' 9,000 9,000 31,282 22,282 18,116 64,000 64,000 31,282 (32,718 388,756 ' 70,000 329,844 100,783 229,061 12,356 ' 70,000 329,844 (100,783 229,061 12,356 (6,000) (265,844) (69,501) 196,343 376,400 574,778 574,778 574,778 - 198,378 $ 568,778 308,934 505,277 196,343 574,778 dl CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Revenue Funds Public Safety Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Investment income Total revenues Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 200 200 633 433 4,600 200. 200 633 433 4,600 2,000 2,000 2,000 - 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,200 2,200 2,633 433 6,600 8,910 8,910 8,910 - 2,310 $ 11,110 11,110 11,543 433 8,910 441 CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Revenue Funds Village Parking Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Investment income Total revenues Other financing sources (uses): Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 1,500 1,500 1,009 (491) 1,495 1,500 1,500 1,009 491 1,495 29,236 31,129 1,893 - 29,236 31,129 1,893 - 1,500 (27,736) (30,120) (2,384) 1,495 30,120 30,120 30,120 - 28,625 $ 31,620 2,384 - 2,384 30,120 92 I I 1 1 1 1 CI CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Revenue Funds South Coast Air Quality Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Intergovernmental Investment income Total revenues Expenditures: Current: Planning and development Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over(under)expenditures Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 21,244 21,244 25,944 4,700 23,545 800 800 2,656 1,856 1,373 22,044 22,044 28,600 6,556 24,918 5,700 5,700 10,699 4,999 7,573 5,700 5,700 10,699 4,999 7,573 16,344 16,344 17,901 1,557 17,345 35,909 35,909 35,909 18,564 $ 52,253 52,253 53,810 1,557 35,909 1 93 CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Revenue Funds LLEBG Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Intergovernmental Investment income Total revenues Other financing sources (uses): Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 27,000 49,564 49,772 208 - 300 300 2,032 1,732 162 27,300 49,864 51,804 1,940 162 27,600 50,164 45,400 4,764 - 27,600 50,164 45,400 4,764 - (300) (300) 6,404 6,704 162 162 162 162 - - $ 138 138 6,566 6,704 162 94 CITY OF LA QUINTA ' Special Revenue Funds Low/Moderate Income Housing Project Area No. 1 Fund ' Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 ' Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual Revenues: Taxes $ 3,100,292 3,486,725 3,737,113 250,388 3,194,919 ' Developer fees 45,848 45,848 48,860 Investment income 312,880 312,880 96,383 (216,497) 267,399 Rental income 341,000 341,000 388,121 47,121 404,752 ' Gain (loss) on sale of land 150,000 150,000 406,461 256,461 361,102 Miscellaneous - - 25,096 25,096 - ' Total revenues 3,904,172 4,290,605 4,699,022 408,417 4,277,032 Expenditures: ' Current: Planning and development 7,508,980 8,725,380 3,265,008 5,460,372 2,164,104 ' Total expenditures 7,508,980 8,725,380 3,265,008 5,460,372 2,164,104 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures (3,604,808) (4,434,775) 1,434,014 5,868,789 2,112,928 ' Other financing sources (uses): Transfers out (1,739,031) (1,739,031) (1,739,031) 1,739,297 1 Total other financing sources (uses) (1,739,031) (1,739,031) 1,739,031 1,739,297 Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and ' other financing uses (5,343,839) (6,173,806) (305,017) 5,868,789 373,631 Fund balances at beginning of year, tas restated 6,012,303 6,012,303 6,012,303 - 6,268,281 Fund balances at end of year $ 668,464 161,503 5,707,286 5,868,789 6,641,912 1 95 CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Revenue Funds Low/Moderate Bond - Project Area No. 1 Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Investment income Total revenues Expenditures: Current: Planning and development Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over(under)expenditures Other financing sources (uses): Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 268,391 268,391 32,618 268,391 268,391 32,618 67,695 67,695 268,391 268,391 (35,077) (1,784,724) (1,177,000) 607,724 (1,570,149) (1,784,724) 1,177,000 607,724 1,5( 70,149) - (1,784,724) (908,609) 876,115 (1,605,226) 1,741,539 1,741,539 1,741,539 - 3,346,765 $ 1,741,539 43,185 832,930 876,115 1,741,539 CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Revenue Funds Low/Moderate Bond - Project Area No. 2 Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Investment income Total revenues Expenditures: Current: Planning and development Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 74,163 74,163 8,734 74,163 74,163 8,734 - - 24,609 24,609 74,163 74,163 (15,875) (2,522,731) (2,522,731) - (2,522,731) 74,163 2,508,718 2,508,718 2,508,718 $ 2,508,718 14,013 2,582,881 - 373,267 2,522,731 - 2,522,731 373,267 2,596,894 2,596,894 357,392 2,151,326 2,508,718 97 (This page intentionally left blank) 98 I MAJOR AND NON -MAJOR DEBT SERVICE FUNDS ' Debt Service Funds are used to account for the accumulation of resources for, and the payment of, general long-term debt principal and interest. The City of La Quinta has the following Debt Service Funds: La Quinta Financing Authority Fund - To account for rental activity for the Civic Center and rental income used to pay the Financing Authority Civic Center debt obligation. Redevelopment Agency, P.A. No. 1 and No. 2 - To account for the accumulation of resources for the payment of debt service for bond principal interest and trustee fees. 1 99 CITY OF LA QUINTA Debt Service Funds Financing Authority Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual Revenues: Investment income $ - - 1,514 1,514 - Rental income 678,955 678,955 678,955 - 679,670 Miscellaneous 9,175 9,175 27,615 18,440 - Total revenues 688,130 688,130 708,084 19,954 679,670 Expenditures: Current: Planning and development 9,175 9,175 9,133 42 9,648 Debt service: Principal 260,000 260,000 260,000 - 250,000 Interest 418,955 418,955 418,955 - 429,670 Total expenditures 688,130 688,130 688,088 42 689,318 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures - - 19,996 19,996 (9,648) Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in - - - - 8,333 Total other financing sources (uses) - - - - 8,333 Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses - - 19,996 19,996 (1,315) Fund balances (deficit) at beginning of year 10,087 (10,08 7) 10,087 - 8,772 Fund balances (deficit) at end of year $ 10,087 10,087 9,909 19,996 10,087 100 I 1 1 1 F 1 I 1 CITY OF LA QUINTA Debt Service Funds Redevelopment Agency Project Area No. 1 Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Taxes Investment income Total revenues Expenditures: Current: Planning and development Debt service: Principal Interest Payments under pass -through obligations Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in Transfers out Proceeds of advances Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year, as restated Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 11,489,722 13,946,901 14,948,451 1,001,550 12,779,677 - - 575,845 575,845 588,883 11,489,722 13,946,901 15,524,296 1,577,395 13,368,560 221,000 236,280 237,341 (1,061) 214,629 1,352,660 3,349,544 3,349,544 1,352,660 3,703,920 4,228,397 4,228,397 - 3,707,492 6,084,577 6,069,687 6,231,592 (161,905) 6,842,720 11,362,157 13,883,908 14,046,874 (162,966) 12,117,501 127,565 62,993 1,477,422 1,739,297 1,739,031 1,739,031 (981,937) (3,888,672) (3,888,672) 757,360 (2,149,641) (2,149,641) 1,414,429 1,251,059 1,739,297 (1,855,699) 362,208 245,806 884,925 (2,086,648) (672,219) 1,414,429 1,496,865 131,132 131,132 131,132 - 2,690,106 $ 1,016,057 (1,955,516) 541,087 1,414,429 4,186,971 1 101 CITY OF LA QUINTA Debt.Service Funds , Redevelopment Agency Project Area No. 2 Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 ' Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 , Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual Revenues: Taxes Investment income Total revenues Expenditures: Current: Planning and development Debt service: Principal Interest Payments under pass -through obligations Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in Transfers out Proceeds of advances Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year, as restated Fund balances at end of year $ 4,786,650 5,641,374 6,070,400 429,026 5,017,628 , - - 84,159 84,159 52,296 4,786,659 5,641,374 6,154,559 513,185 5,069,924 ' 88,770 88,770 98,580 (9,810) 82,987 155,531 155,531 155,531 - 152,340 , 1,005,741 912,016 1,229,894 (317,878) 1,042,718 4,142,833 4,716,188 4,717,789 (1,601) 3,716,567 ' 5,392,875 5,872,505 6,201,794 (329,289) 4,994,612 (606,216) (231,131) (47,235) 183,896 75,312 , 338,760 338,760 338,760 - 338,842 , (152,668) (1,230,180) (1,230,180) - (493,939) - - - - 435,708 t 186,092 (891,420) (891,420) - 280,611 M (420,124) (1,122,551) (938,655) 183,896 355,923 (5,320,288) _(5,320,288) 5,320288 - 616,620 $ (5,740,412) 6,442,839 6,258,943 183,896 972,543 102 MAJOR AND NON -MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS Capital projects funds account for the financial resources to be used for the acquisition, construction or improvements of major capital facilities and infrastructure. The City of La Quinta has the following Capital Projects Funds: Infrastructure Fund - To account for the accumulation of resources provided through developer fees for the acquisition, construction or improvement of the City's infrastructure, prior to adoption of the new Developer Impact Fee Structure on August 16, 1999. This fund accounts for all developer resources received prior to this date, and is budgeted by the Council through adoption of the annual capital improvement program budget. tuna, Uommunity tenter Fund, street Facility Fund, Park Facility Fund —'lo account for the accumulation of resources provided through developer fees for the acquisition, construction, or improvement of the City's infrastructure. The Developer Impact Fee was adopted by the City Council on August 16, 1999. Six new funds have been established to account for the specific impact areas of these fees, and are budgeted by the Council through adoption of the annual Capital Improvement Program budget. Capital Improvement Fund - To account for the planning, design and construction of various capital projects throughout the City of La Quinta and the Redevelopment Agency. Assessment District 97-1 La Quinta Norte Construction Fund - To account for the bond proceeds and other funding that will be used for improvements to Assessment District 97-1. Assessment District 2000-1 Phase VI Fund — To account for the bond proceeds and other funding that will be used for improvements to Assessment District 2000-1. Financing Authority Capital Projects Fund - To account for the Public Financing Authority bond proceeds that will be used for specific projects and programs of the City. and land acquisition. - To account for the bond elopment, planning, construction f 11N CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds Infastructure Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Developer fees Investment income Total revenues Expenditures: Capital projects Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over(under)expenditures Other financing sources (uses): Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original ' Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ - - - - 722,117 358,989 358,989 210,806 (148,183) 408,366 358,989 358,989 210,806 (148,183) 1,130,483 46,700 42,030 46,700 42,030 4,670 266,909 4,670 266,909 ' 358,989 312,289 168,776 (143,513) 863,574 1 (3,386,343) (5,298,092) (2,253,879) 3,044,213 (3,386,343) (5,298,092 2,253 879 3,044,213 (3,027,354) (4,985,803) (2,085,103) 6,592,913 6,592,913 6,592,913 $ 3,565,559 1,607,110 4,507,810 2,900,700 2,900,700 3,905,989 3,905,989 (3,042,415) 9,635,328 6,592,913 104 CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds Capital Improvement Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Developer fees Intergovernmental Total revenues Expenditures: Capital projects Debt service: Principal Interest Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over(under)expenditures Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 20,000 515,784 276,149 (239,635) 563,056 4,697,200 18,951,359 6,414,543 (12,536,816) 3,728,384 4,717,200 19,467,143 6,690,692 (12,776,451) 4,291,440 8,985,217 44,512,311 14,388,395 30,123,916 11,906,629 745,345 745,345 745,345 - 50,000 65,683 65,683 65,683 9,796,245 45,323,339 15,199,423 30,123,916 11,956,629 (5,079,045) (25,856,196) (8,508,731) 17,347,465 7,665,189 5,079,045 25,856,196 8,508,731 _(17,347,465) 7,665,189 5,079,045 25,856,196 8,508,731 (17,347,465) 7,665,189 105 Revenues: Developer fees Investment income Total revenues Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in Transfers out CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds Transportation Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 284,000 284,000 823,412 539,412 779,825 23,100 23,100 184,044 160,944 22,102 307,100 307,100 1,007,456 700,356 801,927 1,891,080 1,891,080 1,891,080 - 1,264,322 (1,506,322) 180,903 1,325,419 Total other financing sources (uses) 626,758 384,758 1,710,177 Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses 933,858 691,858 2,717,633 Fund balances at beginning of year 801,927 801,927 801,927 Fund balances at end of year $ 1,735,785 1,493,785 3,519,560 1,325,419 2,025,775 801,927 2,025,775 801,927 106 CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds Parks and Recreation Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual Revenues: Developer fees $ 201,000 413,975 212,975 556,103 Investment income 20,500 50,586 30,086 15,315 Total revenues - 221,500 464,561 243,061 571,418 Fund balances at beginning of year 571,418 571,418 571,418 - - Fund balances at end of year $ 571,418 792,918 1,035,979 243,061 571,418 107 CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds Civic Center Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual Revenues: Developer fees $ 284,500 637,564 353,064 725,367 Investment income 19,400 61,369 41,969 20,905 Total revenues - 303,900 698,933 395,033 746,272 Expenditures: Current: General government 203,700 203,700 211,983 8,283 Total expenditures 203,700 203,700 211,983 (8,283 - Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures (203,700) 100,200 486,950 386,750 746,272 Fund balances at beginning of year 746,272 746,272 746,272 Fund balances at end of year $ 542,572 846,472 1,2332222 386,750 746,272 108 Revenues: Developer fees Investment income Total revenues Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in Transfers out CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds Library Development Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Budget Original Final Variance with Final Budget Actual Positive (negative) 2000 $ 150,000 150,000 242,803 92,803 326,539 17,900 17,900 86,245 68,345 8,990 167,900 167,900 329,048 161,148 335,529 1,386,518 - - - - (525,000) (525,000) (1,676) 523,324 Total other financing sources (uses) 861,518 (525,000) 1,676 Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses 1,029,418 (357,100) 327,372 Fund balances at beginning of year 335,529 335,529 335,529 Fund balances at end of year $ 1,364,947 662,901 523,324 684,472 335,529 684,472 335,529 109 CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds Community Center Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual Revenues: Developer fees $ 53,500 53,500 110,033 56,533 147,886 Investment income 5,100 5,100 13,457 8,357 4,071 Total revenues 58,600 58,600 123,490 Fund balances at beginning of year 151,957 151,957 151,957 Fund balances at end of year $ 210,557 210,557 275,447 110 64,890 151,957 64,890 151,957 CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds Street Facility Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual Revenues: Developer fees $ 9,500 9,500 27,696 18,196 26,162 Investment income 1,000 1,000 2,833 1,833 4,500 Total revenues 10,500 10,500 30,529 Fund balances at beginning of year 30,662 30,662 30,662 Fund balances at end of year $ 41,162 41,162 61,191 20,029 30,662 20,029 30,662 III Revenues: Developer fees Investment income Total revenues Fund balances at beginning of year CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds Park Facility Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 3,000 200 3,200 3,000 6,168 200 793 3,200 6,961 9,188 9,188 9,188 3,168 8,934 3,761 9,188 Fund balances at end of year $ 12,388 12,388 16,149 3,761 9,188 112 CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds A.D. 97-1 LQ Norte Construction Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual Revenues: Investment income $ 3,475 3,475 4,444 Total revenues - - 3,475 3,475 4,444 Expenditures: Current: Planning and development - - - - 125,584 Total expenditures - - - - 125,584 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over(under)expenditures - - 3,475 3,475 (121,140) Fund balances at beginning of year 59,654 59,654 59,654 - 180,794 Fund balances at end of year $ 59,654 59,654 63,129 3,475 59,654 113 CITY OF IA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds A.D. 2000-1 Phase VI Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year. ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Investment income Special assessments Total revenues Expenditures: Capital projects Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in Transfers out Proceeds of bonds Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Residual equity transfer Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 135,651 135,651 20,336 - - 345,837 - 135,651 135,651 366,173 25,889 (25,889) - 25,889 (25,889) - 109,762, 109,762 366,173 74,496 74,496 - (2,188,059) (1,580,002) 608,057 - - 2,240,013 2,188,059 1,505,506 682,553 2,240,013 - (2,188,059) (1,395,744) 2,353,440 2,353,440 2,353,440 $ 2,353,440 165,381 957,696 792,315 2,606,186 (252,746) 792,315 2,353,440 114 1 1 1 1 CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds Financing Authority Capital Projects Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Investment income Total revenues Other financing sources (uses): Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 48,514 48,514 (517,732) - (517,732) 48,514 14,773 48,514 14,773 517,732 8,333 517,732 8,333 - (517,732) 48,514 566,246 6,440 587,695 587,695 587,695 - 581,255 $ 587,695 69,963 636,209 566,246 587,695 115 Revenues: Investment income Total revenues Expenditures: Current: Planning and development Capital projects Total expenditures CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds Redevelopment Agency Project Area No. 1 Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ 290,400 290,400 67,250 290,400 290,400 67,250 967,822 1,044,992 830,458 967,822 1,044,992 830,458 223,150 11,413 223,150 11,413 214,534 783,471 106,773 214,534 890,244 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures (677,422) (754,592) 763,208 (8,616) 878,831 Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in Transfers out Proceeds of advances Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year 1,692,447 3,888,672 3,888,672 - 1,855,699 (477,375) (5,023,815) (2,788,179) 2,235,636 (1,428,676) ft - - 107,273 1,215,072 (1,135,143) 1,100,493 2,235,636 534,296 537,650 (1,889,735) 337,285 2,227,020 (344,535) 7,967,272 7,967,272 7,967,272 - 8,311,807 $ 8,504,922 6,077,537 8,304,557 2,227,020 7,967,272 116 11 1 1 CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Projects Funds Redevelopment Agency Project Area No. 2 Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual Year ended June 30, 2001 Revenues: Developer fees Investment income Total revenues Expenditures: Current: Planning and development Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures Other financing sources (uses): Transfers in Transfers out Proceeds of advances Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over (under) expenditures and ' other financing uses Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year 11 Variance with Budget Final Budget 2000 Original Final Actual Positive (negative) Actual $ - - 5,000 5,000 5,000 38,490 38,489 166,832 128,343 98,028 38,490 38,489 171,832 133,343 103,028 357,410 442,910 322,361 120,549 400,721 357,410 442,910 322,361 120,549 400,721 (318,920) (404,421) (150,529) 253,892 297,693 152,668 1,230,180 1,230,180 - (2,495,473) (1,158,905) - 493,939 1,336,568 (232,037) - 1,500,000 152,668 (1,265,293) 71,275 1,336,568 1,761,902 (166,252) (1,669,714) (79,254) 3,634,347 3,634,347 3,634,347 $ 3,468,095 1,964,633 3,555,093 1,590,460 1,590,460 1,464,209 2,170,138 3,634,347 1 117 (This page intentionally left blank) 118 1 AGENCY FUNDS 1 Agency funds are used to account for assets held by the City as an agent for an individual, private organizations and other governmental units. The agency funds and their purposes are as follows: The City of La Quinta has the following agency funds: Arts in Public Places Fund - To account for development fees paid in lieu of acquisition and ' installation of approved art works in a development with expenditures restricted to acquisition, installation, maintenance and repair of art works at approved sites. The development fees are refundable if not expended within two years. Assessment District No. 88-1 89-2, 90-1, 91-1, 92-1, 97-1, 2000-1 - To account for assessments paid to the City for debt service payments on bond issues used to finance sewer improvements. I `J C, 1 1 1 1 119 CITY OF LA QUINTA Agency Funds Combining Balance Sheet June 30, 2001 Assessment Assessment Assessment Arts in District District District Public Places No. 88-1 No. 89-2 No. 90-1 Assets Cash and investments $ 713,358 202,741 250,979 243,696 Total assets $ 713,358 202,741 250,979 243,696 Liabilities Accounts payable $ 8,500 - - - Deposits payable 704,858 - - - Due to bondholders - 202,741 250,979 243,696 Total liabilities $ 713,358 202,741 250,979 243,696 120 Assessment Assessment Assessment Assessment District District District District No.91-1 No.92-1 No.97-1 No.2000-1 2001 503,421 390,903 123,072 399,839 2,828,009 503,421 390,903 123,072 399,839 2,828,009 704,858 503,421 390,903 123,072 399,839 2,114,651 503,421 390,903 123,072 399,839 2,828,009 1 121 CITY OF LA QUINTA Agency Funds Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities Year ended June 30, 2001 Balance at Balance at June 30, 2000 Additions Deletions June 30, 2001 ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES Assets Cash and investments $ 670,159 238,138 194,939 713,358 Liabilities Accounts payable 694 28,119 (20,313) 8,500 Deposits payable 669,465 268,124 232,731 704,858 Total liabilities $ 670,159 296,243 253,044 713,358 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.88-1 Assets Cash and investments $ 169,150 97,164 63,573 202,741 Liabilities Due to bondholders $ 169,150 104,269 70,678 202,741 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 89-2 Assets Cash and investments $ 228,282 135,472 112,775 250,979 Liabilities Due to bondholders $ 228,282 148,023 125,326 250,979 (Continued) 122 CITY OF LA QUINTA e Agency Funds Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities (Continued) Balance at Balance at June 30, 2000 Additions Deletions June 30, 2001 ' ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-1 ' Assets Cash and investments $ 212,518 146,284 115,106 243,696 Liabilities Due to bondholders $ 212,518 157,529 126,351 243,696 ' ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 91-1 Assets Cash and investments $ 457,828 271,102 (225,509 503,421 Liabilities ' Due to bondholders $ 457,828 288,586 (242,993 503,421 ' ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 92-1 Assets rCash and investments $ 339,630 234,628 (183,355 390,903 ' Liabilities Due to bondholders $ 339,630 246,613 195,340 390,903 ' (Continued) 123 CITY OF LA QUINTA Agency Funds Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities (Continued) Balance at June 30, 2000 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 97-1 Assets Cash and investments $ 123,312 Liabilities Due to bondholders $ 123,312 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.2000-1 Assets Cash and investments $ 282,927 Liabilities Due to bondholders $ 282,927 TOTALS -ALL AGENCY FUNDS Additions Deletions 71,276 71,516 Balance at June 30, 2001 123,072 77,484 77,724 123,072 317,981 201,069 399,839 327,936 211,024 399,839 Assets Cash and investments $ 2,483,806 1,512,045 1,167,842 2,828,009 Total assets $ 2,483,806 1,512,045 1,167,842 2,828,009 Liabilities Accounts payable $ 694 28,119 (20,313) 8,500 Deposits payable 669,465 268,124 (232,731) 704,858 Due to bondholders 1,813,647 1,350,440 1,049,436 2,114,651 Total liabilities $ 2,483,806 1,646,683 1,302,480 2,828,009 124 L 1 1 1 1 1 ' CAPITAL ASSETS USED IN THE OPERATION OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS 1 1 1 1 11 1 125 ' CITY OF LA QUINTA ' Capital Assets Used in the Operation of Governmental ' Funds Schedule by Source June 30, 2001 1 Governmental funds capital assets Land $ 13,981,170 Buildings and improvements 14,986,522 Equipment and furniture 1,571,276 ' Vehicles 161,052 Infrastructure 309,739,666 Construction in progress ' 19,387,875 Total governmental funds capital assets $ 359,827,561 ' Investment in general fixed assets by source: ' General fund $ 23,809,779 Capital projects funds 321,978,742 , Redevelopment agency 14,039,040 Total governmental funds capital assets $ 359,827,561 ' This schedule presents only the capital asset balances related to governmental funds. ' Accordingly, the capital assets reported in the internal service fund are excluded from ' the above amounts. Generally, the capital assets of the internal service funds are included as governmental activities in the statement of net assets. 126 ' L 1 1 u 1 1 u 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Assets Used in the Operation of Governmental Funds Schedule by Function and Activity t June30,2001 Buildings and Function and Activity Land Improvements General government: Legislative E - - Citymanager 6,951,090 121,867 Economic development - - Personnel - 25,304 Finance Central services - - City clerk Total general government 6,951,090 147,171 Public safety: Police - Building and safety administration - - Code compliance - - Animal control - - Building - - Emergency services - 1,792 Fire - Civic center building 9,744,142 Total public safety - 9,745,934 Community services: Community services administration - 2,024,311 Parks and recreation programs - 1,971,294 Senior center Total community services - 3,995,605 Community development: Communitv development administration - - Redevelopment agency 7,030,080 880,000 Total community development 7,030,080 880,000 Public works: Public works administration - 4,000 Development and traffic Street maintenance and operations - 12,742 Lighting landscape maintenance and operations - 201,070 Capital projects - - Total public works 217,812 Total $ 13,981,170 14,986,522 Equipment Construction and Furniture Vehicles Infrastructure in Progress Totals 8,572 - - - 8,572 156,527 - - - 7,229,484 13,551 - - - 13,551 4,036 - - - 29,340 91,340 - - - 91,340 197,311 - - - 197,311 204,454 204,454 675,791 - 7,774,052 33,790 - - - 33,790 75,503 - - - 75,503 20,172 - - - 20,172 2,546 - - - 2,546 12,110 - - - 12,110 53,714 - - - 55,506 - 161,052 - - 161,052 83,908 - - 1,676 9,829,726 281,743 161,052 - 1,676 10,190,405 45,952 - 1,018,163 - 3,088,426 16,082 - - - 1,987,376 997 997 63,031 1,018,163 5,076,799 107,206 - - 107,206 6,128,960 14,039,040 107,206 - 6,128,960 14,146,246 70,514 - - - 74,514 141,507 - 299,066,788 12,462,504 311,670,799 83,482 - 2,028,035 - 2,124,259 142,072 - 7,626,680 794,735 8,764,557 51930 - 5,930 443,505 308,721,503 13,257,239 322,640,059 1,571,276 161,052 309,739,666 19,387,875 359,827,561 t This schedule presents only the capital asset balances related to governmental funds. Accordingly, the capital assets reported in the internal service fund are excluded from the above amounts. Generally, the capital assets of the internal service funds are included as governmental activities in the statement of net assets. 127 CITY OF LA QUINTA Capital Assets Used in the Operation of Governmental Funds Schedule of Changes by Function and Activity .Year ended June 30, 2001 Governmental Governmental Funds Capital Funds Capital Assets Assets Function and Activity June 30, 2000 Additions Deletions June 30, 2001 General government 7,777,154 68,159 (71,261) 7,774,052 Public safety 10,125,883 87,404 (22,882) 10,190,405 Community services 5,066,406 30,243 (19,850) 5,076,799 Community development 14,142,674 3,572 - 14,146,246 Public works 311,789,643 10,850,416 - 322,640,059 Total $ 348,901,760 11,039,794 (113,993 359,827,561 This schedule presents only the capital asset balances related to governmental funds. Accordingly, the capital assets reported in the internal service fund are excluded from the above amounts. Generally, the capital assets of the internal service funds are 128 STATISTICAL SECTION 1 129 TABLE 1 CITY OF LA QUINTA General Fund Expenditures by Function Last Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year Ending General Public Public Community Planning & Capital June 30 Government Safety Works Service Development Projects Total 1992 $ 1,921,155 2,155,813 618,612 157,897 904,171 11,813 5,769,461 1993 1,807,205 2,393,202 600,253 146,686 884,537 - 5,831,883 1994 2,359,673 2,786,575 673,144 119,265 511,416 - 6,450,073 1995 1,565,265 3,143,697 576,304 199,115 538,610 282,113 6,305,104 1 1996 1,793,301 3,227,438 813,352 413,142 453,656 201,475 6,902,364 e 1997 2,376,935 3,442,056 889,694 469,110 455,563 170,000 7,803,358 1998 2,229,389 4,099,523 1,159,372 494,402 345,054 - 8,327,740 1999 2,473,241 4,468,294 1,546,650 732,741 626,074 - 9,847,000 2000 2,814,604 4,992,811 1,704,996 768,528 748,949 - 11,029,888 2001 3,063,641 5,636,154 1,417,528 817,460 733,579 - 11,668,362 Source: City of La Quinta Audited Financial Statements 130 TABLE 2 CITY OF LA QUINTA General Fund Revenue by Source Last Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year Licenses Charges Litigation Ending and Inter- for Settlement June 30 Takes Permits governmental Services Proceeds Interest Miscellaneous Total 1992 $3,135,044 576,293 930,503 488,015 (1) 261,380 120,867 5,512,102 1993 3,581,830 622,107 1,157,587 384,000 (1) 238,321 219,641 6,203,486 1994 4,212,604 777,241 1,600,032 469,695 (1) 585,264 1,042,872 8,687,708 1995 4,946,304 902,914 747,784 551,727 477,872 718,310 137,028 8,481,939 1996 5,393,456 998,030 815,980 610,873 12,386 905,420 230,705 8,966,850 1997 5,942,698 793,689 1,072,803 976,897 40,593 941,327 22,712 9,790,719 1998 6,764,355 1,144,562 1,110,553 1,228,269 281,382 1,164,145 114,969 11,808,235 1999 8,101,191 1,951,981 1,466,788 1,965,219 740,985 1,569,796 74,529 15,870,489 2000 8,888,825 2,493,360 2,388,749 1,922,097 - 1,868,073 106,371 17,667,475 2001 10,331,970 2,057,423 2,164,891 1,998,589 - 2,513,789 43,545 19,110,207 (1) 1995 was the first year Litigation Settlement Proceeds was identified as a revenue source Source: City of La Quints. Audited Financial Statements 131 TABLE 3 CITY OF LA QUINTA Property Tax Levies and Collections Last Ten Fiscal Years Percent of Fiscal Year Total Current Percent Delinquent Total Ending Tax Tax of Levy Tax Collections June 30 Lay Collection Collected Collections to Tax Levy 1992 $282,201 260,365 92.3% 25,703 101.4% 1993 282,630 244,731 86.6% 14,824 91.8% 1994 288,407 275,752 95.6% 900 95.9% 1995 549,273 487,043 88.7% 786 88.8% 1996 670,398 643,309 96.0% 2,312 96.3% 1997 824,073 760,350 92.3% - 92.3% 1998 886,175 980,838 110.7% - 110.7% 1999 991,001 1,148,040 115.8% - 115.8% 2000 1,001,074 1,005,983 100.5% - 100.5% 2001 1,071,723 1,091,128 101.8% - 101.8% Note: 1. Proposition 13 limits cities to levying a tax rate for bonded indebtedness only after 1978. 2. Levies and collections are for General Fund only excluding supplemental property taxes. Source: City of La Quints and County of Riverside 132 TABLE 4 CITY OF LA QUINTA Schedule of Net Taxable Value Last Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year Assessed Less Less Net Ending Secured Unsecured Property Property Homeowner's Taxable June 30 Pro a ProvpM Value Exemptions Exemptions Value 1992 $ 1,594,767,374 6,396,816 1,601,164,190 3,605,829 (1) 1,597,558,361 1993 1,773,323,102 6,943,559 1,780,266,661 3,814,434 (1) 1,776,452,227 1994 1,872,768,156 8,119,527 1,880,887,683 3,946,378 18,901,202 1,858,040,103 1995 1,927,834,908 22,822,285 1,950,657,193 4,357,954 20,518,400 1,925,780,839 1996 2,043,276,054 23,801,872 2,067,077,926 6,936,774 22,399,068 2,037,742,084 1997 2,164,204,951 22,511,720 2,186,716,671 6,919,376 22,407,418 2,157,389,877 1998 2,305,593,987 18,844,880 2,324,438,867 9,676,787 24,877,018 2,289,885,062 1999 2,674,887,437 18,756,736 2,693,644,173 10,998,340 27,581,722 2,655,064,111 2000 2,665,520,656 18,712,736 2,684,233,392 11,655,584 28,259,200 2,644,318,608 2001 3,162,945,116 30,599,753 3,193,544,869 19,757,668 30,391,400 3,143,395,801 (1) Homeowner's exemption not available Source: County of Riverside 133 TABLE 5 CITY OF LA QUINTA Property Tax Rates -Direct and Overlapping Governments Last Five Fiscal Years (per $100 of Assessed Value) 2000101 1999/00 1998/99 1997198 1996/97 General 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 Desert Sands Unified 0.09750 0.09750 0.09750 0.09750 0.09750 College of the Desert 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Coachella Valley Water District 0.02080 0.02080 0.02080 0.02080 0.02080 Total Tax Rate 1.11830 1.11830 1.11830 1.11830 1.11830 Source: County of Riverside 134 TABLE 6 CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Assessment Billings and Collections Last Ten Fiscal Years Year Special Special Ratio of Ended Assessment Assessment Collections June 30 Billings Collections (1) to Billings 1992 $ 557,574 552,249 99.0% 1993 559,029 548,291 98.0% 1994 766,011 734,560 95.9% 1995 836,502 737,700 88.2% 1996 729,647 699,351 95.9% 1997 791,012 757,256 95.7% 1998 791,012 761,109 96.2% 1999 790,532 770,164 97.4% 2000 833,630 800,825 96.0% 2001 835,577 803,756 96.2% (1) Includes Prepayments and Foreclosures Source: Muni Financial Services 135 TABLE 7 CITY OF LA QUINTA Schedule of Direct and Overlapping Bonded Debt June 30, 2001 Percent June 30, 2001 Direct and Overlapping Bonded Debt Awlicable Bonded Debt Riverside County General Fund Obligations 0.986% $6,190,196 Riverside County Board of Education Certificates of Participatioi 0.986% 156,400 Desert Community College District Certificates of Participation 3.949 17,889 Desert Sands Unified School District Certificates of Participation 8.727 2,218,485 Desert Sands Unified School District Lease Tax Obligation 8.727 4,228,184 Desert Sands Unified School District Community Facilities No.1 100.000 2,285,000 Coachella Valley County Water District, I.D. #71 Storm Water Unit Certificates of Participation 6.484 850,052 Coachella Valley County Water District, I.D. #55 69.480 7,361,406 Coachella Valley County Water District, I.D. #58 2.576 185,343 Coachella Valley Unified School District 6.212 1,203,530 City of La Quints General Fund Obligations (Finance Authority) 100.000 7,750,000 City of La Quinta 1915 Act Bonds 100.000 8,235,000 Total Direct and Overlapping Bonded Debt $40,681,485 (1) Note: (1) Excludes tax and revenue anticipation notes, revenue, mortgage revenue, tax allocation bonds and nonbonded capital lease obligations. Source: California Municipal Statistics, Inc. 136 CITY OF LA QUINTA Computation of Legal Debt Margin June 30, 2001 Net Assessed Valuation Debt Limit - 15 % of Assessed Valuation Amount of Debt Applicable to Debt Limit Legal Debt Margin $3,143,395,801 $471,509,370 -0- $471,509,370 TABLE 8 Notes: Section 43605 of the Government Code of the State of California limits the amount of indebtedness for public improvements to 15% of the assessed valuation of all real and personal property of the City. The City of La Quinta has no general bonded indebtedness. Source: City of La Quinta 137 TABLE 9 CITY OF LA QUINTA Revenue Bond Coverage Local Agency Revenue Bonds (City Hall Project) Last Nine Fiscal Years Fiscal Year Debt Service Requirements Ending Revenue Available June 30 for Debt Service Principal Interest Total Coverage 1992 $ 182,784 - 182,784 182,784 1.00 1993 548,352 - 548,352 548,352 1.00 1994 548,352 - 548,352 548,352 1.00 1995 699,477 155,000 544,477 699,477 1.00 1996 696,402 160,000 536,402 696,402 1.00 1997 607,950 170,000 437,950 607,950 1.00 1998 734,623 285,000 449,623 734,623 1.00 1999 684,573 245,000 439,573 684,573 1.00 2000 679,670 250,000 429,670 679,670 1.00 2001 678,955 260,000 418,955 678,955 1.00 Note: Revenue available consists of lease payments made by the City of La Quinta to the La Quints Financing Authority. Source: City of La Quinta 138, TABLE 10 CITY OF LA QUINTA 1 Demographic Statistics Last Ten Fiscal Years Total City Fiscal Year Population Riverside Population Ending Square Percent County Percent June 30 Miles (1) Population (2) Change Population (2) Of County 1 1992 28.0 14,727 12.7% 1,281,000 1.1% 1 1993 28.2 15,589 5.9% 1,323,500 1.2% 1 1994 28.2 16,680 7.0% 1,357,400 1.2% 1995 31.2 17,591 5.5% 1,393,500 1.3% 1996 31.2 18,050 2.6% 1,381,879 1.3% 1997 31.2 18,931 4.9% 1,379,956 1.4% 1998 31.2 20,444 8.0% 1,441,237 1.4% 1999 31.2 21,763 6.5% 1,473,307 1.5% ' 2000 31.2 24,240 10.77% 1,522,900 1.6% 1.7% 2001 31.2 26,321 8.58% 1,545,387 Source: (1) City of La Quinta (2) State of California Department of Finance 1 139 Fiscal Year Ending June 30 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 CITY OF LA QUINTA Property Value and Construction Activity Last Ten Fiscal Years Property Value 1 $ 1,594,767,374 1,773,323,102 1,872,768,156 1,927,834,908 2,043,276,054 2,164,204,951 2,305,593,987 2,674,887,437 2,665,520,656 3,162,945,116 Commercial Construction Units Value 12 7,334,871 7 2,441,392 13 6,081,796 4 1,100,119 8 1,018,940 11 1,876,747 14 2,689,642 19 8,894,767 40 13,071,684 39 15,289,134 (1) From Schedule of Net Taxable Value Source: City of La Quints TABLE 11 Residential Construction Units Value 320 35,744,443 324 39,145,539 531 79,318,969 238 29,163,494 336 53,973,239 322 36,971,047 461 70,403,691 770 132,521,054 1,590 292,524,629 1,069 195,774,186 140 1 1 TABLE 12 CITY OF LA QUINTA Principal Taxpayers June 30, 2001 Taxpayer Type of Activity 1 KSL La Quinta Hotel Corp. Hotel KSL PGA West Corporation Residences Sunrise Desert Partners Condominiums KSL Landmark Corporation Vacant Land KSL Land Corporation Residential Land KSL La Quinta Corporation Golf Courses TD Desert Development Residential Land La Quinta Golf Properties, Inc. Golf Course ' M & H Realty Partnership Shopping Centers Washington Adams Partnership Commercial 1 Tradition Club Associates Recreational, vacant land Source: City of La Quinta ' 141 CITY OF LA QUINTA Major Employers June 30, 2001 Emolover Emolovees Activity La Quinta Hotel and Golf Resort 1,500 Resort Hotel PGA West 1,100 Golf Resort Desert Sands Unified School District 550 School District Administration Wal-Mart 250 Retailer The Home Depot 180 Retailer LoeVs Home Improvement 150 Retailer Stater Brothers 126 Groceries Vons 103 Groceries Ralphs 100 Groceries City of La Quinta 73 Municipal Government Source: City of La Quinta 142 1 1 t 1 1 TABLE 14 CrrY OF LA QUINTA Schedule of Insurance in Force June 30, 2001 Company Name Policy Number Covers Limits Tenn Premium Hartford PEBAO7068 Employee Dishonesty, $1,000,000 12/03/00-01 $2,500 Forgery, Computer Fraud General Stu IAG371825A All Risk Property Insurance 25,139,000 07/01/01- 02 16,505 Indemaity& Westchester FPL389464 Including Auto Physical Damage Fire (Excluding Quake & Flood) Agricultural Ins. CCP5629789 Earthquake & Flood 4,500,000 02/07/01- 02 15,780 Company Real & Personal Property Part of $7,500,000 Including Contigent Tax Interruption California Certificate #5 Comprehensive General $0 Deductible Retention 12/03/00 - 01 60,300 Joint Powers Liability $50 Million Insurace Authority California Certificate Joint Powers #5009-056 Insurance Authority Greenwich Ins. Co. AC63329789 Chubb Custom Insurance Source: City of La Quinta Workers Compensation 5,000,000 12/03/00 - 01 37,637 Earthquake & Flood 3,000,000 Real & Personal Property Part of $7,500,000 Including Contigent Tax Intermption Special Events $1,000,000 02/07/01-02 9,970 N/A N/C 143 CITY OF LA QUINTA Miscellaneous Statistical Data June 30,2001 Date of Incorporation ............................... May 2,1982 Type of City ................................ Charter City Form of Government ...........................Council/ Manager City Employees ................................. 72.75 City Land Area (square miles) .................................... 31.2 Population ................................. 26,321 Number of Parks ................................. 9 Total Acreage ................................. 40 Miles of Streets ................................. 170.0 Miles of Bike Paths ................................. 9.7 Number of Major Intersections .................................. 45 Number of Traffic Signals and Safety Lighting ....................... 32 Number of Traffic Signs ................................. 2,605 Number of Street Lights ................................. 8 Public Schools................................. 4 Private Schools ................................. 1 Churches ................................. 3 Banks/Savings and Loan ................................. 3 Number of Single Family Units - Detached .......................... 10,252 Number of Single Family Units - Attached .......................... 2,326 Number of Multiple Family Units ................................ 697 Number of Mobile Homes ................................. 247 Source: City of La Quinta 144 Fiscal Year Ending June 30 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Source: CITY OF LA QUINTA General Fund Balance Trends Last Ten Fiscal Years Reserved $ 6,227,579 5,372,575 4,354,139 6,100,309 6,680,048 8,202,641 8,915,742 8,879,558 10,565,563 11,746,211 City of La Quinta Unreserved Designated Undesignated 76,323 (662,573) 82,056 508,301 3,792,864 4,228,680 5,686,027 5,936,591 8,568,017 - 14,439,998 18,111,835 23,878,259 TABLE 16 Totals 5,641,329 5,962,932 8,147,003 10,328,989 12,366,075 14,139,232 17,483,759 23,319,556 28,677,398 35,624,470 145 (This page intentionally left blank) Cii!?4. 4 44" COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 Consideration of Participation in the Coachella Valley Violent Gang Crime Task Force (VGCTF) RECOMMENDATION: As deemed appropriate by the City Council. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Estimated costs for a full time unsupported Sheriff Deputy position ($36.58 an hour) for the last six months of the current fiscal year is estimated at $76,505 including training and start up costs. The annual estimated costs for subsequent years is estimated at $88,000. The City has recently amended the contract with the County for police services to add a third Target team member and included funds in the current fiscal year budget for a full year of service at the supported rate ($68.60 an hour) in the amount of $142,688. This position will not be filled before January 1 which will result in unexpended funds in the amount of $71,344 (1 /2 of $142,688) which could be applied towards the proposed gang task force position. The remaining funding shortfall for the task force position would be $5,161 ($76,505 less $71,344) which could be obtained from available COPS grant funding. In summary, there is no need to appropriate additional funds to participate in the task force for this fiscal year, and subsequent fiscal years' Police budgets would be increased by approximately $88,000 to fund the task force position. The increase could have a negative impact on the ability to increase other aspects of police services in future years. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: The Coachella Valley Police Chiefs, the District Attorney's Office, and the Probatio'12 3 Department in conjunction with the Department of Justice desire to form an enforcement task force as a means to suppress gang related crime in the Valley communities. The mission of the Coachella Valley Violent Gang Crime Task Force (VCGTF) will be to allocate resources from all the Valley cities and the above mentioned agencies in order to promote safe neighborhoods free of gang violence. Included as Attachment 1 is the Task Force proposal as presented to the CVAG Public Safety Committee. The task force policies will be set by a Board of Directors which will be comprised of an executive from each participating law enforcement agency. The Task Force Commander will be a Special Agent in Charge (SAC) assigned from the Justice Department (it was originally anticipated that the SAC would have been appointed by this time, but the events of September 11 th have delayed the process) . Also included in Attachment 1 is a list of Valley Agencies and their anticipated levels of participation in the Task Force. It should be noted that the Indio Sheriff's station, which serves La Quinta, has received a grant which will fund a deputy to serve on the Task Force. Alternatively, the City Council could provide for an additional deputy to serve on the force. The expenditure of monies to fund the aforementioned position on the task force may negatively impact the ability of the City to enhance service levels in other areas of the police program in future years. Included as Attachment 2 is additional background information provided by Capt. Singerton as it relates to gangs in La Quinta and the proposed Task Force. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Participate in the Coachella Valley Violent Gang Crime Task Force and be represented by the grant funded deputy position at the Indio Sheriff's station; or 2. Participate in the Coachella Valley Violent Gang Crime Task Force and commit the services of an existing position such as a Target Team member or a Community Services Officer to serve on the force; or 3. Participate in the Coachella Valley Violent Gang Crime Task Force and commit the services of one new full time unsupported Deputy Sheriff position to serve on the force; or 4. Do not participate in the Coachella Valley Violent Gang Crime Task Force; or 5. Provide staff with alternative direction. 124 0119 Respectfully submitted, Tom Hartung, Director of Building & Safety Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1. Violent Gang Crime Task Force Proposal presented to CVAG 2. Report from Capt. Singerton regarding the proposed task force 125 ATTACHMENT 1 TASK FORCE PROPOSAL The next few pages contain the task force proposal as presented to the Coachell Valley Associated Governments (CVAG) Public Safety Committee. a VIOLENT GANG CRIME TASK FORCE PROPOSAL Coachella Valley Chiefs Association, Indio Police Chief G. Rawson, Chairman Statement of Problem: During this past year, gang related crime has plagued several communities across the Coachella Valley, and it is highly probable that ongoing feuds between rival communities will continue to proliferate. As is gangs from different country,typical with the gang phenomenon across the many of their violent crimes are perpetuated by individuals who have no fear of law enforcement or the administration of justice. Gang members do not recognize city limit boundaries. Gang members can be characterized as "migratory predators,,, who capitalize on the opportunity to use jurisdictional boundaries as impediments to law enforcement apprehension. The seriousness of a gang related crime is twofold. First, there is the domestic oble regarding the many established gangs in the valley. Just this past yearthree m in an East Valley city, were hideously shot dead in three separate cases within � pours.s d7hese victims were intended targets, shot at close range by rival gang assailants. One incident occurred in broad daylight and in another a three year old boy stood by as he watched his father answer the door only to be executed in a hail of gunfire. Additional firearm related violence has occurred in other Coachella Valley cities and unincorporated ese incidents have included murder, attempted murder, d veby shootin of stharmed ty 7h ery of businesses involving gunplay, and other violent assaults by means of firearms. These senseless 126 Violent Crime Task Force acts are the byproducts of gang -vengeance, drug trafficking, or other actions perpetuated by gang phenomenon. Second, there are additional gang influences from areas outside the Coachella Valley (particularly Los Angeles), which aggravate existing local gang problems. Some of these outside influences seek to organize and control local gangs for purposes of increasing profits from drug trafficking activities. Consequently, gang related crime to one degree or another, will continue to fester and perpetuate itself across the valley. Each community is currently, or will shortly be, compelled to respond with a myriad of customized anti -gang strategies that encompass prevention, intervention, and enforcement. In an effort to address this problem, the Coachella Valley Police Chiefs Association has endorsed and is intent on furthering the effort to develop a valley -wide" gang task force. The following is a proposed Plan of Work, summary of agency participation, and estimated budget. Method of Operation: The Coachella Valley Police Chiefs, the District Attomey's Office, Probation Department, and allied criminal justice agencies desire to form an enforcement task force as a means to suppress gang -related crime in our communities. Law Enforcement in the valley agrees that the formation of a task force is an effective strategy to minimize gang crimes committed by gang members who are mobile and do not observe a geographic boundary. Mission Statement: The mission of the Coachella Valley Violent Gang Crime Task Force (VGCTF) is to allocate resources from all Coachella Valley cities, the District Attomey, Probation, and other allied law enforcement agencies, for the purpose of promoting safe, secure neighborhoods free of gang violence. Method of Enforcement: Enforcement policies will be set by VCGTF Board of Directors comprised of executives, one per pefficipating law enforcement agency. VCGTF will accomplish the mission by embracing the following values: 1. Abrogate traditional jurisdictional boundaries that function as impediments to law enforcement's ability to address gang members who migrate and commit violent crimes in other communities. 2. Collaborate in a manner that encourages individual police departments to function as one single unit whose enforcement efforts are dedicated to eradicating the adverse effects of violent gang crime. 3. Facilitate a more coordinated effort to support the District Attomey's Office in their desire to ensure gang crime investigations are properly qualified for sentencing enhancements that increase terms of incarceration for convicted gang offenders. VGCTF Tasks & Duties: The following duties and responsibilities are proposed as specific tasks for valley gang task force personnel. Task Force Commander • Oversee and manage the administration and operations of the Task Force. 127 Violent Crime Task Force • Serves as information source and liaison with the Task Force Steering Committee. • Develops and coordinates Task Force Strategies. • Plans, coordinates, and leads major tactical operations plan. • Approves expenditures, monitors, and ensures expenses stay within budget. • Oversees active investigations and worms with District Attorney for filing gang crime enhancements. • Conducts ongoing assessments of VGCTF policies, management systems, evidence processing, reporting procedures, and methods of operation and make recommendations to the policy board for Improvement. Gang Task Force Officers • Identify, investigate and worm cooperatively with the District Attomey's Office to seek prosecution of known gang offenders. • Develop, collect and utilize an automated gang intelligence data base suitable for sharing amongst valley police departments, probation, parole, and District Attomey's office. • Perform surveillance to identify and arrest known gang violators. • Serve STEP ACT and Civil Injunctions on identified gang members. • Use high visibility specialized patrol tactics to discourage gang activities In gang prone segments of the valley. • Provide follow-up response to significant gang crime offenses occurring in a specific area. • Assist other law enforcement agencies with gang related criminal investigations. • Assist Parole and Probation by intensifying searches of gang member clients who have search terms. • Work in cooperation with School District Security forces to develop gang intelligence. • File with the Task Force Commander monthly intelligence reports of gang activities and trends in the Coachella Valley, • Monitor police reports for gang incidents and crimes. • Serve outstanding fugitive warrants relating to gang fugrtives. • Provide training to valley area law enforcement agencies on gang related issues. • Work in cooperation with community anti -gang strategies by providing gang information through presentations to area schools, civic and business groups. 128 Violent Crime Task Force AGENCY PARTICIPATION: The following is an update regarding participation in the Coachella Valley Violent Gang Crime Task Force (VGCTF), and a proposed budget. Effective January 1, 2002, the following agencies are committed to participating in the task force as indicated: AGENCY PERSONNEL FUNDING SOURCE 1. Dept. of JusticeBNE (1) SAC* State funded 2. District Attomey (1) Prosecutor County Funded 3. District Attorney (1) Investigator County Funded 4. Indio PD (1) Officer City General Fund 5. Palm Springs PD (1) Officer City General Fund 6. Probation (1) Officer JAIBG Grant funds * SAC denotes Special Agent in Charge The below listed agencies are considering participation in the task force as indicated: AGENCY PERSONNEL FUNDING SOURCE 1. RSO — Palm Desert (1) Deputy Source Pending 2. RSO — Indian Wells (1) Deputy Source Pending 2. Cathedral City PD (1) Officer None identified to date 3. Desert Hot Springs PD (1) Officer None identified to date 5. State Parole (1) Agent None identified to date 6. Child Protective Services (1) Investigator None identh7ed to date (Added) 7. RSO — Indio Station (1) Deputy JAIBG Grant Funds (Jurisdictions include Coachella and La Quinta) OFFICE SPACE Temporary office space exists at the Palm Springs PD due to temporary staffing shortages in drug task forces presently located in the basement. However, once drug task force staffing levels are restored, the Gang Task Force will have to find a new location. There is permanent space available in the former CVNTF trailer offices located next to Del Webb development. The office space at this facility costs $1 per year, and Del Webb has no objection to the Gang Task Force occupying this office space. The below listed budget is a preliminary proposal concerning start up and reoccurring costs. See attached budget matrix. Additional 120 Violent Crime Task Force grant funds approximating to $100, 000 will likely be available for supporting one time start up costs. PROPOSED BUDGET - START UP COSTS (One-time) 7 Desks/Chairs (used from CVNTF) available now $ 0 7 Telephones wNoice Mail system (used from CVNTF) $ 0 8 Lap top Computers w/case & car adapter $15, 972 Laser Jet Printer w/cabling, router, switches, network cards $ 8,073 8 Nextel Cell Phones/radios & accessories $ 2, 479 Internet set up cost $ 180 FAX Machine w/toner $ 1,555 Misc furniture items $ 2, 500 Subtotal.......................................................................... $30, 739 PERSONNEL (1) Office Assistant li (Salary & Benefits) $25, 000 Overtime $ 1,500 Subtotal........................................................................... $26, 500 OPERATIONS: Communications Telephone lines $ 683 Circuit lines $ 153 Internet Access $ 170 Cal Gangs $ 500 Office Expenses Janitorial $ 280 Alarm Monitoring $ 15 Utilities (Electric and trash service) $ 589 Subtotal............................................. ........................... $ 2, 390 TRAINING: Cal Gang Conference $ 4,362 Cal Gang Membership Assoc. fees $ 160 Misc. gang related training $11, 522 TOTAL.................................................................. ............... $71,391 EQUIPMENT. - Participating agencies are responsible for providing a vehicle and radio for their assigned officer. The probation department has received grant funds that will support the purchase of some computers that will be given to the gang task force. TIMELINE: 130 9 Violent Crime Task Force September 2001: DOJ initiates selection process for the Gang Task Force SAC. October g001: DOJ announces name of SAC and assigns SAC to Gang Task Force VCGTF planning" team is formed, comprised of SAC, gang officers, DA investigator, and probation officer. Planning team committee prepares: 1) Operational Manual 2) Budget 3) Operational Plan November 2001— December 2001: Planning committee presents Operational Manuel, Budget, Operational Plan to VCGTF Board of Directors for review and approvals. January 2002 and thereafter. Agency participants begin assigning full-time personnel to the VCGTF. 131 f..t0 ATTACHMENT 2 VIOLENT GANG CRIME TASK FORCE PRESENTATION REPORT Recommendation Three options are presented for your consideration. 1. Option 1: Take no action. Since, the Indio Station has received grant funding for a Deputy position, we will be able to take a proactive approach on the task force representing all our jurisdictions (including the City of La Quinta). 2. Option II: The City of La Quinta may consider re -assigning the newly approved CSOII to the Coachella Valley Violent Gang Crime Task Force. The additional position will allow the task force to utilize a CSO in many of non - sworn duties thereby freeing up the sworn officers so that they can focus on enforcement actions. Duties could include the preventative arm of the task force (e.g., presentations, school liaison, and documentation). The CSO will be of great assistance in transporting prisoners, standing by during detentions, etc. While removing the CSO from City field duties will not provide the relief for your patrol officers, it is preferable to moving or re- assigning a patrol Deputy. The addition of the Community Service Officer will allow the City to contribute to this effort without removing the critical need to maximize deployment of officers in the City. 3. Option III. The addition of another Deputy Sheriff position to the task force. The additional position will increase sworn presence and enforcement abilities. (It is our opinion that the City needs to continue its efforts to increase its current contract hours for deployment within the City. A task force Deputy will not be available to meet this need. However, costing is included for your consideration.) Background The Coachella Valley Violent Gang Crime Task force is modeled after the multi - jurisdictional law enforcement teams that have operated in and around Los Angeles County and specifically target members of known violent gangs, i.e. the gang members that are engaged in drive by shootings, sales of narcotics and the intimidation of law- abiding citizens. Often these individuals are released back into the community on parole from prison. We know, through our local parole agents, where they live and we also know from experience these gang members will continue to commit violent crimes whenever the opportunity presents itself. The strategy is simple. We watch gang members by means of undercover surveillance, and then via aggressive enforcement action, we arrest them. Once arrested, we work closely with the Riverside County District Attorney's Office to ensure that they are prosecuted with gang member sentencing enhancements in mind. Violent Crime Task Force This paper will provide a brief overview of the history of the gangs in the Coachella Valley area including Coachella. In addition, characteristics, organization, structure, gang violence and involvement in schools will be discussed. These gangs are evolving, however, local gangs are not as sophisticated and structured as many California gangs and crime organizations. Gangs are not all restricted to the Los Angeles area. Given the proximity of the greater Inland Empire to the Los Angeles area and today's mobile society, the gang presence in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties have increased dramatically. In Riverside County, the number of gangs, gang members, and gang -related violent crimes has risen dramatically during the past few years. There are more than 270 gangs in Riverside County. They are Hispanic, Black, Anglo, and Asian. Comparatively speaking the cities of the Coachella Valley have not experienced a gang epidemic on the scale of other cities in California. However, it is a presence that if left unchecked will undoubtedly grow to the proportions found in other communities in California. Gangs in Riverside County are no longer primarily consisting of members who grew up in local neighborhoods or geographic area and joined to be associated with that area. Although that scenario has existed for generations in some areas and still exists today, Riverside County now deals with "transplanted" gang members from Los Angeles and other areas. The causes of the change are many. In some cases, parents of gang members have moved into this area in an effort to remove their children from a prior bad situation to a better environment away from gangs. In all too many cases the children have maintained their old contacts and war like mentality. They continue their criminal behavior and recruit new members into their lifestyle. In other cases, the gang members have moved here to avoid the frequent negative law enforcement contacts in other counties, or they have come to this county to participate in the lucrative drug market. DEFINITIONS There are probably as many definitions of what constitutes a "gang" in today's society as there are gangs themselves. The following criteria are used uniformly by law enforcement agencies to define a "gang" and a "gang members": Gang: a group of at least three members, who socialize on a continuous/regular basis which has a name, claims a neighborhood or territory, and are involved in criminal activity 133 01A2 Violent Crime Task Force Gang Member: Self admission of membership in a gang Identified as a gang member by a reliable informant Identified by an informant whose reliability is untested, but which is corroborated by independent information An individual who resides in or frequents a particular gang's area and affects their style of dress, use of hand signs, symbols, or tattoos, and associates with known gang members An individual who has been arrested several times in the company of identified gang members for offenses consistent with usual gang activity. Following these guidelines requires effort and documentation but eliminates misidentification accusations and issues later on and maintains the integrity of gang identification systems. Obviously there are other entities, ranging from loose knit social "groups" to community organizations. What is distinctive about street gangs however, is what makes them a threat to the very communities and schools in which they are located is their propensity for engaging in criminal and sometimes violent behavior. Such behavior may range from simple property damage to random vandalism and graffiti to drug trafficking, assault and battery, and even murder. While gangs are not new to the American culture, the increase in the level of street gang violence in California over the past several years establishes gangs as a major social problem. Total gang membership in the state is thought to be an estimated 150,000 plus individuals. Gang Violence Gang violence is on the increase, as can be seen by the increase in gang -related assaults and murders. Street gang violence has steadily progressed from "fists and tire irons to firearms" in terms of methodology used by gang members in confrontations in the past 10 years. One of the primary reasons gang violence has increased is the sophistication of the weapons now used. Zip guns, small caliber revolvers, and sawed off shotguns have been replaced by semi -automatic rifles and semi -automatic handguns. The AK-47 assault rifle and 9 millimeter semi -automatic handguns are now the weapons of choice used by street gang in assaults. Street gang violence occurs in cycles and is generally initiated by some incident that may be minor in nature. A particular gang may take great offense to the incident as being disrespectful to them. In return, they retaliate against the offending gang with deadly force to uphold their image with other gangs. The retaliation will go back and forth until the perpetrators are arrested, and/or the police enforcement action against the warring gangs becomes intolerable to the gang members. Then and only then does Violent Crime Task Force the shooting cease. Today's gang violence is usually random spontaneous and unpredictable. Thus, gang violence is very difficult and often impossible to prevent. Currently, the Indio Station has 18 identified "gangs" operating within it's jurisdictional boundaries (not including the incorporated City of Indio). Seven of these gangs operate in La Quinta. Several of the gangs in our jurisdiction are not actually based within the area where they are operating. We have identified a trend in La Quinta where gang members from the neighboring cities have relocated into La Quinta and brought their gang activity with them. La Quinta actually has one gang with its base location in the city. The 18 gangs operating within the Indio Station area of responsibility comprise an identified membership total of 355 members living within the jurisdictional boundaries. La Quinta has approximately 65 identified members residing in the City. 135 (14 T 0 0 jhf 4 4 Q" AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: 3- COUNCILIRDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 CONSENT CALENDAR: ITEM TITLE: STUDY SESSION: Consideration of Award of Contract to Tera-Cal PUBLIC HEARING: Construction, Inc. to Construct the La Quinta Civic Center Campus Improvements, Project No. 97-09 ' Appropriate $1 1,000 from Urban Forestry Grant received from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection; appropriate $520,577 from Redevelopment Project Area (RDA) Number 1 funds, contingent upon the future adoption of an advance agreement with the Park and Recreation Developer Impact Fee Fund; and award a contract to Tera-Cal Construction, Inc. in the amount of $1,649,558 to construct base bid line items 1-13, 16-19 and 21-35, Additive Alternate #1 line items 1-4, Additive Alternate #2 line item 1, and Additive Alternate #4 line item 3 (base bid area with colored concrete and walkway lighting). The following represents the project funding sources identified within the City's Fiscal Year 2001 /2002 Budget for the construction of the Phase I Civic Center Campus Improvements: Arts in Public Places (401-000-493-000) Infrastructure Funds (401-000-493-000) Financing Authority (401-000-493-000) Urban Forestry Grant (401-000-493-000) RDA PA #1 (401-000-493-000) Total Funds Budgeted: Less Prior Expenditures: Total Available Funding for Construction Phase: $ 348, 600.00 $183,250.00 $526,174.00 $1 1, 000.00 $807,488.00 $1,876,512.00 ($ 230, 246.24) $1,646,265.76 136 TAPWDEPT\COUNCIL\2001\01 1 120f.wpd In addition, the City of La Quinta Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 2001 /2002 through 2005/2006 anticipates an additional $1,000,000 of RDA Project Area No.1 funding towards the Phase II Civic Center Campus Improvements in Fiscal Year 2002/2003. However, it should be noted that while the additional revenue may be available during Fiscal Year 2002/2003, the additional revenue is not currently appropriated or available for expenditure. The following three alternatives are presented for the City Council's consideration: Analysis of Alternative I: The following costs are anticipated if the City Council chooses to award the Phase I Civic Center Campus Improvements (Base Bid Area): Construction (Base Bid Area) $1,436,727.89 Design (balance to close work activity) $35,000.00 Testing/Survey $43,101.84 Construction Management $140,080.97 Project Contingency $165,491.07 Administration $71,836.39 TOTAL: $1,892,238.16 Difference: ($245,972.40) As illustrated, the award of this Phase I alternative would require an additional appropriation in the amount of $245,972.40. This alternative, as proposed, would limit the finish on all entries, walkways and artistic pads to a gray broom finished concrete. The award of this alternative would limit the City Council's ability to construct the proposed Phase II improvements in the future, as it would require the removal and replacement of the gray concrete with co.lored concrete. Analysis of Alternative 2: The following costs are anticipated if the City Council chooses to award the Phase I Civic Center Campus Improvements with colored concrete and walkway lighting (Base Bid Area plus Additive Alternative Nos. 1 and 2 and Additive Alternative No. 4, Bid Item No. 3): Construction (Base Bid Area) $1,649,558.26 Design (balance to close work activity) $35,000.00 137 a0 TAPWDEPT\C0UNCIL\2001 \011 120f.wpd Testing/Survey Construction Management Project Contingency Administration TOTAL: Difference: $49,486.75 $160,831.93 $189,487.69 $82,477.91 $ 2,166,842.55 ($520,576.79) As illustrated, the award of this Phase I alternative would require an additional appropriation in the amount of $520,576.79. This is staff's recommended alternative. The award of this alternative would provide the maximum flexibility for constructing the proposed Phase II improvements if additional revenue becomes available in Fiscal Year 2002/2003 as currently anticipated. Analysis of Alternative No. 3: The following costs are anticipated if the City Council chooses to award the Phase I and Phase II Civic Center Campus Improvements. This ultimate improvement includes both the Base Bid Area (Phase 1) and Additive Alternatives 1 through 6 (Phase 2): Construction (Base Bid Area) Design (balance to close work activity) Testing/Survey Construction Management Project Contingency Administration TOTAL: Difference: $2,470,697.96 $35,000.00 $ 74,120.94 $240,893.05 $282,071.20 $123,534.90 $3,226,318.04 ($1,580,052.28) As illustrated, the award of this alternative would require an additional appropriation in the amount of $1,580,052.28. The estimated budget presented for the soft costs (construction management, testing and survey) within all three alternatives are based upon historical project costs and translated into an average percentage of construction cost. Subsequently, the costs presented are expected to fluctuate. However, the proposed contingency is adequate in all three alternatives to account for any overruns in these areas. 133 The Arts in Public Places (APP) budget presented above is restricted to specific art TAPWDEPT\C0UNCIL\2001 \011120f.wpd features. Of the $348,600 appropriated toward this improvement, $244,498 has been either previously expended or is specifically encumbered toward an art feature. The remaining balance, in the amount of $104,102, is available and appears adequate for the art features within the bid and their associated soft costs. The funding currently available for this project consists of funds from the Arts in Public Places Fund, Infrastructure Fund, Finance Authority (Civic Center bond proceeds), and RDA Project Area No. 1 Funds. However, since it was anticipated additional funding would be needed to construct the project and the new funds would require payment of prevailing wages, the project was bid with prevailing wage provisions. On December 19, 2000 the City Council approved plans, specifications, and Engineer's Estimate (PS&E) of probable costs and authorized staff to advertise and receive bids for Project No. 97-09, Phase I Civic Center Campus Improvements. The approved Phase I bid document included Additive Alternative Bid Items for the Phase II work activity. The Phase II items were included within the Phase I bid documents for the purpose of obtaining a more accurate cost estimate for future budgeting purposes. On June 20, 2001, the City of La Quinta was notified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection that the City's Urban Forestry Grant Request, submitted in May 1998, was approved. The original grant request was for $1 1,000, specifically, for the purchase of 166 fifteen gallon trees to be planted throughout the City. Following receipt of the grant notification, the City submitted an amendment request, which was subsequently authorized, to install the 166 fifteen gallon trees within the Civic Center Campus Improvement. On October 16, 2001 the City Council approved a Consultant Selection Committee; and approved three Requests for Proposals (RFP), one for construction management services, one for professional survey services, and one for professional material testing services; and authorized staff to receive proposals and negotiate with the most qualified firm in each discipline to provide professional construction management services, professional survey services, and professional materials testing services. On October 24, 2001, sealed bids were received for the construction of this project. The following table illustrates the results of the bids received. A detailed bid comparison summary is provided as Attachment 1. 139 TAPW DEPT\COUNCIL\2001 \011 120f. wpd Phase I - Base Bid Phase II- Add Total Bid (Basis of Award) Alternates (All Areas) Engineer's Estimate: $955,578.72 $995,019.25 $1,950,597.97 Tera-Cal Construction: $1,436,727.89 $1,162,612.45 $ 2,599,340.34 James Simon Co.: $11553,521.81 $1,490,529.96 $3,044,051.77 4-Con Engineering, Inc.: $1,676,406.65 $1,378,787.56 $3,055,194.21 The basis of bid award, as defined in the bid document, is the lowest combined price of the line items within the base bid area. As indicated, Tera-Cal Construction is the lowest responsible bidder for the proposed Civic Center Campus improvements. In order to accelerate the construction of park related projects, the City Council and Redevelopment Agency may consider advancing RDA Project Area No. 1 funding which would be subsequently repaid with Park and Recreation Developer Impact Fees. Staff is presently working with the City Attorney on the required agreements. The advance agreements will be available for the City Council's and Redevelopment Agency Board's consideration on December 4, 2001. The City Council may award any, or all, of the bid items presented within the bid schedule. The following alternatives are presented for consideration: Alternative 1: Award the Base Bid Area in the amount of $1,436,727.89. Awarding this Phase I alternative will require an additional appropriation in the amount of $245,972.40. The Base Bid Area (Attachment 2) provides for the following: • Site Grading • Gray concrete entries, walkways and artistic pads throughout the site • A lake and island with waterfalls, and a stream • Two bridges to the island • A geyser within the lake • Hydro seeded turf area and irrigation system throughout the site • 166 15-gallon trees • Drinking fountain • Retaining walls/seat wall at berms in five locations • Artwork T:\PWDEPT\COUNC1L\2001\01 1 120f.wpd 140 .s 05 Alternative 2: Award the Base Bid Area with colored concrete and walkway lighting (Attachment 3) in the amount of $1,649,558.26. The award of this Phase I alternative would require an additional appropriation in the amount of $520,576.79. Alternative No. 2 includes the following: • Site Grading • Color paving with light broom finish in lieu of gray concrete • Color paving with exposed aggregate in lieu of gray concrete • Interlocking pavers in lieu of gray concrete • Stone pavers over concrete bases in lieu of gray concrete • Color paving with sand finish for future artistic work in lieu of gray concrete • Pole mounted light fixtures • Bollard Light Fixtures at the entries • A lake and island with waterfalls and a stream • Two bridges to the island • A geyser within the lake • Hydro seeded turf area and irrigation system throughout the site • 166 15-gallon trees • Drinking fountain • Retaining walls/seat wall at berms in five locations • Artwork Alternative 3: Award both Phase I and Phase II improvements at this time. This ultimate improvement includes the Base Bid Area, plus Additive Alternates 1-6 in the amount of $21470,697.96. The award of this alternative would require an additional appropriation in the amount of $1,580,052.28. This alternative (Attachment 4) includes the following additional amenities: • Historic Plaza Fountain • Tree accent lighting • Boulder walkway lighting • Pole mounted light fixtures • Larger size trees (24", 36", and 48" box trees) • Various shade structure including a pergula at the Historic Plaza, tryst shade structures, gateway shade structures and pavilion shade structures • Exercise stations • Trash receptacles • An outdoor stage • Benches • Gazebo 141 J TAMDEMCOUNCIL\2001 \01 1120f.wpd The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Appropriate $1 1,000 from Urban Forestry Grant received from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection; appropriate $245,972 from Redevelopment Project Area (RDA) Number 1 funds, contingent upon the future adoption of an advance agreement with the Park and Recreation Developer Impact Fee Fund; and award a contract to Tera-Cal Construction, Inc. in the amount of $1,436,728 to construct base bid line items 1-35; or 2. Appropriate $1 1,000 from Urban Forestry Grant received from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection; appropriate $520,577 from Redevelopment Project Area (RDA) Number 1 funds, contingent upon the future adoption of an advance agreement with the Park and Recreation Developer Impact Fee Fund; and award a contract to Tera-Cal Construction, Inc. in the amount of $1,649,558 to construct base bid line items 1-13, 16-19 and 21-35, Additive Alternate #1 line items 1-4, Additive Alternate #2 line item 1, and Additive Alternate #4 line item 3 (base bid area with colored concrete and walkway lighting); or 3. Appropriate $1 1,000 from Urban Forestry Grant received from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection; appropriate $1,580,052 from Redevelopment Project Area (RDA) Number 1 funds, contingent upon the future adoption of an advance agreement with the Park and Recreation Developer Impact Fee Fund; and award a contract to Tera-Cal Construction, Inc. in the amount of $2,470,698 to construct base bid area, plus additive alternates 1-6 (the ultimate improvement); or 4. Provide staff with alternative direction. Resp tfully su mitted, Steven D. er, P.E. Interim Publ Works Director/City Engineer Approved for submission by: r Thomas P. Genovese City Manager Attachments: 1. Bid Comparison Summary 2. Alternative 1 Site Plan 3. Alternative 2 Site Plan 142 4. Alternative 3 Site Plan TAPWDEPT\COUNCIL\2001 \011 120f.wpd ATTl NT 1 J O U Z 0 _2 w Cl) H W W U U W a Q Z U J z Q F- Z F- w g W W W F. Z_ — U W z U W z a_ 0 Z D z 0 J U H it O U) U W Z z O F- LU U >Q U it Q O 0 a_ z Or4. d p it ~ p O M U) H z gz�0 �-acn LLU�� O ) a- TWO U�ZU 0 UO m (1) LLJ U H > U W W z U Z CL W Z Itzi U W� N O W W cc > U 0 U) w W a 0 0 N w U N 0 zm w W U) � m 0 00 00 00 0 0 0 O N � c M M O O O O It o� It -M ON ti cc' (NO (MO N cM m 69 6�9 00% 69 69 W. 0 r ER 6q 6q N 69 a CD 0 0 0 CD J O O 0 O 0 0 Cl N � co m LT LO Co O 0 C et V (N (� W,O O N ClCN cn m0EA M m 69 � EA Vy r 69 69 h 0 00 00 0 00 0 C. 00 O O O 00 O O 0 00 Cl O O OCD O LO 'IT LO LO LO 69 01i 69 69 69 co r E9 r co 69 E9 E9 cc 00 J O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 RW, 0 L0n� On On m LO r L 69 L r 69 69 013 64 h 69 69 00 00 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 00 0 Oo O O O CD 00 m O O co (D CD LO 61) Ln ER Ln E9 V3 O (O ti 6H CO 6w 9 E9 E9 E9 CD CD 0 J O O O O O O O O O Cl O 00 O O O OEfi 00 � CO M (O E9 69 E9 d9 0 00 0 0 0 00 00 - O O CD O r 00 O O L n N O (MM N O N Coo N d9 69 69 Q% E9 0o O O OLOn 00 J O Mo 0 0 0 om oo O O L n N O N O 1 Or m co to CO N ER 669 69 69 69 E9 E9 Ef3 y J J cn J J J J J J J r r r r r r 0 O r r Z 0 a F- g D 0 w Q C� w W � cn W Q Z QQ mX W W 0 �Q M d z W > C J p p X CL z cn U OQ aU Q co w j z ZO U QQNJ�� U - pU~j P: W0 W 2Z� JWLL m_w Z 0U Un aU) LL UOO JM -iU� J L0 Z Z U r N M 't Lol (O I f-- O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO (O r co O N �- N M Cl) Ln Ln L� N I� PI-L N N r (M (O r O O) E9 ER E9 O o OLO J CD J O 0 r LL 0 Ll- N E9 N r (o � � m O m CD h ti 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O � � O O Ln (M O 00 O O E9 69 E9 O O O J � J O 0 0 0 co cn m co m 69 69CD h h CD 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � 0 qt M co r• Ln op O Lri Lri E9 69 69 O O 0 J J O O 0 O E9 MLO C~0 M m (D ER 6fi y "It "Ity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O- 0 LO N O N N T ti 0 0 69 E!9 6fi E9 cn m O O O J O O CD O oLLQ O Q o Q O O O 0 co co J J J J r r 0 r N LO r W Of Z p Q V J W c}i�cn JZ Ug UW J n WP J J UO ZU Q of W =w p a� Z� J Ow O O 00 n.LL 0 U Up H Z ° �' W mQ NU W Q W W Q 3 zz U w 0 � gw Q a_ �o U QY(Wn gi- O r r r N r M r LL a 4 C 4 � 0 0 0 0 0 �cp co BC�p0 (NO O) C) O UO Ln r ti CD 69I 6'T �; �I O 0 0 0 0 0 cM 0 Co 0 r- (+M o0 M Ln Or E19 ER 69 N 0 O O O LO to Lri o 0 69 69 Ln 0 0 0 0 0 (0 00 0 co 0 0 0 r co 0 � 1- N N r N r_ 6fi 69 69 OP. 0 O O O N N 69 69 N r 0 0 0 � 69 69 � 69 0 0 0 0 0 CD cn co � LO Lon ocn �q0 o o 0 0 co co J W J co ( Cl Ln � r ( O r LO r r "tt p W C) U W cn W O a z W 0 FW- W W CL Z z U Q 0 U Z J } J J Q Z 0 Z wa W J Yp U� YQ U� Z 0 p m QW U a 0 It r U') r (orl_00 r r r 143 P. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r- ti 0 - O O O N LLOO COO 0~0 O LO O co O LO 69 0 w co U O N e- 1w f` V- O O st Ln � 643 O ER 60? 6�9 6M9 64 w 2 W cnt rn o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Q 2 � T- 0 O 0 � N a' 63? 6) O cM COO O LO M c EL ZW,(c)69y LO W, � h p 0 0 0 Co CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q o O 0 M O O Ln LO O Ln Lf) O U O O O_ 000 It N N r-- N Z F' 6R 69 EA Efl ER W.W._O M W W w — z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z U 0 0 W O 0 0 O O 0 Q' LO 6F3 O Oa ClO LO Ln CD LO Ln U ~ &9r N N H H 643, 6r: z 69 69 D Dn 0 0 0 CD zCD 0 L 0 0 0 0 O J O M O O O O O O O T- ti Co I O o OO co U I¢- Ln_ EF? coo M 69 6f3 69 6i cq i 69 U) z w O F— U J O CD O O CD CD O OW CD CS Ci U LO co O O o o O 0 0 a' 0 69 co O O 0 000^ 0 a.69 eN- M M 69 60i 69 ti H z g�-acn LiU2FE O O O O O O O O O O Ow¢Q O O o o O O o o O O -,Ua W Q 0 O 0 co 0 0 0 o 0 O 0 o 0 O 0 o 0 O 0)�0wm O W W O V Ln DO O O Ln Ln LO Ln CD U a F- U Q O N Itt � CD et co co LO O — 69 69 69 N• N69 61i 69 � 6R 00 CNN9 w 0 U m U U N w o 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 o Q U W z 0 0 v 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V 61) oo 0 0 CD E- C7 t 0 LLo Lon U M N 64 � w H MY 69 z 69 � h F- Z J Q J J J J Q J W W W O LO 00 •- �- ti co CD `ct w C7 z U) Z m Z J a U O LL z cn cn p a? 2 2 Z Q O F- w Q D U a a a O H— Qw 3J aw 3-' z = OY 'L_� w� a w0 w0 ¢ J O W 00 O F� wF- U� ZOO Q U p R0 U� mW mW UQ EU w_ W O Q' M� N� (qF- COOUP 0�' W J J w J J 0 J J 0 J W J J J W J� J 2 J (� J Q J U¢ cn aw ¢w ¢ a a d ¢ O ¢� H E H Q F- Q H F- F- z:5 f- J ?-a z� ?° Za zm 0 z i w H 0 N _ N N CO) N N N N 00 0 O LO LO O c0 t0 06 N a) N 63J 69 J 00 0 LO O to O N � co 69 69 h 00 0 00 0 N O 0 6F1 6`} J Cl CD O O 0 0 0 N � Z 61).� co 00 0 O O O N � cn 63 69 J O O 00 0 LO N ti m CO 00 0 CD CD a 00 C � 0 0 6% 64 J 00 o 00 6 % 0 m 6l co W J w H w W -I a w 0 J aU 2� Ow U n. } �m CLz WO °o� m� N N 0 0 0 O O N N 0 N M N W. 69 O Ln o co 0 N CD O 04 69 0 0 °ram' Lon m C(D Ln 00 0p W? 69 .M- E9 0 0 0 CD 00 00 O ce) O M LO 04 c?) O O m 00 69 69 c`no 0 0 o LOOn o N• 6N9 60r! LO O O 604 CC7 O °' 0 0 rl c 06 O 0 6M9 bi � O O O � 6 o fn W J J W e- CD (D � � e- O M z a � O z �� Uw rn LO z >a LLI ~� W� w Y w IXz UF- pN ~ U z Q ap �_jca O� WZ 00 w Z U pQ co 0 6� �U) Q W Z~ QN w >0 �w } Zw =a —� O M CM M CM M o o ao 0 0 O O C4 M M clf E9 6H N 0 o ti O O C4 ca ca to EA 69 r 69 J O Co O 10 N• H 0 0 � O O co CCD r- o LL � � 0 N O _z 2 N Z Q Z I--O z Y z 0 Ln M O z 9 O 144 .Iu O J H U O O ~ 2 ^ U) w w U) w U w Q d F- Z U Z J Q 00 Z_ w w g w w z_ H — O Z w U u.l z ce O U F- z z O U J H w O z z w ~ w O U ui U U >Q of Za)2(j LLJIxZ gz�0 L- ILU) LL.U2� O�Va WWO U C- U ~ F- O z LLJ p Um U U) LLJ H > (wn Of U w w U Z n. z W ~ Z H z D Z O H a C) U W p � a w n F Q C C a O z 2 w F- O � I- ti N r- 0 0 c`) o 0 r` r.- T O CA (D J 0 CD LO Lo LO N co 69 EA M CO 69 O 9 6ek h U) U) U) U) J mcM O � � LO M T T of T (D � T T W 0 w n. co w z m c~n ~ 0 U O w_ m > w LU a o z z z w U W W CL� a z o IL o w_ W W J w Ix OU) O� wz Zw O — O O LUmO O U) F Q U) 5.T N M � LO 0 0 0 0 N N T T cM M � V LO LA (D (D CO 00 Tp Tp v% 69 J J O O � O O M O c O LO QQ ? h y Co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O co � J J O O � O O o o Im c j 0 Eta y 69 h O O O O 0 0 0 0 CO CO Ln (n O o (n (n r J O o � Co o o m Ln ca 0 0 0 0 CD 0 O O O O LO LO EA EA 69 Eta J J O o � O o o o 69 h 69 y CD Z o z a ik eq > Q >= J WQ Z J a O Q CO O OW �a _ JO Lu CI) > � Q > W Z �QUQ J a O Q z Ow w J 2 a0 pW c~n =� > Q W Z LL H J a O a 0 Iq0 0 lq00) 1c0 O Oa 0 00 OMO r 0 0 0 0 LO LO LO co OO h W W W W l� (D N M N W w H Q a-U) w p U) J z J z = V) UU UCH J D w Q� Q� Ofw u"U w— w D C� w� mw J(1) T N M V a w Le > V LL Q z M a w 2 C Q � J d o a O o 0 0 o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 o vo oaDo� Cr aD V CO N cD qq� U I T I- .cr (D le e qct CO N N O T � T 6fi EA CA Eta o o o o o O o o o O O O O O 100 O O O O O N O o m 0 0 O O O M N O Eta 0 6% c7 f` to T 6% T O EA Eta T 69 69 cl Eta Eta O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 o 0 O O C w m O o to M 0 CO 0 co I- 0 N N Cn ti� * 0 CO LC) ti M ti ui CO Ili' d (D N NN OT TEJ� - T(t� Eta Q% Il- 60!Y 64 O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 O O 0 to 0 0 w C O N o 0 M N 0 69 O T CO 69 I- 69 r.- T T EA 69 T Ei? I-W N 6% 6'i V) 0 0 0 O O o 0 0 0 00 O Or- 0000 (o o Co co T Co co 00 CO N N N O O M 014, M N ti M N 0 m CO O cM (D O r` O N M O T T Efi co Eta T Eta LO Eti T Vt V> Eta CO V). Eta 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O N CO et N (D 0 ti CO M T O T 0 69 M 69 T V, .- EA ER EA LO T N EA 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O N O O O O O N N O O O O M CO N 0 N ch CO " T N (D �� M M O T N O T M T Et} 0% I` 69 Eta T6A 69 69 69 Eta 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 00 01000 0 0 0 0 0 uirl- 0v 0 0 0 0 N h Eta 0 69 (M r` CO 64 64 69 N Eta EA Csi 69 W W W F- W W W W J � °� 0No v CD u M ti T to r- LO N a H U) Q Q � QQ W 0 W W m m U Q U w W m Z� u)w00 NrOi v �� TOUa00 p X Z U) m z z J U) U) w _ D W Q ) a ir z T N M t LO I (D I r` CO C) 140 Oil Z O U Q.' F- Z Z O W U OQ U Q O Of � Z_r�-aS Ix =oM� LU gz�0 L- 0w<< CD o 0 0 O W 2 W Q 00 CN7 UCLWO Q ~ N� 00 Z U N 9 U m U) 2 6� U_ U H >_ U w Woo d T- N Z �� m F- W z y D 0 0 0- F-- ti co OO LO co O � N 2 W H J W (D CD LO 0 a Cl) N O D h F- z Q Q W W LO M W ('J 0 v) a W U) 0 Z W 0 Z W in J z ~ U EL �m g0 LL O z 2 t o O O O O O O O O O O O CQ Il- O O LO 0 0 0 0 0 o o LO 0 f- O f-� O to 00 CD 46 O r- O 1 O M 0 O ti to M 9 0 0 O N LO 00 I, Io O LO (M Ln (D (3LO O N r- N N M•- M Ln N O � M N N 00 Lf) 69 64 O) O 61) 69 61) 69 69 69 Cl) Itt O E9 I I 6H O O LO O O O O O O O J O O It O O G O 0 0 0 61) O N� LLO � c� i� 0 C _ _ __ m 6f? N 6R N 64 ONO Ef3 mt 6F? LLO 69 r' see y 0 0 0 00 0 000 0 0 (D O O O O O O O O O O O In N O O M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M co st O N O O O O In O 00 O � CO O M O O 00 N M 0 00 Ln co LO et 64% 00 M 0 O N 6F? cM LO 69 69 69 E9 Efi E9 er M Co E9 69 v-: M ER 64 0 0 0 0 o O O O O O J 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0� O O tog G O C O CD O C O O O O O O O e- O O O CO N M In e- Co 69 64? co 00 M LO O 6- 69 6A. W- 6% 69 I Mh O O O O O O O O O O O LO v O O O O O O O O O O O w M N O O O N O O O 0000 N v qw O M In O M O N W O (D CO) (D I- 00 N O O ch (D CA � N O It 69 E19 MY � M � O E9 69 M CO V) N 69 ER Cl O O O O O O O O O J o o M OO O OO o O 0 0 O O 1 C 00 C7 C7 O O LO O O O LO O O o CD LO CM LO O Cl) O N N � M v O 66R � CO 66F? 60 6 % 60% 69 69 h 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O LO fl- O O O O O O O O O O O N Cn O O O O O O O O O O O C) ti O O O O O O O O O O O T- CA N Ln O O O O O O LO N Cl) O LO M O 00 LO O O LO LO N M M Ln O N er N e- - N 69 00 O LO Ef3 Efi 69 69 69 69 64 60 69 T" O 6R O O O O O O O O O O J O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O 00 Ln 69 O O O O O LO � O LO O O LO LO N � m U3, 6�9 6N9 69 6R 61R N a W Cq .J LL Cn Q Q W Q W a W a W Q W a W O N O e- LO 00 co S2 LU of LU OfW- LU z FL S F- W S S F- U O U =U Q� U) of S U Z U C� 3 p w LU LU d Z Q � W 2QFQ- cn Q UU�U U) 0 CL 0 U) < z U) S O Ix m O F-� U S U 0 D O O W CD w (q W a J Q w X (n w co O U CD CL CD n. W F- N Cl) V LO CD � 00 O O� H w 3 >_ c w W) �k Z > Z Jm Q Z Q 0' W Q W F' Q LL Q O z la- F C9 O 0 146 G1 ^7 N Z W `n � 4 ' �I U Iu :i a o ctj�UJ U� $ o m S tu7- O QJ Z ZZ� ZN ,c Q� -- --_- L ? Q 0 o J �-r�-' -- - - - _ - - - - - - - — - p� SO: 0-ui0000+-00 I';p� I� I b z a�gpzzzz� zz LLt! o 0 0 �? µ �W Q ►u3wwutiw0 w W �NtnOOOOX OO <I o CL q �{�npppp��pD °' = o 9� C wtujp�ppLl# pf1 o 3I HE p��Qmmmt�0mm F a cD 1— W W W a o Q 2 cp d) W W cp cD cq 0 d) I ��aaaaoaa a a Y G mmm Q Q Qmmmm m IIt p A o 0 M A F a t r ty hs � i •'i E� .;r'I 0 r }(• K� -•, N.L � O t pro s'''.+O t V 0 h��i�- as S �� • M h »' t y`�'N x�,� 't^*�' r I I �CIF �F a I � . r r � . -t x��" "' ^tic' ^,.$ s � . � � „ "ea �yich �+;��e. ; Q I •� I`1 •t' e' .:r + - +iF7 ix : M a'v 2F d ey'AJ,,•t.- i''�} Okj 1p ci §,�, !D {y i Q :..sM1tr i v4;'� r7 idC" 1� A j � y.: • �.r+•TM>kry' � •{� ti�i r s �:m ". � s� a t i4' �•. ' � � i rt•p 4y 'si w •'t r'C , ` .may.+ ` ' cA � � ` , f r ., 11 �+K Z�,,r�f 1. E v`i:yv .. r� a f�i•1�.�," ,�� 'q.Y -; jF 1 O a � �"' .1 � •it i� �`ki �� s -t- /«�^ N 3, � � ,� K.�4.. .Rf E ,{ }f � � j;� I F y5 ^ t 6. r 77 i ' � A .ay •s w* #,� , `� ,. r«Y �� .#. S 1 .r #a0:� Q r. d r � .,�- .—. - —.. ,I J i a ,.,,p, '<' '- wx •�` z L+• -S r„, k y .a f — --v �. .uaiom d0 lik1L"U1.t if 3. i ! 4� ,;yi.�'�r` ��'� { bi. «. k :: i.i'�Y iS'F.:°' +na5`Y ri �..r'� T': •Gp iA r "; j Y �Q t,{r r�''tr,�i'oai '4f X ;i `'{ i 0 IjA t a LU 1% r k a u y�" sea t i a are t s f,. t t. UJ • y t 'fir ,. �,� r y xy -- . rkx .„ sii`.y g"y s ^'Ld ♦ / i t i' S' i JT , All t� � �► � � � � � �•• �� tacr+ �oilwn� t` 14�( � � • � � • • �pr�t4 � f �,. ;+1' •)r i �q 9 S f t L"��,u'�� ! J • a IGiI! t�lalY R': 1 1 `y��U e j p{t+ {"x� a�.+7,1: ' t. F} t � 71 it tl tl tl t/ i r R r It r d w • ti{ ' 'iT � � P � I i r �x I t�f°'".-t',R.',?r.% � � >� P . r �• ' Y, . ,� i ,1, +1 11 it �Ir Y r Af �"✓�-� c t �, " 1 ty Rt�4 i a � k "`hy�", i e 1 1" �, .'irf �a �c Mr� � .. � nlA.a a�'' nxai'��r', • ■i i I>e�.>av�xa u, ' �'''i.3 +i.Cr4.:±ak� 1.4 �j ��i � ,i � "� � ` •n11� P 3t ! s f F W r c1 _ f !'t+r�'� a.r , V t � � r iv:✓�F it i t�•t'Y: rp. •t� 1}+M 1�ei fw t^' �t}. �y�},ui' eery{ '+ti ,+r �, ?ky t I� afro t%'iY �I F. 1 N 1•,�•{+3. _.} ! L(µJ,'f •a r �' '\ 1 ,� Y vl � �r� f �." ' , P � �w I � 1 Y ,tr t Y� � t §'� l " �i �'+ �•h K"�M1:k.11^ 4•� r ^ + 5�, ry}!l% b,t a` '' � f `� �5 7 - `� .� � a��}z, f�t'�f t � t tn, t "' � 7 yi z A Yf f t txn fk yryYt { r F k }�t tiu4 i 4C ffi 'fit u L � } f� ,7 � .� � ♦ i .� ' ADO t3'��':�1 , < 3 . � f Y 1 I ��.��. y t :�� +� �- �i r k,ri{. ddla < I,: r Ry; t'y,; • �.J�� ,t'rr t 'e �� k t �. � , P4. r 4 ] ��.t! �ii f Ft{Sr• +•YyhDi' � (' y I { iyv x itt } s "°•'e`r e� � � � ..r ti d..l� � 1f /�1 yr x'} {F� 'r r rsY'� hll w 1�tt;,,.,•' f; 5 9,-• 5.jt};%:� �.� . `7i. i%p k}! .r. � ` r+lVS�r'� 1 0 i.� 7,.G��'+!'© LA.. rJ tYt � • Si��, '1� e r�.�. 'ji,��, f�ay.� �>��yi ,t��f il., tw 7 r4t i r1 ..r ri ( lea+q 7g `^>•}y , +rx r. 5 f /. '' .;'] 7�,�+tr 7?� �y-'ir.t;. ! 1 t r + 1x-i. i y{SC•P�� r� > < n 4, 7 .• { 44,, 7f C, t} 1 ' C'a L� L h� �}� / • t .� t, J+raf 2`wµ r. •" f.., 1 �..F22'4- f, r fi4r , t y y. ,�+,. + Tf� � 141, 1 � �� ,� _� r ��,:i a �F� ✓ ..'�. y r] �� J �� • 3�JS �011 fisj�, 7 C 1 �i/5 lr 747 } v} t - jl +,,.._ (`� \� � a (►t�� t f?1� 4 s � .�... !'$vs; -J,arl 1�4¢ i3HL +,Ni; � y r �1,, 'V �` r. i• f'1-r 1,� �} \n� j � f 1� r 1''��t'�' �'� �'�' I3� { 1 �ty� 1 y i � : +• i�o?-` �}"ir'r•�K'1M1��w 7. r 40 iv>n r PAR � + i Y • '� 1 t � `fJ:i\T i Il Lo C) Z f II =30 11=11 I �. i E 9 f s I I x .�•...��r uFL V a Near 1 ,t.�Y tl 9� 7�.}�,.7h'k,'� • I � I E-4 g V u J d ' II I 149 AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 CONSENT CALENDAR: ITEM TITLE: Consideration of a Park Name for Park Site Located Between Saguaro and Bottlebrush Drives RECOMMENDATION: As deemed appropriate by the City Council. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: On January 3, 1995, the City Council approved the criteria for naming parks, as provided as Attachment 1. The City of La Quinta has recently acquired a new park site with the closure of Bottlebrush and Saguaro Drives, as provided in Attachment 2. Per established policy, the official name for this park must be approved by the City Council, as outlined in the park naming criteria. The Community Services Commission reviewed possible names for the park at their September 10, 2001 meeting. The Commission directed staff to contact the neighbors of the park to solicit possible names for the park site. At the Commission's October meeting, two names had been submitted for consideration, as provided in Attachment 3. The Community Services Commission is recommending the park site be named Desert Club Manor Park, as suggested by a resident via the Park Naming Submittal form. However, at the November 5, 2001 Community Services Commission meeting, the Commission discussed their concerns about the name Desert Club Manor Park. The Commission's concerns focused on city residents not knowing that area by the name Desert Club Manor and therefore not being able to locate the park. The Commission also mentioned that the City's parks have been named for streets on which they are located, and Desert Club Drive is located southwest of the Desert Club Manor tract. The Commission felt that by naming the park site Desert Club Manor Park, there might be some confusion for residents who do not know the Sagebrush Drive area as Desert Club Manor. The Commission also considered other possible names such as Saguaro Park, Bottlebrush Park and Washington Street Park; however, due to the request by a resident of the area to have the park named Desert Club Manor Park, the Commission is passing this recommendation for City Council consideration. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Approve the name Desert Club Manor Park for the park site located between Saguaro and Bottlebrush Drives; or 2. Approve another name for the park site located between Saguaro and Bottlebrush Drives; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, 011' I I �.. - Attachments: mmunity Services Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager 1. Criteria for Naming Parks 2. Map of Park Site 3. Park Naming Submittal Forms 151 002 S:\Community Services\CCReports\CC.167.Park Name.wpd ATTACHMENT 1 � ,�Quraw PARK NAMING SUBMITTAL FORM Thank you for your time and consideration in providing your comments. Please follow the criteria for the Park Naming Process on back side. If you have any questions, please contact the Community Services Department at 777-7090. LOCATION OF EXISTING PARK SITE: PROPOSED NAME FOR DESIGNATED PARK SITE: NAME OF INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION MAKING REQUEST: MAILING ADDRESS: CITY/STATE/ZIP CODE: DAYTIME PHONE: E-MAIL ADDRESS: EXPLANATION OF PARK NAME BASED ON CRITERIA: FAX #: Return completed forms to: City of La Quinta Community Services Department 78-495 Calle Tampico PO Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Thank you for your suggestion! 152 u e G:\MyData\CRISTAL\Doc\DOC.008.wpd Criteria For Naming of Parks Options to be considered in naming facilities: (in order of importance) • ra ti V W.t! ►-t - A. This can be local, regional or national major significance. The City of La Quinta is rich in history, and the La Quinta Historical Society may be consulted for suggested names and events the Community Services Commission might consider for recommendation to the City Council. A. Recognizable area or neighborhood. If on a school site, it need not necessarily be the same name as the school. Names that aid in locating a park are acceptable. B. Assumed name. Use only if the area has been know by this name for a long period of time. C. Natural phenomena. D. Combination of natural phenomena and place name. E. Horticultural. F. Combination horticultural and place. G. Rivers, creek ways. A. Deceased, group or person, civilian national heroes. B. Living persons. Criteria: Facilities may be named after persons only after a study has been completed. Individuals should be known for their civic work. This civic work shall be over and above an ordinary interest level. A resident of the City of La Quinta who attains local, state or national recognition for human, community, health, safety, or parks and recreation work would be acceptable. Donors: People who have been instrumental in acquiring sites either by actual land or monetary donation (enough to purchase the entire site) or who have donated the entire amount for complete development of a- site. A donation of land which serves as a part or parcel of a larger park or open space may be honored by an "area" dedication. G:\MyData\CRISTAL\Doc\DOC.008.wpd 153 r 5 U U eRIM F c- C1 c,q .k p c 0 ��v O VMS i OE9CRPwt PARK WtOVEMa1T PROGRAM I ati a L. acne. PmPd ■► I oa-M w owswo L MA-W � S LANDSCAPE PLAN „ -j J U a a z U 5 a r- z a LLJ i U - cn xa z a J e U a i H 0 ?ag Or z N J2 0 O I Lix Z LL. O o N OW o w z Y « O U Q v a z x V) 3 IS o a 1 Q N p N a s U) t N 9-� o 1511 ATTACHMENT 3 PARK NAMING SUBMITTAL FORM Thank you for your time and consideration in providing your comments. Please follow the criteria for the Park Naming Process on back side. If you have any questions, please contact the Community Services Department at 777-7090. LOCATION OF EXISTING PARK SITE: PROPOSED NAME FOR DESIGNATED NAME OF INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION MAKING REQUEST: MAILING ADDRESS: CITY/STATE/ZIP CODE: DAYTIME PHONE: E-MAIL ADDRESS: EXPLANATION OF PA K NAME BASED FAX #: CRITERIA: (k,-) Return completed forms to: City of La Quinta Community Services Department 78-495 Calle Tampico PO Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Thank you for your suggestion! G:\MyData\CRISTAL\Doc\DOC.008.wpd Criteria For Naming of Parks Options to be considered in naming facilities: (in order of importance) 2. 3. Histodc Events and Napml A. This can be local, regional or national major significance. The City of La Quinta is rich in history, and the La Quinta Historical Society may be consulted for suggested names and events the Community Services Commission might consider for recommendation to the City Council. A. Recognizable area or neighborhood. If on a school site, it need not necessarily be the same name as the school. Names that aid in locating a park are acceptable. B. Assumed name. Use only if the area has been know by this name for a long period of time. C. Natural phenomena. D. Combination of natural phenomena and place name. E. Horticultural. 'Sa � p F. Combination horticultural and place. G. Rivers, creek ways. C:-- - +k'z ) ..c S t t t- A. Deceased, group or person, civilian national heroes. B. Living persons. Criteria: Facilities may be named after persons only after a study has been completed. Individuals should be known for their civic work. This civic work shall be over and above an ordinary interest level. A resident of the City of La Quinta who attains local, state or national recognition for human, community, health, safety, or parks and recreation work would be acceptable. Donors: People who have been instrumental in acquiring sites either by actual land or monetary donation (enough to purchase the entire site) or who have donated the entire amount for complete development of a site. A donation of land which serves as a part or parcel of a larger park or open space may be honored by an "area" dedication. G:\MyData\CRISTAL\Doc\DOC.008.wpd PARK NAMING SUBMITTAL FORM Thank you for your time and consideration in providing your comments. Please follow the criteria for the Park Naming Process on back side. If you have any questions, please contact the Community Services Department at 777-7090. LOCATION OF EXISTING PARK SITE: PROPOSED NAME FOR DESIGNATED NAME OF INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION MAKING REQUEST: MAILING ADDRESS: 7F -& 7Q CITY/STATE/ZIP CODE: K DAYTIME PHONE: 766, S 4 Y — 46 / V FAX #: E-MAIL ADDRESS: G 01111x. EXPLANATION OF PARK NAME BASED ON CRITERIA: '-1-4i4? / � 6� ;7 "�26-e -.1 �' '6 A j I _'k 04 / -4- V__ -If _t 0__" -.1 , "- ' ke, Rett Thank you for your suggestion! cJ / G:\MyData\CRISTAL\Doc\DOC.008.wpd AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 CONSENT CALENDAR: Consideration of Sunline Transit Agency Proposal to Create or Amend a Joint Powers Agreement to Facilitate Construction of an Electric Power Plant RECOMMENDATION: As deemed appropriate by the City Council. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Sunline reports that there are no fiscal implications for the requested action. Creation or amendment of a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA), however, will ultimately entail some staff time and set in motion a series of events that could include the sale of bonds, construction and operation of a power plant, and sale of electricity. Sunline estimates that a "profit" of $1-2 million may be realized by Sunline. Sunline further indicates that it may be possible to utilize these profits to subsidize transit services. Staff is unable to evaluate profit potential, or risk/loss potential, without additional information on energy market characteristics and the nature of agreements between the project partners and the JPA participants. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Sunline Transit Agency representatives ("Sunline"), made a presentation to the City Council at its regular meeting of November 6, 2001 outlining a proposal to construct and operate a power plant in the Coachella Valley. During this presentation, Sunline and its prospective partner, Sunlaw Energy ("Sunlaw"), identified a project that would include construction and operation of a 120- megawatt natural gas power plant. Other partners would include Questar Corporation, BP Capital and other public entities (i.e., Imperial Irrigation District ("IID"), et. al.). 158 As presented, Sunline would own the project, provide a vehicle for tax exempt financing and exemption from property taxes, help with permitting and, as necessary, help secure rights -of -way. BP Capital would secure natural gas and provide cash to help build the project. Sunlaw and Questar would conduct studies, process permits, hire contractors, enter into contracts for sewer, gas and electricity, provide additional equity, and operate and procure natural gas, and market any power not used locally. Sunline and Sunlaw indicate that, if Sunline had the power of eminent domain, they could attain the status necessary to issue tax-exempt bonds, thereby providing a savings on financing costs. These savings would either be passed on to customers or, alternatively, retained by the partners as "profits." Sunline has represented that its profits may be used to subsidize or enhance transit services. Sunline has advised staff, however, that the partners have not formally developed profit sharing agreements as of this date. The legal and policy issues related to the profit sharing and use concept have not been fully explored. Sunline/Sunlaw indicate that electricity from this plant will be available to Sunline (i.e., if certain legislative changes are made that would allow direct sale of electricity to another entity within IID's service area), locally (i.e., if a local municipal utility is formed), the IID grid, and the wholesale market. Sunline prepared a "Sample Staff Report" for City use during consideration of this matter (Attachment 1). This report further outlines project details and prospective benefits. Staff discussed the concept further with Bill Maier, Sunline Chief Financial Officer, on November 14, 2001 (Richard Cromwell, Sunline General Manager, was not available during the time this report was being prepared). Staff was advised that additional written material relative to project costs, revenues, profit sharing arrangements, etc., were not available for dissemination at this time. Mr. Maier advised that Sunline was working with special legal counsel (i.e., Ms. Emily Hemphill of Selzer, Ealy, Hemphill and Blasdel) on the project, but indicated that final decisions had not yet been made on whether this proposal would be best served by an "implementation agreement" under an existing JPA, an amendment to an existing JPA, or establishment of an entirely new JPA. Staff further inquired as to the experience of the proposed team, including Sunlaw, in structuring and implementing projects of this nature (i.e., involving public/private partnerships, profit sharing, etc.). Staff was referred to Mr. Bob Kendall with Sunlaw. Mr. Kendall advised that Sunlaw constructed two plants in Vernon, California in the early 1980's and operates those plants today. These plants were privately financed. Mr. Kendall indicated that Sunline itself, as a corporate entity, 159 002 does not have experience with public/private ventures such as was being proposed by Sunline. He further indicated, however, that Sunlaw principals did have experience with public/private ventures while employed by other companies. Finally, staff contacted IID regarding Sunline/Sunlaw's proposal to sell power to the IID grid. IID advised that a meeting had been held regarding the concept, but details specific to prospective sales to IID or other municipalities had not yet been provided. The California energy market has been volatile in recent years as a result of market factors and regulatory/deregulatory actions. Staff has not been provided market data or projections specific to anticipated supply/demand ratios that might affect the fiscal feasibility of the Sunline proposal. Sunline has verbally indicated that safeguards will be included within agreements with their partners in this project to minimize or eliminate loss liability or exposure to Sunline or JPA signators. These safeguards may affect Sunline's "profit" share. Staff cannot assess the risk/reward of this proposal without additional information. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1 . Authorize the City's Sunline representative to support in concept a proposal for Sunline Transit Agency to finance, construct and operate an electric power plant, including extension of the power of eminent domain to Sunline, subject to City Council consideration and approval of appropriate JPA implementation language; or 2. Do not authorize the City's Sunline representative to support in concept a proposal by Sunline Transit Agency to finance, construct and operate an electric power plant; or 3. Defer action on the Sunline proposal pending provision of additional information including JPA implementation language; or 4. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, t Mark Weiss, Assistant City Manager Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1. Sample Staff Report from Sunline SAMPLE Staff Report ATTACHMENT 1 DATE: TO: City Council FROM: ITEM: Sung Electric Generation Center and Power of Eminent Domain for SunLine. Recommendation Recommend that the City Council: 1) Authorize it's SunLine Board Member to vote favorably on the creation of the Sung electric generation project, and 2) to approve adding the power of Eminent Domain to SunLine. Background SunLine is in the process of creating a partnership to construct an electrical generation plant, which for the first time, would have an excellent chance to produce electricity that could be used right here in the Coachella Valley. SunLine, in partnership with Sunlaw Energy Corporation (no affiliation with SunLine), Questar Corporation and BP Capital LLC, is exploring the feasibility of constructing and operating a 120 megawatt electricity generation facility in the Thousand Palms area. Each of the partners brings a particular expertise to the project, ensuring success from concept to construction to operation of the facility. SunLine's principal role, and the reason SunLine needs the power of eminent domain, will be to provide the municipal framework that will allow the project to qualify for lower cost tax-exempt financing, and exemption from property taxes. SunLine has a four -fold interest in this project: 1. To ensure a constant and reliable electric power source to support its operations, particularly to drive the electrolysis units needed in government contract work. This reliable power source could also be advantageous to the entire Coachella Valley if municipalization efforts continue through the CVAG process. 2. Since this project will consume approximately 30 times more natural gas than SunLine's current fueling needs, it will enable SunLine to negotiate prices for natural gas as a considerably higher -volume consumer. 3. To reduce power costs through our association with IID. 4. Will produce a revenue stream to expand public transit in the Coachella Valley. This project will provide three distinct advantages to the community over other current or recently proposed projects: 1. It proposes significant emissions advantages. It will use SCONOx technology, which is the current standard for pollution control for such facilities across the United 2 2 162 States. This technology not only reduces Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) to levels well below the best available control technology (BACT), but also reduces all the other primary pollutants (PM-10, Sulfur Dioxide — SO2, Carbon Monoxide - CO and Volatile Organic Compounds -VOC ) as well. 2. It will open for business as a combined -cycle (rather than simple cycle) project, which means it will produce power with less fuel, thereby being more efficient. 3. It will use the latest technology in wet/dry cooling procedures, using water only when absolutely necessary (over 50% will be reclaimed water from CVWD), and recharging the aquifer for what is used. In summary, this will be the cleanest, most efficient gas turbine power producer in the country, characteristic of the leading -edge technologies with which SunLine has been associated for years. The location of the project is expected to also result in maximum efficiency. Sunlaw will shortly obtain an option on land in close proximity to both the Southern California Edison (SCE) Mirage Substation and Imperial Irrigation District (IID) Ramon Substation, located on Ramon Road in Thousand Palms, in an area of low population density. The project can easily be connected to either, or both substations. The project partners feel that there is a finite window of opportunity for the construction of gas turbine facilities in California. Accordingly, the project should be moved along expeditiously so that it can be in-service in early 2003. To accomplish this, we would need to obtain SunLine's Board of Directors' approval by the end of December, 2001. Fiscal Implications None to the City for taking this action. hApctran\Barbara\SunSg2.doc hAu\s\aaaa\SunSg2.doc 163 REPORT/INFORMATIONAL ITEM: /'7 INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD Meeting October 10, 2001 I 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 Mahfoud followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENT: Board Members Lewis, Olander, Chairman Mahfoud, Osborne, Moulin and Felice (via videoconference) ABSENT: Board Member Mitchell OTHERS PRESENT: John Falconer, Finance Director and Vianka Orrantia, Secretary II PUBLIC COMMENTS - none III CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA At the request of Board Member Lewis, Mr. Falconer presented page 2 of the June LAIF Report, to be discussed under Item VI - B. Based on a conversation with Board Member Moulin, Mr. Falconer presented a revised page 007 of the Treasurer's report, which will be discussed under Item V - A. IV CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of Minutes of Meeting on September 12, 2001 for the Investment Advisory Board. MOTION - It was moved by Board Member Lewis/Moulin to approve the Minutes of September 12, 2001. Motion carried unanimously. 1 164 Investment Advisory Board October 10, 2001 Minutes V BUSINESS SESSION A. Transmittal of Treasury Report for August, 2001 Board Member Lewis advised that because the City no longer uses a percentage of investments for the various government agency investments (GSEIs), he suggested making a change to Page 3, of the Treasurer's Report, in the column listed under "Authorized Investments and Diversification." Board Member Lewis further suggested that Mr. Falconer change the title to read All Funds Actual Percentage or Dollars, and list the dollar amounts of the particular agencies. Mr. Falconer concurred and suggested adding another column to reflect all funds actual and include the dollar amounts next to the column with the percentages at 100% as a double check. Mr. Falconer advised the Board of the revision on page 007. Mr. Falconer advised that listed under Fiscal Agent Investments rather than one block of information, with the new revision it would consist of two blocks. The revision reflects the $34 million of Treasury Notes that were purchased for the bond proceeds on the recent bond issue, which was reflected in the total but not the detail. Vice Chairman Moulin advised that the changes in bond proceeds from the beginning of the month to the end of the month, and how it was being explained, are reflected on the cash flow page on page 008. In response to Board Member Lewis, Mr. Falconer advised that of the $46 million that was spent, three weeks later, in accordance with the agreement with the County, a wire was sent for $8.6 million to the County to pay-off a Pass Through Agreement. Mr. Falconer advised the Board that we are required by the IRS to spend the money within three years or obligate the money for five years, per the tax-exempt laws. In response to Board Member Lewis, Mr. Falconer advised the Board the timing was right and the Redevelopment Agency had the bond capacity to raise the funds and went to market. Board Member Lewis asked what rate was being paid on the bonds, Mr. Falconer advised that the net interest rate is approximately 5.1 %. In response to Board Member Lewis, Mr. Falconer advised that we had two ratings: the stand-alone 2 165 Investment Advisory Board Minutes October 10, 2001 rating, without insurance, was an "A" rating: however, insurance was purchased, along with a Surety Bond, therefore the rating was a triple "A" rating. Chairman Mahfoud asked who the underwriter was. Mr. Falconer advised he would get back to the Board as to who the underwriter was. (Wedbush Morgan Securities, San Diego, California) Chairman Mahfoud asked if the City was making any changes in projected revenue growth and budget due to a possible slow down? Mr. Falconer advised the Board that he could speak in general terms, and Mr. Falconer advised that he modified the revenue report to reflect revenues for this year versus last year. For the months of July and August, the City revenues are at their projections, if not a little bit ahead. September was good for building permits, but T.O.T. Tax will be down around 50% for the month. Mr. Falconer advised that he believes that there will be a rebound in the economy next year and in terms of the City's budget, the City will meet its projections for this year. Vice Chairman Moulin advised that Mr. Falconer will continue to go into shorter maturities. The $34 million was placed in Treasury Notes, with a three-month maturity. Mr. Falconer advised the Board that he remains very cautious due to the current market. Mr. Falconer advised the Board that he currently does not have any investments in Sally Mae due to the unavailability of inventory. Vice Chairman Moulin stated that the yields were not much different between the Treasury Notes and the GSE's. MOTION — It was moved by Board Member Lewis/Olander to review, receive and file the Treasurers Reports for August 2001 as amended. Motion carried unanimously. B. Consideration of Changes in Investment Policies Mr. Falconer advised the Board, the three items listed were an outcome of the meeting with the Council on September 25tn Vice Chairman Moulin advised that Staff is asking to lift the limitations on the $6 million dollars previously agreed upon by the Treasurer and the City Manager. Vice Chairman Moulin also advised that a larger number 3 166 Investment Advisory Board Minutes October 10, 2001 will be required, and the question to the Board would be whether or not a limit would be needed. Mr. Falconer advised that there are generally two funds — the pooled funds under the direct control of the Treasurer and fiscal agent funds under the control of U.S. Bank. The fiscal agent funds have no wire limitation. For instance when the Treasurer called U.S. Bank and instructed them to purchase $34 million in U.S. Treasuries, they transferred the funds with no limitation. For pooled funds the Treasurer tries to roll investments over as they mature and remit only the difference, if any. However, there have been instances where an investment matured and was not rolled over and the City received the entire amount back. Mr. Falconer continued that the City has received a T-Note of $10 million and it would take two days to reinvest the funds - $6 million one day and $4 million the next. In addition, the possibility exists that with only one person able to verify a wire, these or any other wire could not be processed if the verifier was unavailable. In response to Board Member Lewis, Mr. Falconer stated that wires only come into play with the pooled funds under the direct control of the Treasurer. In response to Board Member Lewis, Mr. Falconer stated that the bond proceeds are in the custody of U.S. Bank. Board Member Lewis asked for clarification, if a $10 million bond was purchased, even though Wells Fargo delivered a $10 million bond, Wells Fargo would not deliver out the $10 million due to the $6 million dollar limit? Mr. Falconer replied that Wells Fargo does not deliver out the bond, and clarified that Wells Fargo was not our broker, and his limit was $6 million per day. Vice Chairman Moulin asked Mr. Falconer if the bank agreement specifies a limit or specifies no limit? Mr. Falconer replied that it specifies the City specify a limit or no dollar amount on wires. Vice Chairman Moulin asked who was authorized to make these wire requests? Mr. Falconer replied that when securities are purchased, the City Manager or designee's approval is needed, regarding the type and the amount that the Treasurer chooses to purchase. Mr. Falconer advised the Board that upon his arrival in the morning he calls and the bids are received. Mr. Falconer chooses the investment he wants to purchase that day, than Mr. Falconer instructs the broker to deliver the security to the Bank of New York, which is the City's Trustee. The Bank of New York is faxed a form notifying them to expect the security to be delivered 4 161 Investment Advisory Board Minutes October 10, 2001 with the CVSIP number and the dollar amount, along with instructions with either same day or next day settlement. A wire is prepared and initiated by either the Treasurer or City Manager. The wire is then verified, with only one person in the City who verifies the wire, which is the Accounting Manager. The Accounting Manager verifies that the trade ticket information agrees with the wire based on information prepared by Mr. Falconer. Upon verification, either the Treasurer or the City Manager sends the wire. Chairman Mahfoud asked that by adding one more person to verify would there be room for error? Mr. Falconer replied that by adding an alternate person, (Assistant City Manager) this would allow him to make that day's transaction, in the event the Accounting Manager was out of the office. Mr. Falconer advised the Board that there is a three -step process: initiate, verify and send. Mr. Falconer can initiate the wire; the Accounting Manager verifies the wire and than Mr. Falconer sends the wire. The money is wired to Bank of New York and Bank of New York than emails Mr. Falconer informing him that the money is received. A journal entry is then made to book the transaction into the City's accounting system. The City's Financial Services Assistant prepares a fax to the Bank of New York. Board Member Osborne advised the Board of his concern of having no .limit on a wire, and the same person sending the wire and receiving email confirmation and would recommend the Financial Service Assistant be an additional wire verifier. Mr. Falconer advised that he could instruct the bank to change the email for verification to the verifier. Board Member Lewis advised that he would like to see a change in internal controls prior to changing the limit of the wire. Mr. Falconer advised the Board that due to the recent events he would like to expand the number of brokers at the three broker/dealers. Mr. Falconer continued that at two of the three broker/dealers only one broker has been approved. Board Member Osborne recommended Diane Valenzuela from our Merrill Lynch broker/dealer in Indian Wells. Mr. Falconer stated that he had intended to ask Fred Sandoval of Merrill Lynch for his recommendations. Mr. Falconer stated the City has a prescribed process on bringing on new brokers, which would come before the Investment Board prior to Council consideration Mr. Falconer recommended three brokers per broker/dealer. 5 Investment Advisory Board Minutes October 10, 2001 MOTION — It was moved by Lewis/Olander to recommend the changes as discussed. Motion carried unanimously. VI CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL A. Month End Cash Report — September 2001 Mr. Falconer advised the Board that he currently has not been making any investments in Commercial Paper due to the current situation in America. In response to Chairman Mahfoud, Mr. Falconer advised that the City will have some investments due at the end of October and a large maturity at the end of November. Noted and Filed. B. Pooled Money Investment Board Reports — July 2001 Board Member Lewis advised the Board that he requested page 2 of the June LAIF Report to be distributed. In the July report, year-to-date yield, last day of the month, it went from June of 2001 at 6.1 % to July 2001 at 4.6%. The June report went from May of 2001 at 6.2% to June 2001 at 6.1 %. Board Member Lewis advised the Board that this was a substantial drop in the July report. Mr. Falconer advised that it was possible the drop in percentage was due to a fiscal year end as to compared to a month end report. Noted and Filed. VII BOARD MEMBER ITEMS Board Member Lewis asked Mr. Falconer if the Minutes from the joint meeting with the City Council were going to be distributed for approval. Mr. Falconer responded that the Minutes will go to the City Council for approval and will be included in the next Investment Advisory Board Agenda packet upon Council's G 169 Investment Advisory Board Minutes approval. Vlll ADJOURNMENT October 10, 2001 MOTION - It was moved by Chairman Mahfoud/Lewis to adjourn the meeting at 6:20 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Submitted b , Vianka Orrantia Secretary 7 REPORT/INFORMATIONAL ITEM: /9 CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION MINUTES October 11, 2001 I. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Cultural Arts Commission was called to order at 7:02 p.m. in the Study Session Room of the La Quinta Civic Center. Chairperson Shamis presided over the meeting. Commissioner Diamond led the Pledge of Allegiance. MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioner Denise Diamond Commissioner Else Loudon Commissioner Elaine Reynolds Commissioner Rosita Shamis (Chairperson) MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Dan Baxley STAFF PRESENT: Dodie Horvitz, Community Services Director II. PUBLIC COMMENT III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR V. VI. A. Approval of Minutes of September 11, 2001 B. Art in Public Places Financial Report for September 2001 C. Monthly Department Report for August 2001 It was moved by Commissioners Reynolds/Loudon to approve the Consent Calendar with corrections. Unanimous. PUBLIC HEARING - None BUSINESS ITEMS A. Cultural Arts Symposium Commissioner Shamis gave an overview of the Cultural Symposium's progress and what has been done so far for the Symposium to be offered on Saturday, November 3, 2001 at the La Quinta Civic Center from 1:00-5:00 p.m. Commissioner Shamis asked everyone to review the flyer produced by Ms. McBride and to take some flyers to hand out. She stated that she is very pleased that the two guest speakers will be in attendance, as it is an honor to have this level of participation in the Coachella Valley. Ms. McBride is responsible for the format of the Symposium and each guest speaker will be given 30 minutes each to present their information, this includes the question and answer session. The La Quinta Historical Society has accepted an invitation to present a display in honor of November being celebrated as Culture and History month. Two folk artists will present their crafts during the presentation. Leslie McMillian will coordinate the singer for the National Anthem. The Mayor has been invited to present the opening remarks. Ms. McBride will then facilitate the presentations. SACommunity Services\CAComm\CACMIN.10-11-0l.wpd 17 _ The Cities of Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage have confirmed their participation and Indio has not confirmed as of yet. The City of Palm Springs will bring a 2 minute video to be shown during their presentation. Commissioner Shamis has contacted the Indian Tribes and invited them to attend. They will receive formal invitations from the Riverside Arts Council. The McCallum Theatre has been invited to attend as well. Commissioner Shamis asked Commissioner Diamond if she could deliver invitations to the College of the Desert staff. Commissioner Diamond will deliver 25 invitations. Lodging; Johnny So of KSL reported that three rooms for the 2"d are no problem. And the 3' may not be a problem either. Staff has sent a letter requesting the contribution of rooms to the Symposium event. Dinner on the 3rd for Panelists: After some discussion, the Commission determined that dinner for Commissioners as well as panelists should be paid for by the City. Alcohol will not be covered as part of dinner. The Commissioners determined that the Commissioners will cover the cost of any drinks for the dinner. It was motioned by Commissioners Diamond/Reynolds that the Commissioners dinner will be reimbursed. The vote was 3-1, with Loudon dissenting. It was discussed that clean-up of event is responsibility of Commissioners. Assignment of tasks: Name tags will be provided by the Riverside Arts Council. Greet and sign - in table: Commissioners Diamond and Loudon Sign In Sheet: Staff will produce Evaluation Form: Riverside Arts Council should provide this. Staff will fax a copy of the evaluation form used last year. Commissioner Loudon was concerned that 30 minutes each speaker may be too long. Shamis said that Ms. McBride is responsible for the timing of events. Commissioner Shamis suggested that Colleen coordinate with John Naguis to facilitate questions. It was determined that set up to begin at noon with all Commissioners in attendance. B. November Date: After a brief discussion, it was determined that the November Commisison meeting be held on Thursday, November 1, 2001. It was motioned by Loudon/Reynolds to move the November 2001 Cultural Arts Commission meeting to November 1. Unanimous. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIALS VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Artist Partnership Day Commissioner Shamis reported that for Artist partnership Day she has found eye 11) 1 Ir. SACommunity Services\CAComm\CACMIN.10-11-0l.wpd 002 cooperative artists, which include 6 artists for high school and two for the middle school. Staff will send the specific details to Commissioners Shamis and Loudon. B. 20th Anniversary Meeting Celebration will include concert and fireworks at the high school . Commissioner Shamis offered three options for musical entertainment: Riverside Philharmonic for $12,000. This option would require asking City Council for additional funds. State Street Strutters — $5,000 Local group - Scott Smith for approximately $500 Commissioner Loudon will bring information back at the November meeting for discussion. C. La Quinta Arts Association Commissioner Reynolds reported that the La Quinta Arts Association will be holding an Arts Show at the Senior Center D. Coachella Valley Arts Alliance Dinner Dance Commissioner Loudon reported that the Arts Alliance Dinner/Dance will be on December 6, 2001 and they have many great prizes. E. Temporary Art Commissioner Diamond would like to start the process of identifying sites for the temporary and permanent art pieces. This will be placed on the November agenda. IX. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioners Reynolds/Loudon to adjourn the Cultural Arts Commission meeting. Unanimous. Meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. NEXT MEETING INFORMATION November 1, 2001 7:00 PM La Quinta Civic Center Study Session Room Next agenda: • 201h Anniversary Celebration Musical Group • Attendance at the 20th Anniversary Celebration Meeting • Temporary Art Locations Submitted by: !6 OF' r. - munity Services Director 173 S:\Comffttt ity Services\CAComm\CACMIN.10-11-01.wpd 003 REPORT/INFORMATIONAL ITEM: 19_ MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA October 9, 2001 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Abels who asked Commissioner Robbins to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Steve Robbins, Robert Tyler, and Chairman Jacques Abels. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Kathy Jensen, Planning Manager Christine di lorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Planning Consultant Nicole Criste, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Abels asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of September 25, 2001. Commissioner Butler asked that Pages 7 and 8, be corrected to read that Commissioner Kirk was present for all three votes. There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Tyler to approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved. B. Department Report: 1. None. Commissioner Kirk asked staff if there was still time to submit comments on the General Plan Update. Staff stated they would need them as soon as possible. V. PRESENTATIONS: None. 174 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 1 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 VI. PUBLIC HEARING: A. Specific Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1; a request of Forrest K. Haag for RJT Homes, Inc. to modify development standards and text information for a private residential development on no more than 178 houses on approximately 73 acres located at the southwest corner of Avenue 50 and Jefferson Street. 1. Chairman Abels 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. Senior Engineer Steve Speer informed the Commission that in the course of plan checking the project, it was found that the retention basin did not comply with the Conditions of Approval. Staff asked the developer to explain this and they said the lake level was raised so they are unable to retain storm water in the lake and this caused it to spill down to the retention basins causing them to be larger/deeper. Normally, staff has not allowed the depth in a retention basin to go beyond five feet in depth. The one exception has been the Tradition which has a detention basin 35 feet deep with a water depth of ten feet when the 100-year storm is contained. 2. Commissioner Robbins asked staff to clarify whether it was the depth of the water in the retention basin that is not more than five feet or the depth of the retention basin before adjacent grade in not more than five feet. Staff stated the intent is to not have more than five feet of water and not more than six feet deep at the closest point between the lowest point in the road adjacent to the retention basin. Commissioner Robbins stated he thought the retention basin at the Adams Park was deeper than six feet. Staff stated the upper bench of the Park slopes toward the retention basin which reaches six feet. It is greater on the west side adjacent to the street. 3. Staff stated that in order to make an exception to this project, it would take an amendment to the Specific Plan. In this case it is possible to consider deeper basins. The Public Works Department has put together criteria that if more proposals are submitted in the future, staff will have something to compare them against. 175 002 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 2 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 Staff is asking the Commission to consider depth versus width and the issues associated with this. This applicant is asking for a water depth of nine feet in an 11 foot deep basin. Discussion followed regarding the depth of retention basins. 4. Commissioner Kirk asked how high the lake was raised. Staff stated two feet. 5. Chairman Abels asked staff to clarify the safety issues. Staff stated that to address some of the safety concerns, staff is recommending that if they go to deeper basins for every additional five feet of water, eight foot wide benches must be installed. Therefore, if you were to go off the edge the deepest the water would be is five feet. Staff is also requiring them to make them open spaces and possibly gated and padlocked during rainy seasons. 6. Commissioner Tyler asked where the square footage was measured from for the floor of the basin, or projected surface. Staff stated they are intended to be the size of the lot dedicated for the basin, so it would be the boundary of the lot. 7. Commissioner Tyler asked why staff was not allowing the use turf on the bottom of the basin. Staff stated they are more sensitive to water conservation and asked that the flat areas be a desert scape and the sloped areas be either turfed or planted with a ground cover and the bottom be some type of landscape material. 8. Commissioner Tyler stated the table on Page 45 of the staff report is asking for ten feet deep and the guideline states it should be a 30,000 square foot lot instead of the 20,000 square foot lot they are suggesting; can the applicant comply with this. Staff stated the applicant has stated they can comply with this requirement. 9. Commissioner Butler stated the staff report sites the percolation should be 240 hours for 20,000 square feet; does the developer have to show that the basin would absorb at that rate. Staff stated they are required to give the City soil testings and the City has set requirements to measure this with. Commissioner Butler asked if a developer does have an area where the percolates will absorb at this rate, can they reduce the size of the basin? Will the City set any standards on this? Staff stated the standard is contained in the Zoning Code and the only time an exceptiori G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 3 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 would be considered is in a Specific Plan. Staff is asking the Commission to help set those standards at this meeting. If we clear the safety and percolation issues, there is a trade off that could be beneficial. 10. Commissioner Robbins stated he had concerns in regard to the reducing the setback to ten feet in areas not adjacent to open space. He is not sure that is what the City wants, if this would set a precedent. 11. Chairman Abels asked the difference between bench and terraced area. Staff stated they were the same thing. 12. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Chris Bergh, M.D.S. Consulting, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the request. 13. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Kirk asked the applicant if this was an aesthetic issue. Mr. Bergh stated yes, as some of the houses near the lake would have to look down to see the lake. 14. Commissioner Butler asked if the water issue was within the water conservation boundaries. 15. Commissioner Robbins stated it was his assumption the project would have to meet the City's Zoning Code and would have the proper mix between water surface and other types of landscaping. 16. Commissioner Tyler stated many projects would like to use lakes to augment their retention basin to meet the 100 year flood condition. Is he correct that they are saying they are already at high water levels with the minimum levels? Mr. Bergh stated 40% of the retention is within the lake area and 60% of the balance goes to the retention basin. 17. Commissioner Kirk asked about the 10 foot setback. Mr. Forrest Haag, speaking for the applicant, stated there are 10 foot setbacks on the golf courses. It is perceived, on most projects with golf courses, that the rear yard area belonging to the golf course is owned by the property owners. In this project there are lots that front on to the cul-de-sacs and back up to one another. There are homeowners who want large footprint homes on small 177 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 4 004 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 lots. They do not want the problem of taking care of a large rear yard, nor do they want a pool. According to their marketing information there are people that do not want this large backyard. There are some homeowners who want the extended rear yard to look over a golf course, or in this instance a lake, and others who want no part of that. 18. Commissioner Butler asked if there was room in a 10 foot rear yard for a pool. Mr. Haag stated they can do an infinity -edge pool. Discussion followed regarding the economics of a ten foot setback. 19. Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this project. There being no further discussion, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 20. Commissioner Robbins stated he has problems with the ability of these homes to be scrunched together. As a compromise he could support 30 feet between the back of one house to the back of the other. 21. Commissioner Kirk stated he supports staff's recommendation regarding drainage. He does, however, has a problem with the ten foot setback. He does not mind more density, but in the right location and this project is not a high density project. He agrees there are some people who would want the smaller rear yard setback, but he is not sure this is what they want in La Quinta. Therefore, he is against that portion of their request. He agrees with staff in that he would like to see some sort of compromise and perhaps Commissioner Robbins' suggestion might work. Another way may be to have the 20-foot setback as an average rather than a minimum so if there are architectural elements that jet into the setback, they can account for them and balance out the rear yard as an average. 22. Commissioner Butler stated he is satisfied with the retention issue, but the developer is the one putting himself at risk in regard to the density and whether the setback is ten feet or 20. He is uncertain whether or not the Commission should make that decision for them. He has no objection to the ten foot setback if the developer believes he can sell the product. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 5 005 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 23. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to clarify that the only architectural projections being considered were those in the front yard setback. Staff stated that was correct. Commissioner Tyler stated he would not like to give up on the 20 foot setback. He had some concerns in regard to the conditions. Conditions #12 and #18 relate to the same issue and should be combined. 24. Commissioner Robbins stated one is a landscape requirement and the other is a natural retention requirement. 25. Commissioner Tyler noted that Condition #5 of the Specific Plan is lined out and Condition #6 of the Tract Map is not lined out. Staff stated both conditions should be left in. Commissioner Tyler asked why there were new Fire Department conditions. Staff stated the Fire Department determined new ones were needed. 26. Chairman Abels stated he did not like the idea of 10 foot setbacks as this is not what was wanted in La Quinta. He would agree with the averaging at 20 feet. 27. Commissioner Butler asked the applicant if this was a siting situation and what the motivating factor was for the ten foot setback. Mr. Haag stated that in the evolution of the architecture and the development of the map, the architecture has been driven by the market. The engineering is trying to keep what the developer believes is a saleable product within the plan. Very few of these lots, less than 15, and somewhere between ten and fifteen percent of the lots require this ten foot setback. Commissioner Butler asked if these lots were all paired housing. Mr. Haag stated no, but odd shaped lots on maybe 10-15 lots need the 10 foot setback. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated that in regard to averaging, it would be difficult to enforce as the building permits are issued in groups which makes it hard to determine the average of the entire subdivision; second you preclude anyone from adding an addition because you would have to calculate what the addition's setback would be in relation to the entire subdivision. 28. Commissioner Kirk stated the averaging should be per lot. Discussion followed regarding averaging and determining the lots that can have the ten foot setback. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 6 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 29. Commissioner Tyler stated he is in favor of a curvilinear development; however, isn't there any alternative to the ten foot setback? Mr. Haag stated the developer wants his statement in the perimeter look and the interior amenities and replicated architecture. 30. Chairman Abels stated he concurs with the applicant's request as it is a matter of economics. 31. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-125, recommending approval of Specific Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as amended: a. Condition #5.A.1.: Remove the strike out. b. Condition #48: Change to read, "retention basins over 20,000 square feet." C. Condition #57: Rear yard setbacks for houses and guest houses not backing up to open spaces, shall not be less than 10 feet for 22 of the lots with those specific lots to be determined prior to the City Council public hearing and the remainder shall have 20 foot rear yard setbacks. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: Commissioner Kirk and Robbins. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 32. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-126, recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 29858 Amendment #2, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as submitted/amended: a. Condition # 49: Change to read, "retention basins over 20,000 square feet." ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 7 007 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 B. Conditional Use Permit 2001-063; a request of Sprint PCS for approval of the installation of a 68 foot high wireless antenna camouflaged as a Palm Tree (Monopalm prototype design) and related ground -mounted equipment for cellular telephone service within a self -storage facility on 3.77 acres located at 46-600 Adams Street, Storage USA. 1 . Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked if this tower was totally enclosed within the project and asked why the project was required to have two parking spaces. Staff stated it was within the storage facility and the parking spaces were required by the Zoning Code. The parking spaces within the Storage facility are for RV rental parking spaces. 3. Commissioner Kirk asked the location of the other two approved sites. Staff stated the last one approved was AT&T at the Imperial Irrigation District facility. Commissioner Kirk asked if it had been determined to be legally possible to have multiple tenants on a tower. Staff stated it was legal and a condition had been added on to the AT&T tower. Commissioner Kirk asked if this applicant had been asked to have multiple tenants on this tower. Staff stated the applicant would have to address this as it would have to be ten feet higher to accommodate another user. 4. Commissioner Robbins stated his only concern was the proliferation of the monopalms throughout the City. 5. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Linda Nobia, representing Telecom Wireless Solutions sole consultants to Sprint PCS, gave a presentation on the project. In regard to the antennas she stated this tower will serve only La Quinta. 6. Commissioner Kirk asked the radius of the service area and if it could accept other applicants. Ms. Nobia stated yes, but it would not get as good a coverage. They would have to expand the lease area for additional equipment. They would be willing to accept a 181 condition requiring it as long as they have the lease area to do this. 008 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 8 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 7. Commissioner Tyler asked if all the proposed telecommunication facilities meet the current standards set by the FCC. Ms. Nobia stated yes. 8. Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this project. There being no further discussion, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 9. Commissioner Tyler questioned why it should be condition to have the parking spaces. 10. Commissioner Kirk asked how the City could enforce a requirement to have an additional tenant on the tower. City Attorney Kathy Jensen stated that if they consent to the condition, it will be a lease situation and could be difficult to enforce. 1 1 . Commissioner Kirk asked the applicant how they would enforce this. Mr. Don Williams, Telecom Wireless Solutions, stated they are getting ready to construct a co -location facility and could also do the same at this location. Most carriers would rather co -locate than do their own pole as it is cheaper. They do need a vertical separation between the two facilities and this can be a problem. In regard to landscaping and parking spaces, they are happy with whatever the City decides. They do have an employee who checks the poles each month, but this does not require a parking space. They are happy to plant the trees, but need help as to where to put them as it is an entirely paved area. Their leased area is not big enough to put the pole and two trees. 12. Commissioner Butler stated he would want the palm trees next to the pole. Discussion followed as to possible planting alternatives. 13. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-127, approving Conditional Use Permit 2001- 063, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as amended: a. Condition #8: Add, "Trees shall be maintained and replaced if they die." 182 009 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 9 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 b. Condition 9: Deleted and replaced with a requirement for a multiple antenna. The Resolution shall be modified to add a new finding that the required parking spaces as required by the Zoning Code are not needed as the parking spaces provided within the Storage facility are sufficient and additional parking is not needed. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. Chairman Abels recessed the meeting at 8:30 p.m. ane reconvened at 8:37 p.m. C. Village Use Permit 2001-010; a request of Edwin G. Cosek (Andrew's Bar and Grill) for review of exterior remodeling plans for an existing one story commercial building (formerly Chez Moniques) on 0.17 acres to include outdoor patio dining, landscaping, signs and vehicle parking areas located at 78-121 Avenida La Fonda. 1. Commissioner Kirk excused himself due to a possible conflict of interest and left the dias. 2. Chairman Abels 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. 3. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked if the old sign would be removed. Staff stated yes. Commissioner Tyler asked about the lack of parking. Staff stated parking would be available on the street and on site. Commissioner Tyler asked about the 25 feet on the west side of the building. Staff stated the area is proposed to be landscaped and the parking capacity can be addressed by the applicant. 4. Commissioner Butler stated he was concerned that with the restaurant to the west of this project there could be a parking problem. Staff stated they thought the parking was sufficient. 0810 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 10 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 5. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. John Calgerious, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the request and stated the seating capacity of the restaurant is 82 and is anticipate to be open within ten weeks. 6. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the applicant. There being no questions of the applicant, Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this project. There being no further discussion, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 7. Commissioner Robbins stated he is in favor of the project as it should be an addition to the Village. 8. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-128, recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2001-010, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN: None. Commissioner Kirk rejoined the Commission. D. Village Use Permit 2001-012; a request of Santa Rosa Plaza, LLC for review of 18 Casitas buildings, each containing eight units, for a total of 144 units on a portion of the Santa Rosa Plaza Specific Plan property located on the north side of Calle Tampico, between Desert club Drive and Avenida Bermudas. 1 . Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Robbins asked for clarification as to why all four sides of the elevation were not included. Staff stated the two fronts and two sides are the same. 184 011. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 11 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 3. Commissioner Tyler stated the emergency exit should be shown on the plans. Staff noted this is called out on the Specific Plan. 4. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Daniel Brown, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the request. 5. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commission Kirk asked if the applicant concurred with the conditions. Mr. Brown stated he did and explained the green area shown on the plan shows how they would like to have the site look, even if it is more than 25 percent turf. Commissioner Kirk asked what the use of pavilion would be when it is proposed for the middle of the parking lot. Ms. Bridget Meyers, representing the applicant, stated they have been discussing this with several landscape architects. The vision is to use it for outdoor entertainment or exhibits for the pedestrian usage. Commissioner Kirk asked if Embassy Suites has ever marketed the casitas units without a hotel attached. Mr. Brown stated they would be constructed at the same time so it would not be an issue. They will be individually owned. 6. Commissioner Tyler stated he was concerned that the people who own the casitas units would be subject to the construction noise of the hotel. Mr. Brown stated they are planning to build the two at the same time so it would not be an issue. 7. Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this project. There being no further discussion, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 8. Commissioner Robbins stated his only concern is the applicant's request for more turf and asked if the Specific Plan was conditioned to a set amount of turf. Staff stated the condition was added by staff at the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee meeting. The original Specific Plan requires it to meet the Landscape Ordinance. The applicant is requesting the elimination of Condition #4. Commissioner Robbins stated he would recommend reducing the evaporation ratio from 8 to 6 and let them do what they want with a certain amount of water. Discussion followed regarding the amount of turf and water to be allowed. Mr. Brown stated he was concerned this would n4 8 5 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 12 012 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 allow them to obtain the oasis look they are wanting. Following discussion it was determined the amount of turf would be limited to 33 percent. 9. Commissioner Kirk stated he has a problem with the casitas units resembling apartments rather than a true casitas unit and he would recommend additional features be added. 10. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-129, recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2001-012, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as submitted/amended: a. Condition #4: A landscaping shall be a maximum of 33% b. Condition #10: The emergency access on Desert Club Drive shall be specified on the plans ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: Commissioner Robbins. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. E. Site Development Permit 2001-714; a request of Madison Development LLC for review of development plans for one retail building located on the northwest corner of Washington Street and Highway 1 1 1, within Point Happy Commercial center. 1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked about the window signs on Washington Street and if the Commission could prohibit this. Staff stated the Specific Plan would not allow it. 3. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. John Vuksic, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the request. 4. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the applicant. There being no questions of the applicant, Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 13 18 (� 13 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 project. There being no further discussion, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-130, recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2001-714, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Development Permit 2000-671, Amendment #1; a request of Toll Bros. For review of architectural plans for one new prototype residential unit to be located within the Norman Golf Course, on the north side of Airport Boulevard, east of Madison Street. 1. Chairman Abels 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 Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. There being no questions of staff, nor of the applicant, Chairman Abels closed the public participation. 3. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to adopt Minute Motion 2001-121 approving Site Development Permit 2000-671 Amendment #1, subject to the Conditions of Approval as recommended. The motion carried unanimously. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Staff informed the Commission that the City Council would be determining if there would be another joint hearing on the General Plan g Update. Staff would notify the Commission of the date. 014 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 14 Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 2001 B. Commissioner Tyler gave a report on the City Council meeting of September 18, 2001. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Butler to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held October 9, 2001, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:31 p.m. on September 25, 2001. Respectfully submitted, i Batt -,` S er, xecutiUe Secretary Y City o a Quinta, California 188 015 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-9-01.wpd 15 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA October 23, 2001 I. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Abels who lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Steve Robbins, Robert Tyler, and Chairman Jacques Abels. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez, Community Services Director Dodie Horvitz, Planning Manager Christine di lorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Abels asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of October 9, 2001. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 3, Item 6, be corrected to read, "...from the floor of the basin..."; Page 8, Item 6 corrected to read, "...radius of the service area..."; Page 9, Item 11 corrected to read, "They do need a vertical separation...", Item 13.b. corrected to read, "...for a multiple antenna."; Page 12, Item 6 corrected to read, "...construction noise of the hotel." There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Butler to approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved. B. Department Report: 1 . Staff informed the Commission of the Joint meeting between the City Council and Planning Commission on November 14, 2001 regarding the General Plan Update. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-23-01 .wpd 1 189 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 V. PRESENTATIONS: None. VI. PUBLIC HEARING: A. Site Development Permit 2001-715; a request of Sean Kearney for a compatibility review of architectural plans for a single family residence to be located at 78-775 Lowe Drive within Acacia. 1 . Chairman Abels 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 Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Sean Kearney, the applicant, stated he as available for questions and had submitted the landscape plans. 3. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Tyler asked if the color of the roof tile was similar to what was in the neighborhood. Mr. Kearney stated yes. Commissioner Tyler asked that the applicant adhere to the City Ordinance in regards to hours of construction. 4. Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this project. There being no further discussion, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 5. Commissioner Robbins asked if the architectural details in regard to the popout were allowed. Staff clarified it was a chimney, not a popout. 6. Commissioner Tyler asked if the size of the house was compatible with the house sizes in the existing subdivision. Staff stated it was compatible. 7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-131, recommending approval of Site 190 Development Permit 2001-715, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended. 002 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 10-23-01.wpd 2 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. B. Environmental Assessment 2001-420, Specific Plan 87-01 1 Amendment No 3, Conditional Use Permit 2001-064, and Site Development Permit 2001-708; a request of the Lathrop Development for review of the design guidelines and development standards fora 25,240 square foot two story building; a site development permit to allow construction of a 25,240 square foot two story commercial -office building/ and a conditional use permit to allow commercial, retail and office uses to be located north of Avenue 47, west of Adams Street. 1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioners asked staff to clarify the entrance of the project, which staff did. 3. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to clarify the one-way driveway. Staff stated the circulation pattern had been changed and was all a two-way circulation pattern. Commissioner Tyler asked about the retention basin at the northeast corner, which should be the northwest corner, that is referred to in the Specific Plan but he cannot see on the plans. Staff clarified its location and stated that according to the study it was of sufficient size. Commissioner Tyler asked why a conditional use permit was required. Staff stated it was included in the original Spanos tract map which included Lake La Quinta which was conditioned to allow a commercial use. When this project was developed and Avenue 47 was redirected south of the tract line, it required the use to have a conditional use to exist as proposed. Commissioner Tyler questioned the Environmental Assessment where it stated the Coachella Valley was in the non -attainment area for PM 10 and that is not what he understands to be true. Staff noted that new data has shown the Valley to no longer be in compliance. Commissioner Tyler asked why the applicant was being required to pay for 25 % of the cost and design to construct a traffic signal G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-23-01.wpd 3 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 at Avenue 47 and Washington Street. This signal has been in place and operational for years and it would seem more appropriate to address the proposed signal at Avenue 47 and Adams Street. Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained staff was modifying the existing conditions to the existing specific plan. This condition was being clarified and in the condition there is an exception. This parcel was created by the map. Staff is asking them to reimburse the City for the signal. The Spanos Company built all of the street and were the owner of the lot so they should not have to reimburse again for things they have already completed. It is a continuation of a previous condition in the Specific Plan. 4. Commissioner Butler asked staff to clarify the zoning. Staff stated it is Regional Commercial. 5. Commissioner Kirk asked if Item V.b. of the Addendum which required archaeological monitoring, was a Code requirement or mitigation measure. Staff stated it was a mitigation measure. Commissioner Kirk asked if it was staff's practice to have a mitigation measure when it is a less than significant impact. Staff clarified it was a judgement call for the Commission and staff. Planning Manager Christine di lorio stated it is in regard to a Phase I study with a recommendation from the archaeological report. Commissioner Kirk stated that in Item Vlll.b. the City's Landscaping Ordinance and City standards as mitigation measures; are they mitigation measures or City Ordinances. Staff stated they were all City standards. Commissioner Kirk asked why there was no Mitigation Monitoring Program. Staff clarified it was a mis-communication between staff and the consultant who was preparing it for the City Council and not the Commission. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was a fence or wall on the site; on the eastern property line. Staff stated there is a condition for the north side to require access to the north property so it would blend in with whatever regional development is developed on the north. There is an existing wall on the east side that belongs to CVWD. Commissioner Kirk stated it was his understanding this property was part of the Spanos Specific Plan and contains conditions related to that project and will become a part of the Washington Square Specific Plan which is in the process of being updated. Staff stated that once an application is submitted, the Washington Square Specific Plan would be updated and this 9 project would be incorporated into that plan. O v 4 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-23-01.wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 6. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Tom Lathrop, the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. 7. Commissioner Tyler asked what uses were contemplated for that portion of the plan that is designated as warehouse. Mr. Lathrop stated it would be storage for his own business. There would be no roll -up doors with no industrial use. 8. Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this project. There being no further discussion, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 9. Commissioner Kirk stated he liked the project as it has a good articulation of design. He hopes the rest of the project is integrated with this one. 10. Commissioner Robbins stated he likes the project. 11. Commissioner Tyler asked if the City would be incorporating new lighting standards based on what was being considered for the La Quinta Arts Foundation. Staff stated yes. 12. Commissioner Butler stated he likes the project. 13. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-132, recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-429, subject to the findings as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 14. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-133, recommending approval of Specific Plan 87- 01 1 Amendment #3, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended. 193 005 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-23-01.wpd 5 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 15. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-134, recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit 2001-064, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 16. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-135, recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2001-708, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. C. Environmental Assessment 2001-438 and Capital Improvement Project 2001-694; a request of the City of La Quinta for review of the development of an 18.07 acre community park site with various size lighted soccer fields, two lighted baseball fields, concession stand, restrooms, tot lot skate park, picnic areas with barbeques and shade structures to be located on the northeast corner of Adams Street and Westward Ho Drive. 1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Community Services Director Dodie Horvitz presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Mr. Oscar Johnson, consultant for the project, gave a presentation on the site plan. Ms. Coleen Marcum gave a presentation on the proposed lighting plan. Mr. Mark Crane, architect for the project, gave a presentation on the building architecture. 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the applica 194 Commissioner Tyler asked about the number of stalls in the 006 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 10-23-01.wpd 6 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 restrooms. Mr. Crane stated it was similar to other parks. Commissioner Tyler stated that with this size and number of soccer fields, the number of stalls is inadequate. If there is a standard he does not know why it is not applied. Community Services Director Dodie Horvitz stated the current fields have one stall in each restroom and it is adequate. 3. Commissioners Kirk and Robbins stated they had no objections to the architecture. 4. Commissioner Kirk stated that in regard to the lighting, it is indicated 95% of the light can be maintained. Why not contain 100% of the light on most of the fields? Ms. Marcum stated that when 100% of the light is facing down, there is no way to hit the light levels in the middle of the field where it is needed. 5. Commissioner Butler stated he did not believe the School District had to meet the City's standards. His concern is the light poles. Ms. Marcum stated that at the time the school was constructed the light poles were donated and need to be updated. The poles are too short and cannot handle the wind elements for more efficient light fixtures. The light problems on the field can be solved. Commissioner Butler asked if this would compounding the problem with the new lights being installed in regard to the dark sky. Community Services Director Dodie Horvitz stated the City is working with the School District to resolve the light problems. The park lights will be monitored through the Community Services Department. 6. Commissioner Tyler asked about the type of poles to be used. Ms. Marcum stated they are stainless steel with a concrete base. They have met the requirements of the athletic organizations and the poles will be painted to blend into the surroundings. 7. Commissioner Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this project. 8. Ms. Lynn Hay, 78-815 Wakefield Circle, stated she was unable to attend any prior meetings regarding this project. She understands La Quinta needs the soccer fields, but the Palm Desert fields are not near residential houses and the parking is severely handicapped. Her biggest concern is that the parking is not larg enough to meet the need that exists. 19 3 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-23-01.wpd 7 007 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 9. Mr. Dave Thornton, 78-805 Wakefield Circle, stated his biggest protest is a sports center so near their homes with the noise and traffic all weekend and during the week nights as well. With all the activity that is existing and proposed it will become a very congestive area. He requests the City look for another location. In regard to the lighting, the sky will still be lit by the reflection off the field regardless of what lights are installed. 10. Mr. James Tourje, 78-760 Wakefield Circle, stated he moved into his house in 2000, and he knew there was a park going in when he bought his home. He is in favor of the park, however, he has a problem with a high usage park surrounded on three sides by homes. He would ask the City to consider a different location that could handle the high traffic volume. 11. Ms. Angie Ciota, 45-570 Sunbrook Lane, stated she cannot understand how the City could place such a high intensity park in the middle of a residential area. The high school is already a nuisance. The parking is completely inadequate and the traffic will increase greatly. Put this in a commercial area. 12. Mr. Bob Prince, 78-770 Wakefield Circle, stated his main concern was the lighting, but most of those concerns have been resolved by the lighting consultant, but the high school is still an issue. Being able to lie in your backyard and look at the lights will no longer be possible. The City needs to take a careful look at the lighting and parking. 13. Ms. Ellie Tourje, 78-760 Wakefield Circle, stated she knows this park has already been approved and she does not know what can be done regarding the size of the park. The two complexes together are going to compound the problems. As there are no street lights on Adams Street this could even be a safety concern. She submitted a petition from the homeowners regarding the park. 14. Ms. Lynn Hay, stated the reason they chose La Quinta is because of the restrictions to keep it a quiet and dark community. 15. There being no further discussion, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 16. Commissioner Robbins asked what the applicant to explain the 196 exercise clusters. Mr. Johnson explained. Commissioner Rob bro8 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-23-01.wpd 8 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 asked why there were no conditions of approval for this project. Community Services Director Dodie Horvitz stated they are contained in the mitigation measures. Commissioner Robbins stated he lives in proximity to the tennis stadium and he does not have an impact from its light source. What he does have a problem with is the lack of parking, especially if there is a football game going on at the same time at the high school. 17. Commissioner Kirk asked how the number of restroom stalls was determined. Mr. Johnson stated it was based on previously designed facilities and an average number of users. Based on their averages, it should be adequate. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was sufficient tree coverage to take care of the light leakage. Ms. Marcum stated yes, but surrounding property owners did not want the trees. Commissioner Kirk asked if while the City was working on the General Plan, and larger and larger development are built, the City should be considering whether or not to build larger and larger parks. This design has been the result of a lot of input from the community, consultants, and staff, and as this cannot be changed, the City needs to consider smaller parks for future developments. 18. Commissioner Butler stated that in his opinion the lighting issue has been resolved and the high school soon will be. With the number of people that have been drawn to this area it has created the need for this size of park. Planning is done before the homes are built to accommodate the demand as it grows. 19. Commissioner Tyler stated the staff report did not contain any information on the new lighting design and had it been looked at by the City's lighting consultant for the Arts Foundation. Staff stated no. Commissioner Tyler .asked if staff had any information on the restrooms at the Palm Desert park facility. Ms. Hay stated there were five or six stalls in the women's restroom facilities and probably the same in the men's. Community Services Director stated that facility is 26 acres as compared to this park at 18 acres. Commissioner Tyler asked if the restroom facilities could be increased. Staff stated it could be modified to increase the facilities, but they are under a cost constraints. Mr. Crane stated it would probably increase the budget. Commissioner Tyler asked why the plans he received were different from the ones presented. Mr. Johnson stated the basketball courts had to be relocated due to the grading and size constraints. �. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-23-01.wpd 9 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 20. Commissioner Kirk asked staff what was being approved. Staff stated the design of the landscaping and building, the Mitigated Negative Declaration constraints, the lighting and any of the other studies submitted. 21. Commissioner Tyler stated the traffic analysis was not accurate. 22. Commissioner Kirk asked if parking could be addressed as a mitigation measure. Could there be mitigation measures added to ensure there was no conflict with the high school football games? Staff stated a mitigation measure could be added that no games would be allowed at the time of home football games. 23. Commissioner Tyler asked how staff could control what fields are used. Staff stated it could be controlled by the lights that are turned on. 24. Commissioner Robbins asked if this facility is built as designed will there no longer be any games played at the sports facility on Avenue 50. Staff stated both facilities would be used. 25. Commissioner Kirk asked if the fields were being used at their maximum so teams are not able to come in and practice prior to a game. Mr. Mark Woods, La Quinta Soccer Association, stated practices are divided into groups and assigned days that they can practice during the week and games are scheduled for weekends. 26. Commissioner Tyler asked how many participants take part in the game. Mr. Woods stated they have 947 players signed up, but they are spread out over the entire day and usually only 147 kids playing in an hours time. 27. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the project was closed and open for Commission discussion. 28. Commissioner Tyler stated he was in favor of the project, but was unable to support it due to the inadequacy of the parking. 29. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-136, recommending certification of Environmental Assessment 2001-418, subject to the findings a amended: 010 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-23-01.wpd 10 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 A. Mitigation measure limiting the use of the fields to no games after five p.m. when there are home high school games. B. I.c) & d)4. Add Saturdays. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Abels. NOES: Commissioner Tyler. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 30. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-137 approving Capitol Improvement Project 2001-694, as amended: A. If there is not an appropriate joint use agreement with the High School to provide overflow parking, we recommend to the City Council there be more parking and less fields. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Abels. NOES: Commissioner Tyler. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. VIL BUSINESS ITEMS: None Vill. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner Tyler gave a report on the City Council meeting of September 18, 2001. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Robbins to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held November 13, 2001, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:08 p.m. on October 23, 2001. Re!ppctfully submitted, lg� ty a yer Executive Secretary Ci La Quinta, California oil G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-23-01.wpd 11 REPORT/INFORMATIONAL ITEM: 410 MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA October 3, 2001 I. CALL TO ORDER 10:00 a.m. A. This meeting of the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee was called to order at 10:03 a.m. by Planning Manager Christine di lorio, who led the flag salute. B. Committee Members present: Dennis Cunningham and Bill Bobbitt. C. Staff present: Planning Manager Christine di lorio, Principal Planners Stan Sawa and Fred Baker, Planning Consultant Nicole Criste, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Planning Manager Christine di lorio asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of September 5, 2001. There being no corrections, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to approve the minutes as submitted. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Development Permit 2001-671, Amendment #1; a request of Toll Bros. for review of architectural plans for one new prototype residential unit on the north side of Airport Boulevard, east of Madison Street within the Norman Golf Course 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like to address the commission. Mr. Gary Lemon stated he was in agreement with the staff's recommendation. 200 G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\ALRC 10-3-01.wpd 1 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes October 3, 2001 3. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunning ham/Bo bbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2001-039 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2001-671, Amendment #1, subject to the conditions as recommended. B. Site Development Permit 2001-715; a request of Sean Kearney for review of architectural plans for a single family residence located at 78- 775 Lowe Drive, within Acacia. 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. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he had a potential conflict of interest due to the proximity of his residence to this home and therefore, withdrew from the meeting. 3. There being no quorum due to the possible conflict of interest, the application was removed from the agenda and no action was taken. C. Site Development Permit 2001-714; a request of John Vuksic for elevations and landscaping plans for one retail building (Building #2) located at the northwest corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Washington Street within Point Happy Specific Plan 1. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if they were windows or blockout as shown on the elevations. Staff stated it was to be windows and the applicant could explain in more detail. 3. Mr. John Vuksic, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. 4. Committee Member Cunningham asked what the users would be Mr. Vuksic stated so far they had a Tuxedo shop and realtor. Committee Member Cunningham stated he liked the windows on Washington Street with the pop -outs, and asked if there were any City codes that would preclude someone from advertising in th2 0 window. Planning Manager Christine di lorio stated the Specific 002 G:\WPD0CS\ARLC\ALRCl0-3-0l.wpd 2 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes October 3, 2001 Plan and Sign Ordinance which restricts the amount of window advertising. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what material the window frames would be constructed of. Mr. Vuksic stated they were a sage green aluminum. 6. Committee Member Cunningham stated he had no issues and thought it would be a good addition to the center. 7. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he agreed. 8. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2001-040 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2001-714, as recommended. D. Site Development Permit 2001-708; a request of Tom Lathrop for review of building elevations and landscaping plans for a 25,240 square foot two story building located on Avenue 47, west of Adams Street within the Washington Square Specific Plan 1. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Tom Lathrop gave a presentation on the project. 3. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the exterior would be a sand finish. Mr. Lathrop stated it would be machine sprayed, and noted some of the architectural details on the building. Committee Member Cunningham stated the gables portico in the upper center appears to be light in stature in relation to the balance of the building. The columns on either side do not carry down with scale. Planning Manager Christine di lorio asked if the Committee wanted the columns enhanced and increase the size of the quatrafoil. Committee Member Cunningham stated yes. Mr. Lathrop stated this side of the building is pushed very close to Avenue 47 so you are basically within 20 feet of the building when driving by. Across the street is residential and he was not trying to make any type of a statement, but actually playing it down. Committee Member Cunningham stated he didn't want2(0 G:\WPD0CS\ARLC\ALRCI0-3-0I.wpd 3 •• 003 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes October 3, 2001 add detail, but that the building seemed out of balance and should have something to balance the weight of the entire building. Discussion followed regarding the roof line. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt stated it was a standard desert plant pallette. Some of the tree varieties are fast growing and are short rooted which tends to make them high maintenance. He would not use as many of this variety because they are high maintenance and can be a liability if not maintained. In addition, the date palms in front of the building should be bought at a younger stage because the older ones can be a liability in high traffic areas because of crown drop. The large planting areas for the shade trees are great as the trees will be healthier. Mr. Lathrop stated they were restricted on what plants they could use because of the Washington Square Specific Plan. Discussion followed on date palm trees. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2001-041 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2001-708, as recommended. a. Prior to issuance of building permit revise the south building elevation increasing the size of the portico columns and the quatrafoil to match the lower gable on either side of the main structure. E. Village Use Permit 2001-010; a request of Edwin G. Cosek (Andrews Bar and Grill) for review of exterior remodeling plans for an existing one story commercial restaurant building (formerly Chez Monique) on 0.17 acres to include outdoor patio dining, landscaping and vehicle parking areas located at 78-121 Avenida La Fonda. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Ed Cosek stated he was available to answer any questions. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the steel tubing indicated on the patio cover. Mr. Cosek stated the steel columns would be supporting the main beam that the rafters run on. The G:\WPD0CS\ARLC\ALRC10-3-0l.wpd 4 v 004 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes October 3, 2001 beams would be covered with resawn cedar and stained to match. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what would be on top of the lattice for shade. Mr. Cosek stated it would be an open lattice. Committee Member Bobbitt stated his concern was that the wood would warp and turn. Mr. Cosek stated they would be using blocking and are adding a fascia in front. It would also be stained. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that if they were to have the open ends it should have some type of gingerbread finish. 4. Committee Member Cunningham stated he would suggest a laminated material or paralams for the patio cover. Committee Member Cunningham stated the blocking would not keep the wood from turning. The only thing he has found that works in the desert is gluilams or paralam as they will not turn and will stain well. He then asked how the existing roof ties in, or does not tie in with the existing fascia. Mr. Cosek stated they would be removing the existing fascia and run the boards back underneath. The pilasters will be stuccoed the same color as the building. They would be using lexon glass enclosures rather than wrought iron on the windows. Committee Member Cunningham stated his only concern was the use of woods and would recommend paralams be used. Discussion followed on how the roof construction would tie in. 5. Staff asked if the Committee had any concern regarding the box frame system not having lattice work above. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he had seen some that are open and are attractive if heavy enough. He asked the size of the wood. Staff stated they would be 4" X 6" . 6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2001-042 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2001- 010 as amended: a. Paralams shall be used for the patio cover joists. F. Village Use Permit 2001-012; a request of Santa Rosa Plaza, LLC for review of landscaping and architectural plans for 18 buildings "Casitas" portion of a 14 acre site to be located on the north side of Calle Tampico, between Desert Club and Avenida Bermudas. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information containe 0 4 in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Commune PDOCS\ARLC\ALRC10-3-01.w d 5 v 005 G.\W p Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes October 3, 2001 Development Department. 2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like to say anything. Mr. Dan Brown, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked the height of the buildings. Mr. Brown stated 26 feet. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the brackets shown on the elevations and whether or not they were structural. Mr. Brown stated they were not structural and were made out of wood. Committee Member Bobbitt went over the plant list and suggested they eliminate the eucalyptus trees. Barrel Cactus are expensive and can be a liability. Committee Member Bobbitt recommended the date palms be inspected and young in age. 4. Committee Member Cunningham stated he liked the project and had no objections. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2001-043 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2001- 012, as recommended. G. Site Development Permit 99-659; a request of Point Happy Ranch LLC for review of architectural and landscaping plans for a mixed use project consisting of commercial buildings and senior care living in villas and multi -tenant buildings located on the west side of Washington Street, south of Highway 1 1 1 . 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like to address the Committee. Mr. Dennis Sunstrom, the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that on an existing date grove it is wise to get rid of all the older trees. The design of the buildings are dramatic and very attractive. He asked what the commercial uses would be. Mr. Sunstrom stated they would 205 \ARLC\ALRC10-3-0I.w d 6 006 G:\WPD0CS\ARLC\ALRCI0-3-0I.w Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes October 3, 2001 primarily support the residential use of the facility. 4. Committee Member Cunningham stated the historical value is a private value in this case. It is a good project and he has no objections. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/ Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2001-044 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 99- 659, as recommended. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: Vill. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee to a regular meeting to be held on November 7, 2001. This meeting was adjourned at 1 1 :18 a.m. on October 3, 2001 . Respectfully submitted, T . SAWYER, Executive Secretary City La Quinta, California 206 007 G:\WPD0CSURLC\ALRC10-3-01.wpd 7 REPORT/INFORMATIONAL ITEM: a ' MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall Session Room 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA September 20, 2001 This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order by Chairman Maria Puente at 3:00 p.m. who led the flag salute and asked for the roll call. I. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance. B. Roll Call. Present: Commissioners Irwin, Mitchell, Sharp, Wright, and Chairman Puente. Unanimously approved. Staff Present: Planning Manager Christine di lorio, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Secretary Carolyn Walker. ll. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Irwin/ Mitchell to approve the Minutes of July 19, 2001. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS A. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment of a 15 ± Acre Parcel; a request for approval of an assessment including a records search and field reconnaissance of the property, along with archival research for the property located at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52. Applicant: RLF Development - Archaeological Consultant: Archaeological Associates. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department, with the following change in Recommendation 1. 207 PACAR0LYN\1iPC9-20-01.wpd -1- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 20, 2001 The report currently recommends "That a report on the monitoring shall be submitted to the Historic Preservation Commission for approval prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit, or final inspection in the study area." The recommendation should read "The monitoring report shall be submitted to the Historic Preservation Commission prior to issuance of the first building permit." 2. Commissioner Sharp asked if the house on the subject property would remain. Principal Planner Sawa answered no, it would be removed. Planning Manager di lorio commented the whole property would be graded, including removal of the dune area. 3. Commissioner Sharp asked if this property was in the area that is currently planned for a Ralphs grocery store. Principal Planner Sawa answered no. This property is located on Avenue 52, and, the Ralphs property is located on Avenue 50, approximately a mile away. 4. Commissioner Wright stated the property was the triangular parcel not included in the Country Club of the Desert project. 5. Commissioner Sharp asked if staff knew what the developer was proposing to build. Planning Manager di lorio stated it could possibly be a drug store, market and a bank, but project tenants are not known at this time. 6. Commissioners Mitchell, Wright, and Sharp stated they supported staff's recommendations. 7. Commissioner Irwin also supported staff's recommendations, and asked that the monitoring continue on the project. 8. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Sharp to adopt Minute Motion 2001-013 recommending approval of the Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment of a 15 t Acre Parcel, located at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52. Unanimously approved. P:\CAROLYN\HPC9-20-01.wpd -2- 208 002 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 20, 2001 B. Archaeological Monitoring Report for the Miles Avenue Borrow Site; a request for approval of soil removal operations and leveling report at the project borrow site. Applicant: City of La Quinta - Archaeological Consultant: CRM TECH (Bruce Love). 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Commissioners Mitchell and Wright supported staff's recommendations. 3. Commissioner Irwin supported staff's recommendation but requested monitoring when development begins on the property. 4. Commissioner Sharp asked a question about this parcel being a portion of a larger parcel. Principal Planner Sawa answered yes, it was. Planning Manager di lorio commented Phase II had been completed on the whole property, but this particular area was of concern because of sand blowing from the dune onto the neighbors' property. Once development begins the rest of the monitoring will be completed. 5. Commissioner Sharp stated he supported staff's recommendations. 6. Chairman Puente asked a question about the location of curation facilities. 7. Commissioner Irwin answered artifacts are currently stored at the La Quinta Historical Museum until the new museum is complete. There was general discussion about storage and preservation practices. Planning Manager di lorio stated all items were boxed and kept up to museum and curation standards. 8. Chairman Puente asked how the human remains were handled. Planning Manager di lorio answered there are Federal Laws prescribing how these items are handled. 9. Chairman Puente asked when the new museum was going to be completed. 200 003 PACAR0LYNWPC9-20-01.wN -3- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 20, 2001 10. Commissioner Irwin answered the current time frame is projected to be within two years. In the meantime, all artifacts are being kept in a secured, air conditioned room with all items in an acid - free environment, properly labeled, with all the catalogs and reports per Commission direction. 11. Chairman Puente stated she supported staff's recommendations. 12. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Irwin/Sharp to adopt Minute Motion 2001-014 recommending approval of the Archaeological Monitoring Report for the Miles Avenue Borrow Site; a request for approval of soil removal operations and leveling report at the project borrow site. C. Phase II Archaeological Testing, Mitigation and Monitoring of a Ten Acre Commercial Site; a request for review of a final report on the testing and monitoring of the grading at the site. Applicant: Madison Development (Ed Alderson) - Historic Consultant: CRM TECH (Bruce Love) 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Commissioners Mitchell and Wright stated they supported staff's recommendations. 3. Commissioner Irwin had a question regarding one of the restaurants having a basement. Planning Manager di lorio answered that had been an issue but it had not been determined whether a basement could be included. 4. Commissioner Irwin asked that a condition be added that if a basement is added monitoring be required if there was excavation below the normal grade. She cited the proximity to the Whitewater area. Planning Manager di lorio stated that condition could be added. 5. Commissioner Sharp stated he accepted staff's recommendations. 6. Chairman Puente stated she supported staff's recommendations. PACAROLYN\HPC9-20-01.wpd -4- - 04 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 20, 2001 7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Sharp/Mitchell to adopt Minute Motion 2001-015 recommending approval of the Archaeological Monitoring Report for the Miles Avenue Borrow Site; a request for approval of soil removal operations and leveling report at the project borrow site, with the addition of the following recommendation: A. Monitoring shall be required during excavation, if a basement is approved for any of the buildings. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Relay for life memo from Community Services Director, Dodie Horvitz. B. Cultural Commission Symposium on November 3 from 12:00 - 6:00 p.m. C. Question about Museum Conference in October to fulfill CLG (Certified Local Government) eligibility requirements for Chairman Puente. VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Sharp/Mitchell to adjourn this meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission to the next regularly scheduled meeting to be held on October 18, 2001. This meeting of the Historical Preservation Commission was adjourned at 3:22 p.m., September 20, 2001. Unanimously approved. Submitted by: Carolyn alker Secretary P:\CARO9-20-0 l .wpd -5- 21 �- 005 a��`�•c DEPARTMENT REPORT: A O� �p • CV 01� 4 p 9�5 OF T TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager DATE: November 20, 2001 RE: Department Report — Response(s) to Public Comments The following is the response to public comments made at the November 6, 2001 City Council meeting: 1. Ms. Beverly Montgomery, 78-483 Calle Huerta, spoke regarding the Senior Center. She mentioned that the Soroptimist Club wishes to donate additional landscaping material, and that the City's gardener would need to cultivate the area and plant the materials. The Mayor thanked Ms. Montgomery for her comments. The plant materials have been donated and installed. No further response is necessary. 2. Mr. Patrick Swartout, Public Affairs Manager of The Gas Company, spoke regarding natural gas utility rates. He stated that there would be a 25 % rate reduction this winter. In addition, he mentioned that The Gas Company offers rebate, financing, and energy efficiency programs; information may be obtained from their website, www.socal as.com, or by phone at 800-427- 4400. No additional response was necessary. 212 a�''u"'Q•c DEPARTMENT REPORT:—�J O� �p ? INCORPOMM OF TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of he City Council FROM: Mark Weiss, Assistant City Manager DATE: November 20, 2001 RE: Update on City Marketing Program Provided below is a status report on economic development/marketing efforts (completed, currently underway, ongoing): Economic Development Events — The City participated in the annual International Council of Shopping Centers' (ICSC) Western Division Conference in Palm Springs (October 2001). The City's participation involved sponsoring the reception for the event and working the economic development booth during the trade exposition. City staff provided gifts, games, and valuable information as a means to promote La Quinta as a great place to start, expand or relocate a business. The City hosted the Third Annual Realtor's Breakfast in October 2001 at the La Quinta Resort & Club for commercial realtors and financial professionals. An update on the City's progress and investment opportunities was offered to guests, along with a message that they are invaluable partners in promoting La Quinta. Print Advertising — Several ads have been prepared highlighting economic development activities/opportunities in the City and depicting the La Quinta "lifestyle." The publications include: Alaska Airlines magazine, ICSC program guide, Palm Springs Life magazine (desert progress issue), and Estates West magazine. Projects currently underway include an ad for the Bob Hope Chrysler Classic tournament guide and an advertorial for America West Airlines magazine. 2002 Economic Development Infomercial — The 2002 infomercial has been completed and encourages business development in La Quinta with a focus on "growth with charm." It will be broadcast in the Coachella Valley, San Diego, the Midwest, the Pacific Northwest, and parts of the Inland Empire and Orange County beginning in November 2001 and continuing in January 213 and February of 2002. Ten -second and thirty-second spots have also been completed and will air in the Coachella Valley during the local news (on KMIR and KESQ) . City/Chamber Bi-monthly Meetings — The City and Chamber continue to meet on a quarterly basis, with the Mayor currently serving as Council representative. The last meeting took place October 26, 2001. Some of the items discussed included: Village Faire, 201h Anniversary Celebration, economic development infomercial, Chamber Board Planning Session, Mayor's luncheons (November 1, 2001 and January 3, 2002), and City map. The next meeting is scheduled for December 7, 2001. Marketing Committee Meetings — The Marketing Committee also continues to meet quarterly, and involves representatives from the City, Kiner-Goodsell, the Chamber of Commerce, and the La Quinta Resort & Club. The group shares and compares marketing strategies and explores opportunities for joint projects. The last meeting was held November 8, 2001, and the next meeting is scheduled for February 7, 2002. Coachella Valley Economic Partnership (CVEP) — Staff continues to work closely with CVEP to attract new businesses to La Quinta. Retail center, office space, and other property information is updated frequently and forwarded to CVEP in response to direct inquiries from prospective businesses. Some of the centers/sites that the City and CVEP promote include: La Quinta Court, Point Happy, La Quinta Corporate Center, La Quinta Village Business Center (Plaza Tampico), La Quinta Professional Plaza, Stater Bros./Wal-Mart One Eleven Center, Ralph's Village Center, and Von's Plaza La Quinta. Recently, staff provided CVEP with office space information for "COMDEX," a technology show taking place in November 2001. New Dine/Shop Program — As part of the City's Marketing Plan, staff and Kiner-Goodsell will be exploring the idea of a new shop/dine program to promote businesses in La Quinta (in particular restaurants and retail outlets). The planning will begin in early spring 2002. The program is targeted for implementation during the summer of 2002 when businesses may benefit most from the program given the slow -down that occurs in the summer months. 214 002 DEPARTMENT REPORT: 3- A DECEMBER 4 DECEMBER 5 DECEMBER 7 DECEMBER 8 DECEMBER 11 DECEMBER 18 JANUARY 3 JANUARY 4 JANUARY 15 FEBRUARY 5 FEBRUARY 8 FEBRUARY 19 CITY COUNCIL'S UPCOMING EVENTS CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIUPLANNING COMMISSION MEETING VILLAGE FAIRE EVENT ANNUAL EMPLOYEE AWARDS BANQUET HOLIDAY OPEN HOUSE IN COURTYARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY COUNCIL MEETING VILLAGE FAIRE EVENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY COUNCIL MEETING VILLAGE FAIRE EVENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING 215 November 2001 Monthly Planner 1 2 3 12:00 PM Mayors October December Lunch S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 28 29 30 31 30 31 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2:00 PM City 10:00 AM ALRC 12:00 PM Energy/ Council Meeting Envi-Sniff 7:00 PM Cultural Arts Commission Election Day 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Veteran's 12:00 PM Transp. 7:00 PM C.V. 9:00 AM RCTC- 3:30 PM Historic Day -Perkins Mosquito Abate. Pena Preservation Veteran's -Perkins 5:30 PM Invest- Commission Day 7:00 PM Planning ment Advisory Observ- Commission Board ed (City Meeting 7:00 PM Special Hall Closed) Joint CC/PC Meeting 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 6:30 PM League of Cities-Riv.Div. 9:00 AM CVB- Henderson 2:00 PM City Council Meeting Thanksgiving Thanksgiving Day (City Hall Holiday (City Closed) Hall Closed) 25 26 27 28 29 30 �v 2:30 PM RCTC 7:00 PM Planning 12:00 PM CVAG Budget -Pena Commission Human/Comm- Meeting Adolph 4:00 PM DRRA Airp-Henderson;' Printed by Calendar Creator Plus on 11/15/2001 December 2001 Monthly Planner Printed by Calendar Creator Plus on 11/15/2001 217 17 January 2002 Monthly Planner 1 2 3 4 5 10:00 AM ALRC 12:00 PM Mayors Lunch December 01 S M T W T F S 2:00 PM City . ' • Council Meeting 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 New Years Day 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 (City Hall 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 CLOSED) 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 7:00 PM C.V. 9:00 AM RCTC- 12:00 PM Energy/ Mosquito Abate. Pena Envi-Sniff -Perkins 5:30 PM Invest- 7:00 PM Cultural 7:00 PM Planning ment Advisory Arts Commission Commission Board Meeting 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 10:00 AM Public 9:00 AM CVB- 3:30 PM Historic Safety -Perkins Henderson Preservation 12:00 PM Transp. 2:00 PM City Commission -Perkins Council Meeting 6:00 PM League of Cities-Riv.Div. 7:00 PM Commu- nity Services Commission 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Martin 7:00 PM Planning 12:00 PM CVAG 9:00 AM LAFCO- Luther Commission Human/Comm- Henderson King Holi- Meeting Adolph day (City 4:00 PM DRRA Hall CLOSED) Airp-Henderson 27 28 29 30 31 6:00 PM CVAG- Exec Com-Pena February 02 S MT W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Printed by Calendar Creator Plus on 11/15/2001 218 DEPARTMENT REPORT: 3-3 CV 4 ZP Qu&rA MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council C� FROM: June Greek, City Clerk DATE: November 20, 2001 SUBJECT: Vacancy in the Investment Advisory Board At the meeting of June 19, 2001, the City Council appointed Cecile Mitchell to serve as a member of the Investment Advisory Board. Ms. Mitchell has missed more than three consecutive Investment Advisory Board Meetings held on July 19, September 12, September 25, and October 10, 2001. Section 2.06.020 of the La Quinta Municipal Code contains the following language: "If a member absents him/herself from three consecutive regular meetings or from twenty-five percent of the scheduled meetings of the board, commission or committee in which he/she serves, within any fiscal year without advance permission from the board, commission or committee or the appointment authority, his/her office shall become vacant and shall be filled as any other vacancy". At present the Board is operating with five (5) members in attendance at meetings and one (1) member participating via teleconferencing from Northern California. Should the Council desire to make changes regarding the size of the Board, an ordinance amending Section 2.70.101(B) of Chapter 2.70, (Attachment A) of the La Quinta Charter and Municipal Code would be necessary. The City Council also has the option to direct staff to begin a recruitment for this position and appoint a new Board Member. 219 2.70.010 ATTACHMENT A Chapter 2.70 INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD Sections: 2.70.010 General rules regarding appointment and terms. 2.70.020 Board meetings. 2.70.030 Board functions. 2.70.010 General rules regarding appointment and terms. A. Except as set out below, see Chapter 2.06 for general provisions. B. The investment advisory board (the "board") is a standing board composed of seven members from the public that are appointed by city council. La Quinta residency is preferred, but not a requirement for board members. Recruitment for members may be advertised outside of the city. C. Background in the investment field and/or related experience is preferred. Background information will be requested and potential candidates must agree to a background check and verification. D. On an annual basis, in conjunction with the Political Reform Act disclosure statutes, or at any time if a change in circumstances warrants, each board member will provide the city council with a disclosure statement which identifies any matters that have a bearing on the appropriateness of that member's service on the board. Such matters may include, but are not limited to, changes in employment, changes in residence or changes in clients. (Ord. 287 § 1 (part), 1996; Ord. 268 § 1, 1995; Ord. 222 (part), 1993) 2.70.020 Board meetings. The board usually will meet monthly, but this schedule may be extended to quarterly meetings upon the concurrence of the board and the city council. The specific meeting dates will be determined by the board members and meetings may be called for on an as needed basis. (Ord. 336 § 1 (part), 2000: Ord. 287 § 1 (part), 1996; Ord. 222 (part), 1993) 2.70.030 Board functions. A. The principal functions of the board are: (1) review at least annually the city's investment policy and recommend appropriate changes; (2) review monthly treasury report and note compliance with the investment policy and adequacy of cash and investments for anticipated obligations; (3) receive and consider other reports provided by the city treasurer; (4) meet with the independent auditor after completion of the annual audit of the city's financial statements, and receive and consider the auditor's comments on auditing procedures, internal controls, and findings for cash and investment activities, and (5) serve as a resource for the city treasurer on matters such as proposed investments, internal controls, use of change of financial institutions, custodians, brokers and dealers. B. The board will report to the city council after each meeting either in person or through correspondence at a regular city council meeting. (Ord. 336 § 1 (part), 2000: Ord. 287 § 1 (part), 1996; Ord. 269 § 1, 1995: Ord. 222 (part), 1993) (La Quima 9-00) 42-2 6 F. T DEPARTMENT REPORT: Qum& OF 9ti TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Tom Hartung, Director of Building & SafetyA - DATE: November 20, 2001 RE: Monthly Department Report - October 2001 Attached please find the statistical summaries for building permits, Animal Control, Code Compliance, and business licenses for the month of October. The reports depict the following highlights: • Year to date building permit valuation is $180,657,612.25 which represents an issuance of 3,049 building permits through October; • 2,412 animal control cases have been handled through October; • 2,236 code compliance cases have been initiated through October; • 11 new licenses were issued to La Quinta based businesses in October; • $1,770.00 - garage sale permit income in October; • $2,410.00 - Senior Center income in October: • New Life Community Church $ 495.00 • La Quinta Arts Association 865.00 • Montes Birthday Party 1,050.00 $2,410.00 221 (D LQ o O LO O O o O o O 0 O 0 O o g O o O o chi O o O 0 O o co LU 00 69 69 69 69 69 69 69). 69 69 69 69 69 69. 69 Re g t- aT- 69.r' m c) r O O (") m O O p O O O O O p O O O O O O O O O p O O O p O O O O O 0 Re a= 0o a). 0 69 of r-69 o 0 69 0 69 0 69 0 69 0 69 0 69 0 69 0 6H 0 69 0 69 0 69 0 69 o 69 r- M Z Z M th 6A 0 Q ti N 0 O � T- O 00 U) (O O (O O In O N U) N O 0 M 00 O (0 0o M ti ti (V U) e- O U) Re C) r� ti O 69 In ti 00 r- U) 1- I- N r� qT O r- O M V-: N co V-: o ti U) O d O ti rl- 4 ti T- O � O O cM (O 00 (M (0 (h O N 6 It d: (D co V) d' d U) (V 69 r- 69 613, U) 69 r-: r- N N r- •- 69 I-f � (0 � O T- (C) N 00 M CO) 00 " 69 NN 69 64 69 69 69 69 f r�j W fL ~ O O O O r- 00 O N O O O O In ti � LO O 0 O U) (O N O O 0 0 (O Itt 0 LO (D co C>' W) W = O 0) 69 (0 to IT T- (O U) O I- 60) In q' 0o (O O 69 O 00 N It 69 69 O U) 'gr 69 (0 M v W) CL H Z 69 69 69 69 69 r. 69 17 69 69 cM 69 0 0 1 O N 64 1 1 1 CN 1 1 1 1 t 40)-1 v LO co 0 v 0 0 0 00 LO 0 O 0 0 0 0) LO v 0 0 0 'IT 0 rn 0 O v 0 0 0 co LO rn o V O N � 0 'IT N 00 U7 00 (fl O r-0 0) ti U) ti U) % ti 0 N (O 00 C6 00 0o Op O CV (D O r` N .- 6 0) N (h � N U� (O IT 00 00 V t` e- G O U) O I` 00 OD O co O T- 00 U) N 69 q17 N M N O O M co (O M � v M 06 c7 0o O 00 W) Z _ Q N N J N 0) (O T- LO If ( 69 N� 04 69 (fl � 66H 6~9 LO 6') 6.q 1 � 64 000 CY Z O 0)L 9 69 00') gy m a 69 U. O W a 0 Q U) In O lq' N O 00 M O O O O O O (O O O O O U) O 7 O O O Oo O O O O O O M Nv O CIO 69 0) O O T- cM N O 0) O O O to U (O co 00 (0 N v � (0 N N N � 0 V Z Q Z O 0 c7 'cr N (0 In 1-7 In 00 co � O 1,:" M 00 t- O U) O e- O r- U) T-:d' r1- M r` .0 P.:(O J In OD 69 0)m N 69 a)00 cM Vt V) 69 m 'q m U-) d' 69 1- N 0) � r--IV U*) cV W)ti to m U �i 6 �= fA N 64 �= 6H o 00 69 CO) zz O (O 0 O O O LO cM O O p O O O O O 0 0 O (D O O O O O O O O 0 O W) to U _ O (O O 69 O 0 N � N O O Lf) O 69 O (0 cM O O O O O cai m O (9 O 69 O O O O U) 06 0 N 6 0o 0 Z co N cM O (O 00 to O N .- M N to 00 U) U7 (0 N U) to 0 O N 69 N 00 O (o M (Oo O 691 (o o O 14, 69 6V).69 M 69 69 V C' .- 69 69 � (O NO 00 r- N (M 1- M r- () M O N M (D I�t N U) 0o 00 O (O 0o N (O M cM ti ti M G CO) r T � � J W O OD 0 N LO oo O O 0 r- (O O U) ti O N d U) N U) M 0o co 0 V N G ti CO .-- r- t0+! Z p W W J J J U p W p Z O 0 r- r- 0)o (O ti N 0 ti0olOO�o�Q00 IL N IL �Co LLJZ F- p w LU W p Q O w g J Q Z O Q z O W U �_ Q Q Q LL a. U- Q Q U U Q 0- Z O LLI UJZC� Zpcn z U LLW Z Z Go it Qz m U) J W W W ww JHO}_2 w z Z) O v ui O 2 U - Q w 00 w wpL7 F n U m U LLJ 0-0 C 222 ANIMAL CONTROL REPORT FOR: October, 2001 Steve Alexander, Moises Rodarte, and Jackie Misuraca ANIMAL PICKUPS Oct Dogs Alive 5 5 Dead 4 OTI 7 Cats Alive 16 Dead 6 OTI 0 Other Animals Alive 9 Dead 8 TOTAL ANIMALS YEAR TO YEAR TO INCIDENTS YEAR TO YEAR TO DATE 01 DATE 00 HANDLED Oct DATE 01 DATE 00 355 408 Bite Reports 2 26 19 53 88 Animal Trap 32 0 Set Ups 2 68 80 178 147 Cruelty to 56 70 Animals 0 9 11 3 0 93 72 Vicious Animal 72 96 Restraining 1 1 1 Special Hour Patrols 4 85 Alive 80 626 627 Zoning Dead 18 181 254 Violations 0 14 OTI 7 35 0 Lost & Found 20 309 TOTAL ANIMALS REMOVED Animal Rescue 0 9 105 842 881 Outside Agency 0 0 City Reclaims 16 99 Other 3 132 TOTALS 48 752 VIOLATIONS: No Owner Warnings Citations Dogs at Large 30 1 10 Noise Disturbance 0 0 0 Defecation removal 0 0 0 License Violation 0 0 15 Other 0 0 0 Monthly Total 30 1 25 YEAR TO DATE 261 26 531 TOTAL MONTHLY INCIDENTS HANDLED: Oct. 01- 209 / Oct. 00 - 265 YEAR TO DATE INCIDENTS HANDLED: Oct. 01 - 2,412 / Oct. 00 - 2.296 130 `i 309 26 13 79 141 814 223 3 CODE COMPLIANCE REPORT FOR: Oct. 2001 Oct. 01 YEAR TO DATE 01 YEAR TO DATE 00 ABATEMENTS: Nance Abatements Started 66 1071 703 Weed Abatements Started 6 118 185 Vehicle Abatements Started 119 1039 1063 Dwelling Abatements Started 3 8 60 TOTAL STARTED 194 2236 2011 TOTAL COMPLETED 253 2021 2246 Home Occupation Inspections 5 81 122 Business License Inspections 0 13 172 Garage sale permits Issued 177 1290 1384 224 V- V- V- � V- � -r- V- O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N -p M In (D � d to e- M N 0 N N N\ N O O O N O M M _I 00 O O O O O O O O O V) w 2 w 2 of F- J Z 0 J F W O o UQQ� a p w U U O O ZofQQ C�V W Z p a O� a w Q ZOU I—I—��W =wwU_f—�—� J-, wQ v W Q< Z W W I j w O Q Z apwpQQ2wUww J_ J_ �I 2 Q w w 0 0 w W �0Z02JJU2F-<W H H H H H H H H H H H >,Z Z Z Z _Z Z Z Z Z Z Z M00000000000 7I J J J J J J J J J J QJ W U p CN ~ D O w w Z)w U w w 20 0 0 0 0 Q j p0 z�O�2�W2w2Z W = J = Ur J Ur Q �' J W Q W (n 'aw=�=�2UQ>Qu.i N 1- 0 LO O 0 LO LO 0� to C0 qt � qt LO M N O 1` N qt 100 'Rt Mit 1� O CD N eM O N N 00 q9T M 1- r- 0 ql M d• qq LO 1� qt ti 'd• to LO LO 1- In 't w J Z J Q w U) Z Q O Z Q OC/) O m Q cliff O Q W Y Q }.o WJw 2C) cn0 mZCptY OwQO J N Z O 2 _J U E W W -� O F- tY H Z C� �� H� U Q Z m H 0 W w W H +. Wp U�tn�Q N >- I-- O LL --1O-IQWwWQwwIYO�� cu �mm2 J `— 2Z5 O M CO 00 it to It ti M O O n �C LO LO LO LO LO In LO A CO lf) � I CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO � c0 CO � • � (� m 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v a�''u"`�•c DEPARTMENT REPORT: L-1 0 U = rJ }. INconeoen'rm 44 rea OF T19 T0: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: JERKY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: NOVEMBER 20, 2001 SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF OCTOBER 2001 Attached please find a copy of the Community Development Report which outlines the current cases processed by staff for the month of October. 226 PAMonthly Department Report.wpd 1 F- Z LU H Q a in z LLI O W W 0 F- Z U z O V a Z O H W CD Q E U cn C "a "0 "0 "a _0 -0 O "a -0 "a -0 "0 "0 O O c O O O O .n O cn c — O O O O O O O O O v— N O O O 00 00 00 O — O O M Q m LU n cc a N O i co — C U c 0 �a) = LL cn U L N N O i co � � Q L. C - N f��` W cn Q C O J U a. cn t— O + 0 a cn c ; O U LL (n cn N CL C 2) W cn C0 0 a c Q N O C 'C o N c c N cn` — co +� N C O h..L '� c W U C O N }' C Q p > O 0 � U N z 4-' + U) 0 U U 0 +U-+ U :r- O U co �> U .CC C, cn c U O z + ?7 N O a A 0) C - ' L '0 � C ° •CL E F 5 L 0 a)N N C.)N 00 cn U U "0 > O a Q Q 00 �(N r- r- J U U QCU O O a) 0 C > ° '+c—, c a 0 Q V' N MI C0 � 0 u U U CLUU (O V- 0 > > O O a- a Q Q ' N �O 0 CLU N N O O 0\0� .- N , a.0 0� c � }? Q) 0 M c) co 0) O co o O c CU 0 0 co a) Q c 0 N +, v LO .0 '� L J L ca .i U 3 cr a) O N L c .� L O a) 0 O >.-. vj C' Q) C O CQ c0 �U U a)-0 c c� 0 CD D O>-0 N C 'fl L 0 >, 0 c J Q J a) J Co CU Co 0 a)� L- a) ,+- cv 0 cn + , L s C7 --� C7 v co -0 C O 0 CL-0 0 i M M J L O 0 p -0 4-' 4,,, 0.. O + 4-()0co O -0 Q C p a) 0 C ' C < C U_ O N N C C O cn O V O ('� N }, U +� C C ca O O 0 EO o c�=NN > '-' 'a aCi "0 c--°a� +-, • N C� O E •a", a) cac C 'c (n •L 0 L- O > Q C 0 C O 0 •c a) ° O c +� O L p C •C m ° c +.+ cn rn C •� cv p Q 0 ,�- O O Q O_ '+-' a U) �_' .0 E a) a) a) a) N 0 N v 0 U 0 c (0 Q c Co a) C O >` _ — O a) c C> L C Q .0 c C O.— N (� L O O _ C 0 •� a) a) co C p C p (BZza) -0 ' — 0 , a) c� O -0 C (U Q a) C X +- c �_ L 0 }; X X N > a) cv a) +-j " >, O _� `� 0 O � a) C = 0 D O U a) a) +>+ C C c Q + a) 0 U N N C ' O= C y Co > C c 0 _� CD o aCi C U a) � cn 0' � c a) ca 0 >, .0 s Q� a0 �C7 p 0 U aEct (n �� • E O O c LO .0 p• cn L a) L �+- +� C L L , 0 4cl)- c cn L 0� co Q c L X D>� +•+ 0) 2 L �••+ O (n O O O c � c� (� �� 0 0 CC L O + a) cn N "a LM • O C= Q ' O L C a) +.1 0 ' 1 0 . �-.+ '.i cn C Q p ' � � O O a-- '+-' D Co LO 0 Q O a) 0 C ca c — 0— m (n co Q cc Q a) 0 0 •0 0 C � O C 0 > a) CQ 0 O C +>, 0 � cn O c a) O U O p o O L 0 L L� 0 07 _� O O Q CT'� 0 0 0 0 0> O Q'� C D 0 a) > N CO OCR coo cnQ=Q �I-� OC�Q OC-00�C �Q �C'DOQ a) Wcc W a. Q .� w p U� O J 0 N C �� cV '0 v 0 ._ c Oz ' O C M� O (D O cM N C_ O� O +0' N � ° '-P O� U U c U O N N N X Lo CI (D0 C Q r". c O 00 O U � CL o 4-' O O 00 O U O M ca � 6= co 0� 00 0'. N N M N -00)� c Q.- c QO Q QO (n C7 O a_ O (D N (D 0 CL O 0 N O 23 3 M 0 V U W O > a) O > CL O a Q Q a Q M, \ M 0 0 N N_ O U �— M , J U U QU 00 0) 00 a) C > O p co 0 CL (1) a CL a) QQ� >_ , . U .— O a) N N O ``' N 00 M LL , U U U a_UU -p (L) a) > > O CL CL a sco Q Q , 1 e— 00 M O , U U a.0 C C V a) v) L N V\ L o ° -p 'D O (1) > > O CL CL a CLQ Q Q , I 00 00 N 00 M , U U CLU N -0 > O O > Q O CL CL a Q Ln , U d� W , J U Qa. a) > a) > O > O Q, O Q aQa Q a Q Q Ln , (0 N O U M M , LJL (� U Qa-U > a) O > Q, O as Q a Q Ln , U O M , J (� QCL > (1) O > Q O CL CL Q a Q Lid , U a) M ,l J U QCL v O � O O p O .� . a CD a) �' coa) �" ca Co C O L ca -a LO cu� � o o N 0 U L4 O pco O J a) = o c aD � v c o +� O L. �a) •mQ i },U O �CO � My cc c O cra W s + �F- a a) ? E co a) _0cn +.� Co U) ° C +� 00 -0° 0 a) Cl) a) ° U cv >O O C a) L cc C C a) > M O L O N co a) 0 00 L ; �' L .O N N Q N >, co c ,0 CL U CL CU Ca a) 0 U LO a) a CO -p cu cv U) ` c� Lo cV 00 N cU � ca c 'C C N C cn a) O a) cn O co }, O 4) .c co o O co C C O cn O O a) L � .V C = 0 ``- C L cn CD C .-- a) a V> O O ca N a) O n ca 0 O CC 0 co CC ��_+-' + 'a CL a ° a aL O a)� OLaa)+ -C + LO C C 0) - ° ° - i N ac �Oa 0-0 omc > 00°V ° C ° L 0 a n a Q co 0 V °Q O +,cn O 0 -a >-C Q L '^ m a-C > a > L L C �,y, V +� O 0 a) C O O a) O f�t� �a O "a %p ° O _ C ° C° C "D O C L C ai i -C C C 0 Q cn ' L (�1♦) M 00 O a) O > O W 0 e! CLOJ 0 � � L- a) L M a) C a) C) O V N E ca p Cp U c d o v U o cm �, CD a) J ° w C m 2 U o U E a) .Q m o cn 4* ca-v tE:t 0 o r r r'a r-� � MQU N L �U 00�- CN co 0 E 00 0 O N O O 0 O O O O O Q NOU M O N*.P ON N N.0 L x �� 2 M a.. �� CL V CL c ca a) a r cn a E— o L CO CLo o 2 ca cn J I— 0) �ke U) (n (n cr Zi 0 a 11� O CO +-i � -0O N N— O .� +., a c O QU C I •� ON000 O 00 O U U O CLL) M O �N �V U U aU cM U a r- O V) c a� = L- � O > 4'-l1 O L a OQ � N O .� C •� co U a Q O > > 0 OL a a Q Q , r-O c0 �� 00 r- r-' U U aU r- O C > o OL E a� Q CD r-.r O M �� OV-Q �- r- U U as O > Q >O N Q' O Q a ' MQ O r-� O C)r- -j U Qa c MU r- (� r- 0 O�� r•r-N r- a U 2a -C co L x CD 00 _0 _0 N m a j•` c r- L cn O J +•+CO 0 N O .O- co N �O c co '� co O 4- C cv O c O +•' cnO V N �••' C C C 0o .O N o c O L m m o -C N O N � C LL � C o s O O v — �• 2 N +i `- > • L. co J }' cn E ca c C M �, Q co O c0 ca M _ ai co o a Q '� m o �.•, .cn 0 +- C o N L p a) c . +j N C v (0 00 n Q co U C— c> Cl) U� NUL O� a Co M +j O oa U COM U C o N a� n o LO +, c 0�0 00 Z p0 0 O o CL M -C C Q C Oco =s L (n O N 'D co +•' {s-+ O Q > >Q c C.)C a U . O U O O O� J C C O S L +-j O C O O OO O. a `� N C >` i-+ M> �G rO- Qo U a C ID N +•+ O cm Ysc > o o -O — L L =O O• J . O CN O j 0 OC C � cU -0°'- Co � C cn N }, E > a) o O in cLoOaN a NU.J O aO c w O o O(D V O E cn U O Oc c O co � N N cn O .}+ cCcn GD O cn O 0-� C CD o O+' C C O C - =O OO •—cr c cr Q LO cr N �•°' a -0 ccm m c �mOC 0• � cc.0mCCon cn c c a) co E a c c d 00 2 co E '+-, c� •cr c -0 O m N F- 2 N �� acid N= +� j cO ? ,L -1 E N Q CD F- a) L a +O+ cn C O LL N O V r- J J E 06 0 4-}.r 0 M O U j C M cn O cn C)O n co M O �CY) - O C O O - ( O OU N O O �+, c_ Q=cO0 O p O O O CO - a) rr- o 0 p.c pN }, 000 N O O N E N C M N O O C) cn N+ o N N2_O o a •C a U a� Z :D �U) D� Cl-s o D a p a I- OZ (n -J M U > LL f-- �e > J (n a LL U (n (n cc F- U un '30 05 0 a O H O a A V W a '0 •` M N� LC) (1) + Q ; Co +j U O 0 a �, a Q a, �M U� aa.a O a a CF) �� U� aC C '> a) O - O O 0 M O s O c O +r L U 0) > c Q O � O cu .Q s 00 C N _�z .E m U �,� O cu z O O +, CD cu }' O C c O a)N c .N 0 a -•� m O _ (n �> c C .Q O E co "� 4- � 0 o >. cn o O N - U w- to �. Cl ''�/^•�� 0 V L 0 E a) � 0 a� >4 Q-8 cu 06 a) a - a > o O 0 O O +� c ()0 O = 4- U Li 0 0 0 c o -v `� � c ai c LD c -° a) a? o ' E c> a cna (D o OCU Z o OC_ o 0 0 c co L co 4-J O () N a N O L O O E _0 c N -a c c °c o 1 E �, o O E a O U rn � o N N tl*- c I� a N � 0 OCL � N O E O a) MO OM 0 O o cn O C c L L CL > Q TT VJ U)Q U)2 i-00 U)J 0 m O CL W cc Q F- U) F— V W n O cc a J _Q V W a U) o r' o N O e- O e- O T- 0 M � E p o M co O M M N as U 3 -- N-- to O I� �O 00 d a� y o' 0 0 0 00° 0 0 U m ^ co o +• 0 m c �- o o o N o o 0 c° o M O O a to O O J Y M V 0 H O o a c � c C +• = ,� a .a C W O c Ira CL oc = ao m o> > aD C7 Q W CD W Z t o c C J 2 H L. J .0 V L c V ° Z e0 LL o 0 +• p� c •_ N ++ c a c 0 o c0 !� ca 0aci 0 A 232 007 � a 0000(u L. DEPARTMENT REPORT: a" c, All C&t!t IvconroannD'�4 OF T19 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY CO NCIL FROM: DODIE HORVITZ, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTO DATE: NOVEMBER 20, 2001 SUBJECT: TRANSMITTAL COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF OCTOBER 2001 UPCOMING EVENTS OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT FOR THE MONTH OF DECEMBER 2001: Dec 1 Shopping Excursion to Algodones, Mexico Dec 1 Mastering Microsoft Power Point, Boys & Girls Club Dec 3 *Monthly Putting Contest Dec 3 *Rug Hooking Class Dec 3 *Free Imperial Irrigation District Assistance Dec 4 *Classic MGM Movies Dec 7 Annual Treelighting Ceremony at Village Faire Dec 11 *Free Medicare and Insurance Counseling Dec 11 *Free Health Screenings Dec 13 *Free Legal Consultations Dec 13 Holiday Shopping Excursion to South Coast Plaza, Costa Mesa Dec 15 Annual Breakfast with Santa, Senior Center Dec 18 *Free Hearing Consultations Dec 20 *Holiday Luncheon Dec 21 *Free HI -CAP Counseling * Senior Center Program, Daytime Class or Event 233 T 6 4hf 4 „� aut�cra Community Services Department Attendance Report for the Month of October 2001 Summary Sheet Program 2001 2000 Variance Meetings Per Month 2001 2000 Leisure Classes 312 69 243 35 14 Special Events 295 194 101 5 3 Adult Sports 470 335 135 12 11 Senior Center 1986 1510 476 123 105 Total 3063 2108 955 175 133 Senior Services Senior Center 404 475 -71 11 22 Total 404 475 -71 11 22 Sports Complex Use La Quinta AYSO 1,450 1350 100 25 25 LQ & PD Football 200 190 10 12 12 Total 1,650 1540 110 37 37 Total Programs 5,1171 4,1231 9941 223 192 Volunteer Hours Senior Center 903 552 351 Meals on Wheels 52 75 -23 Total Volunteer Hours 955 627 328 Monthly Revenue Senior Center $ 11,281.00 $ 5,259.00 $ 6,022.00 Community Services $ 5,444.00 $ 3,615.00 $ 1,829 Total Revenue $ 16,725.00 $ 8,874.00 $ 7,851.00 Revenue Year to Date Senior Center $ 22,971.00 $ 17,140.50 $ 5,830.50 Community Services $ 22,693.00 $ 18,498.00 $ 4,195.00 Total Revenue to Date $ 45,664.00 $ 35,638.50 $ 10,025.50 234 002 Community Services Program Report for October 2001 2001 2001 2000 2000 2001 2000 Participants Total Participation Participants Total Participation Variance Meetings Meetings Leisure Classes Microsoft Excel 10 10 0 0 10 1 0 Beginning Computers 9 36 9 36 0 4 4 Intermediate Computers 7 28 6 24 4 4 4 Intermediate Drawing 6 18 0 0 18 3 0 Karate for Kids 11 55 0 0 55 5 0 Taekwondo 8 40 0 0 40 5 5 Oil Painting Basics 4 8 0 0 8 2 0 Tappercize 10 50 0 0 50 5 0 English Riding Lessons 5 5 0 0 5 1 0 Latin Ballroom Dance 6 6 9 9 -3 1 1 Italian for Travelers 14 56 0 0 56 4 0 Totals 90 312 24 69 2 31 35 14 2001 2001 2000 2000 2001 2000 Participants Total Participation Participants Total Participation Variance Meetings Meetings Special Events Catalina Island Trip 53 53 0 0 53 1 0 2 on2 Grass Volleyball 20 20 0 0 20 1 0 Art Partnership Day 150 150 150 150 0 2 2 Tiny Tot Halloween 72 72 44 44 28 1 1 Totals 295 295 194 194 101 5 3 2001 2001 2000 2000 2001 2000 Participants Total Participation Participants Total Participation Variance Meetings Meetings Adult Sports Open Basketball M/T 150 150 55 55 95 10 9 Adult Soccer League 80 320 140 280 40 2 2 Totals 1 2301 4701 195 335 1 35'1 121 11 Recreation Totals 1 6151 10771 4131 5981 4791 521 28 Page 2 230 Senior Center Attendance 2001 2001 2000 2000 Registered Total Registered Total Meetings Participants P articipation Participants Participation Variance 2001 2000 Senior Activities ACBL Bridge 218 218 134 134 84 5 4 ACBL Bridge, Novice 99 99 0 0 99 3 0 Ballroom Dance, Complimentary 10 10 0 0 10 1 0 Bridge, Duplicate/Social 426 426 382 382 44 14 13 Dog Training, Complimentary 8 8 4 4 4 1 1 Ice Cream Social 32 32 35 35 -3 4 4 Kaffee Klatsch 20 20 0 0 20 3 0 Monthly Birthday Party 33 33 30 301 3 1 1 Monthly Luncheon 102 102 95 95 7 1 1 Movie Time 65 65 54 54 11 8 8 Putting Contest 6 6 7 7 -1 1 1 Television Viewing 33 33 30 30 31 n/a n/a Senior Activity Total 1052 1052 771 771 2811 42 33 Senior Leisure Courses Ballroom Dance 20 49 11 38 11 3 4 Ceramics 9 34 11 33 1 4 3 Computer 14 43 0 0 43 13 0 Cooking 10 11 7 7 4 1 1 CPR Class 8 8 7 7 1 1 1 Dog Training Class 8 19 8 22 -3 4 4 Exercise 50 468 50 378 90 3 13 Knitting 4 12 0 0 12 3 0 Spanish Lessons 11 19 10 30 -11 2 4 Stained Glass 7 12 0 0 12 2 0 Watercolor 9 29 0 0 29 4 0 Senior Leisure Courses Total 150 704 104 515 189 40 30 Senior Leisure Classes Arts and Crafts 12 12 25 25 -13 1 4 Computer Tutor 4 4 5 5 -1 3 5 Creative Writing 12 12 14 14 -2 4 4 Golden Tones 93 93 53 53 40 7 5 Painting 19 19 15 15 4 5 4 Quilting 24 24 22 22 2 - 4 3 Rug Hooking 4 4 3 3 1 4 1 Tai Chi 26 26 9 9 17 4 3 Tap Dance 27 27 64 64 -37 5 10 Woodcarving 9 9 14 14 -5 4 3 Senior Leisure Classes Total 230 230 224 224 6 41 42 TOTAL SENIOR PROGRAMS 1432 1986 1099 1510 476 123 105 Senior Services A.A.R.P. "55 Alive" 43 43 46 46 -3 2 2 Ambassadors 65 65 56 56 9 n/a n/a FIND Food Distribution 212 212 288 288 -76 4 4 Hearing Consultation 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 Health Screenings 14 14 26 26 -12 1 2 I. I. D. Energy Assistance 38 38 37 37 1 n/a 7 I. I. D. Energy Assistance/No fee 7 7 4 4 3 n/a 3 Legal Consultation 17 17 10 10 7 1 1 Medicare Consultation 2 2 0 0 2 n/a n/a Share Meetings/Sign-up 5 5 7 7 -2 2 2 TOTAL SENIOR SERVICES 404 404 475 475 -71 11 22 SENIOR CENTER TOTAL 1836 2390 1574 1985 405 134 12 3G Page 3 0 0 4 POLICE REPORT Inside this issue: October Significant Ac- tivity Report September Crime Statistics Summary Explorer Program Report for October School Resource Officer Reports for October Motor Officer Statistics Report for October Target Team Report for October Volume 1, Issue 10, Indio Station Traffic Report Special points of interest from the Crime Statistic Summary: • Driving under the influence arrests continue to increase significantly. • The rate of domestic violence for YTD 2001 has shown an increase of only 4 incidents over the YTD 2001 rate. • Injury traffic collisions showed a monthly decrease and the total for YTD 2001 is only 2 more than YTD 2000. • The average response time for emergency incidents (total of 14) was 3.35 minutes. Sept. 2001-Oct. 2001 Q DEPARTMENT REPORT NO. j La Quinta Middle School Welcomes Deputy Brooker The new school year has brought a new staff member to the La Quinta Middle School. Deputy Robert Brooker joins the staff as a replacement for Deputy Morton who has left LAMS to become the SRO at La Quinta High School. Deputy Brooker brings a vast amount of experience to this assignment. During his 14 years with the Sheriffs Department, he has worked a variety of assignments including Corrections, Patrol, Rangemaster, and Field Training Officer. He has also received training refer- ence the implementa- tion of the new Youth Accountability Team program. Prior to starting his law enforcement career, Deputy Brooker served in the Marine Corps. Robert has lived in the Coachella Valley for 13 years. He is married and has two daughters. Deputy Brooker is looking forward to working with the staff and students at LAMS. Goodbye to a Good Friend and "Deputy" The Indio Station recently lost a good "deputy" and a good friend. The Indio Station K-9, "Kaya," passed away due to an inoperable tumor that was discovered during an exam in early October. Kaya, and his handier, Deputy Ken Patterson, have been patrolling the cities of Coachella, La Quinta, and the unincorporated areas of Riverside County since 1998. Numerous felony offenders were located, subdued, and arrested by Kaya and Deputy Patterson. Kaya had special training as a narcotics detection K-9. On numerous occasions, he used his keen sense of smell to locate hidden narcotics. Recently, Kaya and Deputy Patterson located several pounds of methamphetamine _.�. during a vehicle stop. Kaya will be sorely missed and was definitely "man's best friend." The Sheriff's Department will be naming Kaya's successor at the Indio Station in the near future. SORWOK K Y Arrests © 15 Searches A is Seizures 4g 2 Value 0 $171,347 Weapons Seized 0 8 City of La Quinta La Quinta Police Department Captain Darla Singerton, Commanding October 2001 Highlights (Numbers in parenthesis denotes number of calls for service that day) Monday, 10-01-01 (37 .' Attempt Arson to construction trailer within Citrus CC. No suspect info. yet. Dep. Meyers. Tuesday, 10-0 -0 1 None IWednesdML 10-03M (47) None Thumdav -0 0 Gilbert Franco Lopez, 46, La Quinta, arrested for vehicle theft. Frida 10-05-01 (52) Rudy Levario, 21yrs of Indio, arrested for DUI at WA X Hwy 111. Dep. A. Smith Injury collision at Fred Waring X Galaxy. Both parties injured. Cause was a Right -of Way violation. Dep. Adams. a Greg Shook, 9/18/81 of La Quinta, arrested for Possession of Meth. after being contacted in the parking lot at City Hall. Dep. Armstrong. Wendy Pollard, 6/2/67 of La Quinta, was arrested at her place of business for Welfare Fraud and Perjury warrants stemming from a La Quinta case. Dep. Armstrong. Saturday_ _10�06-01 (46): Eleazar Jimenez, 37yrs of Indio. was arrested for Felony Drug warrants and Parole violation after a suspicious person call at Circle K. His friend Sophia Hernandez, 44yrs of Indio, was arrested for several misd. warrants. Dep. A. Smith. Travis Westmorland, 25yrs of La Quinta, arrested for warrants at his Dune Palms residence. Dep. Eller. Sunday, 10-07-Q1_ [M Manuel Cardenas, 9/26/85 of La Quinta, arrested as an escapee from Juvenile 'Placement during a ped-check at Tampico X WA. Dep. Wedertz. Wal Mart Employees Albert Trujillo, 22yrs of Coachella, and Jose Zamora, 23yi s of Indio, arrested after taking electronics equipment from the store. Dep. Eller. 23 La Quinta Significant incident Report M� pl,10-08-01(45 Reckless Discharge of Firearm in the area of Ensenada X Montezuma. Several callers initially reported hearing over 20 shots but were unable to provide a good location. Responding units were unable to locate casings, damage or injured parties. At daylight, a citizen located casings near the above location. Dep. Kane/ Dep. Price. Rogelio Sanchez Carranza, 29yrs, of Coachella, arrested during traffic step on Las Vistas 8/of Fred Waring, for a warrant issued Eby the US marshal. He was stopped as a suspicious vehicle after being seen parked in front of residence with an open garage. IPD assisted with a K9 who alerted on several areas of the vehicle. A hidden compartment was found but was empty. 2.7 grams of "Ice" found within a woman's purse in the trunk. SIB gave all info. Dep. Anguiano. Juday,10-09-01 (321 None 110-107011 Assault with a deadly weapon, Jason Siqueros Gonzales, 32, La Quinta, shot in the right leg while leaving Circle K Store in a vehicle. Unknown suspect exited a grey Toyta Corolla and fired approx. 5 times at Gonzales' vehicle. Press release sent. 17-yr. old male La Quinta resident arrested for discharging of a firearm in a negligent manner, pass, of marijuana, and carrying a concealed weapon in vehicle, booked at juvenile hall. Ernie Puchi, 38, LA Quinta, arrested for battery, his son Eric Puchi, 18 also arrested for public intoxication. "t hum ay. 10-11-01 (80). 14-yr. old male juvenile, La Quinta arrested for poss. of a deadly weapon and for carrying a loaded firearm. 10-12-01 Christopher Anthony Romero, 25, La Quinta, arrested for battery on spouse and for resisting arrest. Dean Veith, 30, La Quinta arrested for DUI. Saturdav,l0-;13-Q1 (72): Nelson Martinez Garcia, 5/18/67 of La Quinta, arrested for Criminal Threats and brandishing a Weapon. Dep. Edralin. Isidro Rivera, 4/4/75 of Indio, arrested for burglary. Dep. Edralin. Sund, py, 1 14-01 (51): Multiple burglaries and an auto theft, in the Cove area. As many as ten cases and other additional calls of suspicious persons. At one point the suspect fled from a deputy on a vehicle stop. Dep. suspected the driver fled due to DUI but later learned the vehicle was unreported stolen. Suspect located at about 0530hrs and was captured after a foot pursuit. Marcos Antonio Castro, 11/21/78 of La Quinta, found in possession of property from several reported and unreported burglaries/thefts. He was also identified by the deputy as the driver of the stolen he had stopped earlier. Bail increase approved to $50,000.00. Dep. Thomas. A 13yr old and a 14yr old were located near Alvarado and Colima when deputies responded to a prowler call thought to be related to the above incidents. Upon contact, the two males were observed wearing surgical gloves and carrying pry tools. Both booked into Juv. Hall for Possession of Burglary Tools. They are not yet linked to any of the known burglaries but we are checking. 13yr old was a escapee from Juvenile Placement. Sgt. Barfknecht. 239 Monica Nunez, 1/15/63 of La Quinta, arrested for Public Intoxication at Montezuma X Navarro, Dep. Brewster. Monday,10-15-01 (471:. Fatal, single car collision on Eisenhower between Tampico and Ave 50. Carol Pedraza, 20yrs of La Quinta, was N/B on Eisenhower when her vehicle crossed over the S/B lanes and onto the West shoulder. She continued N/B, and eventually became airborne into the storm channel on the west side of the bridge. Her vehicle struck the N/side of the concrete chanal and came to rest at the bottom. She was pronounced dead at the scene. There were no known witnesses to the crash and the vehicle could have been there for over 2 hours prior to being located by golf course employees. Dep. Brewster. Jaime Contreras, 18yrs of La Quinta, arrested for N-Bail Juv Warrant during a ped-chk at Tampico X Desert Club, Inv. Ramirez. Tuesday._10-16-01 (54): Gregory Guzman, 29, Tempe AZ., arrested for credit card fraud at La Quinta Hotel. Marco Espinoza, 38, La Quinta arrested for spousal abuse. Wedne_ day. 10-17-01 (621; Missing Person, Sarah Nielson, 21, father hasn't heard from daughter since 10-11-01. Suicide, Andrew Smith, 57, overdose on medication. History of medical problems and suicide note left. Thursday. _10-1 1 62 : Attempt suicide, Daryl Starkey, 32, transported to Desert Hospital for mental illness. Friday,10-19-01 (63): None Saturday, _'10,-20 52: Mark Otton AKA Marcos Suarez, 5/31/82 of La Quinta, arrested at Rubio X Durango for Public Intoxication. He was also the suspect in a Prowling at 52400 Blk of Rubio. Admitted to being the prowler, victim could not ID and so declined to prosecute. Dep. Thomas. Injury collision at WA X Ave 50. Olga Albert, 77yrs of Costa Mesa, turned W/B Ave 50 from N/B WA, against a red arrow. Was struck by Angel Gerardo, 22 yrs of La Quinta. Gerardo's wife treated and released from JFK. Albert and her passenger, Arlene Cahn 75yrs of Huntington Bch, were admitted to Desert Hospital. Albert with broken ribs, Cahn was in surgery and her condition was unk. Dep. Lee. Sunday, 10-21-01 (34): Gina Berry, 37yrs of Newport Bch, arrested for DUI after being stopped S/B WA X 111 for driving w/o headlights on. Dep. Eller, Alberto Reyes, 33yrs of La Quinta, arrested on Felony Warrants at his Velasco residence. Dep. Eller. Monday, 10-22-01 67): None 240 t i La Quinta Significant Incident port Page 4 Tuea 0-23-011 40): Ricardo Cota, 23, Palm Desert, arrested for hit-and-run. Lissa Cinat, 40, Michigan, arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol. Wednesday, 10-24-01 (60� Jane Zullo, 19, La Quinta, arrested for bad checks. Fernando Arthur Hernandez, 23, La Quinta, arrested for spousal abuse. Thursday. 0-2" 1 (34): Christopher Freel 18, Kyle Patton 18, arrested for burglary. Juvenile female previously reported as 601 wic arrested for battery. Friday. 10 -26-01 (66)i Louis Vidal Gutierrez Jr., Indio arrested for parole violation. Margarito Perez, 23, Indio arrested for kidnapping, after forcing his ex -girlfriend into vehicle, suspect located in his vehicle about 1 1/2 hrs. later. Saturday,10-2T-01 ( h None Sunday., 10-28-01 Mark Russell Harpenau, 10/28/70, was arrested for Vandalism and Public Intoxication at the La Quinta Resort Hotel after he broke a window during a disturbance. Citizen's arrest. Dep. Thomas. Major Injury collision at Miles X Adams. Cruz Martinez, 19yrs of Thermal, was driving eastbound in a Honda and ran a red light. Scott Whale, 41yrs of Montana, was northbound Adams and was hit broadside by the Honda. 4 occupants of the Honda fled the scene but were located and identified with the help of witnesses. Martinez was booked for Felony DUI and Felony hit-and-run. Dep. Brewster. Aaron Garza, 23yrs of La Quinta, was arrested for Public Intoxication after being involved in a disturbance with family members within MHP on Miles Ave. Dep. Alvarado. IMonday,10-29-01 ("): Brandy Gonzalez, 21yrs of La Quinta, arrested for Burglary, Petty Theft with Priors, and Under the Influence of Drugs at the La Quinta Stater Brothers. Dep. Myers. Adrian Sandoval, 31 yrs of Coachella, arrested for Burglary and Parole Violation at the Stater Brothers in La Quinta. Dep. Black. 53yr old La Quinta woman taken to Indio Mental Health for evaluation after she attempted suicide by taking % bottle of aspirin. Dep. Diaz. Tuesday, 10-30-01 mil None 241 Le Quinta Significant Incident Report Wednesday. 10-31-01 (88): Michael Nelson, 40, La Quinta, arrested for DUI. Total calls for service: 1568 2441 MOTORCYCLE OFFICER STATISTICS October 2001 * Speed Violations 68 Lane Change Violation 0 Tows 4 0 Fail to Yield 0 Seat Bellt Violations 0 Injury T/C 0 0 Turning Violations 4 DUI Arrests 0 Non -Injury T/C 2 0 Stop Sign Violations 0 Cut Traffic for Citation 32 Suspended DL 9 0 Signal Light Violations 7 Cut Traffic for Collision 3 Non -Moving 30 0 Child Seat iolations 2 Wamin n I I 41 I Fatal T/C 243 1 0 La Quinta Motor Officer Report HIGHLIGHTS 100401 - Misd. Warrant served. 100901 -10 hr. training day (cones and ride). 101001 - Bike down due to radar installation. 101901 - Service day @ Malcolm Smith. 102401 - 10 hr. training day at LAPD. Page 2 The above statistics do not include the Halloween Safety Program. 244 CITY of LA QUINTA MONTHLY SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER REPORT October 2001 SCHOOL: LA QUINTA HIGH SCHOOL Deputy Stephen Morton RSO Grant Funded Position HIGHLIGHTS: • Four of the sixteen arrests were referred to the YAT Team. • I made one arrest of a student in possession of marijuana for sales on school grounds. • I made one arrest of a student in possession of marijuana on school grounds • I issued three citations for parking and vehicle code violations on or near the school. • I made nine arrests of students violating the truancy ordinance. • Three arrests were for students committing a battery on school grounds. • I conducted several business / truancy checks near the high school. • I conducted several follow-up investigations from patrol referrals regarding students. I also conducted several follow-up investigations regarding runaway juveniles. • I conducted several parent / student conferences regarding student behavior issues. Actual reporting period covers September 25, 2001 through October 22, 2001 SROs attend patrol briefings, participate in investigations with juvenile suspects, and attend the numerous school -related committee meetings. Their knowledge of student activities is invaluable to police efforts in juvenile crime prevention and apprehension. 45 CITY of LA f.1UINTA MONTHLY SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER REPORT October 2001 SCHOOL: LA QUINTA MIDDLE SCHOOL Deputy: Robert Brooker RSO Grant Funded Position School Session: September 20, 2001, through October 29"', 2001. HIGHLIGHTS: • Attended school staff meetings. • Attended valley wide School Recourse Officer meeting. • Participated in school bus evacuation drill. • Conducted CPS follow-ups and follow-up investigations on reports of runaway juveniles. • Counseled numerous students that violated school rules, but were not violations of state law. • 1 conducted investigations and documented incidents that occurred on campus that ranged from batteries, death threats, suicide threats, unknown substances (suspected to be Anthrax), to public intoxication and possession of drugs at a La Quinta High School football game. • Assisted the school staff in several incidents of medical aids and suspicious circumstances that occurred on campus. • 1 conducted a "Say No To Drugs" assembly at a local elementary school during "Red Ribbon Week". • In conjunction with Holly Johnson, the district manager of AAA Travel Agency, we presented a Halloween Safety program to about 800 students at Adams Elementary School and about 750 students at James Monroe Elementary School. 1 assisted patrol with a kidnapping that occurred in the cove area of La Quinta. An anonymous person reported witnessing the kidnapping of a mother after she had put her kindergarten child on the school bus. Identifying the area of occurrence as a bus stop for Truman School, I responded to the school and identified the student. Checking the school records I was able to obtain a name of the victim. The victim had a Temporary Restraining Order on a male, who fit the description of the suspect in the kidnapping. Relaying this information, along with information the suspect in the TRO had a felony warrant for his arrest, aided the patrol units in his apprehension and arrest within 30 minutes of the kidnapping, along with the safe return of the mother. 246 46 Riverside County Sheriff's Department La Quinta Target Team Monthly Report October 2001 Deputy Aaron Eller and Deputy Eric Spier The following is a summary of the Target Team activities for the month of October. Ongoing Investigations 4 Arrests/ Filings 7 Vehicle checks 8 Business Contacts 3 Investigation assists 3 Arrest Warrants Served 2 Arrest Warrants Attempted 2 Programs 0 Pedestrian Checks 6 Crime Prevention Hours 10 Bar Checks 2 Back-ups 2 Follow-ups 14 Search Warrants 0 240 La Quinta Target Team Report Probation Searches 3 Parole Searches 0 Meetings 0 Recovered Stolen Property 2 Citations issued 0 Surveillances 1 Property Checks 8 Civil Commitments 0 Bicycle Time 0 Training Hours 16 Illegal Drugs Seized 0 Total Mileage: 590 miles Noteworthy Accomplishments; Page 2 • The Target Team has updated the current list of La Quinta Parolees w/home addresses and photographs to assist with investigations and identification for target team members and patrol personnel. • The Target Team is continuing an ongoing investigation of drug trafficking in which at least one major suspect has been identified. • Crime analysis has been tasked with mapping the areas of the highest concentration for residential burglaries. The Target Team will utilize this information for the implementation of a burglary suppression program. o The Palm Desert T-400 Team has been contacted for an overview of known burglars and theft rings. Future programs utilizing both teams are being planned. This partner ship has resulted in the arrest of three known suspects, which have conducted 459 PC in the City of La Quinta on 9-5-01. These arrests have developed additional information for other known burglars. 24 Riverside County Sheriff's Department EXPLORER POST 503 PROGRAM REPORT October 2001 Training meetings were held on October 2, 97 16, 23, and 30. The Training meetings covered the following topics: 1) Report writing, 2) Competition training (Building searches, DUI investigations, and tug-of-war training), 3) Probable cause and arrest lecture, 4) Defensive tactics and handcuffing, 5) Coroner facility tour, and 6) Physical training. Sgt. James Navarro taught the report writing class. Jennifer Richards, Riverside County Sheriff's Department, RSO, Crime Analyst, handled the tug-of-war training. Deputy Sarah Bautista did the DUI investigation practice. I coordinated the building search scenarios. Deputy Ken Black instructed the probable cause and arrest class. Senior Deputy Aaron Eller taught the defensive tactics and handcuffing class. Sgt. Dan Eaglin led the coroner facility tour. Investigator Simms and I supervised the physical training day. Several Explorer Post 503 Explorers volunteered at the RSO picnic in Beaumont on 101301. Sheriffs Service Officer Monica Santillanes and I supervised the Explorer Post 503 Explorers at the picnic. Explorer Post 503 Captain Andres Martinez started working for RSO as a Sheriffs Community Services Officer. Submitted by Explorer Post Advisor Senior Deputy Andy Gerrard 249 ojarA FO - Uf � . 11�y+'��yI,M�q.��i;Ah.ufilJY..'W'rYJt+Qi"�+l�Yu'.'�O/ry^Ni`J✓bYJo'W .��'Y�y.w,H'wy'J .'�, ��."L /�'�wi" ' � i� r+� iv.....•-y � v,.m.s'..,..r ....A'�+ +'W..•".. Yw.aMWra0.'Ir w.r�' emu: CITY OF LA QUINTA SEPTEMBER CRIME COMPARISONS CRIME SEPTEMBER 2001 SEPTEMBER 2000 YTD (01) YTD (00) *HOMICIDE 0 0 1 0 *RAPE 0 0 12 11 SEX CRIMES (FEL) 1 5 6 15 SEX CRIMES (MISDI, 2 1 15 13 ROBBERY 1 0 11 7 ASSAULT (FEL) 10 10 82 78 ASSAULT MISD 19 13 169 145 BURGLARY 46 28 479 277 *VEHICLE THEFT 11 5 106 75 *THEFT (FEL) 13 14 181 165 THEFT MISD 33 29 355 279 VANDALISM ISD 35 15 228 248 DOM. VIOLENCE 10 8 112 104 NARCOTICS 10 12 95 65 DUI 12 2 104 64 T/C NON -INJURY 47 26 407 343 T/C INJURY 3 5 44 42 T/C FATAL 1 0 3 2 TRAFFIC CITATIONS 272 362 2626 2395 * STATISTICS INCLUDE ATTEMPTS 251 o 0 0 co N N a a w w r— r— Ce) LO r r C`4 0 r o LO o o o O 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL w tz w D to LL A J a Q w In LL UX W w w 0 U_ O 252 o N W L.L 2 o 0 0 0 0 N N 0 0 1 0 to to r Lb O r ' co LO cD r N TIM ' � r O O O O O O CD LO fit' M N r- U: LL W W H w_ m LL J Q N Q W m m LL V) W XU W N IR W 0. 2�5 Z W 0 N W m W W a p w vi Lij z U0 � Q Oo U Q � Z � � m C1 Q J V— O 00 O O N N a a w w 1 0 O co O ' � O M O o O 0 0 M W r, O N LO O Lf) o Ln N N w W 0 W a U w J U_ J W 0 J O U CO) U W O U J Q F- W 13 N W cr O 254 C) N W cm G W F— CL W U) Z 0 rr� VJ 0 W LPL U Q J r TY ao Z N CO U O. U0 Z 255 H z ui F- Q W H Z a J O 0 N W m 2 W` 1^ CL W CD W U_ DC W Cn w O LL. CO ..J J U U. O Z O I.d.� O U o 0 0 0 0 N N a a w w Al O O O O O O O O dam' N p coo CIO `t N 256 Q J r O O N W im 2 W W U) W U_ �N I.f.. W CD w 0 CD VJ J J Q U U. 0 z �0 VNNJ Q 0 U W (0 1 Q W Cl) co 0 r O O O O O N N 0 � 1 0 r CO Q U U •d- N O 00 CO It N O 257 F� z W 0 N W W F— W LU CD 0 UJ ~ U a J U LL LL Q U. z z U) O Q � O O O 00 N N IL a w w -0 0, ' O LO CM cO N N C0 M ;N N J o 0 0 0 � M N � Q Q LL li z U H D z z O z U H CO 0 Q H U U U- LL 258 It CITY OF LA QUINTA DISPATCH INFORMATION / SEPTEMBER 2001 TYPE OF CALL RESPONSE TIME MINUTES NUMBER OF INCIDENTS EMERGENCY 3.35 14 ROUTINE 11.2 878 "STATS TAKEN FROM RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF DATA WAREHOUSE RESPONSE TIME REPORT 259 Riverside County o t Sheriff Department sjouUttill Volume I, Issue IO November I, 2001 Bulletins are provided to standardize traffic enforcement procedures and accident investigation. Additionally bulletins will provide training about department policy, legal issues, and law updates. Driver Inattention— Definition and Associated codes Modern technology continues to advance at an ever increasing rate. This technologic is rapidly improving our quality of life by increasing communications, effi- ciency, and lower the cost of prod- ucts. Some of this technology is being incorporated into automo- biles either by manufacturers de- sign or by consumer modification. Some of the most common exam- ples are cell phones, onboard navi- gation systems, climate control, and instrument panel heads -up - display. The effect this improve- ments have on the driver's ability to safely monitor and control a motor vehicle is a common topic of debate. Historically, all kinds of driver inattention has been recorded in the associated factor section of the collision report known as "inattention". This section has commonly been over used by offi- cers who do not understand the criteria necessary to establish a factor of inattention. The Collision Investigation Manuel (CIM) states that inattention should be marked if " in the opinion of the officer" it was a factor in the collision. How this contributed to the collision must be explained in the narrative. Commonly, officers will at- tempt to assign an associated fac- tor of inattention to drivers who state that they were looking at a road sign, their speedometer, or a vehicle about to enter traffic. These examples are not inatten- tion and are normal activities as- sociated with driving a motor ve- hicle. Unfortunately, the driver may have picked a poor time to do them and a traffic collision is the result. In an effort to collect more data as to factors that contribute to traffic collision, the California Highway Patrol issued Information Bulletin # 122 in December of 2000. This bulletin detailed the data collection codes to be used in recording the different actions drivers are performing when they are being inattentive. These activi- ties "should be verified by wit- nesses, involved party statements, and/or physical evidence before being documented as an associ- ated factor." (A list of the codes and their definitions is compiled along the right side of this bulle- tin.) As we all have seen, drivers frequently perform any one (if not more) of these tasks at the same time while they attempt to drive. The resulting poor driving has in- variably lead to numerous traffic stops and probably more than a few traffic collisions. In order to correctly assign an associated factor of inattention, the investigating officer must attempt to Inattention Codes Cellphone (P)-Self Explanatory Electronic Equipment (Q) - computers, Fax, On board navigation systems, two-way radio, MDT, heads -up -display. find some means of corroborating the claim. Generally this will be Radio/CD- (R) - Adjusting very easy since the reason the issue each or associated headphones. came to your attention was a wit- ness, other driver, or passenger Smoking (S) -Cigars, Pipes, stating they observed the driver doing something other than driving. cigarettes (lighting of each). Even without this, a cursory visual inspection of the interior of the Eating (1) - Self-explanatory vehicle will often reveal evidence that the driver was inattentive. Children (In - Disciplining or Common items could be: spilled Distracted by. food, beverages, cosmetics, and reading material. Also the presence of a computer, radio headphones, Animals (V) - Interfering with or unsecured pets may Prompt you Control (Riding on lap). to investigate further. Use these opportunities to establish a rapport Personal Hygiene (W) - Make - with the driver and you may very surprised at what they will tell you! up, shaving, brushing teeth, etC. Remember the goal of these codes and collision reports is to accurately record what occurred at during the incident and provide data to the state to improve driver safety. Reading (X) - Books, Newspa- pers, etc. Other (Y) - Explain in narra- tive. Legal Update:Weaving within a single lane -Violation or Legal Conduct? While on nighttime patrol, you observe a vehicle in front of you traveling at a normal speed as you patrol your beat. As you watch the vehicle, you observe it weave from side to side within its marked lane of travel repeatedly over a distance of 3/4 of a mile. The vehicle never leaves its chosen lane and in fact never even drives on the lane lines. Has a violation of law been commit- ted in your presence? Can you le- gally stop the vehicle to conduct an investigation as to the cause of the weaving? In the past, the California Su- preme Court ruled that an officer could stop the vehicle but based its decision on the fact that the officer involved had extensive training and experience in both the identification and apprehension of drivers operating vehicles under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUI). This case, People vs. Perez (1985), was the standard for the last fifteen years. This decision was challenged last year by a driver who was charged with DUI after being stopped for weaving (People vs. Bracken (2000). The distance involved in this case was 1 /2 mile instead of the 3/4 of a mile cited in People vs. Perez The officer making the arrest in this case had less experience than the officer that ar- rested Perez The result was the same, the stop and detention were upheld and the defendant's conviction affirmed. The lesson to be learned from this most recent case is that if a vehicle weaves within its lane while being followed by law enforcement, the cause may be either a mechanical violation or that the driver may be under the influence of alcohol or drugs. In either case, the burden of showing that the vehicle's actions constituted reasonable sulMon that a violation is being committed in your presence will ultimately rest with your training and experience. Obviously the distance that the vehi- cle traveled while weaving is ex- tremely important as well as the severity of the side -to -side move- ment. Factors such as the lane width, traffic conditions, and over- all roadway configuration may be crucial to a successful prosecution. As important as all of these items are, there may be other fac- tors that cause a vehicle to weave. Many common causes are fatigue, cell phones, and other distractions. But no matter what the cause, repeated and prolonged weaving over distances of about 112 mile should be investigated to protect not only the driver, but also the motoring public. Do you have any suggestions for future topics; If so, e-mail them to BLEE on the county network. Presented by: Department Report /O City of L Quinta Fire Department Quarterly Report Dorian J. Cooley Battalion Chief 261 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT In cooperation with [he C'aliTnriria Dcpai-wwl7t of'Forestrt• anc1l-ire 1'1-otcctio17 210 West San Jacinto Avenue -Perris, California 92570 - (909) 940-6900 • FAX (909) 940-6910 November 4, 2001 Tom Tisdale Fire Chief Honorable Mayor Pena and Proudly serving the Members of the City Council unincorporated areas of City of La Quinta Riverside County and the cities of: P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Ref: Quarterly Report Beaumont ''' Banning Attached lease find the Fire Department Quarterly Report for the City of La Quinta for p p Q y p ty ❖ July through September of 2001. Calimesa Canyon Lake The report depicts the following highlights: Coachella 4- Desert Hot Springs Riverside County Fire Department units responded to a total of: Indian Wells .;. • Medical Aids 233 Indio . False Alarms 1 Lake Elsinore • Structure Fires 36 4. • Vegetation Fires I 1 ._Quinta La10 . Automatic Ringing False Alarm 143 Moreno Valley . Other Fires (vehicle, refuse, etc.) 34 Palm Desert • Public Service Assists 15 4. (non -emergency assistance) Perris .;. . Fire Menace Standby 8 Rancho Mirage (fuel spill, gas leak etc.) San Jacinto Temecula The number of calls which the fire department responds to continues to rise. Overall , it is noticed that call volume increased 16% this year when compared to the third quarter of last year. This increase was not seen in any one category, but rather was noticable in several call areas. Board of Supervisors Bob Buster, District 1 Respectfully submitted, John Tavaglione, ' District 2 Tom Tisdale Fire Chief Jim Venable, District 3 Roy Wilson, District 4 `f L To , m Mullen, By: Dorian J. Cooley / y y District 5 Battalion Chief Attachments 2 6 � La Quinta City Fire Responses Quarterly Totals Quarterly Comparisons 02001 ■ 2000 250 200-/ 150-/ 100-/ 50-/ 0 cn co E = N L N E N ` U 0 , � Q cv N lL cc l - 0 C N M '0 U L cc a)0 cncc 0) �.0 O �,t�v/oJJ�� 0 cn W (I/ 5� LL Third Quarter 2001 2000 Medical Aids 233 215 False Alarms 1 2 Structure Fire 36 21 Vegetation Fires 11 16 Ringing Alarms 143 111 Other Fires 34 17 Public Service Assists 15 22 Fire Menace Standby 8 10 TOTALS 481 414 11,9,01 263 La Quinta City Fire Responses Monthly Totals 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 :2 Q a) E cu Q N U �L L 2 iz c ca a) E ca Q 0)- 0 Li L w Q U a) c cu co a) c a) U) U_ a) a. iz ❑ July-01 ■August-01 ❑ September-01 Jul -01 Au ust-01 Se tember-01 Medical Aids 76 71 86 False Alarms 0 1 0 Structure Fire 17 8 11 Vegetation Fires 1 3 7 Ringing Alarms 54 57 32 Other Fires 13 13 8 Public Service Assists 5 7 3 Fire Menace Standby 2 1 5 TOTALS 168 1 161 1 152 264" 70 50 40 30 20 10 9 La Quinta City Fire Responses Monthly Breakdown D Medical Aids ■ False Alarms O Structure Fire D Vegetation Fires ■ Ringing Alarms El Other Fires 0 Public Service Assists 0 Fire Menace Standby July-01 Jul -01 Medical Aids 76 False Alarms 0 Structure Fire 17 Vegetation Fires 1 Ringing Alarms 54 Other Fires 13 Public Service Assists 5 Fire Menace Standby 2 26 :e 70 .E 50 a 991 20 10 F La Quinta City Fire Responses Monthly Breakdown ❑ Medical Aids ■ False Alarms ❑ Structure Fire ❑ Vegetation Fires ■ Ringing Alarms El Other Fires El Public Service Assists ❑ Fire Menace Standby August-01 Au ust-01 Medical Aids 71 False Alarms 1 Structure Fire 8 Vegetation Fires 3 Ringing Alarms 57 Other Fires 13 Public Service Assists 7 Fire Menace Standby 1 266 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 La Quinta City Fire Responses Monthly Breakdown ❑ Medical Aids ■ False Alarms ❑ Structure Fire ❑ Vegetation Fires ■ Ringing Alarms 13 Other Fires 0 Public Service Assists ❑ Fire Menace Standby September-01 Se tember-01 Medical Aids 86 False Alarms 0 Structure Fire 11 Vegetation Fires 7 Ringing Alarms 32 Other Fires 8 Public Service Assists 3 Fire Menace Standby 5 267 AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 CONSENT CALENDAR: Public Hearing to Certify a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-418, and a Request to Change the Zoning Designation to Low Density Residential and the General Plan Designation to Low Density Residential Within the Sphere of Influence of the City of La Quinta for Subsequent Annexation for Approximately 200 Acres, Bounded on the North by Avenue 52, on the East by Monroe Street, on the South by Avenue 53, and East of the Existing City Limits. Applicant: NRI, La Quinta Limited Partnership RECOMMENDATION: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-418; and Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving General Plan Amendment 2001-077, subject to the findings. Move to take up Ordinance No. by title and number only and waive further reading. Move to introduce Ordinance No. on first reading. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: This project was originally advertised for the City Council meeting of July 3, 2001. At that time, staff's intention was to annex the entire 240 acres to include all properties to Monroe Street. On June 26, 2001, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the annexation with the exclusion of 40 acres belonging to 268 P:\JERRY\CCDesertAnnex.wpd Ms. Waters. Ms. Waters is the property owner of the 40-acre parcel located at the northwest corner of Avenue 53 and Monroe Street, and currently operates a grape vineyard. At the public hearing, Ms. Waters requested her property be removed from the annexation. Staff modified the EA to address the concerns of Mr. Hargreaves (attorney for Ms. Waters) and renoticed the public hearing excluding Ms. Waters' property. The public hearing notice provided a new 20-day review period for the revised EA. The remaining 200 acres are currently located outside the City limits, but within the City's Sphere of Influence and located generally at the southwest corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 52. The applicant has requested annexation into the City of La Quinta. Prior to annexation, LAFCO requires the General Plan designation and pre - zoning be established to City standards. Project Request The General Plan and Zoning designations proposed by the applicant are for Low Density Residential development. The requested land use and zoning designations are compatible with the surrounding development in the area which is characterized by single family residences around golf course development. Ms. Waters has specifically indicated that she will continue her grape operation. Under the City's current zoning regulations, the property, once annexed, would be allowed to continue its operation forever or until the current, or future property owner chooses to discontinue the activity. In addition, Ms. Waters' attorney, Mr. Robert W. Hargreaves of Best Best & Krieger, raised issues regarding the Environmental Assessment (Attachment 1) . Planning Commission Action The Planning Commission at their meeting of June 26, 2001 (Attachment 2), recommended approval of the Environmental Assessment (EA), General Plan Amendment and Zone Change with the deletion of Ms. Waters' property (APN 769- 200-01 1) . Public Notice The applications were re -advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on October 29, 2001. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the Zoning Ordinance of the La Quinta Municipal Code. To date, no comments have been received. Public Agency Review 269 All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. 002 P:\JERRY\CCDesertAnnex.wpd Conclusion The proposed General Plan Amendment and Pre -annexation Zone Change are consistent with General Plan goals, policies and programs for a varied housing stock. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council Certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-418; and Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving General Plan Amendment 2001-077, subject to the findings; and Move to take up Ordinance No. by title and number only and waive further reading. Move to introduce Ordinance No. on first reading; or 2. Do not adopt Resolutions of the City Council certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-418, approving General Plan Amendment 2001-077, and approving Zone Change 2001-100; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, rry Hed-ri' immunity Development Director Approved for submission by: homas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachment: 1. Letters from Robert Hargreaves, Best Best & Krieger, dated June 26, 2001 and July 3, 2001. � 2. Planning Commission minutes for June 26, 2001. Q PAJERRY\CCDesertAnnex.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 2001-418 PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-077, ZONE CHANGE 2001-100, AND ANNEXATION, ESTABLISHING PRE -ANNEXATION DESIGNATIONS FOR 200 ACRES ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-418 APPLICANT: NRI, LA QUINTA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP COUNTRY CLUB OF THE DESERT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 20th day of November, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 2001-418 for General Plan Amendment 2001-077, Zone Change 2001-100, and annexation, for the property generally located at the southwest corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 52, more particularly described as follows: APN 767-200-002, 003, 004, 005, 007, 008, 009, AND 010 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 26th day of June, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 2001-418 for General Plan Amendment 2001-077, Zone Change 2001-100, and annexation, for the property generally located at the southwest corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 52 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 2001-418) and has determined that although the proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-077 and Zone Change 2001-100 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! 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: 271 P:\JERRY\CCDesCCResoEA418.wpd City Council Resolution 2001- Environmental Assessment 2001-418 NRI, La Quinta Limited Partnership - Country Club of the Desert Adopted: November 20, 2001 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change 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 2001-418. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change 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 and Zone Change 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 and Zone Change 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 and Zone Change 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. 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 Environmental Assessment 2001-418 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). 272 005 P:\JERRY\CCDesCCResoEA418.wpd City Council Resolution 2001- Environmental Assessment 2001-418 NRI, La Quinta Limited Partnership - Country Club of the Desert Adopted: November 20, 2001 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 2001-418 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum attached hereto and on file in the Community Development Department. 3. That Environmental Assessment 2001-418 reflects the independent judgement of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 20th day of November, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: 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 2 006 P:\JERRY\CCDesCCResoEA418.wpd City Council Resolution 2001- Environmental Assessment 2001-418 NRI, La Quinta Limited Partnership - Country Club of the Desert Adopted: November 20, 2001 APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California r 007 P:\JERRY\CCDesCCResoEA418.wpd REVISED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM, EA 2001-418 1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment 2001-077, Zone Change 2001-100, Pre -Annexation land use designation and zoning 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Jerry Herman, 760-777-7125 4. Project Location: Southwest corner of Avenue 52 and Monroe Street 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: NRI/LQLP 81-100 Avenue 53 La Quinta, CA 92253 6. General Plan Designation: Proposed: Low Density Residential 7. Zoning: Proposed: Low Density Residential 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.) Revised environmental assessment for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to assign land use and zoning designations to a total of 200 acres as part of an annexation application to the City of La Quinta. The original environmental assessment assessed a project area which included a total of 240 acres. The parcel located at the northwest corner of Avenue 53 and Monroe Street was removed from the proposed annexation boundary, at the owners' request and the direction of the Planning Commission. The proposed designation is Low Density Residential. The County General Plan designation is 3A, 0.4-2 units per acre and 313, Residential, 0.2 to 0.4 units per acre. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. North: Developed polo grounds South: Approved golf and low density residential development, Country Club of the Desert West: Approved golf and low density residential development, Country Club of the Desert East: Vacant desert lands and agriculture 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) 2 " It L Local Agency Formation Commission 008 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\Annexl3EACkIst.WPD 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 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: 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 EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. FM7 11 Date 17 ' 000 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\Annex13EACkIst.WPD 2 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 analysis 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 analysis 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 277 010 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\Annex13EACklst.WPD Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: I. 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 EIR, 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) 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) III. 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) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X X X X X X R X 91 GAWPDOCS\EACCAnnexCklst.WPD 011. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Project Description) 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? (Master Environmental Assessment, Exhibit 5-1) 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? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.) 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? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.) 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? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.) 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) f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-5) 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? (General Plan EIR, p. 4-77 ff.) 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)? (General Plan EIR, p. 4-77 ff.) X X X X X X X X GAWPDOCS\EACCAnnexCklst. WPD 012 VI VII. c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site? (Lakebed Delineation Map) d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (General Plan EIR, p. 4-77 ff.) 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 EIR, page 4-30 ff.) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (General Plan EIR, 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) 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) MMME MMME M�M= ==ME MEMO M X 19 280 013 G AWPDOCS\EACCAnnexCklst. WPD 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) 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 p. 6-1 1) 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? (General Plan EIR, page 4- 30 ff.) 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? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) 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) GAWPDOCS\EACCAnnexCklst. WPD X X X X X X X 281 014 IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? (Specific Plan Project Description) 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 coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Master Environmental Assessment 2-11) 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? (General Plan EIR, page 4-157 ff.) b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (General Plan EIR, page 4-157 ff.) c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan EIR, page 4-157 ff.) 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? (Master Environmental Assessment) 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) XII. 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) ? (General Plan, page 2-14) b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials) GAWPDOCS\EACCAnnexCklst. WPD R In X F. r1l K4 91 X KI X X 2 8 . 015 c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application X Materials) 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) 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)? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) 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? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Application Materials) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Application Materials) F. X EMEN E on MMME ==ME 26I6 GAWPDOCS\EACCAnnexCklst. WPD XVI. g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Application Materials) UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, pg. 4-24 ) 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? GAWPDOCS\EACCAnnexCklst.WPD X X X X X X FA X R X 284 0117 10 XVIII. EARLIER Analysis. Earlier analysis 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 analysis used. Identify earlier analysis and state where they are available for review. The EIR for Country Club of the Desert (SCH #99061109) was used in the preparation of this checklist and addendum. 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. 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 SCAQMD CEQA Handbook. General Plan, City of La Quinta, 1992. City of La Quinta Municipal Code Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report, the Desert, August 2000. Quinta General Plan 1992. SCH No. 99061 109, Country Club of Country Club of the Desert Traffic Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads, October, 2001 G AWPDOCS\EACCAnnexCklst. WPD 11 283 018 REVISED ADDENDUM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-418 I. d) The proposed annexation will not result in an increase in light or glare in and of itself. Buildout of the parcel, however, will generate light, since the proposed project will occur on a currently vacant parcel. The land use designation to be placed on the parcel will result in low density residential units, which generate low levels of light. The project will be required to meet the City's standards for outdoor lighting, which will ensure that lighting is directed downward and contained within the site. Compliance with these standards will reduce the potential impacts of light and glare to a less than significant level. I I . a) &c) Approximately 75 acres of the 200 acres in the annexation area have been in agriculture for some time, primarily as sod farming. The Waters property, consisting of 40 acres immediately south and east of the annexation area is being farmed currently, and produces table grapes. Annexation of the 200 acres, and the imposition of land use designations, will not in and of itself impact the agricultural use of the annexation area. In the long term, however, the annexation area will be developed in low density residential land uses. Currently there are two parcels (769-200-002 & 003), totaling 40 acres, which are under the Williamson Act contract. This acreage is included in the 75 acres currently in agriculture within the annexation area. The applicant has filed a Notice of Non -renewal for these parcels. The loss of 75 acres of land currently in sod farming within the annexation area will not represent a significant loss of prime agricultural land in the Valley. The sod farming and pasture lands which occur in the annexation area do not represent a significant portion of those lands in that use in the Coachella Valley. Data from the County of Riverside shows that land in agriculture in Riverside County has substantially increased in production in the last twenty years. Under the revised project, the 40 acre parcel located at the northwest corner of Avenue 53 and Monroe, which had been included in the original assessment, but has been removed at the request of the property owner and Planning Commission, can continue as an agricultural land use without interruption under the County's jurisdiction. Acreage in production of table grapes in Riverside County increased 146% from 1979 to 1999, from 9,496 acres in 1979 to 13,829 acres in 1999 (please see attached statistics). Should the Waters property, southeast of the annexation area property, be converted to residential land use by the land owner, the loss of land for agriculture would not be significant, given the increase in production which has occurred in the last 20 years. The County land use designation does not designate the annexation lands for Agriculture. The current County General Plan designations for 40 acres of the annexation area is 313, Residential 0.2 to 0.4 units per acre. The other 160286 10 019 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAAdd418.WPD acres are designated 3A, Residential 0.4 to 2 units per acre. That portion of the annexation area designated 3A could generate 320 dwelling units, and the 3B designated land could generate 16 dwelling units, for a total of 336 residential units. The 40 acre parcel to the southeast of the proposed annexation area, and previously included, is also designated 313, Residential 0.2 to 0.4, and could generate 16 dwelling units. There is no specific project proposed with the annexation and associated General Plan and Zoning Map amendments. The maximum number of units which could be generated under the City designation on the 200 acre annexation land is 800 units. It is likely, however, that either a standard tract or a country club development will occur. This type of development in La Quinta has typically resulted in densities of between 2 and 3 units per acre. Such a development would be similar to the densities which are currently allowed under the Riverside County General Plan. The property owner of the 40 acres located at the northwest corner of Avenue 53 and Monroe Street (the Waters property) provided comments on the original Environmental Assessment. These comments included concern that the development of the acreage to the north and west of their property would result in conflicts between their existing agricultural land use and the future residential land uses. The property owner requested both a buffer and a notification process be implemented by the City. The development of residential land uses on the annexation area will result in the construction of a 6 foot wall along western and northern the property lines of the 40 acre parcel. The current County General Plan includes discussion of buffers between agricultural and residential land uses, without specifying the size of such buffers. Under the County's jurisdiction, Ordinance No. 625.1 ("An Ordinance of the County of Riverside Providing a Nuisance Defense for Certain Agricultural Activities, Operations, and Facilities and Providing Public Notification Thereof") provides on -going protection for agricultural activities adjacent to residential development. This ordinance protects agricultural operations from the potential complaints which can arise from neighbors of agricultural land uses. The ordinance also requires that developers of residential projects adjacent to active agricultural land uses notify potential buyers within 300 feet of the agricultural land use that they are purchasing a home near an agricultural land use. This ordinance has been effective in protecting agriculture from such complaints. In order to address the potential for land use conflicts between agricultural and residential land uses, the following mitigation measures are shall be implemented: 1. Prior to the Conducting Authority Hearing before the Local Agency Formation Commission, the City shall adopt an ordinance whose intent and content is equivalent to Riverside County ordinance 625.1, including2 8 j a notification requirement of 300 feet. v . 020 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAAdd418.WPD 2. All development proposals within the proposed annexation area which will occur adjacent to existing active agriculture shall be required to incorporate a 100 foot landscaped setback from the property line(s) of the adjacent agriculture into development plans. No structure shall be permitted within the setbacks. III. c) & d) The primary source of air pollution in the City is the automobile. Although annexation will not cause an increase in air emissions in and of itself, the buildout of the project will. The proposed land use designation for the project site is low density residential, 0-4 units per acre. At this density, a maximum of 800 single family residences would be possible. Based on calculations provided by the Institute of Traffic Engineers, 800 units could generate up to 7,656 trips per day'. As shown in the Table below, buildout of the annexation area will not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds. 1 Running Exhaust Emissions (pounds/day) PM10 PM10 PM10 CO ROC NOx Exhaust Brakes Tires 50 mph 237.29 9.13 48.67 -- 1.01 1.01 Daily Threshold* 550 75 100 150 Based on 7,656 trips/day and average trip length of 6 miles, using EMFAC7G Model provided by California Air Resources Board. Assumes catalytic light autos at 75°F. * Operational thresholds provided by SCAQMD for assistance in determining the significance of a project. The Coachella Valley is a non -attainment area for PM 10 (particulate matter of 10 microns or smaller). In order to control PM10, the City has imposed standards and requirements on development to control dust. Although no immediate project is proposed, the disturbance of the site for construction will eventually have an impact on air quality from PM 10. These impacts can be mitigated by the mitigation measures below. 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. Institute of Transportation Engineers, "Trip Generation, 6th Edition." Rate calculated for single family residential, 2 8 at 9.57 trips per day. 021 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAAdd418.WPD 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. 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 buildout of the annexation area will not be significant. Moreover, improvements in technology which are likely to reduce impacts, particularly from motor vehicles or transit route improvements in the future are not included in the analysis. 289 022 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAAdd418.WPD IV. a) The annexation area was previously studied for biological resources2. The biological analysis concluded that four types of habitat occur on the site: Desert Scrub, Agriculture, Pasture and Disturbed. No species of concern were identified in site surveys conducted specifically for Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard, Palm Springs Ground Squirrel, Palm Springs Pocket Mouse and Flat Tailed Horned Lizard. The area was, however, identified as having mesquite hummocks, which provide important habitat for a number of desert species. The proposed annexation area includes several mesquite hummocks. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1 . Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project proponent(s) shall submit an on -site biological resource analysis identifying the total acreage of mesquite hummocks on the 200 acre site, or any portion thereof proposed for development. 2. Prior to construction or site preparation activities, the project proponent(s) shall enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the California Department of Fish and Game and an appropriate non- profit organization whose purpose is to acquire and manage land for the purpose of protecting special status plants and wildlife. This MOU shall provide the organization chosen the financial resources necessary to purchase and manage the equivalent acreage identified in mitigation measure #1 of mesquite hummock habitat in the Willow Hole area. V. b) Annexation of the project site will not, in of itself, have an impact on cultural resources. Buildout of the site, however, could impact such resources. A cultural resource survey was conducted for the subject property3. The survey found a number of resources in the area, but only very limited resources on the annexation area property. In order to ensure that buried resources are not lost if they occur, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: E 3 1 . A qualified archaeological monitor shall be present during all demolition, earth moving and grading activities. The monitor shall be empowered to stop or redirect activities on the site should a resource be identified. A final report shall be filed with the Community Development Department prior to occupancy. "Biological Assessment for the Country Club of the Desert Project," Michael Brandman Associates, May 2000. "A Phase I Cultural Resource Investigation of the Country Club of the Desert Project Area..." McKenna et. al., September 1999. 290 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAAdd418.WPD 023 VI. a) i) & ii) 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. The site is not subject to liquefaction4. In order to protect the City from hazards associated with groundshaking, 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. VI. b)&c) The subject property is subject to soil erosion due to wind. The City will impose requirements for a PM 10 management plan, which will control this hazard (please see above). The soils on the property will also be examined through an on -site soil analysis required prior to issuance of grading permits. These requirements will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. VIII. b) 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 CVWD Water Management Plan includes a Preferred Alternative (Alternative 4) for the management and recharge of groundwater, which results in positive cumulative water storage for the period from 1999 to 2035 (Table 6-1). 0 Comments made on the original Environmental Assessment indicated a concern regarding water usage associated with residential development. The comments included an attached letter from Pace Engineering, calculating water usage for another project. Although no source or reference is provided for the data used in the Pace letter of June 7, 2001, the author uses an average of 150 gallons per person per day for residential land uses. The proposed annexation area encompasses 200 acres of low density residential land which could generate up to 800 dwelling units. The City's current average household size is 1.99 persons. Therefore, the potential water consumption within the annexation area boundary at buildout would be 238,800 gallons per day, or 0.73 acre feet per day, or 267 acre feet per year. Data provided by the Coachella Valley Water District for the parcels included in the 200 acre annexation area show that a total of 7,829 acre feet of Canal water has been provided to metered locations in the last 10 years. This represents an average annual water usage of 783 acre feet for the entire 200 acres. The 267 acre feet estimated for usage by 800 residential units would "Draft Environmental Impact Report, Country Club of the Desert," SCH #99061109, Impact Sciences, August 2000. 291 024 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAAdd418.WPD therefore represent only 34% of the average annual usage of agricultural land uses within the annexation area for the last 10 years. Since Canal water is the primary source of water recharge plans being implemented by CVWD for groundwater recharge, the current use of Canal water for irrigation can be used in direct comparison to groundwater usage. The buildout of the annexation area would therefore reduce existing impacts to water resources, and would represent a beneficial impact. Alternatively, if the 200 acre annexation area were to develop as a golf course and residential development, with 100 acres of golf course and 100 acres of residential development, yielding up to 400 single family units (a similar land use distribution to that found at the adjacent approved Country Club of the Desert project), the annexation area would require 883 acre feet of water annually, based on the factors supplied by Pace Engineering (133 acre feet for the residential component, and 750 acre feet for the golf component). This represents an increase in water usage of 12.8% over the annual average currently being utilized at the meters located within the annexation area. Since these meters occur only on 60 of the 200 acres in the annexation area, the water usage will represent a net per acre reduction in the water usage for the entire annexation area at buildout. Regardless of the type of development which occurs on the site, all landscaping will be required to comply with the standards of the City's landscape water conservation ordinance, which mandates reductions in both irrigation and evapotranspiration. This standard will further reduce the potential impacts associated with groundwater within the annexation area. VIII. c)-e) When the annexation area is developed, impermeable surfaces will be created, which will change drainage patterns in a rain event. Any project on the site 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. IX. b) The County of Riverside currently has jurisdiction over the annexation area. The land use designation for the subject property under the County General Plan is 3A and 313, which allow 0.4-2 units and 0.2 to 0.4 units per acre, respectively. The City's proposed Low Density Residential designation will therefore somewhat increase this density, but will maintain the intended residential character of the area. The character of the property will not be changed by the proposed action, insofar as residential development would be expected to occur on this site under either jurisdiction. Finally, the adjacent lands to the west are being developed in residential units in a low density. G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAAdd418.WPD 29„ M2 5 The impacts associated with adjacency to existing agricultural land uses immediately south of the proposed annexation area have been addressed and mitigated under item II, above. The mitigation measures proposed are consistent with current conditions and standards under Riverside County's jurisdiction. The County's intent for the properties in this area is clearly defined as residential in their General Plan. The agricultural land uses will continue to operate at the owners' discretion under County jurisdiction. The impacts to land use are not expected to be significant. XI. a) b) & c) The noise environment in the annexation area is generally quiet, due to limited development and low traffic volumes. The ultimate development of the site will result in an increase in noise levels, particularly noise generated by automobiles. The proposed land use designation will result in residential land uses on the site, which are considered sensitive receptors. In order to ensure that these sensitive receptors are not subject to noise impacts, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: Xlll.a) 1 . Any project on the subject property shall be required to complete a noise analysis which includes current conditions and anticipated buildout noise levels, and which includes mitigation measures to ensure that exterior and interior noise levels meet City standards in effect at that time. The analysis shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. Annexation and construction of the subject property will result in potential impacts for both police and fire services. The property, once developed, will generate property tax. These taxes will contribute to the City's General Fund, and offset the potential impact to police and fire service. 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) Based on comments received on the original Environmental Assessment, a traffic study has been prepared for the proposed annexation applications. The traffic analysis assumed that low density residential development totalling 960 units would occur on a 240 acre site (the 40 acre property now deleted from the annexation area was included in the traffic analysis). The analysis examined the potential impacts on the area's circulation system. It is important to note that the firm which completed this analysis also prepared the analysis for the General Plan, and therefore has the most current and accurate data available for the City's circulation system. s "Country Club of the Desert Traffic Impact Analysis," prepared by Urban Crossroads, October 4, 2001. 293 026 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAAdd418.WPD The study found that with buildout of the proposed annexation area, combined with buildout of other projects, based on General Plan designations, the intersections within the project area will all operate at a Level of Service D or better, which meets the City's standards for roadway operations. Improvements required, and to be installed as development occurs, include signalization of the Madison/Avenue 52, Monroe/Avenue 52, Monroe/Avenue 53 intersections, and widening of Monroe, Madison and Avenue 52 to City General Plan standards. It is important to note that the widening and signalization will be required even if the proposed annexation area does not build out. The City requires that development contribute its fair share to street improvements as development occurs. Such a requirement will be imposed within the annexation area to ensure that levels of service are maintained at an acceptable level. XVI. b)-f) Although the annexation will have no impact on utilities, the ultimate buildout of the site 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 residents 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. 29 of 027 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAAdd418.WPD W F+ G7 N W z o a� w o o o � � � � o � � W ox � O Q C) o � z ' o O Z N o ° � z z V � z �a z �w as N � o UW ,-� o H V C) ° zo c,3� ° ax o 0� o as Z C7o N U �O z •• .. 0*z O 0.0 .. z E A w� �A aU �w ox UU _Cd �tb Cd Cd at0> ZUQ a U Q o•� �.0 o Q a a U H cz � b o �J C bA th O O O p o ° 4-4 E., o x a o o o ° o > ° ° 0 Q ° ° ° b �. it .� .o •o i.r .. N .o 0 .� 0 z- .� Cd .� ►.00,3. a a w a a a to P64 o U o C o rig > U Q zz Q� Q C Q aotb cqsw�, w w o o o o o UO UCi uC-u U U U UCa O o U a o W W C13 4rA o �, Cd 0 H cd > �o � •�.cj0-4 o `�, W a o a a) x 0 w Cd v c., v 0 0 c� a w U a F A W � �A aU Ox UV a 40. V o a b �o a cl a� o � cn O n O x z as o 0 0•� o co Q Q Q� Q 4-4 UA UA UAA UA c v� 0 0 o G U >, t ~ W O w w rA a AU o o ;� o .� o W .0 t4 E O C 1 cd o En �bD z E o'o 0 RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO ASSIGN LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION TO APPROXIMATELY 200 ACRES LOCATED GENERALLY AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MONROE STREET AND AVENUE 52 CASE NO.: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-077 APPLICANT: NRI LA QUINTA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP COUNTRY CLUB OF THE DESERT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 20th day of November, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for NRI, La Quinta Limited Partnership to review a General Plan Amendment to assign pre -annexation land use designation of Low Density Residential to approximately 200 acres, pending annexation to the City, located generally at the southwest corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 52, more particularly described as: APN 767-200-002, 003, 004, 005, 007, 008, 009, AND 010 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 26th day of June, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for La Quinta Limited Partnership to review a General Plan Amendment to assign pre -annexation land use designation of Low Density Residential to approximately 200 acres to the City, located generally at the southwest corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 52; 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. 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 General Plan Amendment 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 General Plan Amendment is compatible with the City's Zoning Ordinance in that it supports the development of a range of housing in an integrated community. 297 030 PAJERRY\CCDesCCResoGPA.wpd City Council Resolution 2001- General Plan Amendment 2001-077 NRI La Quinta Limited Partnership - Country Club of the Desert Adopted: November 20, 2001 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 2001-418 assessed the environmental concerns of the General Plan Amendment; and, 3. That it does approve General Plan Amendment 2001-077 as contained in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made part of, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution effective upon annexation. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 20th day of November, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: 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 2 1. P:WERRY\CCDesCCResoGPA.wpd EXHIBIT A li r O 0 N U cz 29q 032 ORDINANCE 2001- A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE ASSIGNING LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION TO APPROXIMATELY 200 ACRES LOCATED GENERALLY AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MONROE STREET AND AVENUE 52 CASE NO.: ZONE CHANGE 2001-100 APPLICANT: NRI LA QUINTA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP COUNTRY CLUB OF THE DESERT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 20th day of November, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for NRI La Quinta Limited Partnership for review of a Pre -Annexation Zone Change to allow the pre - zoning of approximately 200 acres, pending annexation to the City, located generally at the southwest corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 52, more particularly described as: APN's 767-200-002, 003, 004, 005, 007, 008, 009, AND 010 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 26th day of June, 2001 hold duly noticed Public Hearing for NRI La Quinta Limited Partnership for review of a Pre -Annexation Zone Change to allow the pre - zoning of approximately 200 acres, pending annexation to the City, located generally at the southwest corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 521 and recommended approval; 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 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 a range of housing in an integrated community. 4. The Zone Change, to be effective upon annexation of the property, supports the 3 0 0 orderly development of the City. 033 PAJERRY\CCDesCC0rdZC100.wpd Ordinance 2001- Zone Change 2001-100 NRI La Quinta Limited Partnership - Country Club of the Desert Adopted: November 20, 2001 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1.PURPOSE. To rezone approximately 200 acres, pending annexation to the City, located generally at the southwest corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 52, more particularly described as: APN's 767-200-002, 003, 004, 005, 007, 008, 009, AND 010 from County Zoning of Light Agriculture (A-1-20) to Low Density Residential. 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. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 20th day of November, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JOHN J. PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California 301 P:\JERRY\CCDes000rdZC100.wpd � 034 Ordinance 2001- Zone Change 2001-100 NRI La Quinta Limited Partnership - Country Club of the Desert Adopted: November 20, 2001 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 30 035 PAJ ERRY\CCDesCCOrdZC 100.wpd EXHIBIT A 0 0 r TT CD cn Ni W C3 z Q CU w z 0 N 03E ATTACHMENTS 304 037 ATTACHMENT #1 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP 'r`ORwI^ LIMITRO U1A81L/7T ►•i1TMER61+1h Int...D1wG P"4D?e39 0ftJkL C01Sr0/i+LT•Owf ' LAWYERS ,.Mum L .Iy11ir+OpTM- Of.ADLCT C w9%oFG0 or:wwaE • 1S146&.Logbook c N>tub&a MI.[w A I CKPIAR rOalw G n166.wG07haw f • 760 naGwrlAT I a I . a1I.lc JOG IwONAw W9bbc C.61tOww1- Ot: 10 Mal\►.F w' O.wO•if• :..: ^APO T .wGEA50w • ?CTER F. G-a.wwCw �tifmET Olww niwAT pwv10 . wwwCOCw naL.ThS :3..6A^&4^ftN-w POST O/►ICt 6036 1 ±Cl.O 0 ,I.n►Iw• �Tiv[w C Dbo-WWI• natbsl S.PETERCOA LA. FCLw«CaL► Pwa,M OCLCRT G.ulOmwwa :I:La .Gnw i 6AOww EPIC ♦ cwww[m• ADGER A C04.070AD Caw.6 @4 A-mSlaw.• TELi/wOwa Slab: SOO :01 1 .a,nw 1..Zw.t• T 41.000u. OEwwai F CO(^ P w.► /twwCE •nwww D. nwOiw7v P 6494111M #trrn1T a OA►•N«CiP w T/It«i•/a TOL[wTWO TCLCCOP1iw S7r603 54010011 we1►rww CON F1Cnwt• aAr.wT• gyp.«CI• J t1wvM1• n POGERT r A.waAEAVCC we.aw T COLaawt TnCRaLa+ i. AwTOR11CC1 OCGFiE F Rt1U' • w. ►►OTO• At C w.0 aNwE• CO+tTT DPWC1 w iEACw O.v10 w wiwa.Aw ..Eww1/[w T 6S.CwwAn wi•.iSA N +00 t be^" ARThto OI CG..6.e1i1. C"114TOPw90 w CwAJ1C^ LA a+aa►rsM Owiiobov ♦ w..ADws. amt,"C OUTER +1Amw • CwaTEA wAma• C CS.sss 6tiw v1 /R1Ct TwAwC T TAAR C.lansw wwPTwCi t. OLwew MICAALI. D n�.AAIS• ^L^Owu. n M.evts CL•pw A 0160OP ".C"C%&C owl!"tTli m^Pv1.1CnAEt wCLCOD TAAC.E PR•P% .ta1AC T Th000t^& OOaSwla t 2.nw;m- CAq.D .1 Cower.- r .a►Di►SOw• ..sv.w aS R.AOG►Pn C1.ThaA sL GCRF.wO ..aFCL P. TOS.CniTDAC STEYLR A .wOEA90w rwbCm C C1.9Cs wIaL.1.rPN .. PRIsT.T CnwasTfww • OT[P n.CnACL uOa.G.A+ t !w.•u►e• Plaft"fa1TE 6 :TP.wC. ALGEAT► !.TTiGiOw Daw.C.► i 606911i7L O SA1ww AESDCR GPtOOwT It w1.w1..SOw 1.TLE P. CwOw pw/ww A GEwAmD .` FAST GiTw COYa.Aw ^amok N CwITA Ctws Twww^A .AWES A CI►w.w .1aFat AA7wOR9 uw01.E• . COTT.w Daw► O AwRwaa. v.CTDa1 16 wo►r n.r. A G/Riws P►wb. C ► opt S'OI.tA DwwaFa.LE C. CLl•etw wARAC11 O DWaw Daw/Ct ILCh gVIER CRAP OCRLCTA LtS• tosa.•T2nww CwA.6TLnA A' wtwll• E1,1=9 Cntwb ROOM 4 11wwwA n OwwAO 0 GOa•D= L0010 PIANO C^ft^Lno nwACO A PIOWM46t 1. C DAwl91. C STrt V101baw aTLinEh ► 091TS Cn ..Oww O /aw nwET Ion^ orw^Ltw wAaLTlw vwalw•r TIIw TRaP �Onw w' AOTTSCP.C�tP PIEmD C 6•S.aw110. �i►►P1 f i[mAC 8 E OlhCas 1w Ow.&wT on. I.OwTCow[AT +.w Dolton& La[net nwGwtt Oww/E• "Im A.•[AiaO[ ta0aa Oe& 0.400 '1•ICnai♦ LlnntfaOS.R P.Cnw/l0'T f6CEm /P-hA►1w C wOAPt: .•#SO.. D .LPsAT •well n.w L CwOPpA r Ao.? .0%0 OL.T a a •ae a bOl3 ONTaR/0 SOC.C3 wow ebb& tCOTT C. ;MaT11 .wCA G C\ARPt. Ja. wNL1au. wo00 nEPRI♦F Irma C TLRwtT .►wFEC w w«aseta 1IL.2.1070a aid LAW DaCCO toICIS 620 1200 ORwwL C Si a e3 i.i% to -WO all.." In L[Y1.Z- wILl1.n O Own•.wG Jal. I+ICnAE& O DO►" La.ciwt eist'f a 1 NOO 1a •A PAQf9*9l0f^L COAPORAT1011 June 26, 2001 V14 FAC:SI1 ME ?"RAN.S'MISSION Honorable Chairman and Commission Members Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Cabe Tampico La -Quints, CA 92270 Re. E'n>>ironmrntal Assessrnei:l 2 D01-418, General Plun Amendment 200I-077, and Zone Change 2002-] 00 Honorable Chaimian and Members of the Commission. This office represents William and Madeline Waters with respect 1o, the above -referenced maner The Waters, through Romad Investments LP, own the 40 acre vineyard at the corner of Avenue 53 and Monroe that is a portion ofthe land subject to the proposed general plan amendment, Zone change, and potential annexation. The Waters have not requested that their property be part of the annexation, and unless their concerns are addressed, will object to the re -Zoning, general plan amendment, and annexation as a threat to the continuance of their agricultural operation The Waters' property is classified as prime agricultural land and is currently cultivated in 40 , acres of high quality table grapes, in which the Waters have made a substantial investment It is the desire of the Waters to continue commercial agricultural -operations on their land. It is our understanding that under the proposed zoning, the Waters vineyard would be "grandfathered" as a pre-existing; non-conforrrming use The Waters would be able to continue tbe' vineyard indefinitely, but would be unable to make any substantial change in the operation. New faro 0 J 0 3 8 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP }honorable Chairman and Commission Members City of La Quinta Planning Commission June 26, 2001 Page 2 .related structures Would not be permitted, nor would a change of crop, or possibly even a replanting of the existing. grapes Even more troubling is the threat to the Waters' agricultural operation if residential development is permitted on adjoining property without the necessary."measures to buffer the inherently incompatible land uses. Farming operations on the Waters' property generate irnpaets typical of large scale farming operations Heavy machinery may operate at all hours of the day and night, as cuhavation practices demand These operations generate significant levels of noise and dust Applications of agricultural chemicals such as sulfur, herbicides and pesticides create inevitable strong odors. On panicularly cold nights, helicopters tray be employed at low altitudes to stir up the air and prcvcnt free2ing. Organic ferrilizers may be employed that generate their own objectionable odors Workers travel to and from the property, and. engage in work on the property, at all hours of the day and night, generating additional traffic and noise While the applicant of the proposed general plan amendment and re -zoning has not disclosed the nature ofthe contemplated development, it is our understanding that the applicant is the developer of the nearby Country Club of the Desert The intention appears to be to extend the Country Club of the Desen development into the annexation area.* The likely outcome will be to line the borders of the .Waters' vineyard with median density, country -club housing - These residences would likely be marketed to retired seniors, who undoubtedly anticipate enjoying the peace, quiet and fresh air of the rural Coachella Valley The reality of living in close. proximity to a large scale agricultural operation will not fit in with the lifestyles that the retirees anticipate Unless appropriate buffering and notice provisions are required of adjacent residential development, conflicts will inevitably arise between the Waters' agricultural operations and their new neighbors that will render agricultural operations more and more difficult Prime agricultural land is being lost to development nationwide at the alarming rate of 1,000,000 acres annually The loss of prime agricultural land, both in Riverside County and California as a whole, is of strong concern to policy makers at all levels of government. In attemptingto address this concern, the State of California has enabled Williamson Act Agricultural Preserves (Government Code § 51200 et ; eQ.), Agricultural Protective Zoning (Government Code § 6647 4), and Right--to-Farm taws (Civil Code § 3480, el. s= ) . The Report of the California Commission on Local Governance for the 21 st Century strongly encourages all LAFCOs to adopt strong aricultural land protection policies. The Riverside County General Plan notes that agricultural production is the County's largest industry In order to arrest the decline'ofproductive agricultural lands, the Riverside County General Plan provides that 306 039 Ri4Yl1BJi K'H11i�6W LAW OFFICES Of BEST BEST & KRI G,ER t-uP Honorable Chairman and Commission Members City. of L.a Quinta Planning Commission June 26, 2001 Page 3 "The county will encourage the retention and enhancement of existing productive agricultural lands by requiring compatible land uses adjacent to them In *some cases, the protection of existing productive agricultural lands will require that proposed land uses near such agricultural lands provide buffer areas adjacent to agricultural areas to create a transition between agricultural uses and bigher intensity development." (General Plan, p 378.) "The county shall utilize land use buffers between existing productivr agricultural lands and.other, incompatible land uses. Buffer requirements will be established on a community basisand be reflective of the unique conditions that exist in that area " (General Plan, p 3 80 ) "lncornpa 'ible urban development adjacent to productive agricultural land shall be discouraged." (General Plan, p.384 ) . "Buffer areas roust be provided between existing productive agricultural land uses and other, incompatible land uses, when necessary" (General Plan, p 384.) lie Waters will object to annexation into the City. of La Quinta unless sinvlar buffer-arra requirements are imposed on adjoining development. The Coral Mountain Project was required to provide a 500 fl. buffer along its southem boundary to buffer residential development from an adjoining vineyard. The Waters respectfully request that similar buffers be required for residential projects adjoining their vineyard Furthermore, they request that notice ofthe impacts of agricultural operations be required to be given to potential purchasers of residences within one-quaner (1 /4) mile of the vineyard The CFQA documentation submitted to support the proposed re -zoning and general plan amendment is inadequate because it fails to ackn6wledge and address. potential impacts of development that is contemplated by this application Neither the staffrepon nor the environmental assessment honestly describe the nature of contemplated project . Both refer only to the re -zoning and general plan amendment Neither acknowledges that this is the first step in a process contemplated to result in the extension ofthe Country Club of the Desert project into The annexation area. CEQA requires that the environmental impact analysis define the project as broadly as possible to incorporate the whole contemplated project (Citizens Association for Sensible kwvsvt uMu 84a 040 L.Avv OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP Honorable Chairman and Commission Members City of La Quinta Planning Commission June 26, .2001 Page 4 Development of Bishop Area Y. County of lrty_o (1985) 172 Cal. App 3d 151).. CF-QA does not allow a project to be studied in smaller segments that might diminish project impacts In this case, the general plan amendment and re -zoning of this area is obviously a pre -cursor to the development proposal that will identify the actual project The environmental assessment attempts to defer the site's specific environmental analysis to the project approval stage. Segmenting the envirownenial review process into two stages in this manner is not permincd.. lfthe actual project is known at this time, the project must be identified and its unpacts analy2ed if no Specific project is contemplated, then no general plan amendment and zone change is needed at this time Because of the segmented wTure of environmental review. the project's potential impacts on agricultural lands are underestimated The proposed extension of the Country Club of the Desen, as well as other proposed and approved residential projects in the area, will have a substantial impact on existing agricultural uses. These impacts need to be studied and addressed in a comprehensive manner. The pending general plan update process by the City of La Quinta provides the appropriate planning vehicle.. This project should be deferred until the issues of agricultural preservation can be addressed in a comprehensive manner throughout the whole area. Similarly, the project contemplated by this application will inevitably exacerbate the groundwater overdraft situation. Everyone is aware that the groundwater basin underlying this area is in an overdraft situation 'Water levels are lowering in wells throughout the area The Coachella Valley Water District is in the process ofdeveloping and implementing plans to address the overdraft, but to date, there is no resolution in place Necessary additions] sources of water have not been.. acquired, and their acquisition will become increasingly more difiic.Wi as urban, ag;ncultural and environmental -uses compete -or California's diminishing water supply. Furt�herrnorea to date, there is no established way to recharge the ground water to the extent that win be necessary to offset the K demands of increased residential construction In a recent meeting of the Planning; Commission of Riverside County, the Riverside County hydrologist acknowledged that a similar project, the Coral Mountain Project, would inevitably exacerbate the ground water overdraft. The residential.project contemplated byihis re -Zoning would have a similar impact Until this problem is acknowledged and "addressed in a comprehensive manner, it is bad policy, and legally impermissible, to continue to approve residential projects in a piecemeal fashion, without full CEQA review. The Waters respectfully request that this application be put on hold pending a comprehensive y ; review of asticuhural preservation and groundwater issues If the City is intent on going forward at this point, at a minimum, the Waters request that the City enter into a pre -annexation agreement that guaiantees the current agricultural zoning for their property indefinitely; that an appropriate 500 foot 308 041. LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP Honorable Chairman and Commission Members City of La Quinta Planning. Commission June 26, 2001 Page S. buffer be required from any adjoining residential uses;. and that developers be required to give purchasers of residences within one -quarter (114) mile notice regarding the potential impacts of agricultural operations Robert W Hargi&' bf 8&ST RESTIFG R LLP RV1 H.dm cc. William and Madeline Waters AI PMNR WM S46W i 309 ' 042 JUL-7-0-2001 111:59A FROM: TO:97771233 a BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS LAWYERS ARTHUR L. LITTLEWORTN• WILLIAM R, DcWOLFE• g1CHAR0 T. ANDERSON, JOHN D. WANLIN• JOMN E. BROWN MICHAEL T RIDOELL- MIC"ACL GRANT* FRANCIS %) SAUM• OEORGE M. REYES• WILLIAM W. FLOYD. JR GREOORY L. HAROKE KENDALL H MAOVET CLARK H. ALSOP DAVID J. ERWIN• MICHAEL J. ANOCLSON• DOUOLAS S. PHILLIP5' ORCOORY K. WILKINSON GENE TANAKA VICTOR L. WOLF DANIEL E. OLIVIER HOWARD B. GOLDS 5TEPHEN P. OEITSCH JOHN R. ROTTSCHAEFER MARTIN A. MUELLER J. MICHAEL SUMMEROUR SCO77 C. SMITH JACK 6. CLARKE. JR. BRIAN M. LEWIS' 9RAOLlY E.NEUFELO PETER M OARMACK JEFFREY V. DUNN STEVEN C OIBAUN• ERIC L. 0AAHER- OENNI3 M. COTA P N. W F PEARCE ROBERT W HARGREAVES C. MICHAEL COw ETT BRUCE W OEACM ARLENE PRATER MARK A. EASTER MICHELLE OVELLETT£ KEVIN K. RANDOLPH CYNTMIA M. GLRMANO MARGUERITE S. STRAND KYLE A. SNOW JAMES 9 GILPIN KIM A. BYRENS DEAN DERLETM SONIA RUBIO CARVALHO JOMN O. PINKNEY PIERO C OALLARDA DWIGHT M. MONTOOMERY RICHARD T. EOOER FRANKLIN C. ADAMS WILLIAM WOOD MERRILL WILLIAM D DAMLINO. JR. •A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92270 BEANIE L. WILLIAMSON O HENRY WELLES DAVID J HANCOCK HAYLEY C. IWCTCR30M ROGER K. CRAWFORD SHAWN D. HAGERTY JAMES P MOARIS KEVIN T. COLLINS DAVIO W. NEWMAN JENNIFCR T BUCKMAN MARIA E. OLCSs GLEN W. PRICE MARYMICHACL MCLEOD JAMES R. TOUCHSTONE STEVEN M.ANDERSON ROBERT L. PATTERSON BRYAN K. SENARD JAMEE L, RAYMOND PAULA C.P DE SOUSA LYSA M. SALTZMAN MARCO A. MARTINEZ JONH F. WALSH JEFFRY F. FERRE OORINE LAWRCNCE'NUONES ALISON O. ALPERT KRISHAN S. CHOPRA JAMES C. TURNCY MICHAEL O. DOLIDA KAREN M FREEMAN JOHN D HIGGINBOTHAM MALA.THY SUBRAMANIAN LIST MESNREKY CRAIG IA MARSHALL JCrrPCY S. BALLINGER M. THERESA TDLENTINO THERESA E ANTONUCCI MELISSA W. woo E. SCAN ARTNER TRAHO T. TITAN CARMEN MARTINEZ 09 OSABA TRACIE PHAN JASON C. OLES3 WILLIAM J. PRIEST OANIEL i- AOBERTS MARY BETM COBURN LINDSEY A. COTTAM OANICLLE E GERB£R CHRISTINA A. HENRY CLISC L- CHENO KRISTIN C VARNER TAN B. TRAN DANIEL E. KATZ RAYMOND BEST I 1 866. 1957) JAMES M. KRIEGER (1 O 1 3. 1 973) EUGENE BEST 1 1 e03. 1 Oa RECEIVED July 3, 2001 o JUG- 3� �� P:2112 74 VOID HIOhWAT I 1 1 SPITE 2O0 INDIAN WELLS, CALIFORNIA 92210 POST OFFICE BOX I _%6g0 PALM OCSERT. CALIFORNIA 02=35 TELEPHONE (760) SOB 2e I I 7ELECOPIRN 4760) 340 4e9B BBKL^W.COM Of COUNSEL CNAISTOPMCR L CARPENTER MICHAEL O_ HARRIS• ANNE T THOMAS DONALD F. ZIMMER- CMRISTINA L OVER D BRIAN RCIOER KIRK W. SMITH OINA O. HARRIS WARREN B. O►vEN ROBEAT J HANNA DANIEL G. STCVENSO►I OFFICES IN RIVERSIDE (909) 6486 1 A30 ONTARIO 10090 9o% 636.0 SAN DIEGO (6191 SL-p-1 300 ORANGE 1714) 939-SO40 Re: Environmental Assessment 2001-418, General Plan Amendment 2001-077, and .done Change 2001-100 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: This letter is in addition to my letter of June 26, 2001 which I understand has been provided to you as part of the Council Agenda packet. In the interest of brevity, I will not repeat the information in the letter, but add the following additional information in opposition to the proposed environmental assessment, general plan amendment, and zone change. I. The Proposed Annexation is Incompatible With Continuation of Commercial Agricultural Operations Due to concerns regarding the impact of annexation into the City on their ongoing agricultural operations, the Waters request that their property not be included within the annexation area. Until such time as the City ofLa Quinta develops agricultural zoning and policies and standards to preserve the integrity of agricultural operations, the Waters feel that their vineyard is best left in the County, where such uses are welcome and protected. RMPUH\RWM1184956 310 043 07-30-01 11:49 RECEIVED FROM: P•02 _TI IL-:0-2001 41: c-5aA FROM: TO: 9 7 7 71233 P: 31/ 12 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER L.LP Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council July 3, 2001 Page 2 Additionally, the Waters request that if the annexation of the remaining property is to go forward, that a 500 foot buffer be required between residential housing developments and ongoing commercial agricultural operations, and that residential owners within one -quarter mile be given notice of the agricultural operations. As Ms. Waters testified before the Planning Commission, commercial agricultural operations are incompatible with residential uses. The use of heavy machinery and helicopters at all hours of the day and night, commercial pesticides, organic fertilizers, and bird bombs will undoubtedly be a source of constant irritation to neighboring seniors. If adequate buffers and notices are not provided, conflicts between neighbors will inevitably arise. The City cannot in good conscience, or as a matter of good planning, allow residential neighborhoods to be developed immediately adjacent to the commercial agricultural operations. II. The Environmental Assessment and Proposed Negative Declaration Fail to Acknowledge Significant Impacts As noted in my June 26`h letter, the CEQA documentation prepared to support the application is inadequate because it fails to fully acknowledge and address the cumulative impacts of the proposed project and current and likely future projects. I . Loss Of Agricultural Land Is A Significant Impact. The checklist incorporated into Environmental Assessment 2001-418, with respect to agricultural resources, states: "a. Convert prime farmland, unique farmland, No impact. or farmland of statewide importance (farmland) to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for No impacat. agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c. * Involve other changes in the existing Less than significant impact. environment which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of farmland to non-agricultural use?" The addendum for the environmental assessment states: "Il.(c) Portions of the annexation area have been in agriculture for sometime. Annexation of the land, and the imposition of land use designations, will not impact the agricultural use of the land. In the 311 RMPUHIR WHtI 84938 044 07-30-61 11:49 RECEIVED FROM: P.03 _ UL-30-2001 -12: OOP FROM: TO: 97771233 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council July 3, 2001 Page 3 long term, however, the land will be developed in low density residential land uses. This development will result in the loss of 240 acres of agriculture in the Valley. The land is not currently under Williamson Act contract, and as an isolated parcel surrounded by approved residential development, does not represent a significant agricultural parcel. The loss of this land will be less than significant." P:4/12 To the contrary, preservation of prime agricultural land is an important concern of the State of California and the County of Riverside. Nevertheless, the environmental assessment dismisses the loss of 240 acres as "insignificant". Furthermore, it became clear during the Planning Commission hearing that a substantial part of the annexation is subject to Williamson Act contract. The loss of these lands cannot be considered "insignificant". The City of La Quinta has no policies regarding agricultural preservation, no agricultural zoning, and no standards for mitigating land use incompatibilities between agricultural and residential uses. Unless the City plans in a comprehensive manner for agricultural preservation, it will become increasingly difficult to continue agricultural operations within the City, and loss of prime farmland will become inevitable. This cumulative impact cannot be considered "insignificant". 2. The Project Will Negatively Impact Groundwater Resources. With respect to hydrology and water quality, the checklist states: "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. (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells that drop to'a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted.)." Less than significant impact. The addendum acknowledges that "all development adds to demand for groundwater". However, as the project will be required to meet the City's water -conservation standards, the EA concludes that "these mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant. level". Once again, the assessment fails to view the issues in the larger context ofcumulative impacts. Residential development of the annexation area will inevitably place an additional burden on the 1WUBU2 WK 194951 311 045 n7-:iA-A1 11:50 RECEIVED FROM: P.04 TI_I 0 -001 12: 01P FROM: TO: 9 i 771c33 P: 5/ 12 LAW OFFICES of BEST BEST S KRIEGER LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council July 3, 2001 Page 4 overdrafted water table. Under current standards, residential uses are served by water pumped from ground water. The engineering firm for the nearby Coral Mountain Project analyzed the water supply demands of that project, which is a country club/residential development similar in nature to what can be anticipated in the annexed area. They calculated that the development would contribute an additional average demand of 1.8 acre feet per acre per year on the groundwater. (See PACE letter dated rune 71 20001, attached as Exhibit "1 "). Assuming that the proposal now before the City ultimately generates a similar demand, there would be an additional demand of 430 acre feet (1.8 x 240) on the groundwater. Assuming an average porosity of25%, the water table in the vicinity could drop an additional 7 feet per year. That additional demand, when added to the additional demands imposed by other approved and projected projects, will have a significant impact on the groundwater basin. Both Mrs. Waters, and other neighboring properties, have reported that the water levels in their wells have been dropping for years. The draft Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (which is available at tv,7 v.cvNvd.orc) states that groundwater demand in the lower valley currently exceeds recharge by 41,700 acre feet per year (page 3-17), and that groundwater levels have decreased 60 feet or more in soma parts of the lower valley (page 2). (See also CVWD Annual review 2000, excerpt attached as Exhibit "2", regarding the overdraft.) The draft Water Management Plan states that "it is clear that the continued decline of groundwater levels is unacceptable" (page 2-3). The draft Plan notes that "the continued overdraft will have serious consequences for the Coachella Valley". Short term impacts include increased groundwater pumping costs, and the cost ofdeepening wells and installing larger pumps. "Continued decline of groundwater levels could result in a substantial and possibly irreversible degradation of water quality in the groundwater basins" (page 1-2). Areas of the lower Coachella Valley are already experiencing subsidence caused by excessive groundwater pumping. The dropping ofthe water level in the aquifer can cause compaction such that the capacity of the aquifer is diminished. Even if additional water becomes available, the ability of the aquifer to store water will be diminished. The draft Water Management Plan notes that the Coachella Valley does not currently have water rights to imported water sufficient to satisfy its current and future demands. While CVWD has done an outstanding job in attempting to acquire additional sources, those efforts have not yet reached fruition. The ability of the Coachella Valley to acquire the needed additional sources of water imports is not assured as water situation in California becomes evermore critical, with urban, agriculture and the environment competing for additional sources at the same time that the State is R.WUB\R WH118a95s 313 046 A7-RR-Al 11:51 RECEIVED FROM: P.05 J IL-.3fi-Lt_01 -12:01P FROM: TO:97771233 P:6/1L LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council July 3, 2001 Page 5 under directive from the Secretary of Interior to reduce its use of Colorado River Water by nearly 1,000,000 acre feet annually. Even if CVWD is able to acquire the necessary additional supplies, it is not clear that the aquifer underlying the lower valley can be successfully recharged. As noted in the draft Management Plan, "the maximum amount of potential recharge in the lower valley is not known at this time" (page 5-15), With the approval of this project, and other similar projects, the current overdraft of the groundwater will be exacerbated. Water levels in wells will drop faster. The long term damage to the aquifer is unknown, and the ability to acquire resources to recharge the aquifer is uncertain. Consequently, the incremental increase on groundwater overdraft caused by the proposed project cannot be considered "less than significant.". 3. Traffic Impacts Are Not Acknowledged. With respect to traffic generation, the environmental assessment notes: "The ultimate development of the subject property will result in fewer trips than under the County General Plan Designation, insofar as the City Land Use Designation proposed does not allow as many residential units as does the County. Furthermore, the build -out ofthe project will result in improvements on both Avenue 52 and Monroe which will improve circulation in the area. The impact of build -out of the annexation area is not expected to be significant." The assessment once again fails to acknowledge the true impact. The land is currently in agriculture. The proposed general plan amendment, zoning and annexation is*intended to facilitate residential development. That residential development will undoubtedly generate more traffic than the current open space, sod farm, and vineyard that currently occupy the area. The magnitude of that impact needs to be evaluated. That impact, in conjunction with anticipated projects in the vicinity, will undoubtedly be significant unless mitigated. 4. Cumulative Impacts Are Not Addressed. In Section VII, Mandatory Findings of Significance, the checklist provides: "c. Does the project have impacts that are Less than significant. individually limited, but cumulatively considerable ("cumulatively, considerable" means that incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)?" RNffLr$lRW1T184938 314 047 07-30-01 11:51 RECEIVED FROM: P•06 J IL-325-`001 •1?: t 2P FROM: TO: 9777123.3 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council July 3, 2001 Page 6 The City of La Quinta is one of the fastest growing cities in the nation. In the last few years, the City and County have approved a number of developments on the eastern boundary of the City that encroach into established agricultural areas, including Country Club of the Desert, Citrus, PIantation, Norman Course, Travertine, Quarry, Khol Ranch, etc. Thousands of additional housing units have already been approved within several miles of the proposed project, and thousands more will likely be approved in the future. As noted above, the residential development facilitated by the current project will have negative impacts on prime farmland, groundwater overdraft, and traffic. Each additional project imposes additional impacts on these scarce and precious resources. The cumulative impact of these projects on the preservation ofagricultural land and the groundwater basin have not been assessed. Both the City of La Quinta and the County of Riverside are currently undergoing general plan update processes. The City of La Quinta has announced its intention to plan the entire area along its eastern boundary as far east as the Khol Ranch. The County is also updating its plan for this area. Before any additional developments are approved in this area, it makes sense that the issues of agricultural preservation and groundwater protection are studied in a comprehensive manner so that the cumulative impacts can be assessed, alternatives considered and mitigation strategies developed. 5. Mitigation Measures Are Not Implemented. The Environmental Assessment finds that the proposed project will cause significant impacts on biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, and noise, unless mitigated. The attached addendum specifies a number of mitigation measures. Staff proposes the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. However, there does not appear to be any mechanism specified for implementing the proposed mitigation measures. As there is no specific project proposed at this time, there is no project on which to impose the proposed conditions. Neither the general plan amendment nor the zone change are conditioned on implementation of any of the mitigation measures (which would likely be inappropriate in any case). Consequently, there is no effective way to effectuate the mitigation measures, and adoption of a mitigated negative declaration is inappropriate. M. Conclusion The Environmental Assessment assumes that residential development of the annexation property is inevitable and that the incremental loss of farmland is not significant. This will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. If affirmative steps are not taken to protect agricultural uses, farms and equestrian uses will be forced from the area. If La Quinta intends to develop in a manner that is consistent with preserving farm and equestrian uses for property owners that want to continue to pursue those uses, which uses in the past have contributed significantly both to the local economy and the desert quality of life; then appropriate planning needs to occur now. RI►01PUB\RNV"K184958 313 07-30-01 11:52 RECEIVED FROM: ' � • P-07 JUL 12:03P FROM: T0: J7771233 -F: 8-' 12 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council July 3, 2001 Page 7 In order to protect the Waters vineyard, the Waters respectfully request that their property not be included within the annexation area, and that appropriate buffer and notice mitigation measures be imposed to offset the inevitable land use incompatibility. RWH: dm cc: William and Madeline Waters RNIPUHUtA"184958 316 049 07-30-01 11:53 RECEIVED FROM: P.08 JAIL-3T**1-2F,101 •12:03P FROM: TO:97771233 P:9/12 �vt . ✓r ---4 r —1 .. .r✓ . — .r—. -. ../.640V.d 1 v%Jwr- •./yl 1. GId r %J&Oi t1{ • J 1 f 1 1 rc 08 19/�d0i 12:36 FA3 700 3983071 Ellen LtuTd 'frover Wuu;, 8- 7-cl; 3:33p":PAcX ;7Tse;8.3922 r 2i aac�i�ic :n►v>rr�c�D CML MNo»uIZIEP11"Os In c_ 7soe =RGETCVM LANE ► UNnNGMN BEACH CAuFa Na 22647 TIEL: 714-643.573.8 • FAX 714.�48-�� June 7, 2001 W. Dave Twc& Shea Noma fbr Acdve Adulb 41-US BOrr tW5114 Stt~ 121 Pabo Dssem CA 92211 Re-, Ccm3 Mounaai mITrilojw at La Quafa Project 073298P Tract 03 0023 Reepoom to PU=ning Co - iioa Cow,=ut No. 1 RzgardtnS WA= BwOuram Dear Mr. Twedit W, bawv ruviowed the propowd proj=t wau2 dmAWs and grepmmvd *c following eons+rmPlivo urn dns(j►sis: . rouble water 1k;w"d: (From Ag utfer) 1.203 S ingio Fenny Aotive A" Rrsidamm 40.00 Sgvam Fact of Ch6baaor, ,Awouity Otter sad mini Uses Tout -- l Sin& Fso►jiyUnits (at US $airs per dlb► Perm*) AMMAL DFM em: 3o Y=T POTA= WATFA lgme'Potable 3oa.anda {From C-A-p-i " Golf course & Landreape Inisatiaa 11 t acres not sequ ag 6 ivedon 75 acres am miatenmcods lat+dstape ir:ig 08 Tots( —1 95 acres (at 90 mehcs per Ym) Axe -UAL DPI 1,342 ACRE 1 T NCW P4'1LASLr INA IR Exhibit oso 07-30-01 11:53 RECEIVED FROM: p•09 JUL-30-2001.12:03P FROM: TO:977T1233 P:10/12 ..,.. . — . -... ft-W ....�_� ._,-,c.r, r nn ivu. • .j1vj00 (ooD.-_ juts. 4eb ewol 01 : J n-" H3 - W 10/2001 12:50 FAX 760 2883971 _ilea Llord Troyer W1)U" b- 7-0 t : a : B30m; pact ; 7 - 0l..86922 • S/ e Mr. Dow Twadt ducat i, 2001 TrAW at La Quirta Page 2 of 2 As iad'►catod zhwc and � slsvw� oa the a�tbad gaph: ttic project aauuOl �►►atet d�md f� � aquifw is 391 awc tat aad will use 1,391 sass Feet of C.A.P. Wtor for ariVV*A and nna-ponbte uaa9. . We hive seviowod tho Mamb 27, 2001 IV= from CVWD to W. Dan Puk Fq rdin$ the muives - w achy to supplY wau b tiie PmPcmm Prcdgc�4 sad as sussed m the lets 'fie w cent duethnrw a s�fcfeni Wly of woter to dds ogv* to acratmadwv tds *vdzpm w raid 09 mt of OW VaUey for �rimty yscdr.' ' CVWD has p,C:pnrcd a draft CTro=d Watct lampoamc Fiala to &va nd 34WAIMU WQ=dwWr and surfece wam vzop for edsdna Ltd faurc wsUW dMand within the Vsllry. PLM 0(ddS :P'= provides for and mandates wsxer Mifi`gstiost and water c mvira umbnklues, and t=�oas, j and propv d developmwft. Nwu=cs cmdsziet s vr3i apply is the proposed Trilogy at La Qah to Praia= su.b as: I . Mcdrn Lae cf CAP. %os1cr fcr B1iPdoo: a In addition to the uae of GAP. wamrr #ar IIrivdion of fbc proposed golf comae, the pso jest will nrrig� ccmturoa arrc, roadway sac smg14-f msly residence front ywd laaduaping whip C. A.P. water. 2. Coif Course turf arcs limisatii (mend vse of Wfive Warn caaserti 4 v01=dzM Ingo" tiourso sad o+hrr ({awry medians, vo�cn=a areas and nsidacte) landscaped art 3. Ust of wamr ceuving plumbing ftxttuls (shower heads, mills. a=.). In addhinn to wrfarming to t= CVWD Water t Plsn via the G)%0v9 w1w con=VW requimn=nts, the proposed petied wit: raquire less potable waver thm a cmventiansl sna-age restricted community by virtu of the UW=MxjW8 r"1da9. 1 _ Smal ter r 4Acnces (appmrim i*ly 2,000 to 2,200 squcs fWt hQrncs) with $ww plumbing fnc m6 pia c=vccev isl non -age :eark lad coaavvait cs- 2. R.edumd per residence potable crane: dsmaad band upon tbt MMaUer per capita f=lily unit esrimate of 1.9 peoqj1e ptr ho=. We w,ZI aotfin+m am review =a ptmmi &dMvnal findings at the June 20, 2001 hcaring and make caraa}Yes aysilshk for quwe;*W sad clarlftcations at the: tints. FACWIC ADVANCED CIVIL ENGMEMG, EqC- �4�0� E; SIO�I Mz& L Krebs, PS, i is P�ssideztt � � '�G >k Ev 3=°Y ':19329�L3-� intser�tv+eiLrtrsrrlDutl�'w�dt IV 6-7-01.doc �J . CNIL '! 10QFF c�� 051. 07-30-01 11:53 RECEIVED FROM: P.10 jUL-30-2001'12:04P FROM: - 06,110/2001 12:57 FA-1 760 39Ua?l Ellen LICYd Trover a- 17-0 1 : 3 ! 63004; PACE TO:977712331 P: 11/12' Of."S. C-Li 'c.%jcj.L M1.-Oxor-1-1 f4 hm U 1) 'i :7i49464922 tau amrA cated (no w2tor) dtnnn-house 4'Sums hing dirAlopmertt Uwjaarsa w area 223.2 scra potable supply using urn 203junft nit am IM&W CaVpownfty addIdional WQ** acmeve "40 JaCM of u6t& 84usw 20 unhe tat a dluwftd Un As I= total pcftble we 391 AW p*Wblo UseNnit area 1.9 AF1wf*r_ non-patabis supply IrT%afon ram jcif =Ume turf area -.7-7 addhicral REN 12mon area us ted Gc a 147J mm lawn wn etreld landamphq Itotal rmrj-pcftbJib use 1 391 AF/yr nem-PotabwUnIt area 4.7 AFI&cWyr 0 400 a 319 052 07-36-61 11:54 RECEIVED FROM: P-11 JUL-3L'�1-2001*112:04P FROM: 12:36 F-e TOO 3963S71 T.rover 0- 7-01; a'SZ=w;vACE T0:9-71771233 P:121,12 �Uuu� 33 c I OD 320 053 11:54 RECEIVED FROM: P-12 ATTACHMENT #2 Planning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 design articulation. ROLL CALL: AYES: Comrrfi6sioners Abels, Butler, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. OES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Comm' ioner Kirk. Commissioner Kirk rejoine44he Commission. B. Environmental Assessment 2001-418, General Plan Amendment 2001- 077, and Zone Change 2001-100: a request of NRI, La Quinta Limited Partnership for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, approval of a pre -annexation General Plan designation from County designation 2B to Low Density Residential and a Zone Change from County designation A-1-20 to Low Density Residential for the property bounded on the north by Avenue 521 on the east by Monroe Street, on the south by Avenue 53, and on the east by the existing City limits. 1 . Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Community Development . Director Jerry Herman 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 Abels asked staff to confirm that the Ms. Waters would be able to maintain her agricultural operation as it now exists. Staff stated that is correct unless the operation ceases to operate for over a year. In that case it may not. If, however, the City adopts an Agricultural designation and zones this property as Agricultural, then the use can continue forever. 3. Commissioner Kirk asked what legal counsel's opinion on the letter received from Ms. Waters attorney in regard to the City's CEQA documentation and process. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated that in regard to the allegations that they would not be able to change crops or replant, that is obviously incorrect under the City's Zoning Code. With regard to the issue of a proposed residential development, at this time there is no residential project application. At such time as an application is received and is being processed, it would be appropriate at that time to formulate mitigation measures that would provide notice to prospective property owners in this location. At this time it would b821. 054 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC6-26-01.wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 premature. In regard to the Agricultural issues, it is her understanding there are no Williamson Act contracts according to the environmental documents. Community Development Director Jerry Herman clarified that since the environmental document had been prepared, it had been learned that two parcels did have the Williamson Act contract, but applications have been applied for, for non -renewal. This has to be completed before the property can be annexed. Commissioner Kirk asked how the Williamson Act applies here in regard to Ms. Waters property. Staff stated he did not know if Ms. Waters property was under the Williamson Act. Commissioner Kirk asked if the statements in the letter in regard to the overdraft issue is it also not right. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated that was correct. 4. Commissioner Butler stated that during the public hearing process of the Country Club of the Desert, these issues were addressed at that time by Ms. Waters. Staff noted that when the Country Club of the Desert was approved by Council it was conditioned to inform property owners of this use. There is no application on this site and therefore there is no way of conditioning it at this time as this is only a pre -zoning application only. 5. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to identify Ms. Waters parcel. Staff did so. Commissioner Tyler asked if the action being taken by the Commission at this meeting would place any restrictions on her property in regard to what she could do. Staff stated that it had been the direction of the City Council to preserve the agricultural and equestrian uses. Staff is drafting language to do this in the General Plan update. Commissioner Tyler asked what would determine the zoning and her uses in the interim period. Staff stated this preannexation zoning and General Plan designation has no affect on Ms. Water's property until such time as LAFCO officially annexes the property. These applications have to go to the City Council for public hearing. The applications are then prepared and submitted to LAFCO with the appropriate fees. LAFCO normally takes four to six months to process an application and at the end of that time the zoning would be in place. This could take up to a year and a half before the overlay was in place. Until that time, the only restriction on her property would be that she could not add or enlarge any agricultural buildings. The residential units are not affected. If the Commission directed staff to do so, staff could prepare an amendment to the Zoning Code r? regard to nonconforming uses. 055 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC6-26-01.wpd 5 Planning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 6. Chairman Robbins asked if the City had any a agricultural zoning. Staff stated that at this time there is no such zoning, and therefore could not annex this property in with an agricultural zoning designation. Chairman Robbins stated his concern was that this property owner was being asked to go on faith that the City will do this. Is the entire area being considered for annexation under farming. Staff noted it is mostly sod farming, equestrian, or farming uses. Chairman Robbins noted that if the land is developed, the water usage would be the same whether it is being farmed or has residential uses. 7. Commissioner Kirk asked if Ms. Water's property could be removed from the annexation area. Staff stated it could be done, but LAFCO prefers an annexation area to have squared off boundaries, but the final decision is up to LAFCO. Staff noted that if this property is left out of the annexation and decides at a later date to annex into the City, the property owner at that time would be responsible for paying all the fees for the annexation. 8. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Nancy Aaronson, representing NRI, La Quinta Limited Partnership, stated that they and Mr. Debonne own 80% of the annexation area. They currently do not have plans for the site, but do expect their use to be compatible with any agricultural uses. 9. Commissioner Butler asked how the applicant could address the issues raised by Ms. Waters. Ms. Aaronson stated she had briefly read the letter prepared by Ms. Water's attorney, but some of the issues sited as being unique to a farming operation are very much applicable to a golf course operation. They run heavy equipment, machinery, fertilizers, workers coming and going, the application of chemicals, pesticides, very much like a farming operation. In the event they were to develop this site with a golf course, they would be sensitive to the agricultural operation. 10. Commissioner Tyler stated he is aware of the noise issues of a golf course living in close proximity to one. He asked Ms. Aaronson to identify who NRI was in regard to the Country Club of the Desert. Ms. Aaronson stated this is a third partnership with related partners. They are all affiliated. 323 11. Chairman Robbins asked if there was any other public comment. Ms. Waters stated that she lives on a golf course and it is a 056 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC6-26-01.wpd 6 Planning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 different type of operations. Her operation involves a lot of machinery being operated during the middle of the night not just 5:00 or 6:00 in the morning. The chemicals they use are not the same as a golf course operation. In addition, she is concerned that they had to drill down an additional 700 feet to reach ground water as their water source had dried up. Therefore, she is concerned what will happen when the golf courses go in. Her concern is that the neighbors will eventually object to her farming use and she will have problems continuing her farming operation. She would suggest there be a 500-foot buffer between the two uses. She would like to be left out of the annexation. 12. Chairman Robbins stated the Country Club of the Desert will be using canal water which will have no affect on the ground water. They will have domestic wells for people uses. There are farmers who continue to use ground water for farming and this is one of the issues that need to be addressed. The overdraft of the water in this location of the Valley is due to the water for people to drink and for farmers who chose to use ground water for farming. In the overall picture, the site is better off with residential uses than farming. 13. Commissioner Butler explained that pre -annexation does not take away Ms. Water's rights to farm. Ms. Waters stated her concern is that when people do move in, they will be before the Council complaining about all the things that she is required to do to farm her property. 14. Commissioner Tyler asked if Ms. Water's concerns were with the impact her farming operation would have on the potential future residents. Ms. Waters stated yes, and those issues raised in the letter written by her attorney, Mr. Hargraves. Commissioner Tyler stated that whether or not she is annexed, the project will be built, and the issues she is concerned with will still exist. 15. Ms. Gayle Cady, 82-831 Avenue 54, stated this is the first time she has heard any mention of the possibility of an agricultural zone in the City of La Quinta. The parcel in question is in a prime equestrian as well as agricultural area. She does not know if it is true or not that an agricultural use would use the same amount of water as a residential use. Due to the location of this site next to the polo clubs and Desert Horse Circuit, we have the largest conglomerate of horses west of the Mississippi. This needs to be taken into consideration because the smell of horse manure will 324 057 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC6-26-01.wpd 7 Planning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 become an issue to these residents. She is also concerned about the noise ordinance which would not allow tractors to operate at all hours of the night. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated that under City ordinances there are no ordinances regarding agricultural machinery. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated there is a general noise ordinance in the Nuisance Section that says it is a nuisance for a person to make cause, or suffer, or permit to make unnecessary sounds which are physically annoying to persons of ordinary sensitivity, etc. There is a section that pertains to construction specific hours and days for construction noise, but the Code clearly anticipates that existing, nonconforming uses can continue in its intensity, so it is a good argument that the Code would allow the existing levels of noise. If there is an existing use that is established that may create nuisahce effects, if there is residential development coming to that area, it will not be considered a nuisance because it is first in time. 16. Commissioner Tyler stated he was surprised to hear Ms. Cady state that this is the first time she has heard mention of an agricultural overlay. He has attended many of the annexation and General Plan hearings and at each meeting the discussion has been to leave agricultural as it is where it is until the property owner want to make the change. Staff noted this has been the City's direction since annexation first started. Ms. Cady stated she was addressing Chairman Robbins comment directly as she was not aware of a specific zone for agriculture and/or equestrian. In addition, the horse industry brings in approximately $2 million dollars annually to the community. 17. Ms. Ellen Lloyd Trover, 82-150 Avenue 54, noted there is no equestrian overlay mentioned in the draft EIR prepared for the General Plan update. She does not understand the agricultural overlay and she is a retired attorney and does have a little experience in reading legal documents. To her it is premature to define what these things say until they can see the final ordinance is writing. Therefore, she does not know what Ms. Waters would be able to do. It is her understanding in listening to the time table explained by staff, to bring the annexation to LAFCO, but obviously it is unknown what will happen during the hearings before it goes to LAFCO, nor do they know the exact process before LAFCO or disputes that may delay it. Therefore, they are considering an indefinite time that Ms. Waters may have to operate under a system where we do not know whether or not she would be able to change her current operation should she need to 32 059 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC6-26-01.wpd 8 Planning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 modify them to continue her business. Also, we do not know exactly what the overlays will allow. She is concerned about the ground water use in the Valley. If this area is rezoned for Low Density Residential then they are talking about at least a potential for four houses per acre. For Ms. Waters property that would mean four houses that would be using ground water which would be an increase in the demand for more ground water to be used than her one residence uses. She is aware that CVWD has a Water Management Plan, but as she understands it the EIR is not prepared yet. It is a multi -agency plan so who knows how long it will take to get all the agencies into conformity and agreement with this plan or how long it will take to get it adopted and what modifications may take place during the public hearings. If the plan remains as it is written today, it will be the year 2019 before we stabilize the ground water overdraft. She realizes this is not a huge project, but she does realize we have to start looking at every single project and assessing its impact on ground water, because we have to remember we live in the desert and without water we will have nothing here. She is unsure what she is objecting to except the "ifiness" of the project. 18. Commissioner Abels noted that the City is very concerned with water uses. 19. There being no further public comment, Chairman Robbins closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the project for Commission discussion. 20. Commissioner Tyler stated that most of what has been stated is probably beyond what can be decided at this time. 21. Commissioner Butler stated he knows CVWD has taken into consideration the ground water problems in the Valley and are putting in ponds that will regenerate the sources. In considering the applications that are before the Commission, he does not have as many concerns as he will when an application for development is brought before the Commission. 22. Commissioner Abels stated there will be many issues both pro and con in regard to annexation and the Commission will have to address them as they come up. 326 23. Commissioner Kirk stated the issues are not right for consideration 5 until a specific project is proposed. Ms. Water has shown a lot of G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC6-26-01.wpd 9 Planning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 good sense by addressing this at an early stage. Some of her concerns cannot be addressed at this time in regard to conditions which could mitigate those concerns, as there is no application before them for development. He reminded the Commission of another project that was considered by the Commission. There were different, conflicting land uses, but there the property owners of the Low Density Residential were given notice when they bought their property that there would be a condominium project with higher density next to them. They all received the notification and signed off on knowing it would be there. Yet, when that project came before the Commission, they protested the development of the project. Ms. Waters is right, the proposed project will be a wonderful project, and the people buying there will object to the equipment used in her farming operation. Therefore, he does agree that she has a right to be concerned. At the same time, he concurs with Commissioner Butler, development is going to occur whether or not it is in the City or County. There are three options before the Commission: 1) approve the request as proposed; 2) reject it; or 3) approve the request for everything except Ms. Waters property. Therefore, he would suggest that at this time they remove Ms. Waters property from the annexation area. He would caution Ms. Waters that there is an old saying about "being in the tent versus doing something out of the tent". She may want to reconsider this decision. From his perspective he would rather be in the City addressing his neighbors rather than being in another jurisdiction. When she has to come before the Council to request a setback for this project, she will be in the County rather than in the City. She needs to make some strategic decisions. She knows the project will be developed and should be looking at this in how best to approach it. 24. Chairman Robbins stated he has a lot of compassion for Ms. Waters, but what they are considering is an eventual annexation. An annexation in and of itself does not change the land use or any impact on what is currently there. He would agree that Ms. Waters would be better off as part of the City rather than outside the City limits. He would suggest they make a recommendation that the City move forward with the annexation directing staff to start the process of putting the equestrian/agricultural zoning in place. 25. Commissioner Butler asked staff if creating a new zoning would be 3 2 060 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC6-26-01.wpd 10 Planning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 contrary to what they are trying to achieve. Ms. Waters wants to retain her use and it has never been the City's desire to remove the use. Staff stated we do not have an agricultural zone or land use in General Plan or Zoning Code. In order to accomplish what Ms. Waters wants we would have to continue this public hearing and staff would have to create a land use designation and policy for agricultural. Staff would have to create a zoning text amendment for agricultural uses and then schedule those for public hearings before the Commission and City Council. This is the only way her property and use could be made conforming. The other option is to remove her from this annexation and address it when the other annexation is brought forward which may be as much as a year to two years away. Commissioner Butler asked if her property was removed would it have any affect on the proposed annexation. Staff stated it would be submitted to LAFCO for their decision. 26. Chairman Robbins asked if Ms. Waters was the only property owner not included on the application. Staff stated that was correct. 27. Commissioner Abels asked staff to clarify what was before the Commission. Staff explained that what was before the Commission was preannexation zoning and land use. 28. Commissioner Tyler stated the Council has continually reiterated that the City is not actively pursuing annexation. We are reacting to those requesting to be annexed. 29. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-090, recommending to the City Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-418, with the clarification on what properties are within the Williamson Act designation and have been noticed to discontinue. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 328 061 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC6-26-01.wpd 11 Planning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 30. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abets to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-091 recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 2001-077, subject to the findings and the elimination of APN 767-200-01 1. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 31. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abets to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-092 recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change 2001-100, subject to the findings and the elimination of APN 767-200-01 1. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Sidn ADDlication 20001-554; a request of Palm Royale Country Club for appr val of a monument sign to be located at the southeast corner of Washi ton Street and Fred Waring Drive. 1. Cha' man Robbins and Commissioner Tyler excused themselves and 'thdrew from the dias due to a possible conflict of interest due tot a location of their residences in proximity to the project. 1 . Vice Chairm n Abels asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Michele Ram presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy o which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Vice Chairman Abelslasked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Butler a ked staff to clarify what they were recommending in regard t the size of the sign. Staff stated the face is six feet six inches an the base is an additional 18 inches. Planning Manager Christine lorio stated the Code defines the height as being at the grade o the sign. Commissioner Butler asked if lighting was being prop ed. Staff stated it would be externally illuminated with flood lig s. 329 3. Commissioner Kirk asked who approved the original sign. Staff �sn G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC6-26-01.wpd 12 http://w-w-w.farmlandinfo.org/cac/wplwp97-14.htm P � -�tk l Return to Working Paper Series. CENTER FOR AGRICULTURE IN THE ENVIRONMENT r) wt On The Ed e:traym t3$�K Farmlandg Protecting andprograms work? What policies by Jerry Paulson Farmland in southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois was identified by the American Farmland Trust as third of the 20 most threatened farmland regions in the United States in its 1997 report on farmland in the path of development, Farming on the Edge. The rules, practices and attitudes regarding protection of farmland in two counties in southern Wisconsin and two counties in northern Illinois were studied as part of the AFT's review of the effects of suburban sprawl on farmland conversion in the region to determine which policies and programs work and do not work. The four counties that were reviewed were Dane and Waukesha counties in Wisconsin and DeKalb and McHenry counties in Illinois. These four case studies represent two fundamentally different state approaches to protecting farmland, and the full range of development pressures on farmland, from a predominantly urban county to a rural one. The studies show that some policies help to slow down the development of prime farmland in urban growth areas, but that the attitude of local elected officials toward land use planning and development is the primary factor in how well farmland protection policies and programs are implemented. The State of Illinois takes a hands -off approach to local land use decisions. The power to plan and zone the use of land is given entirely to county and municipal officials in Illinois. Municipalities in Illinois also have almost unlimited power to annex land for development. A few state programs and policies encourage farmland preservation, but the ultimate decision on land use is left to the landowner and to the county board or municipality. Wisconsin takes a similar approach to land use planning and zoning, but with greater state -level oversight of local development plans. Wisconsin has a state- wide farmland preservation program that provides tax incentives to landowners who participate in the program and financial assistance to counties and towns to develop farmland preservation plans. But, decisions on rezoning farmland for development are left to local officials to make without any interference by the state. The result is a hodge-podge of land use patterns that reflect each local. ' J 33 11 /20/2001 1:06 Pr 1 of 7 http: iv,�w'w.farrnlandinfo.org cae/wp/wp97-14.htm government's attitudes about the type of growth they want, and how they choose to respond to increasing development pressures. The lack of a o some of coordinated effort to control urban and suburban growth he edgeat risk. the nation's best farmland continues to put farming Illinois: Giving Away the Farm Of all the different programs and policies that promote farmland inances, protection in McHenry and DeKalb counties, county zoning o land use policies and state annexation laws appear to have the most impact on the premature loss of farmland. State laws and policies i uses, Illinois have had little effect on the conversion of far mland with one exception - farmland property assessments. The assessment of farmland based upon its productivity instead of its market value gives farmers and farmland owners a real financial advantage. Theproperty tax cap that applies to McHenry County also helps to keep ttaxes than that, the farmland lower than they otherwise would be. Other Illinois legislature has given away the farm to the whims of local officials. The land use policies and zoning ordinances in both McHenry and DeKalb counties discourage the conversion of prime farmland oto residential uses, but the real test esthe has boards commitment et to come as development protect agriculture in both count y pressure increases. Both McHenry and DeKalb counties have exclusiven Bach agricultural zoning and allow only one new homeon that is Plo forty acres. They both allow rural residential development o judged to be unsuitable for farming because of its sor its ils or slope, s both use for pasture or trees. The land use policies of the two counties direct high density development to muniY cipalities where it can be sesed b public sewer and water. This approach to planning and zoning the a prevented most development in the unincorporated portions o counties. The greatest threat to farmland in McHenry County and DeKalboCounty is the rush by municipalities to annex land for development municipal officials will agree that residential developmentncreased does not pay its own way in taxes collected for the services demanded. nd commercial retail sales bring added tax revenues into city coffers, control over development usually follows more homes. Gaining il stores along major highways and at strategic locations for reta intersections, is one reason given for aggressive municipal annexations policies. For example, the village of Lake in the Hills, in McHenry Cal tax, was base. landlocked by other towns on three sides, with to annex land all the way Several years ago it initiated a concerted effort to secure an area for to Illinois Route 47, almost four 1ma ee Was able to annex more than commercial development. The v g 2,500 acres and is now the fastest growing suburb in northernIllinois.ls. According to recent U.S. Census data, Lake in the Hills' P 8 6 to 16,889 increased by 186 percent between 1990 and 1996 331 11 /20/2001 1:06 2of7 http:i/ww-%,.farmlandinfo.orgicae/%%p/wp97-14.htm people respectively. Other municipalities, like the Village of Algonquin next door to Lake in the Hills, have taken a more deliberate approach to contain development. The village negotiated boundary agreements with its neighbors so it can take its time about annexations, and is phasing in development according to an overall plan that attempts to balance residential and commercial land uses. This strategy also allows the village to get the developers to pay for needed infrastructure improvements through the use of recapture agreements, Tax Increment Financing and other financing methods. The City of DeKalb has adopted a similar perspective on planning and development. The city's land use plan focuses on development of vacant land already annexed into the city. Any further annexations are to be made for deliberate purposes to balance the tax base. The plan is compatible with the county's goals to protect farmland and encourage compact development, a good example of city -county planning. But, with prime farmland stretching to the horizon in every direction, the City of DeKalb has no natural limits on how much farmland it can annex. The fate of farmland in the remaining unincorporated areas of McHenry and DeKalb counties is left to the county board in each county. The greatest pressure facing McHenry County is keeping property taxes down while paying for the increased cost of the services it provides to county residents. The prevailing attitude of the McHenry County Board is that keeping land as farmland costs less in services than rezoning it for residential use, but bringing in new businesses to the county provides more tax revenues without a demand for increased services. This was the primary reason that county officials did everything in their power to bring the Motorola cellular phone plant to McHenry County. The plant added more than $15,000,000 to the assessed value of the county in 1996, the first year of operation. This number will more than double when the plant is finished. The trick is how to provide the necessary work force for new businesses without increasing demands for residential development. So far, no one has perfected this balancing act. Soon after the Motorola plant was approved, the City of Harvard annexed 830 acres of prime farmland to provide housing for Motorola employees. The changes in McHenry County's zoning ordinance and land use policies make it easier to rezone farmland for scattered residential development. It can be expected that more farmland will be converted to rural residential uses in unincorporated areas as demand for this type of housing increases, and as more farmers decide to retire or to move out of the county. DeKalb County has gone in the other direction, making it more difficult to rezone farmland for scattered rural home sites, and denying requests to rezone land in agricultural areas. 3 3' 3 of 7 11 /20/2001 1:06 PM http:/iwww.farmlandinfo.org/cae/wp�wp97-14.htm The cost of providing sewer and water to newly annexed lands has slowed down the conversion of farmland somewhat. Because these expansions are often financed by the use of revenue bonds paid off by user fees instead of taxes, they are not subject to property tax caps and do not require referendums. The policy adopted by the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission that attempts to limit the premature conversion of prime farmland through the Facility Planning Area amendment process has had very little impact in McHenry County. The final decision on FPA expansions is made by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, and the IEPA almost never denies a permit for expansion of a sewage treatment plant or public water supply. Recently, several townships in McHenry County have appointed planning commissions and adopted comprehensive plans that encourage protecting farmland. Townships have very limited power to influence zoning and annexations, but do provide a forum for discussion of the issues and options available to landowners. Because this is a new area for townships in Illinois, the ultimate role that they can play in helping to protect farmland in the county is yet to be seen. Wisconsin: A Prescription for Sprawl The multi -layered land use planning and zoning structure in Wisconsin creates a political system that is a prescription for sprawling residential developments into rural areas. Both the county and the town boards in Dane and Waukesha counties have the power to plan and zone, creating the opportunity for conflicts in how land is used. Any planning efforts that may threaten a town board's local control over land use decisions is vigorously opposed, as was recently demonstrated during the debate about approval of Dane County's "Vision 2020" land use and transportation plan, and Waukesha County's land development plan. The "Vision 2020" plan was developed by the Dane County Regional Planning Commission with the cooperation of Dane County, the City of Madison and the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. Members of the village boards and town boards are represented on the Regional Planning Commission. Nevertheless, 23 towns and five villages out of the county's 60 municipalities voted to reject the plan, and urged the Dane County Board to vote against adopting it. Their concern seemed to be that the plan would erode local control over land use decisions. Despite the opposition, the Dane County Board voted 23-to-15 on November 21, 1997, to approve the land use and transportation plan, which promotes farmland protection. Development forces won out in Waukesha County's land development plan. Only a small corner of the county is designated for agricultural use in the adopted plan, a loss of almost 48 square miles of farmland to rural homesites, "hobby farms" and country estates. The battle to save the county's remaining farms was lost many years ago when town boards, and the farmers who elect them, decided that development was inevitable and efforts to encourage farmland preservation were useless. The self -fulling prophecy of this attitude is reflected in the land 333 4 of 7 11 /20/2001 1:06 PM http://ww,,�x•.farmlandinfo.org!cae,,wpiw•p97-14.htm. development plan. Farmland preservation plans and county zoning ordinances in Dane and Waukesha counties take the same approach to protecting farmland from premature conversion as the two counties in Illinois take: exclusive agricultural zoning and a limit on the size of a parcel that a home can be built on in the agricultural zone. A 35 acre parcel is the minimum size for building a new home in an area zoned exclusively agriculture in Dane and Waukesha counties, but, only farm residences are allowed. Like the two counties in Illinois, the two Wisconsin counties allow less productive, wooded or pasture land to be used for rural residential development. Besides the political structure, the major difference between the Wisconsin and Illinois approaches to farmland protection was, until recently, the way that farmland is assessed for property taxes. The Wisconsin legislature has passed changes in how farmland is assessed so it will be based upon what the land can produce instead of its market value. This change will have a direct impact on the Farmland Preservation Program in the state, but it is not clear if it will help it or hurt it. The Fate of Farmland on the Edge As long as the land remains undeveloped, it will continue to be farmed, even if it is owned by investors or land developers. Escalating prices being paid for farmland in northern Illinois and southern Wisconsin, rising property taxes and federal tax policies all push farmers to sell out. It is unlikely that any state or local tax incentives could off -set the money that can be gained by selling the land for development. Recent changes in capital gains taxes and federal estate taxes may actually make farmland more attractive as an investment. Land use policies and zoning ordinances that encourage compact and contiguous development can forestall premature conversion of farmland to some extent, but it is unlikely that local officials will turn down the chance to increase property tax assessments or the opportunity for increased sales tax revenues by rezoning farmland for industrial and commercial development. Changes in Illinois laws are needed to give counties more say over annexation of farmland designated for protection. Dane County and McHenry County both promote the purchase of development rights and use of conservation easements as a way to preserve prime farmland, and to establish growth boundaries, or greenbelts, around towns and villages. A recent public opinion poll of 400 residents of McHenry County selected at random, asked the question, "Are you concerned about maintaining farmland in your area?" More than half (53.6 percent) of the residents say they are very concerned about maintaining farmland, and 32.7 percent are somewhat concerned. But, when asked if they would support purchasing development rights to preserve farmland and maintain open space, the 334 5 of 7 11 /20/2001 1:06 PM http:,"WWW.farmlandinfo.org!cae/w,p/w•p97-14.htm majority of the people (51.6 percent) opposed the idea, while only 32.9 percent supported purchase of development rights. Although farmers already receive significant property tax breaks, the benefits of using taxpayer money to protect farmland is clearly not a concept that is well understood by people in McHenry County. It is already being done in the Town of Dunn in Dane County. Transfer of development rights is another concept that is not well understood, and would be difficult to implement without careful planning and intergovernmental cooperation. The McHenry County zoning ordinance allows for density transfers within a given parcel of land under its planned development provisions, but there is no legal mechanism for transfers between parcels. State laws allow for the formation of intergovernmental planning agencies that could do this in the right circumstance. So far, there has been little interest in undertaking such planning efforts. Dane and Waukesha counties have both initiated a process to determine how to implement a transfer of development rights program. The use of greenbelts, growth boundaries and boundary agreements between municipalities could put a limit on annexation of farmland into municipalities. This approach would have to be coupled with a very strong commitment by the county board in each county to also limit development in unincorporated areas, otherwise the effect will be minimal. The answer seems to be a combination of good planning policies and politics. There has been a resurgence of political interest in slowing the rapid growth that is occurring in Dane, DeKalb and McHenry counties. The costs of "growth" was an issue in almost every municipal election this year in McHenry County, and several "slow growth" candidates were elected to office, including the new mayor of Woodstock. Farmers in the county are also getting more actively involved in local political campaigns as they see their lifestyles and livelihoods threatened by higher property taxes and suburban sprawl. There is no single solution to stopping the continued loss of farmland on the edge of rapidly expanding urban areas in northern Illinois and southern Wisconsin. But it is clear that what is done to control suburban sprawl, and protect farmland in the next few years will determine the fate of farmers who are farming on the edge. Based upon the findings of the four county case studies, the authors make these recommendations to help protect farmland in northern Illinois and southern Wisconsin: 1. State and county policies and plans should recognize the important role that farming plays in the local economy and the contribution that farmland makes to local property taxes without putting demands on public services, and not view farmland as vacant property waiting to be developed. Viewed as an economic 333 6 of 7 11 /20/2001 1:06 PM http:/iww-w.farmlandinfo.org/cae/wp/wp97-14.html asset provides decision makers with greater justification to protect farmland and farming when faced with proposals for development. 2. Local governments should not rely on zoning to protect farming. More permanent solutions are needed to stop expansion of urban areas into prime farmland and rural areas. Creation of greenbelts, or growth boundaries, around municipalities through the use of conservation easements, transfer of development rights, or purchase of open space lands, are viable options, but the benefits of such programs must first be explained to taxpayers. 3. County and township planning officials should recognize that allowing low- density residential development in rural areas displaces farming as surely as other development, and is the worst kind of sprawl. Rural residential development should not be allowed in farming areas just because the land is not used for production of row crops. Pasture and woodland contribute to viable farming operations, and help to provide other sources farm income. 4. Counties should be given more authority to implement farmland preservation plans and policies through the use of intergovernmental agreements, property tax incentives to discourage annexation of farmland, and limits on expansion of utilities into designated agricultural areas. Views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the American Farmland Trust. CAE/WP97-14 You may purchase a print copy of this paper by contacting Teresa Bullock, Phone: (815) 753-9347, E-Mail: tbullock@niu.edu. CONTACT INFORMATION: American Farmland Trust Center for Agriculture in the Environment 148 N. 3rd St. P.O. Box 987 DeKalb, Ill. 60115 Phone: (815) 753-9347 Fax: (815) 753-9348 E-mail: Ann Sorensen (asorensen@niu.edu), Director. Top of Document. 33ki 7 of 7 11 /20/2001 1:06 PM ��v -,8; � �Cac.A�ht e�.�.� k\A -�� I C, Definining the Edge: An Introduction to Agricultural Buffers I, Introduction II. Executive Summary: Striking a Balance between City and Farm III. How Agricultural Buffers Work IV. The 3 Requirements for Successful Buffer Implementation V. Conclusion: Next Steps 33� 1 Introduction Here in the Central Valley, acres of farmland surround our communities and visibly distinguish us from California's heavily populated, metropolitan coastline. To the Valley's farmers, this land has been the landscape for the real business of agriculture for over a century and a multi- billion dollar industry. But to newly arrived residents in search of affordable housing, the role of this land — and what is involved in maintaining its role — is often misunderstood. With state demographers anticipating that the bulk of the Golden State's future growth will occur within the Valley, local cities and towns increasingly face the tense challenge of balancing suburban expectations against the activity inherent to normal farming operations. The purpose of this workbook This tension does not have to end in conflict. In fact, a wide range of land use tools and policies are available to Valley decisionmakers looking to tailor unique, cooperative solutions. The purpose of this workbook is to introduce Valley planners, developers, farmers to one of those tools: the "Agricultural Buffer". Agricultural buffers come in many forms. Whether it be a simple brick wall or even a linear park, a buffer, in essence, is a physical separation of the landscape that act as the transition between residential and agricultural uses of land. The ultimate goal of preventing conflict between homeowner and farmer. In other parts of California, agricultural buffers have already been found mutually beneficial to the needs of both agriculture and to new residents. There is no reason to think we could not achieve the same success here in the Valley. Of course, this is not to say that buffers are the solution for every community. But as you develop your long term development plans, consider all of the alternatives. 333 2 I. Executive Summary: Striking a Balance between City and Farm It is no secret the Valley is growing. From Bakersfield to Los Banos to Redding, a relentless new housing market indicates substantial change lies ahead. Reliable predictions that today's 5.5 million Valley population will balloon to over 12 million by 2040 should only increase that demand. Given that most of our cities are located in the midst of the world's most productive farmland, much of the region's new development will unavoidably find itself abutting or at least close to a. working farming operation. Planning for Co -existence While new suburbanites may be initially pleased to find themselves adjacent to a farm's "open space", complaints over pesticides, noise, dust and other farming practices are sure to follow.. Likewise, farmers long accustomed to a relatively familiar farming neighbor is likely to experience negative impacts such as litter, dumping and tresspassing of having residences adjacent to his or her active farm. Whether or not the complaints are valid, they cause residents to experience stress , cost the farmers money, and generally only find resolution after the investment of time by local governments. The purpose of this study was to examine possible middle grounds for compromise between these competing needs. But rather than providing a one -size -fits -all solution, we opted to identify the key ingredients methods that have proven effective. With that information in hand, each jurisdiction will be well suited to tailor reach its own unique solutions as part of a comprehensive land use management plan. {THIS SHOULD BE IN A CHART) Urban Complaints Pesticides Traffic Dust, Pollen, Smoke Lights Noise Odor Farmer Complaints Theft Litter Vandalism 333 3 Increaed Liability Pests Farming Restrictions Threat to profitability {THIS SHOULD BE IN A GRAPH/CHART} Realistic expectations Urban Gains Farming Gains Increased viable options for placing development Decreased intrusions into farming Increased quality of life and health Promotion of economic viability Increased appreciation for agriculture Increased appreciation for agriculture Agriculture remains as an economic contributor Promotion of ag land protection Three Buffer Strategies In practice, buffers can take various forms. If designed as a wall or fence, buffers can serve as a definitive barrier between a development built immediately adjacent to active farmland. A more land intensive alternative is to design buffers as strategically sited and stable, defined edges for the particular city. A third option involves enacting setback distances for houses built in specific areasThis study focused on the first two. CHART: What can serve as a buffer? An installed barrier such as a fence, wall, or landscaping Existing infrastructure or topographic features such as roads, rights -of -way, canals, hills Building requirements such as setbacks, special construction specifications, or zoning Recreational or commercial areas Usage modifications, primarily voluntary Cost: What can your community afford? As with all things, one of the most daunting hurdle to implementing a buffer will be cost. The cost of developing a buffer is not simply a product of the initial construction or set aside. Successful buffer programs make allowances for the maintenance and monitoring of their buffers. While in some cases, costs for development or maintenance may allocated to the new homeowners, a strong argument can be made that public resources should be sought out given that the benefits of buffer may eventually accrue to the community at large. Under either scenario, the steps a planner or city official must take, while straightforward, are necessary preconditions: 1) Choose the appropriate buffer for the problem at hand 2) Determine the costs 3) Identify and obtain a source of funding. 340 4 The Three Essentials of Successful Buffer Implementation This study identified three essential ingredients for successful buffer implementation are identified as follows: 1. Acceptance of Community Principles The values and community culture or identity that guide decision -making. Community vision and uniqueness, and the degree to which those principles are felt and upheld by policy makers and the community or region. 2. An Open, Informed Process The ways in which things are done and the ways in which people are involved. Process includes the affective and subjective skills, attitudes and interaction that lead to problem solving and collaboration. 3. Clear and Balanced Policies The quality, clarity, consistency, completeness and power of the actual policies : elated to land use, growth, development, and agricultural preservation. 341 5 II. An Introduction to Agricultural Buffer Zones Determining the reason or need for a buffer Anticipating the potential need for a buffer, and analyzing the sources of concern that a particular site might generate are the first steps to successful buffer implementation. The different reasons leading to the need for buffers are listed here for consideration. Those issues should e considered in order to select the most appropriate buffer type and design. Not All Complaints Are Equal Regarding the nature of complaints, there are some very important distinctions to be made. There is a big difference between nuisance and potential health/public safety. One is transitory where the other can be harmful, and in some cases, life threatening. There is also a distinction to be made between perceived and real threat. A person philosophical stance on farming and the environment, and their lifestyle preferences all contribute to how tolerant or critical a person will be of the neighbor's farming activities. Things such as pesticide drift d dust can be measured. There are instances where accidents happen or wind changes and real drift occurs. However, there are other times when a person thinks they are experiencing a problem although there is no justifiable cause. The purpose of planning buffers is to reduce the number of complaints. Several interviewee3 stressed the need for reasonable expectations of what a buffer can do, and a pro -active educational process to dispel overly optimistic expectations of the buffer and describe the mutual benefits. The most commonly cited problems are as follows. FROM THE URBAN PERSPECTIVE — POSSIBLE COMPLAINTS: CHAR TFOR BOTH HERE 34; 6 Buffer Types and Design Once the need for a buffer at a particular site has been established, the design can proceed. Next to be considered are all the conditions, including type of commodity grown, at the specific site and the existing topography or infrastructure that might lend themselves to all or a portion of the buffer solution. Another consideration is the amount of space available for the buffer. How the buffer gets designed (process) can greatly influence the degree to which the buffer is ultimately accepted. Neighbors, builders and farmers should all have a venue to listen and to be heard. The solutions should develop as a result of the meetings, as opposed to having meetings whose only purpose is to report out what has already been decided. Besides mitigating urban -rural interface problems, buffers that are properly designed and strategically sited serve as a defined edge for redirecting growth. Conversely, growth barriers and community separators such as greenbelts might well end up serving as interface, buffers. There are essentially two kinds of agricultural/urban interface buffers. The first type is where a development or a house is planned that will immediately adjoin agriculture upon construction. These types of buffers commonly take the form of a wall, street, setback, Or perhaps some vegetation. The second kind of buffer is a wide natural or planted area or large permalient geographical barrier that is used to demarcate a formal or informal urban growth line. When installed, it is quite possible that it might have agriculture on both sides until much later when the city is built out and eventually meets the buffer. To be effective, this buffer has to be part of a . comprehensive plan that will not allow growth beyond the buffer, or else "Today's buffer is tomorrow's lineal park." 1 Buffer Design in Detail (ALL OF THE DESIGN SECTION NEEDS TO BE IN A TABLE WITH PHOTOS) 1) Installed barriers Used individually or in combinations, these features are built to block the movement of airborne particles. Depending on the density, they can also effectively block out noise, views, and access. Fences that are tight fitting to the ground will control the movement of certain rodents, but are ineffective against burrowers such as pocket gophers, or climbers such as ground squirrels and rats. Type Does the design consider: substantial vegetation barrier: canopy trees, possibility of increased volume or velocity of hedgerows landscaped berm. berm in rain and storm water? attraction of ests 1 Marc Del Piero, Attorney. Great Valley Center Conference, Sacramento, May 10, 2001. 343 ibination with strategic plantings barrier 1*, or fence: naked or in combination with andscaping fful to crops? unfavorable growing itions, such as excessive shade, heat ction, or wind diverted onto fields? ion for nuisance, such as ti, dirt bikes? costs of on -going iaintenance, monitoring? decreases inland alue? ` the are not usually aesthetically *Although high concrete barrier walls are fairly effective, y pleasing unless specific design efforts are applied to overcome their drawbacks, according to the Woodland Rural/Urban Edge survey. From the survey, negative comments about walls were that they're ugly, trashy, poorly designed, poorly landscaped, confining and too `big city-ish'. Picture: "Brick Divider" Caption: The ubiquitous brick wall goes up first in preparation for a new subdivision to be built within its borders. Walls also block the views that people enjoy, become targets for graffiti, and create a feeling of claustrophobia. The primary objection that respondents in the Woodland Edges survey had about any type of buffer was if the buffer was unsightly or poorly maintained. Roads were favored as a natural barrier. Warehouses or industrial buildings were not favored if they are junky, unattractive, or poorly landscaped." Commercial and retail development was viewed positively, but again the exception being where the buildings are seen as unattractive, or run down. Open fields, trees, shrubs and landscaping received overwhelming positive responses. (see footnote # ) One might conclude then, that the two factors indicative of a buffer's acceptance, from the urban perspective, is its aesthetic character and superior maintenance including attractive landscaping. (see appendix for excerpt of Landscape at Risk.) 2) Existing topographic or infrastructure features . The advantages to using features that already exist adjacent to agriculture are minimum disruption to farming, and cost savings. In planning the construction and placement of certain features listed below, the possibility for serving a dual purpose as a buffer should be considered. Consideration of these features are used most effectively in the long-term, growth planning stages such as General Plans and zoning, well before the subdivision development stage. 2 Cooperative Extension Farm Advisors can help determine the proper landscaping plants to use. 3 Owens, P.E. Landscape at risk: The rural -urban edge. Unpublished manuscript. University of California, Davis. Distributed by the Center for Design, Research, Department of Environmental Design, 1997. 344 8 • hills, valleys, cliffs, natural berms or rises • water barrier, water course: canal, lake, ponds, streams or river, flood plain • roadway and right-of-way, power line right-of-way • airport runway or clear area • parking lot • designated greenbelt area in either natural state or "enhanced" • cemetery Picture: "New Subdivision" Caption: The buffer between this new subdivision and the orchards consists of a canal, just visible to the left of the utility poles, the right-of-way, and a road. It is still too early to know -how, effective the combination will be. 3) Building requirements or restrictions The designation of special use types and building features or placement in zoning regulations and as conditions for permits appears in several forms. Type Does The Design Consider: setback: prescribed or negotiated distance if the effective loss of the use of land is arrier *(see section on Setback Distances)reasonable? what factors might still be of use of industrial, commercial zoning large concern? that large lot zones, especially in of zoning, usually in combination with construction setbacks* * construction codes, the path of growth, encourage sprawl and ag/urban friction* *? whether the chosen n combination with setback, that design will be effective? whet dictate house orientation, double pane her the plan contains hidden costs, windows, and other types of mitigating monetary or otherwise? features M * Some policy documents use the terms "setback" and `buffer" interchangeably. A setback can be one type of buffer, but not all setbacks are buffers. Many policies include minimum yard sizes for single dwellings in agricultural or rural residential zones. While yard setbacks provide some separation, it is doubtful what mitigating effects a 20' — 50' space can have. This study addresses primarily the use of buffers at development or urban growth edges. * * Large lot zoning is increasingly proving not to be a solution. "County and township planning officials should recognize that allowing low -density residential development in rural areas displaces farming as surely as other development, and is the worst kind of 4 City of Napa Zoning Ordinance 17.60.090.A.1, 2 3 4 9 sprawl."5 The Riverside County Farm Bureau Executive manager characterizes the use of in- between zoning (2.5-acre to 5-acre parcels) for buffers as non -effective because parcels that size are "too small to farm, too big to mow, and usually wind up being rural slums." His organization supports transitions from ten acres or larger directly to half -acre or smaller. Yolo County is getting away from "ranchettes." San Benito County is eliminating Planned Unit Development on agriculture zoned land. Kings County has policies to facilitate reversion to acreage of "paper subdivisions" in the county, and to encourage abandonment of little used public roads in sparsely settled rural areas. Other counties are avoiding parcelization, are sunsetting old subdivision maps, or they encourage consolidation of undersized [agricultural] parcels through the use of land use districts (San Bernadino General Plan). Picture: "Big White House II" Caption: By no means the worst of examples, this weedy and trash -strewn yard is typical of many rural large lots. Agricultural uses seen at neighboring houses vary from livestock, vegetables, vineyards, to a plant breeding business. Some yards were less tended than this one, and others were tightly manicured. Other planners and farm advisors concur that the majority of complaints about agriculture come from "ranchettes" and isolated rural developments, not from city -edge subdivisions. "What passes for agricultural zoning is really large -lot residential zoning and bears no relation to the minimum amount of land needed to support a commercial farming operation." Tom Daniels — Agricultural zoning Managing rg owth, prootectin farms. 4) Recreational or "value-added" areas Particularly where land values are high, the inclination is to explore options to make use of the buffer area and to extend its functionality beyond just being dead space. There are concerns, but knowing them ahead of time can help lead to successful implementation if this is the buffer avenue chosen. TYPE CONSIDERATIONS recreational trail: jogging, hiking :)r equestrian use golf course, park, ball Field habitat preserve or wildlife corridor income producing trees, such as timber or Buffers designed to provide additional features such as recreation or habitat may less likely to satisfy the farmers reasons for :dine a buffer since instead of limiting access to those buffers are actuall 5 Paulson, J. Protecting farmland on the edge: What policies and programs work? Center for Agriculture in the Environment. p 7 <http://www.farmlandinfo.org/cae/wp/wp97-14.html>. 346 10 anim als closer. Also, the question arises as to much human or animal presence in the buffer is safe if pesticide spray and drift is one of the ons that a buffer is recommended. 5) Modified usage By modifying usage, a type of "virtual buffer" can be created. However, restrictions on how or what a farmer grows is not a realistic solution, unless the farmer voluntarily changes his farming practice or the commodity he grows, presumably because he has determined he can do so profitably. Otherwise, some kind of incentive or compensation to voluntarily make changes could be offered, providing there were a funding source. Such an arrangement cannot be imposed. If a farmer can profitably convert to organic farming, he might do so voluntarily. Organic farming may be perceived as being more benign than conventional farming, but organic farming creates many of the same "by-products" as conventional farming, such as dust and smell. Although the inputs used are "natural", some of them are very toxic. Not using chemically derived pesticides is the one main difference. Probably of more significance in mollifying the resident is his own perception that organic farming is a better neighbor than conventional farming. The mere perception that organic farming is less invasive may cut down on complaints from residents, although it doesn't address the need for buffering from the farmer perspective. "Organic ag has been cited as an example of a preferred urban neighbor, but under examination that becomes less practical." Farmer, Ventura County "Organic farming practices will not typically influence mitigation measures." County of San Luis Obispo, Mitigating Agricultural Residential Conflict. 1/1995 Certain types of crops that require minimal maintenance activity, such as hay or avocado and citrus trees, if viable, can work as a buffering area between residences and more intensively farmed land. "Non -farm neighbors love living adjacent to avocado groves and, in fact, realtors will advertise the fact. The situation with citrus is similar." San Diego County Farm Bureau Representative "Probably range land is the most desirable from an urban neighbor's perspective." Farmer However, as soon as the farmer decides for economic reasons to switch to a more intensively farmed crop or build processing or greenhouse facilities, the buffer function of the previous crop 3 411 may be lost. Also, the residents may have come to appreciate the previous crops as open space, and feel that any alterations have deprived them of their viewshed. Although that is the urban perspective, it is crucial to keep in mind that the farm is really an outdoor industry and will only provide open space as long as its operation remains profitable. Picture: "House", House II , House w/Factory Caption: A French -style country estate and its mobile -home neighbor have a poultry feed mill as their backyard neighbor. Although the mill is a permissible use in this ag zone, the rural residents avidly protested its construction. ITHE ENTIRE SETBACK DISCUSSION SHOULD BE A ONE PAGE TEXTBOX WITH THE BASIC CONCLUSION BEING THAT THEY ARE UNPROVEN) Do "Setbacks" Count? Setbacks are building restrictions that require that a residence or other inhabited structure(s) to be built back a certain designated distance from the boundary, and in this case, of an agricultural field. Uses are sometimes restricted within the setback to low exposure uses, such as storage sheds, animal corrals, greenhouses, and swimming pools. Policies usually stipulate that the setbacks will be imposed on the non-agricultural side. This is consistent with the intent of protecting agriculture, and in protecting the rights of the person who was there first. It was not uncommon in the policies reviewed to provide for a reduced buffer width if landscaping is added as a screen. Although not all the jurisdictions surveyed had buffer policies, virtually all had some reference to setbacks. Setbacks are simple, as opposed to deciding on a specific buffer construction. The cost, including maintenance, is passed on to the buyer of the property. The Dilemma of Rural Residential Development The distinction should be made between a setback from the lot line for individual residences in rural or agricultural zones, versus setbacks for development and growth boundaries. However, typically the prescribed yard setbacks are smaller for the single residence instance than for developments. The reasoning behind this difference is questionable, since the argument can be made that a single house is just as prone to all the same intrusions of agriculture as a subdivision house that adjoins agriculture. The only exception would be a farmer building his own house on his own farm. Even then, although presumably he wouldn't be bothered by the typical results of farming operations, is it not advisable for him to be protected from pesticide drift, dust, and other health/safety related dangers? Questions Raised by Range in Variability The marked variation in setback distances from one jurisdiction to another is a clear indication that there is little agreement about what constitutes adequate separation, and that distances selected are somewhat arbitrary (see excerpts in Appendix). To a degree, the differences may reflect a county's philosophical views on setbacks, but they also indicate the need for better efficacy data. In reading the policies, several questions come to mind. What is a rational distance and who determines those numbers? • What scientific evidence supports the setback distances? • How are provisions made for exceptions and reductions, and who grants them? Is the process open to too much pressure or subjectivity? • What is the advisability of allowing for transfer of the buffering requirement or dispensation for a fee? • How adequate is the language? How is interpretation of non-specific requirements such as "reasonable" and "adequate" made? A setback distance of 200' is frequently cited within the many policies reviewed, but there is no hard evidence that 200' is the optimal distance, nor is there evidence that it works. "Historically the County has required 100' to 200' buffers between new residential uses and agricultural operations, but this setback has not been universally effective in avoiding land use conflicts." Senior Planner, Ventura County In an attempt to determine if there is more substantial rationale for setback distances, this study conducted an informal survey of Cooperative Extension Farm Advisors for the major commodity groups. The variation in their responses, even within a given commodity group, varied substantially and their comments are revealing. 348 12 "There is every reason to be concerned about the lack of consistency from county to county about the size of setbacks. " (implying the arbitrariness in selecting distances) "Buffer sizes is a very good question. There is little information about the effectiveness of them or about appropriate size." "Since the type of agriculture conducted may change with time, the setback will probably need to be based on the worst case scenario." "My own feeling is that the setbacks should be two miles, although most planning agencies and developers would find this distance totally unacceptable. " "You are trying to get a simplistic answer out of a complex problem." Weather was a common theme in their response, especially the variability of wind velocity and prevailing directions from one site to another, making specific setback distances difficult to standardize. Responding advisors felt that walls and vegetative landscaping could be very helpful in reducing pesticide drift and the other airborne nuisances. With regards to pesticide application, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation and County Agricultural Commissioners enforce set standards and distances for spraying, depending on the category of pesticide used and the method of application. Additionally, each specific pesticide has it own label instructions including spray setbacks. State and county pesticide regulations restrict farming practices near inhabited structures. Advisors pointed out that additional restrictions imposed.by planning policies could unduly hamper a farmer. A 200' minimum was the average between all responses, although the answers were so varied, it is hard to call the two hundred foot minimum a meaningful average. The conclusion is that setbacks are needed, that the distance should be arrived upon based on the circumstances at the local site in question, and that although more space would be advisable, the relationships of cost to risk must be taken into consideration. Costs Finding ways to pay for buffers and deciding who will bear the costs are two of the more challenging issues to resolve. Costs are a driving factor and can influence decisions that impact the effectiveness and suitability of the buffer. Therefore, the goal should be to install the best buffer, and then figure out the means, not vice versa. A funding source needs to be identified for the expenses that come up at the beginning of the project and for those that will continue for an extended period, or through the life of the buffer. roue #1 IMMEDIATE One Time_Type #2 DELAYED -On -Going Land Design Installation _ Upkeep, maintenance Monitoring Who Pays The first consideration is who will pay for the land that is going to serve as the buffer. In virtually all policies reviewed, the responsibility and cost of installing the buffer is placed on the developer who is proposing to locate adjacent to existing agriculture. The separator buffer is not required of the agricultural side, but typically the farmer already has to comply with pesticide application buffers (perimeter areas, as imposed by law, that are off-limits for spraying, depending on the type of product applied and method of application used). "Buffer zones for the use of pesticides are contained in pesticide labels, Federal pesticide regulations, California pesticide regulations, and County permit conditions. Buffer zones are generally placed on the farm property, often limiting the use or reducing the amount of farmable M� land. While these buffer zones work very well in protecting sensitive receptors, they do have a negative economic impact on the farmer." A County Agricultural Commissioner The farmer must adhere to strict rules based on the specific farm commodity, type of pesticide and method of application (spraying from the ground, spraying from the air, etc.). To impose new restrictions on top of that because a homeowner settles next door makes no more sense than making an existing tire mounting business install sound insulation at the insistence of a new day spa that has located next door and wants tranquility. When building a new subdivision, the costs of installing a buffer is no different than any other costs the developer pays for rendering the land acceptable for housing. That could mean remedying poor soil stability, drainage, a grading situation, or providing a sound wall to kill freeway noise. A buffer is another aspect of the infrastructure needed to make the site good for houses. These infrastructure costs are generally incorporated in the cost of the home. The complete costs of the buffer should be included in the financial analysis prior to construction. Picture: "Broccoli & Shopping Center" Caption: This field has a commercial/retail area as its neighbor. The road and parking lot serve a buffering purpose. The use of infrastructure as a buffer has circumvented costs for a dedicated buffer. Types of funding for land acquisition, installation and subsequent maintenance are categorized below. 1) Public "Prepaid" Existing infrastructure has already been paid for. This is why roads, rights -of -way and canals are popular as buffers, sometimes the only buffer at a site. Specific tax or fee (sales tax, bond issue, property tax, or assessment district) Buffers may be included in an open space district or park district, and the jurisdiction passes a sales tax or bond issue to acquire and/or maintain them. Creating an assessment district is another avenue to pay for a buffer. The implication here is that monies are generated from a larger pool than just the homeowners at the specific development in question. A case is made for benefit to the community -at -large, or as part of a larger community improvement program. Special purpose public monies Some buffer projects may be eligible for public grants, especially those where an interface buffer can also qualify as a conservation buffer. Conservation buffers produce one or multiple environmental benefits, such as the protection or improvement of soil, air or water quality, 350 14 improvement of fish or wildlife habitat, and demonstrate a commitment to land stewardship.6 Accomplishing such a dual use would be unique. The local USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is a suggested source. Their continuous Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) is one example. NRCS can also assist in referring to other Federal, State, or local government programs.? The Land and Water Conservation Fund, or California Farmland Conservancy Program are other possibilities. General fund Monies can be used from a city or county general fund, depending on the health of the fund and the political will. Although not a realistic option for every buffer, general fund monies might fund a pilot or demonstration project as a catalyst to increasing the use of buffers. Special legislation For a particularly unique setting, this may be an option. A Massachusetts planner described state legislation that allows a town to raise taxes by 5% (of the tax, not of the valuation) to fund land preservation. The concept raises interesting possible variations for California, although there is no such legislation currently. 2) Private grants, private donations A private non-profit community foundation or individual may have a particular interest in a project, or a project might fall under the foundation's funding priorities, such as preservation of open space or urban forest projects. One example is the Aromas Community Center Foundation. The Foundation purchased a 17 acre parcel from a developer to turn into community baseball and soccer fields. The parcel provides buffering between the one-half to 1 acre parcel home sites and the strawberry fields on the other side. 3) Homeowner, through the cost of the house or special tax/fee The cost of the buffer, including the land, is incorporated in the cost of the home. Through the purchase price the homeowner assumes the cost of the land acquisition and installation of any required landscaping. The maintenance can be paid through a homeowner association fee, or to the city through a specific district tax that is added to their property taxes. Additionally, they will pay normal property tax on the parcel. In the case of a required setback on the homeowner's property, he pays to acquire land and will annually pay property tax for land that is essentially limited or restricted in use. If the city installs the buffer, a development impact fee is a way for the city to recoup the cost of extending or building infrastructure to support new development. The builder pays this fee to acquire the building permit and will roll that into the price of the house. Even though the E Buffers are common-sense conservation. Buffer Notes. Natural Resource Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. < htti)://www.nho.nrcs-usda.aov/CCS/BufrsPub.html> November 3 0, 2000. 7 Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP), Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP), Stewardship Incentive Program (SIP). . <http://www nhg.nres usda.gov/CCS/BufrsPub.html> November 30, 2000. 351 15 developers pass the cost along to the homebuyer, each extra fee that they include in the price of the house shrinks their competitive advantage in the housing market. In another method, the developer pays for the cost of developing a buffer as part of the common area landscaping in a subdivision he is developing. Homeowners pay for the open space acquisition (cost included in their home purchase price) and pay a periodic homeowner association fee for the cost of benefits they receive, including maintenance of the buffer. Planned unit developments typically assess for certain improvements, such as interior streets, public area landscaping (which could include an open, landscaped buffer), and lighting. If the buffer is created to offer recreational uses, as opposed to a simple viewshed, the residents may be willing to pay more. However, the drawbacks of a buffer space that is actively utilized, as noted in section I. 2.4, need to be evaluated. It is more difficult to fund a "future buffer", that is, an area zoned to delineate the urban growth barrier or boundary (UGB). If there is not a developer yet, a mechanism has to be devised to fund the buffer now and defer recouping of the cost at a future date from the developer (and residents) who eventually will reside there and be the ultimate beneficiaries of the buffer. However, the argument can be made that such a buffer benefits not just the adjacent residents, but all the city's residents that enjoy the benefits of a compact, well -planned efficient city. If so convinced, the larger voting area could vote to assess themselves for UGB buffers. If, in thirty years, the buffer becomes a lineal park with development all around it, it nevertheless continues to be a public asset. 4) Land Owner There may be unique instances where the landowner, either the farmer or the developer, finds advantage in donating an easement for a portion of his property for use as a buffer. In other words, the farmer voluntarily stops farming on that portion of his land that is to serve as the buffer, or the developer does not build on a portion of land, but also does not pass on the cost of that land to the homeowner. 5) Mixed The developer pays for the land and development of the buffer (passing the cost on to homebuyers), and then deeds the buffer back to city, or relinquishes easement to the city. Then the city is responsible for maintenance, and recoups their costs through a property tax assessment on the subdivision homeowners, or from the taxpayers at large as part of the city's overall landscaping fee. In instances where fee -based recreational use of the buffer space is acceptable, several options present themselves. - Developer sells land to private enterprise to build and run as a business - Developer deeds to jurisdiction to build and operate, or to build and lease - City votes for a tax or bond to purchase and build; user fees amortize initial costs and pay for on -going maintenance. 35 16 On -Going Costs Once the buffer is in place, it needs to be 1) supported, or 2) self-supporting. Depending on the type of buffer, financial support might mean periodic painting, litter removal, bank restoration, or plant care and replacement. A self-supporting buffer is one that requires no maintenance, or where the buffer is part of existing infrastructure and the maintenance is borne by an outside party, such as Caltrans or an irrigation district. On -going costs can be reduced if the buffer area is planted with low -maintenance vegetation such as native grasses, trees and shrubbery. The remaining concern is that the open space could become blighted with weeds and litter. A cost that is often overlooked is the cost of routine monitoring to follow up on maintenance, effectiveness- of mitigation, design requirements and use restrictions that are stipulated in the subdivision or site plans. In Queen Anne's County, Maryland, the county requires the developer to install very specific plantings and to post a bond for 1_ times the cost of planting that the county holds (up to two years) until they are assured at least 75% of the plants are thriving. This ensures that the barrier does indeed get established, and that it presents a uniform front, whether the plantings are on individual parcels or part of a greenbelt. For effective monitoring, there needs to be scheduled oversight and a meads to pay for it. The monitoring would most likely be the responsibility of the entity or jurisdiction that imposed the buffering requirements. The use of volunteers, particularly from among the initial stakeholders, should not be overlooked. The California Coordinated Resource Management and planning (CRMP) process uses stakeholder volunteers to monitor CRMP projects. These are groups comprised of stakeholders in natural resource conservation issues. 8 Other models besides CRMP are plentiful. The use of volunteers as monitors might be adaptable to some buffer situations. 8 For more information, see <http://ceres.ca.gov/cacrmp/hb-intro.html> 353 17 IV. Three Elements to Successful Buffer Planning Three major components for successful buffer implementation emerged from the research for this project. 1. Principles — the values and community culture or identity that guide decision -making. Community vision and uniqueness, and the degree to which those principles are felt and upheld by policy makers and the community or region. The "Why" 2. Process — the ways in which things are done and the ways in which people are involved. Process includes the affective and subjective skills, attitudes and interaction that lead to problem solving and collaboration. The "How", the "Who' and the "When" 3. Policies — the quality, clarity, consistency, completeness and power of the actual policies related to land use, growth, development, and agricultural preservation. The "What" and the "Where" LPRINCIPLES Underlying principles, or values and beliefs must be present to successfully implement farmland protection, with buffers being one component of that larger picture. This study revealed some of the principles held by communities: That the community buys into the value of agriculture and the importance of protecting it. The values of the community have been solicited, identified and publicized. That once the policies are put in place, they will be supported. That jurisdictions can and will work together. That the long-term benefits should override short-term expediency or gain. That both sides can be accommodated. That managed growth is possible. That there is no "one -size fits all". That differences will occur, but can be and will be resolved. There is a commitment to staying at the table until a resolution is reached. Integrity and consistency build trust and open communication. These key attributes identified as necessary components for success are sound guiding principles that serve as the foundation for decision -making. There is a collective expression of value and appreciation for open space, including farmland. Inclusive processes are used in helping the community identify its common values and principles, which in turn, are incorporated into and reflected by the general plan and appropriate ordinances and policies. 3 ;�4 Signs of Support In those areas where preservation of farming appears to be a principle/value, it is seen as a heritage and lifestyle issue as well as an economic issue. The emotion tied to it reflects its status as a value, something greater than just another feature or business in the area. Buffers are seen as one part of a larger effort to preserve agricultural land. The multiple ways of supporting agricultural preservation lend credence and power to the community's principles. The values are often elicited through a community -wide effort. The results are documented and widely publicized. The City of Redlands published "Redlands 2000", which promoted the concept of an emerald necklace [of citrus groves] around the perimeter of the city. The report is credited with raising the consciousness of the community about its heritage of citrus groves sufficiently to pass a bond measure for orange grove protection. The Placer County "Placer Legacy Open Space and Agricultural Conservation Program" is the result of extensive community input and it documents the area's concern for agricultural preser cation. The words "heritage" and "legacy" connote a deep value, and illustrate the point being made here about the importance of the emotional commitment and foundation that drives and supports the policies. This study identified counties with similar policies, but they differed from one another in the implementation. One reason for differences in how policies are carried out appears to be the strength of commitment to the values, or principles behind the policies, not only on a community level, but also to the degree they are supported by policy makers. There is no magic combination of protective regulations or perfect wording. The magic is in getting the community to agree on what it values. Interpretation of policies -is how disputes occur. Having a common vision can help focus and guide interpretation. The stronger the value on preserving agricultural land, the less susceptible the planners and policy makers are to making exceptions. Trust There must be trust and a commitment to jurisdictional cooperation. Decisions are made for the common good, and with the long-term view in mind. Open communication includes a sincere desire to understand and accommodate differing points of view. "The attitude of local elected officials toward land use planning and development is the primary factor in how well farmland protection policies and programs are implemented."9 Their buy -in to the underlying principles and long-range growth plans helps stay the course against conflicting pressures. 9 Paulson, J. Protecting farmland on the edge: What policies and programs work? Center for Agriculture in the Environment. p 1 <http://www.farmlandinfo.org/cae/wp/wp97-14.html> 35ki 19 2. THE POLICIES AND REGULATIONS The next key to success that emerged from this study was the strength of the policies and regulations. The policies are driven by the principles of protecting agriculture and taking the long-term view for what is best for the area. The policies lead to well -designed buffers as a component of a comprehensive land -use plan. The two aspects to address in policy development are 1) the content — the quality, foresight, specificity, enforceability, and 2) the degree to which all land use planning and implementation is integrated. The integration is important between documents (for example, zoning and subdivision ordinances closely follow the general plan), but also between neighboring jurisdictions. The content might include such things as incentives. The City of Oceanside recently developed a process whereby growers who wish to construct greenhouses or shade houses can get a waiver from the public hearing process on their permits if they build their structures at least 500' away from any property line. Fast -track incentives for development could promote the use of top quality buffers. The developer's costs to install a buffer could well be saved in time. Formal inclusion of buffers in the land use planning process is a relatively new phenomenon. Study respondents were asked how long their buffer policies had been in effect. The average year of implementation was 1989, with a mean of 1991. Since the formalized use of buffers is fairly new, rather than finding one perfect set of policies, what was found were many good components and recommendations from different entities for strengthening buffer implementation. Policy - Ten "Best Practices" 1. On the Books: Policies for buffers need to exist. This might seem as though stating the obvious, but without them the jurisdiction has nothing to stand on. A common commitment to protect agriculture is important, but without policies to codify the goals, eventually the commitment alone will not be enough. More than one planner expressed that a minimum setback distance is a "must", for without it, nothing can be imposed. Another planner described CEQA as a good "back up" for agricultural land mitigation, but not the best tool. It does require that impacts be identified, but it does not require that a project be denied, even without mitigation. Also, there is disparity in how agencies interpret "significant impact". If a project is deemed to meet all the requirements, the city has no ability to require buffers unless specified in the zoning requirements. Picture: "Pesticide Field", "Houses and Field" Caption: This vegetable farm is active year-round. The apartment complex was just built adjacent to it, with virtually no buffer. The properly posted signs indicate the field has been recently sprayed. It will be a long time before the young trees planted behind the complex provide any buffering. Notice the child's car, indicating children live and play nearby. "I am unable to locate any reference to a buffer, agricultural or otherwise. It would have been a good thought back in 1996 [revision of the General Plan], but I'm afraid it did not make it into the Plan. Planner, City of Calimesa, Riverside County 2. Clarity: Policies are very clear and direct. Policies need to be streamlined and clarified so as to eliminate, or at least reduce, differences of interpretation. Planners and developers have different missions, so it is natural that they would approach a given policy with different expectations. However, any progress made in clarifying policies will save time, and maybe even lawsuits. At some decision points implementation is subjective. It is often not as easy as it looks on paper, regardless of how solid the policies are. Key decision/interpretation points along the policy implementation process should be identified and bolstered to increase consistency and clarity, and to minimize the potential for challenge. It has also been suggested that in addition to policy alignment, the language and terminology should also be aligned and "litigation -proofed" to further avoid confusion and room for legal challenges. 356 20 Integration: Buffer policies are integrated into all phases of land use policy development and planning. The General Plan clearly states the values and goals that the City or County wishes to preserve and promote, including the use of buffers. Every relevant regulation and policy integrates language to consistently support and implement the General Plan intent. The area plans (including local coastal plans for areas in the coastal zone) and the implementing regulations contain sections that mesh with one another. Regulations are included not only in the agricultural land use element, but also in the residential goals and development standards, land use maps, zoning ordinances, subdivision ordinances and specific site plans. A strong right -to -farm ordinance is another support mechanism, working in tandem with the land use policies. The right -to - farm ordinance is most effective early in the property purchase, rather than at the end, as when it is included in the escrow phase. Alignment Among Jurisdictions: Land use policies of cities and the county are coordinated where possible, and are mutually supported. This is not an easy process, but the conviction that both sides can indeed reach agreement on key points is necessary. Policies that are clear and consistent are more likely to result in harmonious implementation. It is important for city and county to come together and agree upon those policies that need to be aligned. To be able to accomplish a good plan for where growth will go, LAFCO has to have a strong plan, but one that is mutually supportive between cities and county. "The success of the agricultural greenbelts has a great deal to do with the cities' `buy -in' to the guidelines. The cooperation and coordination between the cities and LAFCO's enforcement of the adopted guidelines have been very successful in Ventura County." Land Use Consultant 1. Site Specific: Minimum buffer requirements exist, and are implemented on a case -by -case basis. There is no one -size -fits all. Provisions are made to consider all relevant site characteristics and topographic features. The size of a proposed development also needs to be considered. The practicality of a 500' buffer is very different for a 50 acre vs. a 500 acre development, as the buffer would consume a large percentage of the smaller development. Although case -by -case review is labor intensive, it may save money and time in the long run. An informal survey of University of California Cooperative Extension farm advisors was a part of this study. Their responses to a question about recommended setback distances indicated overwhelmingly that site -specific circumstances, especially wind, which is the cause of pesticide drift and dust, really call for customized handling. (See section on Setback Distances). 1. Technical Expertise: Input on policy development and site recommendations is obtained from the Agricultural Commissioner or an Agricultural Advisory Committee. The role is usually advisory. Participation might be by tradition or custom rather than by policy, but it is recommended that such technical advice, which may include input from farm advisors, be a considered as a required step in the approval process. Final conditions for approval are forwarded back to the body that developed the initial recommendations so they can know the final status. 1. Ag 1 Open Space: Land use policies do not lump agriculture in with open space policies. Although open space is how many city people perceive agriculture, open space regulations aren't necessarily consistent with farming practices and the need for profitability. Agriculture has zoning needs distinct from open space. 2. Cumulative Effects Considered: Policies address development's cumulative impact on a regional scale rather than on a parcel by parcel basis. They consider the cumulative effect on agriculture and recognize that for agriculture to be sustainable and economically viable in the long terns, large expanses of agricultural land (the critical mass, in the critical places) and its infrastructure need to remain intact. Under CEQA, an EIR is to determine if development is considered to result in "significant impact" on agriculture because 1) development -converts prime agricultural land to non-agricultural use, or 2) project would result in conflict or nuisance with adjacent land us -s. A buffer could result as a mitigation measure. However, CEQA fails to address the cumulative effect of individual projects or site findings, so there must be a means to consider cumulative effects. One way to control cumulative losses of agricultural land is for local governments to adopt thresholds for agricultural land conversion or to attach conditions. "Although CEQA states that a local agency cannot use CEQA to attach conditions to a subdivision approval, the Subdivision Map Act gives the local agency the power to do just that." 10 "Edge" Stabilization: Progress is made to 1) straighten the urban edge, and 2) stabilize the edge. Limiting the number of edges along the city reduces the potential for conflict. Ideally the edge appears more as a solid line than scattered boxes. Not only does a straighter edge reduce conflict, it makes for more efficient deployment of services. Where possible, regulatory "holes are plugged", meaning that previous statutes or zoning ordinances that allowed sprawl and inefficient land use to take place are identified and then eliminated or revised.11 Through the General Plan or the designation of an urban growth limit the jurisdictions commit to a firm boundary. Training: In-service training of planning staff needs to occur so staff, especially newer members, are fully aware of the policies and their implications. Some of the study respondents were very well informed, but others were confused about, or unaware of existing policies. Planners expressed the desire to know more about agriculture, and how such knowledge would increase their work abilities. Training in affective skill - building, facilitation and group dynamics is also useful. "Keys to Success" 10 California Faun Bureau Federation. Land Use Reference Guide. Section 1— 88. 11 The State currently exempts schools from LAFCO and CEQA. School districts look for cheap land since they usually have very limited funding. When schools are built on cheaper land found out in agricultural areas, they are often cited as the cause for the sprawl that creeps out to meet the school. 35'; Broad support [of Urban Limit Boundary] between cites, county, special interests and communities Fortitude of cities and county to stand firm with boundary once established Avoid temptation to find loopholes, make exceptions Rely on purpose and policy to provide implementation direction Incorporate into every available policy and implementation plan document" Chico City Planning Department 3. PROCESS The first component to successful buffer implementation is frequent and solid communication, or mutual engagement, between all parties, from the policy development phase to subdivision approval to buffer implementation. To reiterate a point made earlier, process is a component of successful buffer implementation, but not a freestanding component. There has to� be buy -in at each decision making juncture, and constant attention to communication back and forth to keep concerned parties in the loop as a factor of success, not flattery, and as a means to improving procedures, policies and design. The communication process is open and frank. Consistency in inclusion as well as in implementation lends credibility, which in turn creates a healthy process. This boils down to being a people issue — getting people to understand and appreciate other points of view and resolving or averting conflict between two or more diverse user groups. It means having the right people at the table at the right time. One model, the California Coordinated Resource Management and Planning "(CRMP) is a resource planning, problem - solving and management process that allows for direct participation of everyone concerned with natural resource management in a given planning area. The concept underlying CRMP is that coordinating resource management strategies results in improved resource management and minimizes conflicts among land users, landowners, governmental agencies and interest groups."12 There are many other resources to assist in facilitation, for example public agencies such as Cooperative Extension or community -based programs, as well as private consultants. Beyond the logistics of process, it is a larger awareness and sensitivity to the need for inclusive processes. It means that people see value in stakeholder identification and involvement and believe that open communication will result in the best outcome. Community and stakeholder involvement The principles that serve as the foundation for developing policies and implementing them are best identified collaboratively. If policy makers assess the will of the community and the strength of their commitment to preserving agriculture before any policies are written, later implementation of the policies will be easier. It is important for counties and cities to seek 12 For more information, see <http://ceres.ca.gov/cacrmp/hb-intro.html>. Although usually associated with natural resource management for areas of riparian or habitat concern, the model can be adapted. 358 22 constituent ideas and concerns in general plan updates. 13 It is incumbent on the farming community to show up at planning and informational meetings to present their points of view and to hear others. A collaborative process, though at times cumbersome and time consuming, will be better for the long-term success of the project. Planning departments need to work together to involve all stakeholders on projects that might be controversial, but also on those that seem like a sure thing. There can be hidden conflicts that rise up when least expected, and exclusion creates animosity that is difficult to reverse. Exclusion, whether intentional or not, can lead to any number of later problems, from indifference to figurative sabotage. Where developers are aware of the community culture and attitudes toward agriculture, projects fare better when those considerations are incorporated in their plans from the beginning, including provisions for effective buffers. Land use initiatives, ballot measures, and suits brought about by special interest groups are sometimes the end result of insufficient dialogue earlier. Ongoing education and outreach Educational efforts need to be on -going on at least three fronts. First, the communities need to have frequent communication from governmental agencies about the land use goals and values that guide jurisdictional policies and decision -making. Outreach efforts will reinforce commitment, and will also garner input that serves as an early indicator that sentiment is changing direction, which can then be promptly addressed. Dialogue is needed between government, residents, and farmers. On the second front, planners mentioned their needing to undergo on -going education in policy and land use issues, but especially in agriculture. In the course of their jobs they must make determinations and interpretations about agriculture, so a better understanding of agricultural processes and issues is critical to their ability to make good decisions. . The third facet of education and outreach should be between the agricultural community and urban residents. "The best situations are characterized by empathetic neighbors who actively seek to understand their neighbors' problems." Northern California Agricultural Commissioner The ideal is that through outreach and education, common values and appreciation for other perspectives are instilled. The goal is to move beyond and above an attitude of mutual tolerance to one of genuine appreciation. Agricultural literacy programs exist through Farm Bureau, Cooperative Extension, Natural Resource Conservation Service, California Women for Agriculture, and others. These educational programs lead urbanites to a greater appreciation for 13 Delta County Colorado developed a plan to protect the area's botanical resources. The landscape architects involved in developing the document assert that "the process of creating the plan has been almost as valuable as the actual document produced." Rodriguez, A. A Guide for growth. Landscape Architect. August 1998 pp 32 — 37. 359 23 the complexities of farming and a sense of connection to their food. They help bring the city dweller's outdated perception of farming up to today's reality of how complex it is. Likewise, there are farmers who actively listen to nearby residents and implement practices that make them better neighbors.14 To increase understanding of agriculture, Southern California farmer A.G. Kawamura works with Farm Bureau tours, gives private tours, speaks to public groups and school children, organizes gleaning projects (re -harvesting a field to collect edible "seconds"), does public speaking, and works with hunger and nutrition projects. In Contra Costa County, some growers in sensitive areas voluntarily plant crops that require less pesticide application, or use lower toxicity pesticides, according to the local Agricultural Commissioner. Pesticide education is one example where education can put people more at ease. Some pesticide "scent markers" (odors added to serve as an alerting mechanism) are more volatile than the pesticide itself, so when people smell pesticides, it can be the marker they're smelling. Smelling does not equate to exposure. Knowing the difference between perceived danger and real danger, as well as how to limit one's risk of real danger from pesticides gives a sense of control. Not all farmer interactions with city dwellers are negative. In a study entitled "Conflicts and Solutions When Agricultural Land Meets Urban Development", Mary Handel15 quotes several authors who contend that some farmers find it advantageous to farm at the urban edge. Direct sales are the most common opportunity for the farmer, and people enjoy buying products directly from the farm.16 Although these niche markets are rarely the sole economic foundation -for farmers, they are valuable tools for improving farm -urban relationships. Fact or science driven General buffer guidelines and implementation plans need to incorporate fact based, or science - based solutions. Arbitrary or unrealistic requirements, or those pushed by a vocal philosophical or political minority are more likely to suffer protests and appeals. The guidelines need to allow for flexibility without opening the door to exceptions that dilute them. Impartial fact and best practices rather than emotion or ideology should drive decision -making. Cross -jurisdictional cooperation and integrated regional planning A clear result of the research is that counties and cities must have clear and effective processes for communicating and working with each other on agricultural protection, growth and buffer issues. The decentralization of land -use planning makes two-way communication all the more important. Comprehensive buffer guidelines alone do not prevent counties from suing cities over development. Sutter County sued Yuba City over a subdivision's buffer distances that did not 14 A.G. Kawamura, Orange County. "The Farm", Salinas -Monterey Highway 15 Handel, M. E. Conflicts and Solutions when Agricultural Land Meets Urban Development. Community Development Master of Science Thesis, University of California. 1994 p 88. 16 Bryant, C.R., Russwurm, L.H., McLellan, A.G. The city's countryside. New York: Longman, 1982 p 93. Lockeretz, W. (Ed.). Sustaining_ agriculture near cities. Ankeny, Iowa: Soil and Water Conservation Society, 1987. Blobaum, R. Farming on the Urban Fringe: The economic potential of the Rural -Urban Connection" in Lockeretz, Sustaining Agriculture Near Cities, op cit., p 3. 3 2� follow County guidelines. The suit was settled out of court with. compromise distances. Several improvements to City -County planning communication were implemented as a result of the suit.17 This suit was not unique, as this study came across other instances. Another county reported that they meet annually with the cities over previously approved projects to review the implementation and adjust procedures for continual improvement. This 360-degree communication, formal and informal, helps cement working relationships and leads to better policy implementation. All the jurisdictional departments that hold advisory roles in the planning process should be included in the feedback loop. Where a review or advisory body, such as the Agricultural Commissioner, makes a recommendation, the final outcome should be communicated back to them. Knowing if any changes were made to their original recommendation is useful in developing recommendations on subsequent projects. The Placer Legacy Open Space and Agricultural Conservation Program is an extremely comprehensive plan that exemplifies extensive community input, goals and guiding principles, and inclusion of outreach, identification of stakeholder and advisory groups, and a commitment to scientific review.18 The Board of Supervisors approved the plan in June, 2000 and the expectation is that one of the important outcomes of this plan will be increased cooperation between the cities and counties regarding development and open space preservation. Where in the past, there hasn't been any requirement for the cities to apply buffer standards set by the county; the Legacy plan provides the initiative for inter jurisdictional planning to. "soften the edges", and not merely enclose everything with six-foot sound walls. One out-of-state planner referred to "knock -down, drag -out fights" between the county and .cities to develop a joint plan, but that the effort was worth it. They were committed to coming out with a plan, including matching zoning codes, and the result has been that now the only occasional differences are over interpretation. The `Guidelines for Orderly Development' were developed jointly and adopted by the County of Ventura and the cities in 1969, with a few amendments since then and has been endorsed by LAFCO. "The Guidelines have prevented competition for development and tax monies between the cities and the County. They have prevented property owners and development interests from playing off the County and cities in terms of development standards." Executive Officer, Ventura County LAFCO Approval and appeal processes Counties that incorporate review from either the Agricultural Commissioner, or an agriculture policy advisory committee (San Mateo County, Tuolumne County, Santa Cruz County, Ventura County as examples) with additional technical input from Cooperative Extension Farm Advisors as necessary, report satisfaction with the process. Not only is the agricultural expertise more likely to yield an effective buffer, the recommendation generally incurs less resistance, presumably because there is credibility behind the recommendation. 17 Refer to `Buffer Case Studies" section for an amplified description. 18 <http://www.t)lacer.ca gov/plannin /g_lecr 11egacy htm> April 26, 2001. 3A1 In the case of the Agricultural Commissioner making the determination, their recommendations are advisory, although usually accepted. San Luis Obispo County — The Agricultural Commissioner reviews approximately 100 projects per year. They have received a 95% acceptance rate on their buffer recommendations. This experience is historical, but may differ in the future. The Agricultural Commissioner makes the determination of "significant land use conflict" on project referrals, and recommends mitigation measures. According to the San Luis Obispo planning department, there is rarely any protest from farmers on determinations because they have confidence in the Agricultural Commissioner's commitment to protecting agriculture. Sonoma County — The Agricultural Commissioner receives referrals from the County Permit and Resource Management Department. The Agricultural Commissioner makes setback recommendations that are usually approved, occasionally modified. The Agricultural Commissioner recommends buffers as condition of approval on new projects that affect agriculture. In general, processes that promote consistency and impartiality lead to decisions based on merit rather than influence, pressure or politics. Appeals processes, as with implementation, should be open, fair, and apolitical.19 Framing all the issues Where controversy arises, it is important to recognize that the stated objections are not always the heart of the protests.20 For example, objections might be voiced about the implementation of a buffer, but the unstated motive is anti -growth sentiment. Cost could be raised as an objection, but perhaps the real issue is power, or lack of trust. Unless the underlying problems are addressed, superficial fixes and discussions around the stated topic will not be effective. A facilitated process among stakeholders is one way to dig deeper into identifying both the real issues and the solutions. Many tools exist to frame issues and reach viable solutions. The "Ventura County Ag Futures Alliance" is a coalition of diverse interests that has been "organized to address complex and critical issues facing the long term viability of agriculture in a cooperative, innovative and, hopefully, much more effective way than in the past, Its members are community leaders from various sectors — agriculture, environment, labor, health and wellness, media, government, education and community service." This group has funds to hire a skilled facilitator to assist their dialogue in airing their diverse interests and exploring solutions. The diversity of the group's funding sources reflects the buy -in of their members and the community.21 19 For appeals, Queen Anne's County, Maryland uses a quasi-judicial review panel appointed by the County Commissioners (Board of Supervisors) as the final appeal step. 20 Abdalla, C. W., Kelsey, T. W. Breaking the impasse: Helping communities cope with change at the Waal -urban interface. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. Vol. 51, Number 6, November -December 1996. 21 Pidduck, R., farmer in Ventura County (personal communication) May 2, 2001. 364 26 Ventura County may be unique. In most cases, a separate, funded facilitation process isn't utilized. The main thing for those seeking community and stakeholder involvement is to recognize that deeper issues are holding up progress and that those issues will have to be drawn out before being able to move ahead. V. Conclusion: Your Next Steps The following list is closer to being a brainstorming list than true recommendations. Just as buffers need to be site -specific, how any particular area chooses to adapt or implement practices and ideas from this study will also be very customized. Which issues need work will differ from one area to another. As mentioned in the introduction, buffers are just one part the increasingly complex job of deciding how best to use our land resources, with an eye to the future. The recommendations below were gleaned from this study about buffers, but not surprisingly, could be applied to many land use issues. The following suggestions are placed under subheadings, but many are interchangeable. Some items are chronologically dependent on other items happening first, and others are "stand-alone". Once a jurisdiction selects the topics they wish to explore, they could then easily develop a flow- chart. LOCAL NEED FOR BUFFERS • Conduct an inventory of local complaints regarding edge issues. Assess the degree of severity, both in number and type of complaints. • Inventory the types of near -city farming and what the likelihood of conflict is from that type of farming/crops. • Determine if buffers have a role to play in the long-term growth strategies, and how that role might be strengthened. • Explore the concept of multiple -use (value-added) buffers and their local acceptability. COSTS • Explore local options for funding buffers as part of the necessary infrastructure. • Examine creative funding options. Conduct some costs -sharing brainstorming. Correlate existing fee authorizations to applicability as funding mechanisms for buffers. PROCESS • Identify and address or "heal" old wounds that are preventing or impeding progress. • Analyze strengths and weaknesses of city/county/LAFCO interaction • Establish a buffer "team" to develop vision and process. Determine the composition and members. • Provide training — affective (team building, empathy for farming) 363 27 • Develop setback guidelines through a technical committee. • Analyze exemption statistics. Determine if exemptions and reductions are a problem or not. Develop a technical -based rather than political -based appeal process. • Develop a "land use dialogue group" that is cross jurisdictional (city/county) and cross - interest (government/environment/development/agriculture). Such a group would ideally be run by a non -biased entity. If one group is too unwieldy, there could be two groups, with representatives from each that meet together periodically. From the governmental side, departments beyond planning should be included. Other departments (water resources, for example) deal with land use related issues and should not be left out of land use planning discussions. • Alert statewide constituency groups of needed changes to state laws (CEQA, tax structures, etc.) • Encourage agricultural awareness education. Work with appropriate groups to improve the public's understanding of the importance and value of agriculture, as well as a better understanding of modern production methods. PRINCIPLES a Assess the strength of local will to maintain agriculture as an economic contributor. • Public • Elected officials • Other stakeholders • Conduct community forums to determine what the people value. What is their vision for the area? • See how aligned what people say they want (example: good schools) is with what they do (example: vote "no" on school bond issues)? Determine what needs to be done to correct discrepancies. POLICY • Assess.how well current policies and statutes address land use and effectively direct growth. • Figure out how to "fill in" where current policies leave off (example: CEQA and EIR's). • Review General Plans of cities and county to evaluate for continuity; conflicts, and opportunities for potential synchronization. • Review policies for opportunities to "close growth gaps" left by old statutes. • "Personalize" the ten best policy practices offered in this study. • Review policy direction on rural residential development. Determine if it will be allowed, where it fits in, and how buffers can be improved. • Determine if policies adequately include buffers as infrastructure. 364 28 A. References and Resources Abdalla, C. W., Kelsey, T.W. "Breaking the impasse: Helping communities cope with change at the rural -urban interface." Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. Vol. 51, Number 6, November -December 1996. American Farmland Trust. Farming on the Edge. <www.farmlandinfo.org/cae/foe2> American Farmland Trust. Saving American farmland: What works. Northampton, MA: American Farmland Trust, 1997. Blobaum, R. Farming on the urban fringe: The economic potential of the rural -urban connection, in Lockeretz, Sustaining_ agriculture near cities. Ankeny, Iowa: Soil and Water Conservation Society, 1987. Bryant, C.R., L.H. Russwurm, L. H. and McLellan, A.G. The City's Countryside (New York Longman, 1982) Coppock, R. Kreith, M. (Eds.) California's future: Maintaining viable agriculture at the urban edge. University of California Agricultural Issues Center, 1997. Coppock, R, Kreith, M. (Eds.) Farmers and neighbors- Land use, pesticides and other issues. University of California Agricultural Issues Center, 1996. Daniels, T. Agricultural zoning : Managing growth, protecting farms. Zoning Reports. American Planning Association. August 1993. Eisner, S., Gallion, A., Eisner, S. The urban pattern (6ffi ed.). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1993. Farmland Preservation Report. More localities enacting, agricultural buffer ordinances. Maryland: Bowers Publishing, October 1993. Handel, M. E. Conflicts and solutions when agricultural land meets urban development. Master of Science Thesis, University of California, Davis. 1994. Handel, M. E. Land use reference auide. California Farm Bureau Federation. 1997. Lockeretz, W. (Ed.). Sustaining agriculture near cities. Ankeny, Iowa: Soil and Water Conservation Society, 1987. Medvitz, A., Sokolow, A.D., Lemp, C. (Eds.) California farmland and urban pressures: Statewide and regional perspectives. Agricultural Issues Center, University of California, Davis, 1999. 36D 29 Moss, S. Smart growth versus urban sprawl in California : How state and local public policies perpetuate inefficient development in the world's most productive agricultural valleys. American Farmland Trust. 1999. Natural Resource Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Buffers are common-sense conservation. Buffer Notes. <http://www.nhq.nrcs.usda.g v/CCS/BufrsPub.html> November 30, 2000. Owens, P.E. Landscape at risk: The rural -urban edge. Unpublished manuscript. University of California, Davis. Distributed by the Center for Design, Research, Department of Environmental Design, 1997. Paulson, J. Protecting_ farmland on the edge: What policies and programs work? Center for Agriculture in the Environment, 1997. <http_ //www_farmlandinfo. org/cae/wp/w . 7-1.4_ html> Rodriguez, A. A guide for growth. Landscape Architect. August 1998. Placer Legacy Open Space and Agricultural Conservation Program. Planning. Department, Placer County. 20 June 2000. <http://www_placer:ca. ov/Planning/le&acy_/legacy_htm.> Schiffman, I. Alternative techniques for managing_ growth. (2nd ed.). Institute of Governmental Studies Press, University of California, Berkeley, 1999. Staley, S. R. The sprawling of America: In defense of the dynamic city. Policy Study No. 251. Reason Public Policy Institute, 1999. <http://www.rppi.org/ps251.html>. Sutter County Design Guidelines: Agricultural Buffering Guidelines, Sutter County, January 1999. Thompson, L. The Conflict at the Edge. Zoning News. American Planning Association February 1997. Turner, M. Urban creep wraps farm. Modesto Bee, April 30, 2001. Ventura County Guidelines for Orderly Development. Initial adoption 1969. County of Ventura. Arendt, R.G., Harper, H. Conservation Designs for Subdivisions: A practical guide to Creating Open Space Networks. Natural Lands Trust, American Planning Association and American Society of Landscape Architects. Island Press. August 1996. 366 30 Barron, E. M., Nielsen, I. (eds.) Agriculture and sustainable land use in Europe: papers from conferences of European advisory councils. The Hague; Boston. Kluwer Law International, 1998. Series title: Nijhoff law specials v. 38. Martinotti, G. Perceiving, conceiving, achieving the sustainable city: a synthesis report. Loughlinstown, Co., Dublin, Irelenad. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. Luxembourg: Office for Offical Publications of the European Communities; Lanham, MDL Bernan Associates [distributor], 1997. Nivola, P.S. Laws of the Landscape: How policies shape cities in Europe and America. Washington, D.C. Brookings Institution, c1999. Papadakis, A. C. (Ed.) Marking the City Boundaries (Art & Design Profile, No. 24) St. Martin Press. May 1992. Sanoff, H. Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning. John Wiley & Sons. December 1999. Waterhouse, A. Boundaries of the city : the architecture of western urbanism. Waterhouse. Toronto; Buffalo: University of Tornonto. 1993. Wates, N. (Ed.) The Community Planning Handbook : How people can shape their cities, towns and villages in any part of the world. Earthscan Publications Ltd. June 2000. Other Resources "Conflicts And Solutions When Agricultural Land Meets Urban Development" (Mary E. Handel) Arendt, Randall. "Open Space Zoning: What it is and why it works. " Planning Commissioners' Journal (July/August 1992). Berton, Valerie. "Farming on the edge." American Farmland Summer 1993 California Department of Agriculture. Vision 2010: California Agriculture. 1990. California Senate Committee on Local Government. California's hidden land use problem: The redevelopment of antiquated subdivisions. Sacramento, 2 December, 1986. Carr, Stephen, et al. Public Space. Cambridge University Press, 1992 Cruickshand, A.B., (Ed.) Where town meets country. Great Britain: Aberdeen University Press, 1982 367 31 Daniels, Rom. "Agricultural zoning: Managing growth, protecting farms." Zoning News American Planning Association, August 1993 : 1-3. Governor's Office of Planning and Research. Agricultural Conservation and Growth Management. State of California, August 1992. ---Room to Grow. June 1983 ---Urban Growth Boundaries. December 1991 National Growth Management Leadership Project. Farming on the Fringe." Developments Vol. 3, No. 1 (September 1993): 11-15. San Luis Obispo County Department of Agriculture. Mitigating Agricultural/Residential Conflict. January 1991. Wyckoff, Mark. "Zoning Options to Protect Rural Character." Planning and Zoning News March 1992: 5 - 8. 36 32 Appendicies A. Study Questionnaire B. Excerpt -- Woodland Rural/Urban Edge Survey C. Excerpt -- Agricultural Buffer Zone General Plan Language 369 33 EXCERPTS — LANDSCAPE AT RISK: THE RURAL -URBAN EDGE22 Question #9. Name some things which separate Woodland from the outlying areas (for example, walls, buildings, fences, roads, etc.) and describe your feelings about them. Multiple responses possible What do your see? (Total responding = 137) Walls: 50 (36.5%) Fences: 27 (19.7%) Surrounding roads: 46 (33.6%) Warehouses, industrial bldgs: 41 (29.9%) Farmland/open or dirt fields: 38 (27.7%) (5.8%) Houses/housing developments: 37 (27.0%) (29.2%) Commercial /retail bldgs: 32 (23.4%) Trees, shrubs, landscaping Mall: [Grocery] Center: Other. 13 (9.5%) 9 (6.6%) 8 40 "Other" things mentioned included irrigation ditches and canals, the rice mills, railroad tracks, and spurs, traffic lights, freeways, older Victorian homes, etc. How do you feel? Comments regarding feelings about what is seen at the edge were both positive and negative and were numerous. Walls were viewed in a negative way by over half of the respondents and many comments (both good and bad) were directed at the walls on Road [XX]. On the positive side, walls were seen as good (even necessary) noise barriers and nice looking provided they are properly landscaped. However, to others walls were seen as ugly, trashy, poorly designed, poorly landscaped, confining and too "big city-ish." Surrounding Roads were viewed positively by over half of the respondents. They were described as good natural boundaries, providing a way to keep an open view and accommodating increased traffic. In a negative sense, several were worried that development would eventually jump the boundary roads (such as Road [XX]). Others mentioned that several entrances to town had few trees and little or no landscaping and weren't very attractive. Other comments included the roads being too heavily traveled and needing better maintenance. Warehouses and industrial buildings, too received many negative comments. They were seen as junky, unattractive, poorly landscaped, and as an unappealing entrance to town. Positive comments included the industrial area being vital for employment, and providing jobs. Several commented that some of the newer warehouses such as [car dealership], were attractive and nicely landscaped. 22 Owens, P.E. Landscape at Risk: The Rural -Urban Edge. Unpublished manuscript. University of California, Davis. Distributed by the Center for Design Research, Department of Environmental Design, 1997. 33# 0 Farmland/open fields and trees, shrubs and landscaping received overwhelming positive responses. Respondents enjoyed the openness and general ag feeling associated with the farmland. Trees received no negative comments at all and were seen as providing an excellent natural boundary. Houses/housini developments received many negative comments. Many commented there was too much building and development, and that services (and schools) couldn't keep up. Several mentioned that new lots are too small and there are too few trees, not enough open space. Others mentioned that the new developments created very abrupt boundaries between country and city. On the positive side, some saw new housing as a sign of Woodland's prosperity. Others saw housing as a necessary part of growth. A few commented on the nice character of older homes. Commercial/retail development received mixed comments. In a positive sense, it was seen as blending well with residential, as an indication of available goods and services, and as a sign of jobs. In a negative sense, [XXX's] corner and the [XXX] Street corridor were seen as unattractive entrances giving visitors a bad impression. Other comments included needing more trees and landscaping, the town having too many run down buildings as well as too many new buildings. Fences were described as a defining, but not imposing boundary, and at times necessary to discourage trespassing. On the negative side, some felt they were not well maintained, an eyesore, and too abrupt a boundary when there was no landscaping. Mall comments were primarily positive. It was described as attractive and well maintained, and a good addition to the town. However, others mentioned that it imposed on a beautiful area, and that it killed the downtown area. Two sites were visited, chosen for their interesting experiences with buffers. As it turned out, the two are quite different in circumstances and demographics. The population in Yuba City is older, less affluent and more politically and fiscally conservative than Davis. Davis' 371 35 demographics reflect the presence of a major university. Davis is more politically engaged and has a greater interest in environmental issues, and more prone in the past to tax themselves. The demographic uniqueness of each area affects the way in which they view buffers and how willing they are to pay for having them. (see appendix for brief statistical comparison). SITE VISITATION # ONE Place: Yuba City, Sutter County Site: Buttes Vista Neighborhood Interview Date: May 16, 2001 Contacts: Denis Cook, Community Development Director, Yuba City Tom Last, Chief of Planning, Sutter County Synopsis: This case study examines the interaction between City and County over buffer distances for a 240-acre neighborhood plan. The area in question was within the City limits, but touching the County boundary. The sphere of influence was set over ten years ago, and both City and County are proud of the fact that there have been no development exceptions made since then. Despite the fact that both departments enjoyed productive interaction, there were assumptions made and unintentional specific lapses in communication that led to complications in implementing the buffer at a specific site. The County wrote Sutter County Design Guidelines that are the implementation vehicle for their General Plan. The Guidelines were finalized in January 1999. Included in the 100+ page document are the Agricultural Buffering Guidelines. Both City and County planning departments had a history of working together, and offered mutual document review opportunities where appropriate. Thus, before final adoption of the Design Guidelines, the County planners submitted the Guidelines to the Yuba City planners for review. The City had comments on other portions of the Design Guidelines, but none regarding the buffers, as they appeared to them to apply only to land within the County. The County did adopt the buffer guidelines as written. The guidelines state, "For development projects located on the north or south boundary lines of the Yuba City Sphere of Influence, the County may require a buffer distance which exceeds the distances found on Table 1-1 [which specifies 300' — 800' next to irrigated orchards]. This is to provide additional `insulation' for agricultural parcels located immediately outside of the urban boundary and will result in a more permanent urban boundary line." Moving along on a parallel track, the City was involved in approving a 240-acre neighborhood plan, the Buttes Vista Neighborhood Plan, within the City limits, but touching the City's sphere of influence boundary. Back when the City prepared the Environment Impact Review (EIR) for annexation of that area into the City, the EIR specified minimum 100' buffers. At that time, the annexation EIR was reviewed by the County and deemed adequate. Abiding by the EIR, the City's site plan for the Buttes Vista Neighborhood Plan specified a 118' buffer (98' right-of-way, 20' backyard setback). 3 7 36 The County, upon becoming aware of the proposed project's 118' buffer at the sphere's edge, pressed for the maximum 800' buffer next to irrigated orchards, as prescribed in their Buffer Guidelines. The County was especially adamant because of the location right at the ultimate growth perimeter. From the City's perspective, an 800' buffer was excessive because it would have taken up approximately a third of the proposed development. Also, any land the City had to buy back from the developer would have to be purchased at a valuation based on potential development, or approximately $40,000 per acre. Right across the street, orchards just outside the urban growth boundary are worth $3,000 to $5,000 per acre. The City and County appointed a small ad hoc committee composed of City Council members and County Supervisors and planning staff to craft a compromise. The committee was making progress, but it was ultimately a suit filed by the County against the City that pressed the process toward a compromise. There was no disagreement on having a buffer. The major disagreement was the width of the buffer. The suit was dismissed after the same ad hoc committee that had been convened prior to the suit devised the winning compromise. The final buffer was settled upon at 168'. Thirty feet were added to the backyards on the perimeter, with the developer adding the cost of the land and the impact fees onto the purchase price of the homes. Between the street and the homes, the landscaped area was increased by twenty feet, including a 6' masonry wall atop a 4' berm. Trees had always been planned, but the compromise increased the spacing between three rows, and the stressed row is to be planted on an elevated berm. The houses are being built and sold, but construction has not yet reached the city edge, so the buffer has not yet been planted. The City had to purchase that extra 20' landscaping width from the developer. To pay for it, the city added a development impact fee of approximately $800 per house to the building permit. Every homebuyer within the development pays this "perimeter conflict mitigation fee". To pay for the maintenance of the trees and other landscaping, the city set up a lighting and landscape district that homeowners within the specific area plan pay for through their annual real estate taxes. Outcome: The compromise led to the suit being dropped. The City made sure that the settlement was not precedent setting. Today, City -County relationships are characterized as positive, with no apparent lingering ill will over the suit. A tax exchange agreement between the two jurisdictions is evidence of that positive working relationship. Planners work well together and agree philosophically on the need for buffers. They also agree that the difficulty is in hammering out the details. This case showed that the 300' to 800' buffer distances may not always be realistic, but at this time there is no indication from the Board of Supervisors that they want to revise the guidelines. However, there is the flexibility in the guidelines to review projects on a "site -by -site basis' . Conclusions: The Need for Buffers Both the City's Community Development Director and the County's Chief of Planning agree that buffers are necessary, but that they don't fully accomplish what they're supposed to, especially for the farmer. The major problems their farmers closest to the city experience are young people 373 37 partying and joggers who consider the farm open space. Both situations create considerable liability risks for the farmer. No trespassing signs and chaining off entry roads have not been effective. "No one is opposed to a buffer. It's just figuring out what everyone can live with and what we can afford." Denis Cook, Community Development Director, Yuba City Buffer Design The hardest part is coming up with distances and designs that are a compromise between opposing needs. As Denis Cook said, "We're in the business of minimizing." By this, he meant that they rarely find a perfect cure, but instead can only try to minimize conflict at the edge, minimize impacts of urban development, minimize costs to the city, developer and ultimately the homeowner, minimize loss of ag land, etc. Both planners agreed that the maximum distance that is feasible should be implemented, but then the problem is what to do with that buffer land. Leaving it idle is not efficient use of land, and it would just become weeds and litter if not properly maintained, which costs money. Denis Cook feels that canals offer a bit more protection to the farmer, and don't incur additional costs, as they are pre-existing infrastructure. However, canals are a viable option in very limited instances. Costs The City found ways to pay for the land and on -going maintenance that ensure a tidy and property -enhancing buffer strip. Where existing authority allows for jurisdictions to charge for the cost of infrastructure, such devices should be considered. When new developments are being reviewed, a thorough analysis should include both the overt and hidden costs of infrastructure, including buffers, and provisions made for the homeowners to cover the costs. Denis Cook offered the idea of buying easements along the sphere of influence to help fortify the perimeter of the city from growth and to provide for a smooth, compact urban edge once fully filled in. Many jurisdictions are moving toward achieving this model, but what was unique about Denis' easement idea is that growers entering into the easement agreement would also be paid an "inconvenience fee" to compensate them for the inconveniences they experience by adjoining urban development. In Yuba City's case, approximately 400 to 500 acres would have to be purchased to fully achieve such a cordon. Paying for such easements should be a citywide or possibly countywide responsibility. Such a payment is based on the argument that the entire region benefits by keeping agriculture viable and thus a significant economic contributor, and by creating a compact urban boundary that promotes efficient land use and keeps infrastructure and city services costs down. The easement idea has not garnered any champions in the tax - conservative City and County. 374 38 The Three "P's" Process Both planners agree that the suit resulted primarily from lack of communication specific to the Guidelines and the project, and miscommunication. Although there had been frequent communication and good working relationships between departments on other issues, the County did not do anything beyond their ordinary procedure of sending over a copy. In retrospect, they might have spent extra time with the key City staff to go over the Guidelines and to give the opportunity for more interactive review and comment. The review process the City used with the draft Guidelines did not generate any comments or suggested revisions for the County regarding the buffers because they seemed to apply only to land within the County. Once the conflicting regulations became apparent, the ad hoc committee was a good mechanism to arrive at a workable solution. Before the committee had a chance to resolve the issue, the cross - jurisdictional cooperation broke down. The County used the suit as a vehicle to press the issue, and a compromise was finally reached. Fortunately, the suit left no apparent negative feelings. Realizing that more thorough communication might have prevented the whole incident, both the City and County planning departments established a monthly meeting to jointly review issues related to development, special projects, and zoning. The meetings improve communication and cut down on assumptions. City and County are jointly making a big effort to align their standards so when the City eventually annexes an area, projects already built there under County codes will automatically comply with City standards. The City is conducting a general plan update and both jurisdictions are working together on it. Principles The community -at -large professes a commitment to the preservation of agriculture. What is not as clear, based on recent failed taxation measures, is a community willingness to pay for agricultural preservation. Also, there does not appear to be full recognition of the farmer's property rights by those residents that feel they have free reign on farms and can treat it as fully accessible open space. .Policies The County appears to be satisfied with its policies. The County's buffers are ambitious, but do allow for flexibility and site -specific adjustments. The planners' major problems come from having to deal with policies that were made, or policy exceptions that were granted, well over ten years ago. As an example, their biggest problems with interface don't come at the straight edge of current development, but rather from the multitude of isolated residential developments that zigzag and polka dot the landscape outside the city boundary. These pockets of development were allowed to pop up years ago, but today the consequences are very real. The leapfrog development from years past points out the rationale for buffers. They also make a case for long-range planning and for straight(er)-edge development. Finally, writing the policy for their own jurisdiction is not the problem. The hard part is in writing policy that both jurisdictions can agree on. The creativity, problem solving, and compromise required to find the solution brings us back around to process. What the planners 375 39 struggle with most is how to get agreement and how to implement policy in each and every unique situation. The old adage, "The devil is in the detail, is quite apt in planning. 376 40 SITE VISITATION # TWO Place: Davis, Yolo County Interview Date: May 30, 2001 Site: Wildhorse Davis Greenbelt Contacts: Bob Cordrey, Parks and Open Space Administrator, Parks and Community Services, City of Davis Mitch Sears, Open Space Resources Coordinator, City of Davis Paul Deering, Landscape Architect, Deering Design Frank J. Chan, Principle, Native Plant Resources Synopsis: The Wildhorse Development consists of 400+ acres of upscale housing and open space, including a private golf course that is open to the public. It is situated at the northeastern side of the city limits. The buffer at this site is unique for its size and the degree to which it has been planned and enhanced as a greenbelt for public use and as a wildlife and native plant showcase. The buffer borders two sides of the development, with active agriculture (safflower, tomatoes, alfalfa) on the opposing side of the buffer. The buffer strip is 1_ miles long, and is 200' wide for the majority of that distance. The 200' width has been divided in half by a wildlife fence, with the half closest to the development being open to the public for walking, jogging and biking and for wildlife and scenic viewing stations. The 100' closest to the fields are planted similarly with native grasses and plants and the original black walnut trees, but provide protection for the wildlife. A linear hedgerow abuts the fence separating this section from the agricultural fields. During the site visit, burrowing owls, ground squirrels, jack rabbits, a blue heron and a hawk were spotted. Picture: "Natural buffer. IV' Caption: From right to left: Golf course to the right (unseen); first hundred feet of buffer, with gravel recreational trail, native species plantings, fence separating public space from 100-foot wildlife corridor with more plantings and existing walnut trees, farm fields to the far left. The City requires any developer to improve and dedicate neighborhood interior streetscape improvements and to provide 10% of the development to be improved as neighborhood greenbelt. The City also uses the Quimby Act to appropriate undeveloped park acreage. The 200' Wildhorse Ag Buffer fulfilled the City's requirement for agricultural mitigation. The land 37 41 designated for the buffer had existing black walnut trees, weeds and grass, all of which probably would have stayed more or less in that state until future city improvement. What led to the enhancements was that the developer excavated topsoil from the buffer strip for use within the development, including the golf course. The City considered this a violation of the buffer agreement. The City considered legal options and decided that a more effective solution would be for the developer to be responsible for restoration of the buffer vegetation. The developers, wanting to maintain their reputation, and in the interest of doing the right thing, agreed. This not only accelerated the project timeline, it provided an opportunity to create a model native plant buffer. The City and developer have been working as a team to establish the buffer. In January 2002 the developer will deed the buffer to the City, which will then assume responsibility for maintenance of the buffer. Outcome Besides its intended uses, the City is using this as a study site. All those involved view this as a great research resource. The City is learning in the process, and providing educational opportunities for others. With the plant and landscape experts that were hired to design the buffer, they will be monitoring the effectiveness of the soil preparation, plant establishment, and wildlife activity. They have the unique opportunity to work with professors and students at the University of California, Davis, who are using GPS to monitor soil changes and fertility. They spent the first 1 _ years conducting extensive soil preparation and weed control. They have test plots in the subsoil where the topsoil was removed to study the progress of soil building and the effectiveness of natural innoculum in contributing to the health of the native grasses. They expect to see an evolution of the landscape as natural succession takes place. Conclusions The need for buffers The City strongly supports buffers and they are a part of the City's comprehensive planning. Buffers clearly serve as insulators between agricultural and residential use, but the City views them in a broader sense as one of their means to improving the quality of life. They provide greenscape, serve as neighborhood separators and city/county growth boundaries. Other cities in the region successfully use buffers as community separators. It is intended that Davis' agricultural buffers will connect to the City's internal greenbelt system to provide continuous open space within and around the city. Buffer design The buffer maximizes use by people and wildlife. Native indigenous plants were used for minimum maintenance. Most of the 53 plant species were collected within 15 miles of Davis. The walking/biking trail is gravel, as opposed to asphalt, to conform to the desired rustic look. Special riparian seed mixes were planted and vegetation "islands" were installed to provide wildlife habitat. The riparian areas flood several times in the winter, but are also fed with water off the golf course. The golf course incorporated vegetation recommended by the Audubon Society Guidelines for golf courses. Walnut trees are dominant in the buffer now, but valley 373 42 oaks that have been planted will dominate once they grow bigger. There is also a sycamore grove. All plant choices were reviewed for compatibility with the adjacent farm commodities. In contrast, another buffer area along the south side of Davis has a more "constructed" feel. Houses back up to a meandering, lighted asphalt trail that ends up tunneling under the freeway and connecting to the University. Between the trail and the farmlands is a creek, with vegetation lining the steep banks. Picture: "Scenic Buffer I' Caption: From right to left: Back yard fences; light posts and blacktop trail; trees and landscaping; and unseen steep bank to creek and the farm fields on the other side of the creek. In contrast to the natural settings of Wildhorse, Davis' Putah Creek greenbelt buffer has a more urban, constructed feel to it, with lighted trails and park benches. The trail connects to the University's pathway system. Costs The cost of the land for the buffer was paid for by the developer and assumed by the homebuyers in the cost of their homes. The agreement is that the developer will deed the.buffer land back to the City, at which time the City will assume maintenance costs. One of the benefits of native plants is to minimize on -going costs. Once the plants are established, it is anticipated that maintenance will be limited to mowing for fire protection, vegetation/weed management, minimal replanting, trash removal and signage maintenance. Wildhorse is unique in having the extra money the developer agreed to put into the design and installation of the buffer, to make amends for having removed the topsoil. Since the developer has been paying the bills, an exact amount is not known but the City estimates that the developer has paid about $275,000 for the construction. This includes grading, water lines, riparian areas, planting, and the gravel road. The cost of the consultants is extra. Once the City takes over the buffer in January, it will pay for maintenance through Measure "O" monies. This initiative provides for the City to impose a $24 per year per parcel tax, for thirty years. Besides maintenance for the Wildhorse buffer, the money is designated for purchase of conservation easements and outright purchase (fee title) of agricultural land and riparian corridors around the City. It also provides for the maintenance of lands that are purchased and for open space maintenance. Although not related to the buffer, the City also assesses a landscape tax of $49 per year per parcel. Voters approved the measure to help maintain the City's parks and internal greenbelt 37 43 system. Another ballot measure that would have doubled that tax to $98 failed in June 2001. It received 59% "yes votes, but needed a 2/3 majority to pass. The Parks and Open Space department has a $3 _ million budget for parks and open space maintenance and operations. The Three "P's" Process There was a great deal of community involvement in Wildhorse. When the City annexed the agricultural land for the Wildhorse development, sufficient numbers of people were upset enough about the loss of farmland to get a measure on the ballot that would require future annexations of agricultural land to be approved by voters. The measure passed by 70+%. The City and County are in sync on land use and agricultural preservation. The City staff refer to working relationships between the themselves and the developer as an "ideal team" in how they resolved the buffer issue. Principles Principles and values in the City of Davis are influenced, to a large degree, by the presence of the University and the population there. Residents are protective of the environment and of farmland. The City wants to maintain its small town character, shunning "big -box" stores, large car dealerships and big retail centers. On the flip side, without a large retail tax base, the City and infrastructure costs must borne by the residents. Based on the successful passage of several special taxes, the voters appear to be willing to pay for what they say they want. They also pay extra for greenwaste removal and for recycling. Policies The City's policies related to development are extensive. As one planner said, "It's not cheap to develop here." The policies reflect the community's principles, as can be seen in the provisions for greenbelts and the deliberate and planned acquisition of a permanent farmland and open space perimeter. The City has acquired easements or title to approximately 2,500 acres. Buffers are one part of the comprehensive plan. The City does not have a formal urban growth boundary, but the general plan specifies where growth is to occur. Any development on agricultural land that is not currently approved in the general plan must be voted on. The Wildhorse buffer is an example of what can be achieved with sufficient resources and creativity, and with the policies to make it happen. 380 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 Public Hearing to Consider Street Name Change 2001-012 to Change the Name of a Portion of Via Trieste to Via Livorno Within Lake La Quinta, Applicant: Lake La Quinta Communities RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council Resolution approving a street name change for a portion of Via Trieste to Via Livorno. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: The applicant, Lake La Quinta Communities, has been informed by the United States Postal Service that mail cannot be delivered to all residences along Via Trieste as it is a "U" shape (Attachment 1). The two parallel portions of the "U" shape are both in the 47-000 range of addresses thereby causing confusion in delivering the mail as to which of the two mail boxes to use. The United States Postal Service computers are unable to process these varying address numbers. Project Description: To correct the mail delivery problem the applicant is requesting to change the eastern- most portion of the "U" from Via Trieste to Via Livorno (Attachment 2). Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission at its meeting of September 25, 2001 initiated the process by setting a Public Hearing date of November 13, 2001 to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-138 approving the street name change (Attachment 3). JS I G:\WPDOCS\CC Stf Rpts\SNCLakeLQ-012.wpd Public Notice: A public hearing notice for this item was published in the Desert Sun on November 8, 2001 and copies of the public hearing notice were posted along the portion of Via Trieste to be changed, per Sections 14.08.060 and 14.08.070 of the Municipal Code. To date, no comments have been received. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The findings required to support this street name change are found in Section 14.08.050 of the Municipal Code and can be met as discussed in the attached Resolution. The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Street Name Change 2001- 012 for a portion of Via Trieste to Via Livorno; 2. Do not adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Street Name Change 2001-012 for a portion of Via Trieste to Via Livorno; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, pemy Merman Conjmunity Development Director Approved for submission by: homas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1 . Location map 2. Parcel Map showing portion of the street name to be changed 3. Draft Planning Commission Minutes November 13, 2001 38w G:\WPDOCS\CC Stf Rpts\SNCLakeLQ-012.wpd RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A STREET NAME CHANGE FOR A PORTION OF VIA TRIESTE TO VIA LIVORNO, LOCATED WITHIN LAKE LA QUINTA CASE NO.: STREET NAME CHANGE 2001-012 APPLICANT: LAKE LA QUINTA COMMUNITIES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 20th day of November 20, 2001, consider a street name change for a portion of Via Trieste to Via Livorno within Lake La Quinta for Lake La Quinta Communities; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13th day of November, 2001, consider a street name change for a portion of Via Trieste to Via Livorno within Lake La Quinta and recommended approval; and, WHEREAS, Resolution 2001-121 was adopted by the Planning Commission at its meeting of September 25, 2001, declaring its intent to hold a public hearing on this item at its meeting of November 13, 2001; and 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 findings to justify their approval of said stret name change per Section 14.08.050 of the La Quinta Municipal Code: 1 . Determination of Sufficiency: The proposed street name change is a reasonable request based on the concerns expressed by the United States Postal Service. The change of name will provide for better service to the citizens of La Quinta. 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 approve Street Name Change 2001-012 changing a portion of Via Trieste to Va Livorno per the attached Exhibit "A"; PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 20th day of November, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: 383 G:\WPDOCS\CCReso-COA\SNCLakeLQ012.wpd 003 Resolution 98- AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JOHN PEI A, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC/AAE, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: KATHY JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 384 004 G:\WPDOCS\CCReso-COA\SNCLakeLQ012.wpd m [1 frufl�{� ATTACHMENT #1 1 WS ; 1 38F Ort l� 006 o M TACHME :S9 - kot AT of o de 0 1 I a 7-�- - :, o e rn co d'! TT7 Na tpo. � � T7' c �� om• � ;a m w1 �. v^ �� tab r � tD .,.� - .1:'• • SO all e i ice''' � ' ' •� (o-� �' °� ��' ^ (v O a 1 �N �^ - _ r Y cr to ni UN cu jp a a.�'• o��, `�? o~ r a) oar- in O Z �♦� co W '� 2.• C Q :+J W / In O^ `f oe �'QV I .� O •� 0. / • • rn l f� ul N %; Q I !J Ir — � rn � � 1'' wp 1 a e in to O a. I ootn W. al rl,cn Q1 r , o- ti �. in 0 Clq (V ; o in o . o no ? 1 lDUIN r�1 Q NGo �_ s I o O; O I .J .. . , LA Ln d fV `YJl map . Q >e O ►' i ri UD z ° cw !� .�ry 1 •� v Q d cl W --q A-4 �q O d W 1 r, Q �- f*1 , I W �iT1 W ° �� !n �; ` liDn !n 'fin • �rl !' (v I , o CD 1 I m cab a z .( N r- ^� I �- ' �v '�tv I ~y a I ^ ao w ; in *� .., o _ .o vLn �*! n La 40 3 a3N 1 !� 1 �cv 1 1 03na s 3a 1 N3w3s v3 i� �0 �N ?(v rvi�ao waojs .oi I _^cat N I ^ N ICU .� Div 1` r� co .��v _ p C o- o \ N 141N r�(V a i i c: 00 a Cu . v�i z ^' - 6 get,f,..,' K 9 .,A N I Q1Q J • ^ • 1� v 1 i a co ,n cn rn ATTACHMENT #3 Planning Commission Minutes November 13, 2001 B. Street Name Change 2001-012; `—"� Communities to change the name Livorno within Lake La Quinta. a request of Lake La Quinta of a portion of Via Trieste to Via 1 . Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Community Development Director Jerry Herman presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked if the residents were in agreement with the name change. Staff stated all were informed and had submitted letters requesting the change. 3. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. The applicant not present and there being no one else who wished to speak on this project, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 4. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-138, recommending approval of Street Name Change 2001-012, subject to the findings as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. C. Site velopment Permit 2001-716; a request of First Community Bank for rev w of site plan and signs for the conversion of an existing residence a temporary bank for the property located at the southeast corner of Je rson Street and Avenue 52. 1. Chairman A Is opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Comm 'ty Development Director Jerry Herman presented the information co ined in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Communit evelopment Department. 2. Chairman Abels asked if 11qere were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked abo the access for this parcel on a temporary basis. Acting City Engin r Steve Speer explained there 3 is a double/double yellow line and the could make a right turn in. 008 AAPC 1 1-13-01.wpd 3 AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: November 20, 2001 CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: Public Hearing to Certify a Mitigated Negative PUBLIC HEARING: 3 Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-429; Review of Amendment No. 3 to Specific Plan 1987-01 1, and Site Development Permit 2001-708 to Approve the Development Standards and Design Guidelines for a 25,240 Square Foot Two Story Building for Commercial, Retail, and Office Uses; and Review of Conditional Use Permit 2001-064 to Allow the Use on Approximately 1 .78 acres Located North of Avenue 47, West of Adams Street Applicant: Thomas Lathrop, Lathrop Development RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council certifying Environmental Assessment 2001- 429 for Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, Site Development Permit 2001-708, and Conditional Use Permit 2001-064; and, 2. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Specific Plan 1987-011, Amendment No. 3; and, 3. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Site Development Permit 2001-708; and, 4.. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Conditional Use Permit 2001- 064. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. CITY CHARTER IMPLICATIONS: None. 389 BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW• Site Location: The currently vacant project site (Attachment No. 1), located north of Avenue 47, west of Adams Street consists of 1.78 acres (A. P. N. 643-090-016) . The property is triangular in shape with dimensions of 152.79 feet on the south (Avenue 47), 558.54 feet on the north, and 230 feet on the east. To the east of the site is a CVWD well site; with vacant property to the north and west. To the south, across Avenue 47 is vacant property within Lake La Quinta. The site is designated Regional Commercial in the General Plan and Zoning Code. SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH: SOUTH: EAST: WEST: Project Description: Regional Commercial High Density Residential Regional Commercial Regional Commercial 1) Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, and Site Development Permit 2001- 708 As required by the CR zoning of the property, a Specific Plan has been submitted (Attachment 2) . The site is proposed to be added into the Washington Square Specific Plan 1987-011; thereby amending the Specific Plan. The Washington Square Specific Plan was approved by the City in 1989 and amended twice (1991 and 1997) . The 1997 amendment allowed a 13.39 acre portion of the site to be created and Eagle Hardware to be constructed (now Lowe's Home Improvement). The Specific Plan calls for commercial mixed use development including general retail, office, hotel(s), restaurant, and cinema land uses with a total allowable square footage of 775,000 square feet on the 65.4 acre site. It is anticipated that the City will be receiving an application for a major revision and/or a new proposed Specific Plan for the entire 65.4 acres in the near future. Proposed is a two story 25,240 square foot building with retail, office and wholesale uses; with the ground floor comprising 17,500 square feet of retail and wholesale space, and the second floor comprising 7,740 square feet of office space (Attachment 3) . The rectangular building uses a variety of roof types including gable, hipped, and mansard. All will be covered with a concrete tile. Three tower elements with multi - pane windows, ranging in heights from 28 to 34 %2 feet, are highlighted with aluminum stucco reveals. Store fronts have anodized bronze aluminum frame 3 9 0 002 windows with tinted glass. Decorative stucco cornice trim wraps around the structure. Staircases accessing a walkway deck to the second story, which is finished with coated "copper age" color pipe railing, are proposed for the rear elevation. Wall material consists of a light brown (San Simeon) cement plaster and highlighted with ceramic lava brown tile and Sunbrela brown fabric awnings. Site access is located on Avenue 47 at the west corner of the property providing an entry to the 102 space parking lot (with 11 covered spaces) and access to the front entry of the building. Parking spaces are nine feet wide and 19 feet long, parking aisles are 26 feet, and parking driveways are 28 feet. The parking lot has a five foot landscape setback along the north and east perimeter, and a ten foot landscape setback along Avenue 47 is also provided. The parking lot will have large landscape planters. The distribution of large planter areas with pedestrian walks to the building entries creates a courtyard effect. The 102 spaces meet Zoning Code requirements for the proposed uses including commercial retail, office and wholesale storage. Also provided is future vehicular access to other Washington Square properties. The Washington Square Specific Plan is proposed to be amended to allow this vehicular access. The Landscaping Plan identifies a pallette of plant material consisting of shrubs, groundcover, and trees for the on -site parking and building planters. Plant material along each of the three perimeter lot lines of the site is proposed to have tall screening shrubs such as Clumping Bougainvillea, Bird of Paradise Bush, and Purple Hopseed Bush. The planter area between the one-way driveway will have Mediterranean Fan Palms and Date Palms with shrubs such as Hopseed Bushes, Autumn Sage, and Dwarf Oleander. Planter areas around the perimeter of the building are proposed to have shrubs such as Texas Ranger and Brittlebrush. The Landscape Plan is consistent with the Washington Square Specific Plan; however, the Landscape Plan does not identify and locate specific plant types and quantities from the proposed pallette of materials Site lighting consists of fifteen 18 foot high square poles, located generally on the perimeter of the parking lot, and the shoe box will have flush lenses directed downward. Poles have 175 watt metal halide lamps. The photometric data from the illumination study shows light in the parking area averages 2.33 foot candles. The Washington Square Specific Plan is proposed to be amended to allow relaxing the Zoning Code requirements for illumination of parking areas. 2) Conditional Use Permit 2001-064 The applicant is also requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) which is required to allow a commercial use as a Condition of Approval for properties within Tract 24230 (Lake La Quinta which included the entire quarter section). 3 9 i. OU3 Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission reviewed the developer's request on October 23, 2001, and discussed all aspects of the application requests and, after deliberation, voted (5- 0) to recommend: 1. Certification of Environmental Assessment 2001-429 2. Approval of Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, 3. Approval of Site Development Permit 2001-708, and 4. Approval of Conditional Use Permit 2001-064. The recommendations are based on the attached findings and Conditions of Approval including modifications, as requested by the Commission. Excerpts from the Minutes of the Public Hearing are attached. (Attachment 4). Environmental Assessment: Based on California Environmental Quality Act requirements, staff prepared Environmental Assessment 2001-429 for the project. Staff recommends certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact as the project will have no significant adverse effect on the environment based upon the mitigation measures. Public Notice: This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on October 25, 2001. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the Zoning Code. Public agency comments have been incorporated into the proposed Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: Conditions are proposed that comply with the existing provisions of the General Plan and Zoning Code. Findings for approval 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 Environmental Assessment 2001- 429 for Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, Site Development Permit 2001-708, and Conditional Use Permit 2001-064; and, Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3; and, 3 9: 004 Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Site Development Permit 2001-708; and, Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Conditional Use Permit 2001- 064; or 2. Do not adopt a Resolution of the City Council certifying Environmental Assessment 2001- 429 for Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, Site Development Permit 2001-708, and Conditional Use Permit 2001-064; and, Do not adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Specific Plan 1987- 01 1, Amendment No. 3; and, Do not adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Site Development Permit 2001-708; and, Do not adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Conditional Use Permit 2001-064; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, Hermdn iunity Development Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Specific Plan 87-01 1, Amendment No. 3 (City Council only) 3. Site Plan, Elevations, and Landscape Plan (City Council only) 4. Planning Commission minutes of October 23, 2001 393 005 RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-429 PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 1987-011, AMENDMENT NO. 3, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-064 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-708 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001- 429 APPLICANT: LATHROP DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 20th day of November, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 2001-429 for Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, Conditional Use Permit 2001-064 and Site Development Permit 2001-708, generally located north of Avenue 47, west of Adams Street within the Washington Square Specific Plan, more particularly described as: A. P. N 643-090-016 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 23rd day of October, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 2001-429 for Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, Conditional Use Permit 2001-064 and Site Development Permit 2001-708, generally located north of Avenue 47, west of Adams Street within the Washington Square Specific Plan. 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 2001-429) and has determined that although the proposed Specific Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit 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 for Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, Conditional Use Permit 2001-064 and Site Development Permit 2001-708, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and, WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did �161 Resolution No. 2001- Environmental Assessment 2001-429 Adopted: November 20, 2001 Page 2 find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1 . The proposed Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, Conditional Use Permit 2001-064 and Site Development Permit 2001-708 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 2001-429. 2. The proposed Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, Conditional Use Permit 2001-064 and Site Development Permit 2001-708 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 Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, Conditional Use Permit 2001-062 and Site Development Permit 2001-708 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 Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, Conditional Use Permit 2001-064 and Site Development Permit 2001-708 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 Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, Conditional Use Permit 2001-064 and Site Development Permit 2001-708will 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. 395 007 Resolution No. 2001- Environmental Assessment 2001-429 Adopted: November 20, 2001 Page 3 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 Planning Commission has considered the Environmental Assessment 2001- 429 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 2001-429 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 2001-429 reflects the independent judgement of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 2 day of October, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: 008 Resolution No. 2001- Environmental Assessment 2001-429 Adopted: November 20, 2001 Page 4 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 397 009 Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Specific Plan 87-01 1, Amendment No. 3, Conditional Use Permit 2001-064, Site Development Permit 2001-708 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Fred Baker, 760-777-7125 4. Project Location: North side of Avenue 47, west of Adams Street 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Lathrop Development 72-912 Willow Street Palm Desert, CA 92260 6. General Plan Designation: Regional Commercial 7. Zoning: Regional 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.) Amendment to Specific Plan and Conditional Use Permit are required to establish the parameters for the construction of a 25,240 square foot, two story office, retail and warehousing building on 1.77 acres. Site Development Permit is required to implement the design and allow construction of the building. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. North: Vacant lands in the Washington Square Specific Plan, Lowes Hardware Store South: Vacant lands, Lake La Quinta West: Vacant lands in the Washington Square Specific Plan East: Vacant lands in the Washington Square Specific Plan 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EA 418 Cklst.WPD 010 1 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 Hazards and Hazardous Public Services Materials Agriculture Resources Hydrology and Water Quality Recreation Air Quality Land Use Planning Transportation/Traffic Biological Resources Mineral Resources Utilities and Service Systems Cultural Resources Noise Lj Mandatory Findings Geology and Soils Population and Housing Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: 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 jn the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. nn L� 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. FE] 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 EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ature 399 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EA 418 Cklst.WPD 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 analysis 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 analysis 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 400 012 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EA 418 Cklst.WPD Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: I. 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 EIR, 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) II. 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) III. 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? (Project Description) G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EA 418 Cklst.WPD Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X X X X X X X X ks X X 4 () 1 013 e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Project Description) I 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? (Master Environmental Assessment, Exhibit 5-1) 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? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.) 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? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.) 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? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.) 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) f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-5) 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? (General Plan EIR, p. 4-77 ff.) 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)? (General Plan EIR, p. 4-77 ff.) c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site? (Lakebed Delineation Map) d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (General Plan EIR, p. 4-77 ff.) G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EA 418 Cklst.WPD X X X X X X M X M 40 '2- 014 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 EIR, page 4-30 ff.) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (General Plan EIR, 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) 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) X X X X X X X X X 91 GI_ X X G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EA 418 Cklst.WPD 015 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 p. 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) VIII. 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? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) 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? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) 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: a) Physically divide an established community? (Specific Plan Project Description) 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 coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Master Environmental Assessment 2-11) G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EA 418 Cklst.WPD V./ X X X X X X X X K1 X 40tJ 016 c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5- X 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? (General Plan EIR, page 4-157 ff.) b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (General Plan EIR, page 4-157 ff.) c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan EIR, page 4-157 ff.) 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? (Master Environmental Assessment) 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) XII. 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) ? (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) XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES X KI_ GI_ X X 91 91 4D G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EA 418 Cklst.WPD 0 17 8 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)? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) 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? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) 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) X X X X X M X X X X X X X X XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, pg. 4-24) X 4 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EA 418 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 ANALYSIS. 91 0 X M X /:1 X M X Earlier analysis 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 analysis used. Identify earlier analysis and state where they are available for review. Environmental Assessment 97-339 was used in this analysis. G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EA 418 Cklst.WPD 10 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. 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. City of La Quinta Municipal Code Environmental Assessment 1997-339, and associated addendum. 408 020 G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EA 418 Cklst.WPD 11 E� A � Vz d A a U Ox U U rtj U v� aw�UH cam�... Cd b o 0 0Cd 0 o Ul 1-4 U U En u � P. . o En� o o w o a�-4 P4 w a, P4 w a s Rio z U �' z z �; Q �, �. C , Q w o � m w w b C13 U Q U U U U Gil U Q z r- + CIS Q" a; 0 Cd3 0 `� vs W U c, cC3 'd cd U' N +-' cd �I CA Cd Vi V�C13 N Cd 3 W a� 0 Cd r' V o -0 Q a 0 s co rn N C 0 P., W EW, A F A A aU aU W aa,U W O V U x OU V x OV V b� cd H acq cl o U U cn 0 ao a ur Q w a a P6, z a oz oz U Q U A O CA W cl > O r of p Q Cd U O u O r. A 40 cl ° o Cd >, tv W �,.� W � � W • CA 022 a 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A COMMERCIAL OFFICE USE CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 1987-011, AMENDMENT NO. 3 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did on the 20th day of November, 2001, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of Lathrop Development for approval of guidelines and standards in a development plan including the distribution of land uses and development standards, for commercial and office uses, located north of Avenue 47, west of Adams Street in the Washington Square Specific Plan, more particularly described as: A. P. N 643-090-016 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 23rd day of October, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the Specific Plan Amendment, and did adopt Resolution 2001-133, recommending approval, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval; and, WHEREAS, said Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No.3 has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that the Community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 2001-429), and determined that the proposed Specific Plan will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is recommended for certification; and, WHEREAS, at said public hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to justify the approval of the Specific Plan: 1 . That the proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan in that the property is designated Regional Commercial which permits the uses proposed for the property. 2. That the Specific Plan is compatible with the existing and anticipated area development in that the project, as conditioned, provides adequate circulation. 3. That the proposed Specific Plan will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting uses will require 4 1 Planning Commission review and approval of development plans under a Site Development Permit, which will ensure adequate Conditions of Approval. 023 Resolution No. 2001- Specific Plan 1987-011, Amendment No. 3 Adopted: November 20, 2001 Page 2 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 it does hereby approve of the above -described Specific Plan request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 20th day of November, 2001, by the following vote to wit: 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 024 A:\CC\CC RESO SP 1987-011, AMD. 3.wpd RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 1987-011, AMENDMENT NO. 3 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT ADOPTED: NOVEMBER 20, 2001 GENERAL 1. The applicant 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 permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. All Conditions of Approval for the Washington Square Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 2 shall be retained in full force and effect with the following additions/revisions: A. Revise Condition 21, 471h Avenue, paragraph A. to read as follows: At access locations shown in Specific Plan 87-011, Amendment #2, Figure V-1, along with an access point at the westerly end of Lot 286 of Tract # 24230 (as shown on Appendix "A" of the text of Minor Specific Plan, Amendment # 3). B. Add Condition 21, 47th Avenue, paragraph B. to read as follows: The applicant shall provide for a future 26 foot clear width two way ingress and egress access to the property contiguous to, and immediately to the north of the applicant's property. C. Revise Condition 29, B., 4. to read as follows: 47th Avenue improvements (that portion contiguous to Tract # 27031 and excepting that portion contiguous to Lot 286 of Tract # 24230): Reimburse developer for those improvements installed on the North side of the centerline of 47th Avenue, in the area defined above. Reimbursement shall include responsibility for 25% (twenty five percent) of the cost to design and construct the traffic signalization at 471h Avenue and Washington Street. D. Add a provision under 4.3 of the Specific Plan Amendment No. 3 that allows illumination levels at finish grade in parking areas to be no more than 3 footcandles. 413 025 RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR 25,240 SQUARE FOOT TWO STORY COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001- 708 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did on the 20th day of November, 2001, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of Lathrop Development for approval of a development plans for a for commercial and office building, located north of Avenue 47, west of Adams Street within the Washington Square Specific Plan, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did on the 23rd day of October, 2001, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of Lathrop Development for approval of a development plans for a for commercial and office building, located north of Avenue 47, west of Adams Street within the Washington Square Specific Plan, more particularly described as: A. P. N 643-090-016 WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that the Community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 2001-429), and determined that the proposed Site Development Permit will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is recommended for certification; and! WHEREAS, at said public hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to justify the approval of the Site Development Permit: 1 . The project is consistent with the General Plan in that the property proposed for the commercial project is designated as Regional Commercial. 2. This project has been designed to be consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Code or amended as allowed in the applicable Specific Plan. 3. Processing and approval of this project is in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act in that the La Quinta CommunAA 4 A:\CC\CC RESO SDP 2001-708.wpd Resolution No. 2001- Site Development Permit 2001-708 Adopted: November 20, 2001 Page 2 Development Department has determined that this Conditional Use Permit will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has been certified. 4. The site design of the project is appropriate for the use in that it has been designed with the appropriate parking and vehicular access, and provided with adequate landscaping. 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 it does hereby approve the above -described Site Development Permit request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 20th day of November, 2001, by the following vote to wit: 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 41a 027 A:\CC\CC RESO SDP 2001-708.wpd Resolution No. 2001- Site Development Permit 2001-708 Adopted: November 20, 2001 Page 3 APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 416 A:\CC\CC RESO SDP 2001-708.wpd RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-708 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 20, 2001 GENERAL 1. The applicant 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 site development plan. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. 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) • 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 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. 3. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s) . 4 1 T 029 A:\CC\CC COA SDP 2001-708.wpd RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-708 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 20, 2001 PROPERTY RIGHTS 4. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights required of this approval 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. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. 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. 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. 10. 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 in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading, Paving & Drainage" "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." Precise 41 8 030 A:1CCICC COA SDP 2001-708.wpd RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-708 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 20, 2001 grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. All other plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, entry drives, gates, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and entry monuments. "Precise Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 11. The developer shall have prepared under the direct supervision of qualified civil engineer a "Site Improvement Plan," including but not necessarily limited to the top of curb elevations, top of pavement elevations, drainage swales, and all information to show the compliance with Title 24 Handicap Access. 12. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City Resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 13. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions. If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. 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 irk Tale 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to 1 031. A:1CCICC COA SDP 2001-708.wpd RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-708 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 20, 2001 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. 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 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 permit(s), 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 The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the following: 20. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm (the design storm) shall be retained within the development as per the approved hydrology/storm drainage for Specific Plan 87-011 or unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. 032 A:1CCICC COA SDP 2001-708.wpd RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-708 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 20, 2001 21. Storm water flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated, unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route. 22. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on site or passed through to the overflow outlet. 23. 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. 24. The side slopes of retention basins shall not exceed 3:1. Maximum retention depth shall not exceed six feet for common basins and two feet for individual -lot retention. 25. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in dry wells, or as approved by the City Engineer. 26. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, 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 City's 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 executed and furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or building permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this development plan excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnificatiorr 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. UTILITIES 27. 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. 47ti1� 033 A:1CCICC COA SDP 2001-708.wpd RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-708 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 20, 2001 28. 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. 29. 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 30. 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). 31. Parking facilities shall conform to the requirements of LQMC Chapter 9.150 32. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices. 33. 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. 34. 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 gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. , 35. The City will conduct final inspections 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. A:1CCICC COA SDP 2001-708.wpd 4 2' 034 RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-708 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 20, 2001 LANDSCAPING 36. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. 37. 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. 38. 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. QUALITY ASSURANCE 39. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 40. 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. 41. 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. 42. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As - Constructed and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD A:1CCICC COA SDP 2001-708.wpd 423 035 RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-708 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 20, 2001 or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. MAINTENANCE 43. 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 44. 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. FIRE MARSHALL 45. Minimum fire flow 2125 GPM for a 2-hour duration. Fire flow is based on type VN construction and a complete fire sprinkler system. 46. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all commercial buildings 5,000 sq. ft. Or larger to be fully sprinkled. NFPA 13 Standard. Sprinkler plans will need to be submitted to the Fire Department. 47. Fire Department Connections (FDC) shall be located on the address side of the building, no closer than 15 feet nor farther than 50 feet from a fire hydrant. 48. Approved super fire hydrants, shall be located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the buildings as measured along vehicular travel ways. 49. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 50. Provide primary and secondary access for emergency vehicles. 51. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs. 036 A:\CC\CC COA SDP 2001-708.wpd RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-708 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 20, 2001 52. Install a Rapid Entry (KNOX) key box for each tenant space. (Contact the Fire Department for an application). 53. Install portable fire extinguishers, in cabinets. 54. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review to run concurrent with the City plan check. MISCELLANEOUS 55. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a revised Landscape Plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval which shall identify and locate specific plant types and quantities consistent with the proposed pallette of material. 56. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall revise the south building elevation increasing the size of the portico columns and the quatrafoil to match the lower gable on either side of the main structure. 57. Prior to issuance of a sign permit, applicant shall submit a Sign Program for Planning Commission review and approval. 49°" 1 037 A:1CCICC COA SDP 2001-708.wpd RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A COMMERCIAL OFFICE USE CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001- 064 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did on the 20th day of November, 2001, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of Lathrop Development for approval of a Conditional Use Permit for commercial and office uses, located north of Avenue 47, west of Adams Street within the Washington Square Specific Plan, more particularly described as: A.P.N. 643-090-016 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did on the 23rd day of October, 2001, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of Lathrop Development for approval of a Conditional Use Permit for commercial and office uses, located north of Avenue 47, west of Adams Street within the Washington Square Specific Plan. WHEREAS, said Conditional Use Permit has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that the Community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 2001-429), and determined that the proposed Conditional Use Permit will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is recommended for certification; and, WHEREAS, at said public hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to justify the approval of said Conditional Use Permit: 1. The project is consistent with the General Plan in that the property proposed for the commercial project is designated as Regional Commercial. 2. This project has been designed to be consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Code or amended as allowed in the applicable Specific Plan. 420 038 AACC\CC RESO CUP 2001-064.wpd Resolution No. 2001- Conditional Use Permit 2001-064 Adopted: November 20, 2001 Page 2 3. Processing and approval of this project is in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act in that the La Quinta Community Development Department has determined that this Conditional Use Permit will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has been certified. 4. The site design of the project is appropriate for the use in that it has been designed with the appropriate parking and vehicular access, and provided with adequate landscaping. . 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 it does hereby certify a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project. 3. That it does hereby approve of the above -described Conditional Use Permit request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 20th day of November, 2001, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JOHN J. PENA, Mayor City of La Quinta, California 42 17 039 Resolution No. 2001- Conditional Use Permit 2001-064 Adopted: November 20, 2001 Page 3 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 4 'w 1' I RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-064 LATHROP DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 20, 2001 GENERAL 1. 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. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. The use of the subject property for commercial uses shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits and Conditions of Approval contained in Conditional Use Permit 2001-064, Specific Plan 1987-01 1, Amendment No. 3, Site Development Permit 2001-708 and Environmental Assessment 2001-429, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. 3. The approved Conditional Use Permit shall be used within two years of the effective date of approval, otherwise, it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Used" means the issuance of a building permit for the project. A time extension for this Conditional Use Permit may be requested as permitted in Municipal Code Section 9.200.080 D. 4 n I 041. AACC\CC COA CUP 2001-064.wpd ATTACHMENT #1 PROJECT LOCATION TO SCAM 430 043 ATTACHMENT #4 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissi rs Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Ab NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. B. Environmental Assessment 2001-420 S ecific Plan 87-01 1 Amendment No. 3 Conditional Use Permit 2001-064 and Site Develo ment Permit 2001-708; a request of the Lathrop Development for review of the design guidelines and development standards for a 25,240 square foot two story building; a site development permit to allow construction of a 25,240 square foot two story commercial -office building/ and a conditional use permit to allow commercial, retail and office uses to be located north of Avenue 47, west of Adams Street. 1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioners asked staff to clarify the entrance of the project, which staff did. 3. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to clarify the one-way driveway. Staff stated the circulation pattern had been changed and was all a two-way circulation pattern. Commissioner Tyler asked about the retention basin at the northeast corner, which should be the northwest corner, that is referred to in the Specific Plan but he cannot see on the plans. Staff clarified its location and stated that according to the study it was of sufficient size. Commissioner Tyler asked why a conditional use permit was required. Staff stated it was included in the original Spanos tract map which included Lake La Quinta which was conditioned to allow a commercial use. When this project was developed and Avenue 47 was redirected south of the tract line, it required the use to have a conditional use to exist as proposed. Commissioner Tyler questioned the Environmental Assessment where it stated the Coachella Valley was in the non -attainment area for PM 10 and that is not what he understands to be true. Staff noted that new data has shown the Valley to no longer be in compliance. Commissioner Tyler asked why the applicant was being required to pay for 25 % of the cost and design to construct a traffic si I 43 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-23-01.wpd 3 044 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 at Avenue 47 and Washington Street. This signal has been in place and operational for years and it would seem more appropriate to address the proposed signal at Avenue 47 and Adams Street. Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained staff was modifying the existing conditions to the existing specific plan. This condition was being clarified and in the condition there is an exception. This parcel was created by the map. Staff is asking them to reimburse the City for the signal. The Spanos Company built all of the street and were the owner of the lot so they should not have to reimburse again for things they have already completed. It is a continuation of a previous condition in the Specific Plan. 4. Commissioner Butler asked staff to clarify the zoning. Staff stated it is Regional Commercial. 5. Commissioner Kirk asked if Item V.b. of the Addendum which required archaeological monitoring, was a Code requirement or mitigation measure. Staff stated it was a mitigation measure. Commissioner Kirk asked if it was staff's practice to have a mitigation measure when it is a less than significant impact. Staff clarified it was a judgement call for the Commission and staff. Planning Manager Christine di lorio stated it is in regard to a Phase I study with a recommendation from the archaeological report. Commissioner Kirk stated that in Item Vlll.b. the City's Landscaping Ordinance and City standards as mitigation measures; are they mitigation measures or City Ordinances. Staff stated they were all City standards. Commissioner Kirk asked why there was no Mitigation Monitoring Program. Staff clarified it was a mis-communication between staff and the consultant who was preparing it for the City Council and not the Commission. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was a fence or wall on the site; on the eastern property line. Staff stated there is a condition for the north side to require access to the north property so it would blend in with whatever regional development is developed on the north. There is an existing wall on the east side that belongs to CVWD. Commissioner Kirk stated it was his understanding this property was part of the Spanos Specific Plan and contains conditions related to that project and will become a part of the Washington Square Specific Plan which is in the process of being updated. Staff stated that once an application is submitted, the Washington Square Specific Plan would be updated and t i 045 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-23-01.wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 project would be incorporated into that plan. 6. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Tom Lathrop, the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. 7. Commissioner Tyler asked what uses were contemplated for that portion of the plan that is designated as warehouse. Mr. Lathrop stated it would be storage for his own business. There would be no roll -up doors with no industrial use. 8. Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this project. There being no further discussion, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 9. Commissioner Kirk stated articulation of design. integrated with this one. he liked the project as it has a good He hopes the rest of the project is 10. Commissioner Robbins stated he likes the project. 1 1 . Commissioner Tyler asked if the City would be incorporating new lighting standards based on what was being considered for the La Quinta Arts Foundation. Staff stated yes. 12. Commissioner Butler stated he likes the project. 13. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-132, recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-429, subject to the findings as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 14. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-133, recommending approval of Specific Plan 87- 01 1 Amendment #3, subject to the findings and Condition 413 (I46 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 10-23-01.wpd 5 Planning Commission Minutes October 23, 2001 C. Approval as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 15. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-134, recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit 2001-064, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 16. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-135, recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2001-708, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None., ABSTAIN: None. Z-Vv I -o 1+; a request of the City of La Quinta for review ofv the develop nt of an 18.07 acre community park site with various size lighted so cer fields, two lighted baseball fields, concession stand, restrooms, t lot skate park, picnic areas with barbeques and shade structures to a located on the northeast corner of Adams Street and Westward Ho D 've. 1. Chairman Abe opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Commu ity Services Director Dodie Horvitz presented the information conta ed in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community\buildin Department. Mr. Oscar Johnson, consultant for thee a presentation on the site plan. Ms. Coleen Marcuentation on the proposed lighting plan. Mr. Markhitect for the project, gave a presentation on thhitecture. 434 4'7 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC10-23-01.wpd