The URL can be used to link to this page

2006 04 18 CC6�(# 4 44dja City Council Agendas are Available on the City's Web Page @a www.la-quinta.org CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 Regular Meeting Tuesday, April 18, 2006 — 2:00 PM Beginning Resolution No. 2006-034 Ordinance No. 427 CALL TO ORDER Roll Call: Council Members: Henderson, Kirk, Osborne, Sniff, and Mayor Adolph 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. CLOSED SESSION NOTE: Time permitting the City Council may conduct Closed Session discussions during the dinner recess. In addition, persons identified as negotiating parties are not invited into the Closed Session meeting when the Agency is considering acquisition of real property. 1. CONFERENCE WITH THE CITY'S REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR, DOUGLAS R. EVANS, PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 CONCERNING POTENTIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF ACQUISITION AND/OR DISPOSITION OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON JEFFERSON STREET, BETWEEN WESTWARD HO AND FIESTA DRIVE. PROPERTY OWNER/NEGOTIATOR: SIENNA CORP. City Council Agenda 1 April 18, 2006 RECONVENE AT 3:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 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 should be filed with the City Clerk prior to the City Council beginning consideration of that item. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA PRESENTATIONS 1. PRESENTATION OF A PROCLAMATION TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH IN SUPPORT OF MAY AS MENTAL HEALTH MONTH. 2. PRESENTATION OF A PROCLAMATION TO THE PREVENT CHILD ABUSE, RIVERSIDE COUNTY COLLABORATIVE IN HONOR OF PREVENT CHILD ABUSE MONTH. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 1. CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE VILLAGE AT THE PALMS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. 2. CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE RIVERSIDE SHERIFF'S ATHLETIC FEDERATION REQUESTING THE CITY OF LA QUINTA DONATE $5,000 TO BECOME A PLATINUM SPONSOR FOR THE 1 St ANNUAL DEPUTY BRUCE LEE MEMORIAL GOLF TOURNAMENT TO BE HELD APRIL 21, 2006 AT THE LA QUINTA RESORT. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 4, 2006. V j -1 2 City Council Agenda 2 April 18, 2006 CONSENT CALENDAR NOTE: Consent Calendar items are considered to be routine in nature and will be approved by one motion. 1. APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER DATED APRIL18, 2006. 2. RECEIVE AND FILE THE TREASURER'S REPORT DATED FEBRUARY 28, 2006. 3. RECEIVE AND FILE THE REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES REPORT FOR FEBRUARY 28, 2006 AND INVESTMENT SUMMARY REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDING MARCH 31, 2006. 4. ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH TRACT MAP 29347, LAS VENTANAS, CALIFORNIA COVE COMMUNITIES. 5. AUTHORIZATION FOR OVERNIGHT TRAVEL FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING ASSISTANT ENGINEER II TO ATTEND THE ARIES CLOSED LOOK SYSTEM TRAINING TO BE HELD IN ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, APRIL 27-28, 2006. 6. APPROVAL TO EXTEND A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH NAI CONSULTING TO PROVIDE PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006/2007. BUSINESS SESSION 1. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 89-1, FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006/2007, AND A RESOLUTION DECLARING INTENT TO LEVY ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 89-1, AND GIVING NOTICE THEREOF. A. RESOLUTION ACTION(S) 2. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE CITY'S INTENTION TO TAKE OVER STATE ROUTE 111 WITHIN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. A. RESOLUTION ACTION 3. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF A SPONSORSHIP FOR PRESTIGE AT PGA WEST. A. MINUTE ORDER ACTION 3 City Council Agenda 3 April 18, 2006 STUDY SESSION 1. DISCUSSION AND UPDATE REGARDING THE CITY'S TELECOMMUNICATION ISSUES. 2. DISCUSSION OF THE DRAFT 2006/2007 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 1. ANIMAL CAMPUS COMMISSION (HENDERSON) 2. CITY COUNCIL AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORTS 3. CVAG COMMITTEE REPORTS 4. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WORKSHOP/INFORMATION EXCHANGE COMMITTEE (HENDERSON) 5. C.V. CONSERVATION COMMISSION (SNIFF) 6. C.V. MOSQUITO AND VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT (RON PERKINS) 7. C.V. MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY (SNIFF) 8. C.V.W.D. JOINT WATER POLICY COMMITTEE (ADOLPH) 9. JACQUELINE COCHRAN REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY (OSBORNE) 10. LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES (HENDERSON) 11. PALM SPRINGS DESERT RESORTS CONVENTION & VISITORS AUTHORITY (HENDERSON) 12. PALM SPRINGS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT COMMISSION (NANCY DORIA) 13. RIVERSIDE COUNTY DESERT LIBRARY ZONE ADVISORY BOARD (HENDERSON) 14. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (HENDERSON) 15. SAN JACINTO/SANTA ROSA NATIONAL MONUMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE (HENDERSON) 16. SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY/SUNLINE SERVICES GROUP (ADOLPH) 17. SILVERROCK SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES OF MARCH 29, 2006 18. ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MARCH 1, 2006 19. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 15, 2006 DEPARTMENT REPORTS 1. CITY MANAGER A. RESPONSE(S) TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 2. CITY ATTORNEY — NONE 3. CITY CLERK A. REPORT ON UPCOMING EVENTS 4. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT MARCH, 2005 5. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT MARCH, 2005 A. REPORT ON REQUEST FOR JOINT PLANNING COMMISSION/COUNCIL MEETING 6. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT MARCH, 2005 7. FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT — NONE 8. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT MARCH, 2005 04 City Council Agenda 4 April 18, 2006 9. POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT MARCH, 2005 10. FIRE DEPARTMENT QUARTERLY REPORT - NONE MAYOR'S AND COUNCIL MEMBERS' ITEMS - NONE RECESS TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING RECESS TO 7:00 P.M. 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 time clock on the speakers podium. PRESENTATIONS 1 . PRESENTATION OF THE TRUMAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ART WALL AWARDS. 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. Any person may submit written comments to the La Quinta City Council before a public hearing may appear and be heard in support of, or in opposition to, the approval of project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to the public hearing. 1. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185, THE SUBDIVISION OF 3.14 ACRES INTO TEN SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS AND OTHER PARCELS, LOCATED 425 ± FEET WEST OF JEFFERSON STREET ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE STORM CHANNEL, SOUTH OF FIESTA DRIVE ACCESSED FROM HUMMINGBIRD LANE. APPLICANT: SIENNA CORPORATION. A. RESOLUTION ACTION 0 5 City Council Agenda 5 April 18, 2006 2. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2005-550 AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2005-106, ZONE CHANGE 2005-126, SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002, AMENDMENT NO. 5, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 32752, THE SUBDIVISION OF 2.4 ± ACRES INTO THREE SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, LOCATED BETWEEN WEISKOPF AND JACK NICKLAUS WITHIN PGA WEST. APPLICANT RAY SHAFFER. A. RESOLUTION ACTION(S) 3. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2005-557 AND APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243, THE SUBDIVISION OF 20 ± ACRES INTO 70 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF AVENUE 58, 1000 ± FEET WEST OF MADISON STREET. APPLICANT: INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES. A. RESOLUTION ACTION(S) 4. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2005-546 AND APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801, THE SUBDIVISION OF 2.58 ± ACRES INTO EIGHT SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS AND LETTERED LOTS, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF MADISON STREET, 500 ± FEET NORTH OF AVENUE 60. APPLICANT: BLAKE JUMPER. A. RESOLUTION ACTION ADJOURNMENT Adjourn to a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council to be held on May 2, 2006, 2006 commencing with closed session at 2:00 PM and open session at 3:00 PM in the City Council Chambers, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253. 0s City Council Agenda 6 April 18, 2006 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 April 18, 2006, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber at 78-495 Calle Tampico and on the bulletin boards at 51-321 Avenida Bermudas and 78-630 Highway 1 1 1, on April 14, 2006 . DATED: April 14, 2006 JUNE 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, twenty-four (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, arrangement 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 for distribution. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the 3:00 PM session or the 7:00 PM session. City Council Agenda 7 April 18, 2006 WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE ITEM: March 29, 2006 Mayor Don Adolph & City Council Members City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92247-1504 Dear Mayor Adolph and City Council Members: On behalf of the Village at The Palms Homeowners Association and the Association members, I respectfully request that the unlandscaped portion of the median on Airport Boulevard from the entrance to the Palms Golf Club to Monroe Street be considered for the Developer Impact Fee Program update. This has been an eyesore in our community for over five years and we are hopeful the City of La Quinta will move to complete the landscaping project. Also, we would like the median landscaping considered for a future capital improvement project and for written correspondence at the next available City Council meeting. Unfortunately, developer responsibility for completing this landscape project was not included in the annexation agreement when the City of La Quinta annexed this parcel of land. The County of Riverside did not require the developer to landscape the median. Please advise the date and time when the next council meeting is scheduled, as available board members and association members would like to attend. Thank you in advance for your consideration and assistance. tSincerel) Rick Robinson Village at The Palms HOA Board Member 56258 Palms Drive La Quinta, California 92253 760-564-9326 OL WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE ITEM: "VERSIDE SHE"FF ATHLETIC FEDERATION 800 S. Redlands Ave., Perris, Ca 92570 909-443-2330 Date: March 30, 2006 The intention of this letter is to request the City of La Quinta be a sponsor for the 1" Annual Deputy Bruce Lee Memorial Golf Tournament to be held April 21, 2006, at the Mountain Course, La Quinta Resort Hotel and Club. On the morning of May 13, Deputy Sheriff Bruce K. Lee responded to a disturbance call in the City of La Quinta, which is policed by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. Upon arrival, a mentally disturbed twenty-four year old man, who was known to have had prior difficulties with the law, confronted Deputy Lee. In attempting to question and reason with the man, a physical encounter ensued, whereas Deputy Lee, sustained massive trauma. Deputy Lee was subsequently transported to the trauma unit at the Desert Regional Medical Center where he was pronounced dead a short time later. Deputy Bruce K. Lee was a 22-year veteran of the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, having joined the Department on September 2, 1980. Deputy Lee is survived by his wife of nine years, Patricia, his mother, father, and a sister. Deputy Lee will be missed but not forgotten. In 1996, Sheriff Larry Smith directed the establishment of the Riverside County Sheriffs Athletic Federation (RSAF). The RSAF was created for the specific purpose of assisting and providing Department personnel with the opportunity to positively enhance the Departments reputation with the public through athletic competition and charitable donations. The RSAF is a non-profit benefit corporation, based out of the County of Riverside in the Golden State of California through the Riverside Sheriff's Athletic Federation. We have worked hard to keep this event within the City of La Quinta, since this is where Bruce lived, worked and subsequently lost his life. As you can imagine, the response has been overwhelming in the area of prizes and participants. The tournament filled up within two weeks of its announcement. However, we respectfully request the City of La Quinta be a Platinum sponsor of $5000.00, which will assist with the cost of the course, food and incidentals. The proceeds raised through the Bruce Lee Memorial Golf Tournament will go to benefit the members of the Riverside County Sheriff's Department (RSAF organization) and Concerns of Police Survivors (COPS). Thank you in advance for your consideration. If there are any questions, please contact me at the numbers below anytime. Since ly: ,�� In stig or Pete Reeves Tel: (951) 955-2482 Cell: (951) 906-9837 'verside County Sheriff's Department Administrative Investigations Unit 0 9 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 18, 2006 ITEM TITLE: Demand Register Dated April 18, 2006 RECOMMENDATION: Approve Demand Register Dated April 18, 2006 BACKGROUND: Prepaid Warrants: 67945 - 67955 } 4,553.07 67956 - 67956) 49325.33 67957 - 67984) 156,488.95 67985 - 679851 1,340.00 Voids} (1359758.02) Wire Transfers} 461,325.20 P/R 33217 - 332321 1515706.87 P/R Tax Transfers} 39,988.80 Payable Warrants: 67986 - 68126) 3,6109984.12 $452945954.32 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Demand of Cash - City $925,253.37 Demand of Cash -RDA $3,369,700.95 John M. Falconer, Finance Director AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION CONSENT CALENDAR STUDY SESSION PUBLIC HEARING 010 CITY OF LA QUINTA BANK TRANSACTIONS 03/30/06 - 04/12/06 03/30/06 WIRE TRANSFER - VISTA DUNES 04/03/06 WIRE TRANSFER - US BANK 04/04/06 WIRE TRANSFER - PERS HEALTH 04/06/06 WIRE TRANSFER - ICMA 04/06/06 WIRE TRANSFER - PERS 04/07/06 WIRE TRANSFER - LANDMARK TOTAL WIRE TRANSFERS OUT $2,600.00 $171,245.00 $64,196.60 $7,093.14 $14,213.99 $201, 976.47 $461, 325.20 r�� PREPARED04/11/2006, 8:01:06 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 1 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 85 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHECK VENDOR VENDOR VOUCHER P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NAME NO NO 66875* 2186 MOLINA, LYNNETTE ANGEL -MA 000671 01/13/2006 101-3003-451.33-43 52.50- 52.50- * VOIDED 67721* 2586 PRONET CO. 000808 03/15/2006 101-0000-228.30-00 150.00- 150.00- * VOIDED 67959* 6 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER 000978 04/07/2006 401-1694-551.45-01 126,475.00- 000978 04/07/2006 101-7004-431.32-01 7,740.52- 134,215.52- * VOIDED 67972* 2291 PENA, YOLANDA 000978 04/07/2006 401-1737-551.45-10 670.00- 000979 04/07/2006 401-1737-551.45-10 670.00- 1,340.00- * VOIDED 67986 202 ALCALA, BOB 000982 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 14.00 14.00 * 14.00 67987 2651 ALL STAR GLASS INC. 000975 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-46 210.52 210.52 * 210.52 67988 296 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES 000975 04/11/2006 101-5054-421.36-31 97.50 97.50 * 97.50 67989 569 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIA 000986 04/11/2006 101-6001-463.53-03 280.00 280.00 * 280.00 67990 1890 AMERICAN ROTARY BROOM CO 000975 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-46 864.80 864.80 * 864.80 67991 2655 ANDREWS, SABRINA 000977 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.30-00 50.00 50.00 * 50.00 67992 129 ARCH WIRELESS 000982 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.41-25 298.39 298.39 * 298.39 67993 2653 ATTEBERRY, JOY 000977 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.10-00 50.00 50.00 * 50.00 67994 8 AUTOMATED TELECOM 000975 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.41-25 43.22 43.22 * 43.22 67995 2639 BARTH, JACK 000968 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 2.00 2.00 000968 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 4.00 * 4.00 67996 1499 BEST SIGNS INC 000968 04/11/2006 401-1723-551.45-01 1,874.72 1,874.72 * 1,874.72 67997 2082 BUCKNAM & ASSOCIATES INC 000990 04/11/2006 101-1002-413.31-01 2,378.00 2,378.00 * 2,378.00 0-6 PREPARED04/11/2006, 8:01:06 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 2 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 85 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK ----------------------------------------- CHECK VENDOR VENDOR VOUCHER --------------------------------------- ----------M P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO NO NAME NO NO --------------------------------------------------------- 67998 19 CADET UNIFORM SERVICE 000975 000975 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.44-07 101-7004-431.44-07 109.00 50.66 000977 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.44-07 414.60 000977 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.44-07 333.67- 000977 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.44-07 29.00 000986 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.44-07 74.77 000986 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.44-07 14.77- 000986 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.44-07 323.79 * 353.38 67999 130 CALIFORNIA OVERNIGHT 000968 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.51-31 64.10 64.10 * 64.10 68000 2654 CALLISTER, JANICE 000977 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.30-00 400.00 400.00 * 4n0.00 68001 21 CARQUEST 000975 000975 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 501-0000-511.43-46 53.10 50.96 000975 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 14.64 000975 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 53.10 000975 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 12.87 000975 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 14.64 000975 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 53.10 000975 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 14.64 000986 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 53.10 000986 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 14.64 000986 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 353.10 * 387.89 68002 2641 CARRUTH, HAROLD' 000968 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 2.00 * 2.00 68003 947 CASSEL, LLORA 000982 04/11/2006 101-3003-451.33-43 49.00 49.00 * 49.00 68004 22 CDW GOVERNMENT INC 000977 000977 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.71-01 101-4002-415.71-01 5,753.88 7,188.97 000977 04/11/2006 502-0000-512.56-22 379.61 000977 04/11/2006 502-0000-512.56-22 2,249.26 000977 04/11/2006 502-0000-512.56-22 1,124.63 000982 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.56-02 11,048.32 * 17,744.67 68005 152 CELSOC 000968 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.56-02 25.55 5.55 * 25.55 68006 23 CHECKMATE EXCHANGE 000968 000968 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7006-431.56-02 101-5006-426.51-03 119.94 132.68 * 252.62 Fes+ W PREPARED04/11/2006, 8:01:06 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 3 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 85 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR VOUCHER P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO ------------------------------- NO NAME ------------------------------------ NO NO 68007 354 CLASSIC PARTY RENTALS 000968 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.80-02 88.63 * 88.63 68008 355 CLEAN STREET 000986 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.44-10 8,066.64 066.64 * 8,066.64 68009 206 COMPUTER U 000982 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 252.00 * 252.00 68010 2627 COVE ELECTRIC INC 000968 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.42-30 7,800.00 00.00 * 7,800.00 68011 475 DATAPRINT CORPORATION 000975 04/11/2006 101-5001-424.56-01 34.33 34.33 * 34.33 68012 1115 DAVIS/REED CONSTRUCTION 1000968 000968 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 401-1735-551.45-01 401-1694-551.45-01 66,758.00 62,223.00 128,981.00 * 128,981.00 68013 2648 DCD DEVELOPMENT, INC 000968 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.10-00 000.00 3,000.00 * 3,000.00 68014 1353 DENNING, JEAN 000982 04/11/2006 .101-3002-451.33-43 50.40 50.40 * 50.40 68015 72 DESERT BUSINESS MACHINES 000968 000975 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.43-19 101-4002-415.43-19 157.32 15.86 173.18 * 173.18 68016 26 DESERT ELECTRIC SUPPLY 000986 000986 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 101-7004-431.56-52 433.16 372.13 000991 04/11/2006 101-7005-431.56-52 159.27 000991 04/11/2006 101-7005-431.56-52 321.94 1,286.50 1,286.50 68017 1286 DESERT FIRE EXTINGUISHER 000991 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.43-31 69.62 69.62 * 69.62 68018 1661 DESERT FOUNTAIN GAS SUPPL 000977 04/11/2006 101-3003-451.51-33 6.00 6.00 * 6.00 68019 73 DESERT PHOTO LAB 000968 000968 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 401-1733-551.34-04 401-1723-551.34-04 39.92 23.95 000968 04/11/2006 101-7006-431.56-02 15.97 000968 04/11/2006 401-1733-551.34-04 15.31 000968 04/11/2006 401-1723-551.34-04 25.52 000968 04/11/2006 101-7006-431.56-02 20 130.* 130.87 68020 117 DIETERICH POST COMPANY 000986 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.53-01 82.87 PREPARED04/11/2006, 8:01:06 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 4 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 85 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK - ----------------------------- --------- --------------------- CHECK VENDOR ------------------------------ VENDOR VOUCHER -------- P.O., DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CH K TOTAL NO ---------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NAME NO NO 82.87 * 82.87 68020 117 DIETERICH POST COMPANY 68021 1792 DISC CONSTRUCTION 000990 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.32-01 48,936.25 48,936.25 * 48,936.25 68022 28 DOUGLAS, LES 000982 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 651.00 651.00 * 651.00 68023 389 DUNHAM, KATHY 000982 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 249.90 49.90 * 249.90 68024 309 ELMS EQUIPMENT RENTAL INC 000986 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.44-01 346.50 346.50 * 346.50 68025 939 EMERY LANDCLEARING & GRAD 000990 000990 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 401-1737-551.45-11 401-1737-551.45-11 361000.00 1,637.74 37,637.74 * 37,637.74 68026 31 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES 000968 000968 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.56-27 101-4002-415.56-27 153.21 8.69 161.90 * 161.90 68027 32 FOUNDATION FOR THE RETARD 000990 000990 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-02 101-7006-431.56-02 32.54 162.67 195.21 * 195.21 68028 366 FRANKLIN COVEY 000986 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 81.78 81.78 68029 239 GARZA TURF & POWER EQUIPM 000986 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 84.85 * 84.85 68030 33 GCS 000986 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-46 74.57 360.61 000986 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-46 000986 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-46 487.65 922.83 922.83 68031 367 GENOVESE, THOMAS P 000985 04/11/2006 101-1002-413.51-01 23.67 * 23.67 68032 2652 GLOBAL LED DISTRUBUTORS 000977 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-43 794.25 94.25 794.25 68033 2300 GRAINGER 000985 000985 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-5054-421.43-62 101-5008-419.43-88 42.76 56.85 99.61 99.61 66034 682 HICKEY, RENE 000985 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 171.50 171.50 171.50 PREPARED04/11/200 6, 8:01:06 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 5 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 85 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FA RGO BANK - - - - - - - - - - - - CHECK VENDOR -------------------------------------------------------------------- VENDOR VOUCHER P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO -------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NAME NO NO 68035 454 HIGH TECH IRRIGATION INC 000987 000987 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 101-7004-431.56-52 78.88 78.01 000987 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 458.99 000987 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 120.94 000987 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 6.21 743.03 * 743.03 68036 35 HOARD INC, HUGH 000968 04/11/2006 101-5008-419.72-04 332.05 332.05 * 332.05 68037 36 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICE 000975 000975 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 101-7003-431.56-52 77.16 47.14 000975 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 444.15 000975 04/11/2006 101-5055-422.43-61 297.39 000975 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 33.71 000975 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-37 23.68 000976 04/11/2006 101-5008-419.43-88 65.67 000976 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-37 202.57 000976 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 408.33 000976 04/11/2006 101-5008-419.43-88 18.31 000976 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 11.25 000987 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 75.30 1,704.66 * 1,704.66 68038 194 JACOBS, STEVEN 000985 04/11/2006 101-3003-451.33-43 135.50 * 135.50 68039 2644 JARA-CORNEY, DANIELA 000968 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.10-00 120.00 * 120.00 68040 2645 JAUREGUI, SEVE 000968 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 2.00 2.00 * 2.00 68041 2658 JESSIE, KALEENA 000977 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.30-00 50.00 50.00 * 50.00 68042 2670 JOHNSON STUDIO, ERIC 000985 04/11/2006 101-1000-321.00-00 10.00 10.00 * 10.00 68043 79 KINER COMMUNICATIONS 000968 000968 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-1003-413.55-07 101-1003-413.55-07 1,278.78 2,319.32 000968 04/11/2006 405-9001-702.55-04 3,067.19 000968 04/11/2006 406-9002-702.55-07 1,651.56 000968 04/11/2006 101-1003-413.55-07 4,000.00 000968 04/11/2006 101-1003-413.55-08 140.08 12,456.93 * 12,456.93 68044 2233 KIRKPATRICK LANDSCAPING S 000987 000987 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.34-04 101-7004-431.34-04 51,000.00 353.75 000988 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.34-04 176.88 PREPARED04/11/2006, 8:01:06 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 6 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 85 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK ------------------------------------------ CHECK VENDOR ---------------------------------------------------------- VENDOR VOUCHER P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO --------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NAME NO NO 68044 2233 KIRKPATRICK LANDSCAPING S 000988 000988 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.34-04 101-7004-431.56-02 152.00 1,768.00 000988 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 5,990.00 000988 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 5,106.00 64,546.63 * 64,546.63 68045 764 KLAMATH BAY 000976 04/11/2006 101-5054-421.36-34 331.75 331.75 * 331.75 68046 2660 KLINE FENCE COMPANY, BOB 000977 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 154.00 154.00 * 154.00 68047 865 KRIBBS CONSTRUCTION, BRUC 000988 000988 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.34-04 101-7004-431.32-07 3,552.00 864.00 000988 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.32-07 5,750.00 000988 04/11/2006 101-7005-431.32-07 1,000.00 000990 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.43-73 4,800.00 000990 04/11/2006 401-1732-551.45-01 1,675.00 17,641.00 * 17,641.00 68048 2050 KSL DESERT RESORTS 000968 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.10-00 2,240.00 .00 * 2,240.00 68049 1656 LA CASITA RESTAURANT 000976 04/11/2006 101-5002-424.51-01 299-95 99.95 * 299.95 68050 315 LA QUINTA CHAMBER OF COMM 000990 04/11/2006 101-1003-413.33-02 43,334.00 * 43,334.00 68051 2661 LA QUINTA GOLF ESTATES HO 000977 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.30-00 400.00 400.00 * 400.00 68052 394 LANDMARK GEO-ENGINEERS & 000968 04/11/2006 401-1723-551.34-04 2,532.50 532.50 * 2,532.50 68053 1763 LASALLE LIGHTING SERVICES 000988 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.71-01 297.51 97.51 * 297.51 68054 217 LESLIE, JANELLE 000988 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 14.00 14.00 * 14.00 68055 80 LOCK SHOP INC, THE 000968 000977 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.43-01 101-3001-451.56-02 115.00 39.87 000977 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.56-02 16.16 000977 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.56-02 397.60 568.63 * 568.63 68056 458 LORMAN EDUCATION SERVICES 000990 04/11/2006 101-7006-431.51-01 179.00 * 179.00 PREPARED04/11/2006, 8:01:06 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 7 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 85 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHECK VENDOR VENDOR VOUCHER P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO -------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NAME NO NO 68057 37 LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT W 000976 04/11/2006 101-5008-419.43-88 60.51 60.51 * 60.51 68058 220 MARSHALL, SALLY 000985 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 16.10 16.10 * 16.10 68059 2659 MCCABE, JOAN 000977 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.10-00 158.00 158.00 * 158.00 68060 2669 MILLER CONSULTING, ZACK 000985 04/11/2006 101-1000-321.00-00 3.00 3.00 * 3.00 68061 2640 MILLER, ROBERT 000968 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 2.00 2.00 * 2.00 68062 248 MOBILE SATELLITE VENTURES 000985 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.41-25 227.70 * 227.70 68063 958 MOLLINDO, RICK 000985 04/11/2006 101-3003-451.33-43 49.00 49.00 * 49.00 68064 249 MOORE MAINTENANCE & 000968 000968 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.42-15 101-3001-451.42-15 125.00 125.00 000968 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.42-15 125.00 000976 04/11/2006 101-5008-419.42-15 3,471.83 000976 04/11/2006 101-7005-431.43-59 1,233.93 000976 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.42-15 616.76 000976 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.42-15 1,715.77 000976 04/11/2006 101-3004-451.42-15 2,303.00 000976 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.42-15 125.00 9,841.29 * 9,841.29 68065 2091 MORGAN R MILLS 000985 04/11/2006 101-5004-424.42-07 550.00 2,550.00 * 2,550.00 68066 2624 MOWERS PLUS INC 000976 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 9.37 * 9.37 68067 250 NAI CONSULTING INC 000976 000976 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 401-1743-551.32-10 401-1739-551.32-10 1,920.00 45.00 000976 04/11/2006 401-1740-551.32-10 110.00 000976 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.32-10 7,292.50 000976 04/11/2006 401-1744-551.35-07 745.00 000976 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.32-10 1,037.50 000976 04/11/2006 401-1723-551.32-10 528.25 000976 04/11/2006 401-1748-551.35-07 132.50 000976 04/11/2006 401-1753-551.35-07 1,837.50 000976 C14/11/2006 401-1754-551.35-07 1,717.50 000976 04/11/2006 401-1755-551.32-10 1,637.90 000976 04/11/2006 401-1756-551.35-07 552.50 O tom+ co PREPARED04/11/2006, 8:01:06 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 8 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 85 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK ------------------------------------- ------ CHECK VENDOR ------ VENDOR -- VOUCHER - --------------------------------------------------- P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO NO NAME ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NO ----------------- 68067 250 NAI CONSULTING INC 000976 000976 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 401-1757-551.35-07 401-1752-551.35-07 45.00 1,122.50 000988 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 225.00 000988 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 337.50 000989 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 337.50 000989 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 5,737.50 000989 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 1,500.00 000989 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 1,050.00 000989 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 900.00 000989 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 2,887.50 000989 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 32,52. 500 * 32,223.65 68068 2673 NASER, NUHA 000991 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.10-00 55.00 55.00 * 55.00 68069 693 NATIONAL ENTERTAINMENT TE 000968 04/11/2006 101-3003-451.51-33 112.42 112.42 * 112.42 68070 2671 NBC KMIR CHANNEL 6 000989 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.80-01 000-00 5,000.00 * 5,000.00 68071 2642 NEILSON, MONICA 000968 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 2.00 * 2.00 68072 1770 NEW PIG CORPORATION 000989 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 379.56 1,379.56 * 1,379.56 68073 1065 NIETO, RUBEN 000968 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-43 314.00 314.00 * 314.00 68074 60 NOLEN INC, TRULY 000989 04/11/2006 101-7005-431.43-59 38.00 * 38.00 68075 2656 O'SULLIVAN, JENNIFER 000977 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.3.0-00 100.00 100.00 * 100.00 68076 2214 OCB REPROGRAPHICS 000977 000990 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.56-02 401-1740-551.45-01 23.52 21044 . * 233.96 68077 41 OFFICE DEPOT 000977 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.56-07 526.77 * 526.77 68078 2064 OMEGA LAKE SERVICES 000991 04/11/2006 101-7005-431.56-52 236.25 36.25 * 236.25 68079 187 OVERLAND PACIFIC & CUTLER 000989 04/11/2006 401-1737-551.45-11 708.75 4,708.75 * 4,708.75 C) h-a co PREPARED04/11/2006, 8:01:06 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 9 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 85 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK - ------------------------------------- CHECK VENDOR ------------- VENDOR ---------------------------------------------------- VOUCHER P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO --------------------------------------------------------------- NO NAME NO NO 68080 2204 PARTNERSHIP TCI 000985 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 77.00 * 77.00 68081 519 PET PICKUPS 000989 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 659.89 659.89 * 659.89 68082 224 PITTMAN, NOEL 000985 04/11/2006 101-3003-451.33-43 56.00 56.00 * 56.00 68083 839 POWER PLUS 000989 04/11/2006 401-1723-551.45-01 125.00 125.00 * 125.00 68084 43 PRINTING PLACE, THE 000985 000985 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7006-431.56-02 101-5054-421.36-01 119.56 79.78 000985 04/11/2006 101-5004-424.53-01 821.19 000990 04/11/2006 101-2001-411.53-01 94.82 1,115.35 * 1,115.35 68085 1562 PRISTINE POOLS SERVICE & 000985 000985 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.33-13 101-7004-431.34-04 540.00 107.00 * 647.00 68086 158 PVP COMMUNICATIONS INC 000968 000968 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-50 101-5054-421.71-01 39.66 1,125.93 1,165.59 * 1,165.59 68087 1480 QUARTERMASTER 000977 04/11/2006 101-5054-421.43-62 214.50 14.50 * 214.50 68088 254 RASA/ERIC NELSON 000977 000977 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 101-7002-431.33-34 225.00 240.00 000977 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 650.00 1,115.00 * 1,115.00 68089 327 RBF CONSULTING INC 000977 04/11/2006 401-1743-551.32-10 071.18 6,071.18 * 6,071.18 68090 255 RETIRED EQUIPMENT SERVICE 000989 000989 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-46 501-0000-511.43-46 5,021.86 725.00 5,746.86 * 5,746.86 68091 81 REVENUE EXPERTS INC 000977 04/11/2006 101-5004-424.31-19 612.00 612.00 * 612.00 68092 409 RIENSCHE, PAT 000985 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 304.50 304.50 * 304.50 68093 82 RIVERSIDE CNTY AUDITOR -CO 000985 04/11/2006 301-9001-471.82-28 657.00 2,903,657.00 * 2,903,657.00 PREPARED04/11/2006, 8:01:06 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 10 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 85 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK ____ - - - - - - - - - - - CHECK VENDOR ------------------------------------------------------------ VENDOR VOUCHER P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO ---------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NAME NO NO 68094 492 RON'S TOWING & STORAGE 000989 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-40 60.00 60.00 * 60.00 68095 272 ROSE, GWENDOLYN 000985 04/11/2006 101-3003-451.33-43 210.00 210.00 * 210.00 68096 45 RUTAN & TUCKER 000990 04/11/2006 101-1001-411.32-01 757.70 * 757,70 68097 790 SANTA ROSA TRAILS LLC 000990 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.10-00 9,700.00 9,700.00 * 9,700.00 68098 111 SAXON ENGINEERING SERVICE 000977 04/11/2006 101-5002-424.33-28 630.00 630.00 * 630.00 68099 2647 SCICLI & ASSOC, CHARLES 000977 04/11/2006 101-1000-321.00-00 50.00 50.00 * 50.00 68100 463 SMITH PIPE & SUPPLY CO 000989 000989 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 101-7004-431.56-52 79.48 268.72 348.20 * 348.20 68101 2672 SNELLENBERGER COMPANIES, 000989 04/11/2006 401-1710-551.45-01 000-00 5,000.00 * 5,000.00 68102 647 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY M 000968 000968 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.43-52 101-3002-451.43-52 81.89 220.29 302.18 * 302.18 68103 2657 SPURGEON, ROBIN 000977 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.30-00 508.00 508.00 * 508.00 68104 2650 STANLEY, NELL 000968 04/11/2006 101-1000-321.00-00 4.00 4.00 * 4.00 68105 48 STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAG 000968 000968 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-4001-415.56-01 101-5002-424.56-01 159.17 150.70 000977 04/11/2006 101-7001-431.56-01 102.59 000977 04/11/2006 101-4001-415.56-01 79.33- 000977 04/11/2006 101-4001-415.56-01 123.99 000977 04/11/2006 101-5002-424.56-01 31.78 000977 04/11/2006 101-5002-424.56-01 210.31 000977 04/11/2006 101-4001-415.56-01 1,659.32 000977 04/11/2006 101-4001-415.56-01 66.08 000977 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.56-07 42.88 000989 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.56-02 32.27 000990 04/11/2006 101-7006-431.56-02 29.53 2,529.29 * 2,529.29 68106 53 SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY 000977 04/11/2006 101-0000-203.05-00 474.00 W PREPARED04/11/2006, 8:01:06 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 11 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 85 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK ------------------------------- ------ --------------------------------------------------------- CHECK VENDOR VENDOR VOUCHER ---------- P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO NO NAME NO NO ------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- 68106 53 SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY 000977 04/11/2006 101-4000-341.30-00 450.25 * 450.25 68107 423 THOMPSON, LORNA 000985 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 84.00 4.00 * 84.00 68108 2662 TOLL BROS., INC. 000985 04/11/2006 101-6000-343.33-00 75.00 5.00 * 75.00 68109 57 TOPS'N BARRICADES INC 000989 000989 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-46 101-7003-431.56-46 105.81 210.87 000989 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-46 346.20 * 662.88 68110 424 TORRENCE'S FARM IMPLEMENT 000989 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-46 78.98 * 78.98 68111 58 TRAFFEX ENGINEERS INC 000989 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.32-10 990.67 4,990.67 * 4,990.67 68112 715 TRAINING NETWORK, THE 000989 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.51-01 444.80 444.80 * 444.80 68113 426 TRI LAKE CONSULTANTS INC 000990 04/11/2006 101-7006-431.32-07 14,715.00 5.00 * 14,715.00 68114 62 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT 000989 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.32-07 100.80 100.80 * 100.80 68115 1074 UNITED STATES POSTAL SVC 000977 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.51-31 000-00 5,000.00 * 5,000.00 68116 1777 VALLEY ANIMAL MEDICAL CEN 000985 04/11/2006 101-5006-426.56-28 16.94 16.94 * 16.94 68117 874 VALLEY CRIME STOPPERS 000989 04/11/2006 101-5054-421.36-40 000-00 2,000.00 * 2,000.00 68118 430 VALLEY PARTNERSHIP, THE 000985 04/11/2006 101-1004-413.32-07 160.00 160.00 * 160.00 68119 335 VALLEY PLUMBING 000968 04/11/2006 101-5008-419.43-88 194.80 194.80 * 194.80 68120 431 VIDEO DEPOT INC 000968 000985 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.56-02 101-3002-451.56-02 17.20 17.20 * 34.40 68121 2643 VIGRA, JILL 000968 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 2.00 * 2.00 PREPARED04/11/2006, 8:01:06 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 12 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 85 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHECK VENDOR VENDOR VOUCHER P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO NO NAME -------- -------------------------- NO ---------------- NO --------- 68122 2431 VINTAGE ASSOCIATES 000977 000977 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7005-431.34-04 101-7004-431.56-02 29,067.00 152.40 000977 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 127.66 000977 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 182.87 000977 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 191.77 000990 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 30,304.17 * 30,026.17 68123 499 WEBSITES 2000 000977 04/11/2006 101-5054-421.36-49 140.00 1,140.00 * 1,140.00 68124 85 XEROX CORORATION 7405 000990 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.56-07 229.51 * 229.51 68125 86 XEROX CORPORATION 7413 000985 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.43-19 424.67 1,424.67 * 1,424.67 68126 1495 YEAGER SKANSKA INC 000968 04/11/2006 401-1732-551.45-01 723.15 135,723.15 * 135,723.15 BANK/CHECK TOTAL 3,475,226.10 3,610,984.12 ALL BANKS/CHECKS TOTAL 3,475,226.10 3,610,984.12 ND W PREPARED 04 11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 1 PROGRAM: GM 39L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK HAND -ISSUED NO ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT AMOUNT 0000202 040506 ALCALA, BOB 000982 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 14.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 14.00 0002651 CT91605 ALL STAR GLASS INC. 000975 00 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-46 SWEEPER #29(ACC REPAIRS) 210.52 VENDOR TOTAL * 210.52 0000296 21874 AMERICAN FORENSIC 000975 NURSES 00 INC 04/11/2006 101-5054-421.36-31 BLOOD DRAWS 97.50 VENDOR TOTAL * 97.50 0000569 AMERICAN PLANNING 042685-030506 000986 ASSOCIATION 00 04/11/2006 101-6001-463.53-03 MEMBERSHIP DUES 280.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 280.00 0001890 243760 AMERICAN ROTARY BROOM 000975 00 CO INC 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-46 STREET SWEEPER MATERIALS 864.80 VENDOR TOTAL * 864.80 0002655 15720 ANDREWS, SABRINA 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.30-00 PARK DEPOSIT REFUND 50.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 50.00 0000129 P3393252D ARCH WIRELESS 000982 00 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.41-25 PAGERS 298.39 VENDOR TOTAL * 298.39 0002653 15690 ATTEBERRY, JOY 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.10-00 REFUND -CLASS CANCELLATION 50.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 50.00 0000008 4469 AUTOMATED TELECOM 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.41-25 PAGER 43.22 VENDOR TOTAL * 43.22 0002639 15517 BARTH, JACK 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 REFUND -LOW ENROLLMENT 2.00 15514 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 REFUND -LOW ENROLLMENT 2.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 4.00 0001499 91487 BEST SIGNS INC 000968 00 04/11/2006 401-1723-551.45-01 CHANNEL LETTERS 1,874.72 VENDOR TOTAL * 1,874.72 0002082 167-02.03 BUCKNAM & ASSOCIATES 000990 00 INC 04/11/2006 101-1002-413.31-01 CONSULTING/CONTRACT SVC 2,378.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 2,378.00 0000019 CADET UNIFORM SERVICE 0 ►ts PREPARED 04 11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 2 PROGRAM: GM 39L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ------------------------------- ------------------------------ --------------------------------------- EFT 0 VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO ----------------- NO NO --------------------------------------------- DATE NO DESCRIPTION ------------------------------------- 0000019 25642 CADET UNIFORM SERVICE 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.44-07 UNIFORM RENTAL . 090 0 1090 32142 000977 000977 00 00 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.44-07 101-7003-431.44-07 UNIFORM RENTAL UNIFORM RENTAL ADJUSTMENT . 3_ 32142 37411 000986 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.44-07 UNIFORM RENTAL 74.77 14.77- 37411 000986 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.44-07 ADJUSTMENT CREDIT 50.66 50 25642 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.44-07 UNIFORM RENTAL 9.66 00 32142 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.44-07 UNIFORM RENTAL 279 37411 000986 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.44-07 UNIFORM RENTAL . VENDOR TOTAL * 353.38 0000130 5126314 CALIFORNIA OVERNIGHT 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.51-31 OVERNIGHT MAIL 64.10 VENDOR TOTAL * 64.10 0002654 15721 CALLISTER, JANICE 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.30-00 FACILITY DEPOSIT REFUND 400.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 400.00 0000021 51759 CARQUEST 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 ACETYENE GAS 53.10 14.64 52269 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 WELDING GAS 10 52715 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 WELDING GAS . 11287 53124 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 LIGHT BULB ASSEM. 4.87 64 53116 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 WELDING MATERIALS 53..10 53408 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 WELDING MATERIALS 1464 53685 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 WELDING MATERIALS 53.10 54093 000986 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 WELDING GAS 14.64 54351 000986 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 WELDING GAS 3.10 54514 000986 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 WELDING GAS 596 51959 000975 00 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-46 SWEEPER #41 . VENDOR TOTAL * 387.89 0002641 15515 CARRUTH, HAROLD 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 REFUND -LOW ENROLLMENT 2.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 2.00 0000947 040406 CASSEL, LLORA 000982 00 04/11/2006 101-3003-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 49.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 49.00 0000022 XD77624 CDW GOVERNMENT INC 000982 00 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.56-02 PRINTER RIBBON 1,048.32 5,753.88 XD29672 000977 000977 00 00 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.71-01 101-4002-415.71-01 TECH SVCS MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 7,188.9 XD87031 XF60315 000977 00 04/11/2006 502-0000-512.56-22 COMPUTER MEMORY 37.61 2, XF07998 000977 00 04/11/2006 502-0000-512.56-22 NETWORK CARDS 1,249.26 63 XD30215 000977 00 04/11/2006 502-0000-512.56-22 NETWORK CARDS VENDOR TOTAL * 17,744.67 0000152 CELSOC PREPARED 04L11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 3 PROGRAM: GM339L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ---------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ------ EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO ------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION 0000152 033006 CELSOC 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.56-02 2006 SUBDIVSION MAP ACT 25.55 VENDOR TOTAL * 25.55 0000023 3730328 CHECKMATE EXCHANGE 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-5006-426.51-03 ANSWERING SERVICE 132.68 119.94 3150328 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-7006-431.56-02 ANSWERING SERVICE VENDOR TOTAL * 252.62 0000354 95046 CLASSIC PARTY RENTALS 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.80-02 RENTAL EQUIPMENT 88.63 VENDOR TOTAL * 88.63 0000355 45760 CLEAN STREET 000986 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.44-10 STREET SWEEPING 8,066.64 VENDOR TOTAL * 8,066.64 0000006 22327 COACHELLA VALLEY 000978 WATER 00 04/07/2006 101-7004-431.32-01 PM10 CHECK #.: 67959 19126 000978 00 04/07/2006 401-1694-551.45-01 WATER SYSTEM CHECK #: 67959 VENDOR TOTAL * .00 0000206 040506 COMPUTER U 000982 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 252.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 252.00 0002627 9241 COVE ELECTRIC INC 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.42-30 SECURITY CAMERA INSTALL. 7,800.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 7,800.00 0000475 1325525 DATAPRINT CORPORATION 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-5001-424.56-01 SUPPLIES 34.33 VENDOR TOTAL * 34.33 0001115 032906 DAVIS/REED CONSTRUCTION 000968 00 INC 04/11/2006 401-1694-551.45-01 INTERACTIVE WATER FEATURE 62,223.00 032906 000968 00 04/11/2006 401-1735-551.45-01 BOYS/GIRLS CLUB ADDITION 66,758.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 128,981.00 0002648 032806 DCD DEVELOPMENT, 000968 INC 00 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.10-00 RETURN OF SECURITY 3,000.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 3,000.00 0001353 040506 DENNING, JEAN 000982 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 50.40 VENDOR TOTAL * 50.40 0000072 AR26425 DESERT BUSINESS 000968 MACHINES 00 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.43-19 ANNUAL SERVICE CONTRACT 157.32 15.86 AR26755 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.43-19 OVERAGE CHARGES 7,740.52- 126,475.00- 134,215.52- PREPARED 04/11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 4 PROGRAM: GM339L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA --------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO VENDOR NAME ITEM CHECK HAND -ISSUED INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT AMOUNT NO ----------------- NO NO DATE ------------------------------------------ NO 0000072 DESERT BUSINESS MACHINES VENDOR TOTAL * 173.18 0000026 S1345787.001 DESERT ELECTRIC 000986 SUPPLY 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 433.16 372.13 S1345780-001 000986 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 27 S1343640.002 000991 00 04/11/2006 101-7005-431.56-52 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 321.94 S1345784.001 000991 00 04/11/2006 101-7005-431.56-52 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES VENDOR TOTAL * 1,286.50 0001286 DESERT FIRE EXTINGUISHER 00 CO INC 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.43-31 FIRE EXTINGUISHER 69.62 667403 000991 VENDOR TOTAL * 69.62 0001661 102582 DESERT FOUNTAIN 000977 GAS SUPPLY 00 04/11/2006 101-3003-451.51-33 MONTHLY RENTAL FEE 6.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 6.00 0000073 84510 DESERT PHOTO LAB 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-7006-431.56-02 INSPECTION PHOTOS 15.97 020 1.20 84826 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-7006-431.56-02 INSPECTION PHOTOS . 84510 000968 00 04/11/2006 401-1723-551.34-04 INSPECTION PHOTOS 25.95 25.52 84826 000968 00 04/11/2006 401-1723-551.34-04 INSPECTION PHOTOS 84510 000968 00 04/11/2006 401-1733-551.34-04 INSPECTION PHOTOS 15.31 84826 000968 00 04/11/2006 401-1733-551.34-04 INSPECTION PHOTOS VENDOR TOTAL * 130.87 0000117 637631 DIETERICH POST 000986 COMPANY 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.53-01 PLOTTER PAPER 82.87 VENDOR TOTAL * 82.87 0001792 505589 DISC CONSTRUCTION 000990 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.32-01 EQUIP RENTAL/SERVICE 48,936.25 VENDOR TOTAL * 48,936.25 0000028 040506 DOUGLAS, LES 000982 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 651.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 651.00 0000389 040506 DUNHAM, KATHY 000982 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 249.90 VENDOR TOTAL * 249.90 0000309 415828-001 ELMS EQUIPMENT 000986 RENTAL 00 INC 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.44-01 RENTAL EQUIP 346.50 VENDOR TOTAL * 346.50 0000939 20�214 EMERY LANDCLEARING 000990 & 00 GRADING INC 04/11/2006 401-1737-551.45-11 MAINTENANCE 36,000 00 . 1,00000 637.74 201216 000990 00 04/11/2006 401-1737-551.45-11 RENTAL PREPARED 04L11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 5 PROGRAM: GM339L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ___- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO ---------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION 0000939 EMERY LANDCLEARING & GRADING INC 0000031 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES 369702 000968 00 04/11/2006 006094 000968 00 04/11/2006 VENDOR TOTAL 101-4002-415.56-27 COFFEE SUPPLIES 101-4002-415.56-27 COFFEE SUPPLIES VENDOR TOTAL 0000032 FOUNDATION FOR THE RETARDED OF THE 6872 000990 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-02 SHIRTS 6872 000990 00 04/11/2006 101-7006-431.56-02 SHIRTS 0000366 FRANKLIN COVEY 53274900 000986 00 04/11/2006 0000239 GARZA TURF & POWER EQUIPMENT 40079 000986 00 04/11/2006 0000033 GCS X71112 000986 00 04/11/2006 X71127 000986 00 04/11/2006 X71177 000986 00 04/11/2006 0000367 GENOVESE, THOMAS P 040406 000985 00 04/11/2006 0002652 GLOBAL LED DISTRUBUTORS 030806 000977 00 04/11/2006 0002300 GRAINGER 9067068669 000985 00 04/11/2006 9065338536 000985 00 04/11/2006 0000682 HICKEY, RENE 040506 000985 00 04/11/2006 0000454 HIGH TECH IRRIGATION INC 930298 000987 00 04/11/2006 931292 000987 00 04/11/2006 931500 000987 00 04/11/2006 932219 000987 00 04/11/2006 932790 000987 00 04/11/2006 VENDOR TOTAL 101-7003-431.56-52 SUPPLIES VENDOR TOTAL 101-7003-431.56-52 BLOWER REPAIRS VENDOR TOTAL 501-0000-511.43-46 SWEEPER OIL 501-0000-511.43-46 SWEEPER OIL 501-0000-511.43-46 SWEEPER PARTS VENDOR TOTAL 101-1002-413.51-01 REIMB-LUNCH MTG VENDOR TOTAL 101-7003-431.56-43 BARRICADE LIGHTS VENDOR TOTAL 101-5008-419.43-88 SUPPLIES 101-5054-421.43-62 OFFICE SUPPLIES VENDOR TOTAL 101-3002-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT VENDOR TOTAL 101-7004-431.56-52 IRRIGATION PARTS 101-7004-431.56-52 IRRIGATION PARTS 101-7004-431.56-52 IRRIGATION PARTS 101-7004-431.56-52 IRRIGATION PARTS 101-7004-431.56-52 IRRIGATION PARTS 37,637.74 153.21 8.69 161.90 32.54 162..67 195.21 81 .78 81.78 84.85 84.85 74.57 360.61 487.65 922.83 23.67 23.67 794.25 794.25 56.85 42.76 99.61 171.50 171.50 78.88 78.01 458.99 120.94 6.21 00 PREPARED 04L11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 6 PROGRAM: GM339L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ---------- - ----------------------------------- --- --------------------------------------------------- ----------- EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO ----------------- NO NO ----------------------------------------- DATE NO DESCRIPTION ---------------------------------------------- 0000454 HIGH TECH IRRIGATION INC VENDOR TOTAL * 743.03 0000035 46568 HOARD INC, HUGH 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-5008-419.72-04 REPAIRS 332.05 VENDOR TOTAL * 332.05 0000036 8123594 HOME DEPOT CREDIT 000976 SERVICES 00 04/11/2006 101-5008-419.43-88 BATTERIES 65.67 68.31 2124265 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-5008-419.43-88 TAPE 218 39 9.39 9112672 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-5055-422.43-61 MAINTENANCE 47. 14 6012784 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 WELDER WIRE,SAW 8013359 000975 000976 00 00 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 101-7003-431.56-52 SAND STORM DRAIN REPAIRS .71 43371 08.33 2124229 7013413 000987 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 MATERIAL/PARTS 75 7777.15 9130720 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES .16 444. 3131296 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 ELECTRIC SUPPLIES 68 8021379 000975 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-37 GRAFFITI MATERIALS 202.57 7104879 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-37 GRAFFITI 11.25 6022261 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 SOD/GRASS VENDOR TOTAL * 1,704.66 0000194 040406 JACOBS, STEVEN 000985 00 04/11/2006 101-3003-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 135.50 VENDOR TOTAL * 135.50 0002644 15536 JARA-CORNEY, DANIELA 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.10-00 USER CANCELLATION REFUND 120.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 120.00 0002645 6467 JAUREGUI, SEVE 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 REFUND -LOW ENROLLMENT 2.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 2.00 0002658 15710 JESSIE, KALEENA 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.30-00 PARK DEPOSIT REFUND 50.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 50.00 0002670 040606 JOHNSON STUDIO, 000985 ERIC 00 04/11/2006 101-1000-321.00-00 REFUND BUS LIC OVERPYMNT 10.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 10.00 0000079 25780 KINER COMMUNICATIONS 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-1003-413.55-07 LA TIMES AD PROD 1,278.78 2,319.32 25779 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-1003-413.55-07 PROD OF SHOP/DINE ADS '06 4,000.00 25736 000968 00 00 04/11/2006 04/11/2006 101-1003-413.55-07 101-1003-413.55-08 APR RETAINER RON PERKINS COLLAGE 140.08 25806 25237 000968 000968 00 04/ 11/2006 405-9001-702.55-04 30-SEC CITY SPOT IN LA/OC SPOT IN LA/OC 3,067.19 1,651.56 25237 000968 00 04/11/2006 406-9002-702.55-07 30-SEC CITY VENDOR TOTAL * 12,456.93 (:�)0002233 KIRKPATRICK LANDSCAPING SERVICES TJ PREPARED 04L11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 7 PROGRAM: GM339L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA - - - - - - - - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 0002233 00033017 KIRKPATRICK LANDSCAPING 000987 00 SERVICES 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.34-04 APRIL MAINTENANCE 51,000.00 00033025 000987 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.34-04 APRIL MAINTENANCE(CCO#1) 353.75 176.88 00033026 000988 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.34-04 MARCH MAINTENANCE(CCO#1) 152.00 00033033 000988 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.34-04 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE 1,768.00 00032985 000988 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 PLANT REPLACEMENT 5,990.00 00032984 000988 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 PLANT REPLACEMENT 5,106.00 00032983 000988 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 PLANT REPLACEMENT VENDOR TOTAL * 64,546.63 0000764 KB833 KLAMATH BAY 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-5054-421.36-34 TEMPORARY TATTOOS 331.75 VENDOR TOTAL * 331.75 0002660 033106 KLINE FENCE COMPANY, BOB 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 GATE REPAIRS 154.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 154.00 0000865 6-408 KRIBBS CONSTRUCTION, BRUCE 000988 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.34-04 R&R CONCRETE D/W(LABOR) 3,552.00 425 000990 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.43-73 DRAIN REPAIR 4,800.00 864.00 6-102 000988 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.32-07 INSTALLATION 5,750.00 LMC#132 000988 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.32-07 LANDSCAPE LIGHTING 1,000.00 LMC#132 000988 00 04/11/2006 101-7005-431.32-07 LANDSCAPE LIGHTING 1,675.00 3014 000990 00 04/11/2006 401-1732-551.45-01 MAINTENANCE VENDOR TOTAL * 17,641.00 0002050 032806 KSL DESERT RESORTS 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.10-00 RETURN OF SECURITY 2,240.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 2,240.00 0001656 040406 LA CASITA RESTAURANT 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-5002-424.51-01 ICC CHAPTER MTG 299.95 VENDOR TOTAL * 299.95 0000315 8280 LA QUINTA CHAMBER OF 000990 00 COMMERCE 04/11/2006 101-1003-413.33-02 FINAL PAYMENT '06 43,334.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 43,334.00 0002661 15711 LA QUINTA GOLF ESTATES 000977 00 HOA 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.30-00 FACILITY DEPOSIT REFUND 400.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 400.00 0000394 LP0106-61 LANDMARK GEO-ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS 000968 00 04/11/2006 401-1723-551.34-04 CONST SVC TESTING 2005-10 2,532.50 VENDOR TOTAL * 2,532.50 0001763 58761 LASALLE LIGHTING SERVICES 000988 00 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.71-01 ELECTRICAL WORK 297.51 VENDOR TOTAL * 297.51 0000217 LESLIE, JANELLE W PREPARED 04 11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 8 PROGRAM: GM 39L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA -------------------- ----------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT HAND- ISSUED AMOUNT NO -------- NO NO DATE --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO DESCRIPTION 0000217 040506 LESLIE, JANELLE 000988 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 14.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 14.00 0000080 594780 LOCK SHOP INC, THE 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.56-02 KEYS FOR COMM SVC 39.87 16.16 594797 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.56-02 KEYS FOR COMM SVC 397.60 C213290 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.56-02 KEYS FOR COMM SVC 115.00 E616212 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.43-01 HOSPITALITY DOOR LOCK VENDOR TOTAL * 568.63 0000458 2121147-1 LORMAN EDUCATION SERVICES 000990 00 04/11/2006 101-7006-431.51-01 SUPPLIES 179.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 179.00 0000037 919669 LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT WAREHOUSE 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-5008-419.43-88 STONES FOR WATER FEATURE 60.51 VENDOR TOTAL * 60.51 0000220 040506 MARSHALL, SALLY 000985 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 16.10 VENDOR TOTAL * 16.10 0002659 15773 MCCABE, JOAN 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.10-00 REFUND -CLASS CANCELLATION 158.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 158.00 0002669 040606 MILLER CONSULTING, 000985 ZACK 00 04/11/2006 101-1000-321.00-00 REFUND BUS LIC OVERPYMNT 3.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 3.00 0002640 15516 MILLER, ROBERT 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 REFUND -LOW ENROLLMENT 2.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 2.00 0000248 MOBILE SATELLITE VENTURES 1000085795 000985 00 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.41-25 SATELITE MOBILE PHONES 227.70 VENDOR TOTAL * 227.70 0002186 MOLINA, LYNNETTE ANGEL-MARIE 00 01/13/2006 101-3003-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT CHECK #: 66875 111505 000671 VENDOR TOTAL * .00 0000958 040406 MOLLINDO, RICK 000985 00 04/11/2006 101-3003-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 49.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 49.00 0000249 245655 MOORE MAINTENANCE .000968 & 00 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.42-15 JANITORIAL SVC FOR RESERV 125.00 125.00 245654 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.42-15 JANITORIAL SVC FOR RESERV 0 w 52.50- 5 2 .50- PREPARED 04L11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 9 PROGRAM: GM339L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA --------------------- - -------- ------------------------------------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO VENDOR INVOICE NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT AMOUNT NO ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION 0000249 MOORE 245656 MAINTENANCE & 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.42-15 JANITORIAL SVC FOR RESERV 125.00 245751 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.42-15 JANITORIAL SERVICE 616.76 1,715.77 245751 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.42-15 JANITORIAL SERVICE 125.00 245697 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.42-15 CLEANING SERVICE 2,303.00 245751 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-3004-451.42-15 JANITORIAL SERVICE 3,471.83 245751 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-5008-419.42-15 JANITORIAL SERVICE 1,233.93 245751 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-7005-431.43-59 JANITORIAL SERVICE VENDOR TOTAL * 9,841.29 0002091 MORGAN R MILLS 1106 000985 00 04/11/2006 101-5004-424.42-07 LOT CLEANING 2,550.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 2,550.00 0002624 MOWERS PLUS INC 060338 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 BLOWER OIL 9.37 VENDOR TOTAL * 9.37 0000250 NAI CONSULTING INC 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.32-10 SERVICES 1 ,037.50 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.32-10 SERVICES ,37.50 225.00 2005-01.20(A) 000988 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 PLAN CHECK 337.50 2005-01.20(B) 000988 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 PLAN CHECK 337.50 2005-01.20(C) 000989 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 PLAN CHECK 5,737.50 2005-01.41 000989 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 PLAN CHECK 1,500.00 2005-01.48 000989 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 PLAN CHECK 1,050.00 2005-01.49 000989 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 PLAN CHECK 900.00 2005-01.50 000989 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 PLAN CHECK 2,887.50 2005-01.51 000989 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 PLAN CHECK 525.00 2005-01.52 000989 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 PLAN CHECK 528.25 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 401-1723-551.32-10 SERVICES 45.00 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 401-1739-551.32-10 SERVICES 110.00 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 401-1740-551.32-10 SERVICES 1,920.00 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 401-1743-551.32-10 SERVICES 745.00 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 401-1744-551.35-07 SERVICES 132.50 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 401-1748-551.35-07 SERVICES 1,122.50 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 401-1752-551.35-07 SERVICES 1,837.50 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 401-1753-551.35-07 SERVICES 1,717.50 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 401-1754-551.35-07 SERVICES 1,637.90 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 401-1755-551.32-10 SERVICES 552.50 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 401-1756-551.35-07 SERVICES 45.00 2005-03 000976 00 04/11/2006 401-1757-551.35-07 SERVICES VENDOR TOTAL * 32,223.65 0002673 15910 NASER, NUHA 000991 00 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.10-00 REFUND -CLASS CANCELLATION 55.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 55.00 0000693 60321005 NATIONAL ENTERTAINMENT 000968 00 TECHNOLOGIES 04/11/2006 101-3003-451.51-33 EGG HUNT SUPPLIES 112.42 PREPARED 04 11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 10 PROGRAM: GM 39L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO ------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION 0000693 NATIONAL ENTERTAINMENT TECHNOLOGIES 0002671 NBC KMIR CHANNEL 6 040506 000989 00 04/11/2006 0002642 NEILSON, MONICA 15513 000968 00 04/11/2006 0001770 NEW PIG CORPORATION 3492968-00 000989 00 04/11/2006 0001065 NIETO, RUBEN 032506 000968 00 04/11/2006 0000060 NOLEN INC, TRULY 66823169 000989 00 04/11/2006 0002656 O'SULLIVAN, JENNIFER 15719 000977 00 04/11/2006 0002214 OCB REPROGRAPHICS FC198930 000977 00 04/11/2006 4017467 000990 00 04/11/2006 VENDOR TOTAL 101-3001-451.80-01 SPONSORSHIP VENDOR TOTAL 101-3000-342.70-00 REFUND -LOW ENROLLMENT VENDOR TOTAL 101-7003-431.56-52 SAFETY MATERIAL VENDOR TOTAL 501-0000-511.43-43 AUTO DETAIL VENDOR TOTAL 101-7005-431.43-59 PEST CONTROL VENDOR TOTAL 101-0000-228.30-00 DEPOSIT REFUND VENDOR TOTAL 101-7002-431.56-02 FINANCE CHARGE 401-1740-551.45-01 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLANS VENDOR TOTAL 0000041 OFFICE DEPOT 3300334694-001 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.56-07 PAPER 0002064 OMEGA LAKE SERVICES 04-058 000991 00 04/11/2006 0000187 OVERLAND PACIFIC & CUTLER INC 0602041 000989 00 04/11/2006 0002204 PARTNERSHIP TCI 040506 000985 00 04/11/2006 0002291 PENA, YOLANDA RSG000700045000000978 00 04/07/2006 W w VENDOR TOTAL * 101-7005-431.56-52 CAMPUS LAKE MAINTENANCE VENDOR TOTAL 401-1737-551.45-11 SERVICES VENDOR TOTAL 101-3002-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT VENDOR TOTAL 401-1737-551.45-10 TEMP RENTAL ASST/INTERIM 112.42 5,000.00 5,000.00 2.00 2.00 1,379.56 1,379.56 314.00 314.00 38.00 38.00 100.00 100.00 23.52 210.44 233.96 526.77 526.77 236.25 236.25 4,708.75 4,708.75 77.00 77.00 CHECK #: 67972 670.00- PREPARED 04�11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 11 PROGRAM: GM 39L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ------------------ --- -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EFT 0 VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT ED HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT A NO ----------------------------------------------------------------- NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION 0002291 PENA, YOLANDA RSG000700045000000979 0000519 PET PICKUPS 29068 000989 0000224 PITTMAN, NOEL 040406 000985 0000839 POWER PLUS 13052OP0306 000989 00 04/07/2006 00 04/11/2006 00 04/11/2006 00 04/11/2006 0000043 PRINTING PLACE, THE 060772 000990 00 014/11/2006 060522E 000985 00 04/11/2006 060359 000985 00 04/11/2006 060359 000985 00 04/11/2006 401-1737-551.45-10 TEMP RENTAL ASST/INTERIM VENDOR TOTAL 101-7004-431.56-52 SUPPLIES VENDOR TOTAL 101-3003-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT VENDOR TOTAL 401-1723-551.45-01 RENTAL EQUIP VENDOR TOTAL 101-2001-411.53-01 BUSINESS CARDS 101-5004-424.53-01 FORMS 101-5054-421.36-01 BUSINESS CARDS 101-7006-431.56-02 BUSINESS CARDS VENDOR TOTAL 0001562 PRISTINE POOLS SERVICE & REPAIR INC 4109 000985 00 04/11/2006 101-3001-451.33-13 POOL SERVICE 4111 000985 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.34-04 POOL SERVICE 0002586 PRONET CO. 14815 000808 00 03/15/2006 0000158 PVP COMMUNICATIONS INC 7199 000968 00 04/11/2006 7193 000968 00 04/11/2006 0001480 QUARTERMASTER P610567601018 000977 0000254 RASA/ERIC NELSON 3693 000977 3695 000977 3692 000977 VENDOR TOTAL 101-0000-228.30-00 FACILITY REFUND VENDOR TOTAL 101-5054-421.71-01 EQUIPMENT 501-0000-511.43-50 REPAIRS 00 04/11/2006 101-5054-421.43-62 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.33-34 0000327 RBF CONSULTING INC 6020120 000977 00 04/11/2006 0000255 RETIRED EQUIPMENT SERVICE 1� 401-1743-551.32-10 VENDOR TOTAL * POLICE SHOULDER PATCH VENDOR TOTAL PLAN CHECK PLAN CHECK PLAN CHECK VENDOR TOTAL CONTRACT SVC PRO VENDOR TOTAL CHECK #: CHECK # 67972 .00 659.89 659.89 56.00 56.00 125.00 125.00 94.82 821.19 79.78 119.56 1,115.35 540.00 107.00 647.00 67721 .00 1,125.93 39.66 1,165.59 214.50 214.50 225.00 240.00 650.00 1,115.00 6,071.18 6,071 .18 670. 00- 1,340.00- 1 50 . 00- 150.00- PREPARED 04L11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 12 PROGRAM: GM339L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ----------------- - - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO ----------------- NO NO DATE --------------------------------------------- NO DESCRIPTION 0000255 RETIRED EQUIPMENT SERVICE 000989 00 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-46 REPAIRS -SWEEPER #29 5,021.8625. 95 92 000989 00 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-46 SWEEPER #41 00 VENDOR TOTAL * 5,746.86 0000081 2279 REVENUE EXPERTS INC 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-5004-424.31-19 CITATIONS 612.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 612.00 0000409 040506 RIENSCHE, PAT 000985 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 304.50 VENDOR TOTAL * 304.50 0000082 RIVERSIDE CNTY AUDITOR -CONTROLLER 00 04/11/2006 301-9001-471.82-28 05/06 ERAF SHIFT 2,903,657.00 040506 000985 VENDOR TOTAL * 2,903,657.00 0000492 52754 RON'S TOWING & STORAGE 000989 00 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-40 TRK #21 60.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 60.00 0000272 040406 ROSE, GWENDOLYN 000985 00 04/11/2006 101-3003-451.33-43 INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 210.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 210.00 0000045 469505 RUTAN & TUCKER 000990 00 04/11/2006 101-1001-411.32-01 LGL/GENERAL 757.70 VENDOR TOTAL * 757.70 0000790 040706 SANTA ROSA TRAILS LLC 000990 00 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.10-00 DEP REFUND #261-135 9,700.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 9,700.00 0000111 60314 SAXON ENGINEERING SERVICES 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-5002-424.33-28 PLAN CHECK 630.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 630.00 0002647 SCICLI & ASSOC, CHARLES 00 04/11/2006 101-1000-321.00-00 BUS LIC REF OVERPAYMENT 50.00 032806 000977 VENDOR TOTAL * 50.00 0000463 1531430 SMITH PIPE & SUPPLY CO 000989 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 IRRIGATION PARTS 79.48 268 72 1533169 000989 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-52 IRRIGATION PARTS VENDOR TOTAL * 348.20 0002672 SNELLENBERGER COMPANIES, ROGER 00 04/11/2006 401-1710-551.45-01 REIMB-CART PATH 5,000.00 040606 000989 VENDOR TOTAL * 5,000.00 0000647 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT u PREPARED 04 11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 13 PROGRAM: GM 39L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA -------------- ------------------------------------------------ -- - ------------------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE CHECK ACCOUNT ITEM AMOUNT HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO -------------------------------------------------------- NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION 0000647 SOUTH COAST AIR 000968 QUALITY MANAGEMENT 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.43-52 1768434 1769185 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.43-52 0002657 15714 SPURGEON, ROBIN 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-0000-228.30-00 0002650 033006 STANLEY, NELL 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-1000-321.00-00 0000048 STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAGE 3067492975 000968 00 04/11/2006 3067681862 000977 00 04/11/2006 3067670450 000977 00 04/11/2006 3067670449 000977 00 04/11/2006 3067670448 000977 00 04/11/2006 3067421921 000977 00 04/11/2006 3067421920 000968 00 04/11/2006 3067670443 000977 00 04/11/2006 3067670444 000977 00 04/11/2006 3067670452 000977 00 04/11/2006 3067670451 000989 00 04/11/2006 3067670453 000990 00 04/11/2006 0000053 SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY 31748 000977 00 04/11/2006 31748 000977 00 04/11/2006 0000423 THOMPSON, LORNA 040506 000985 0002662 TOLL BROS., INC. 033106 000985 101-4001-415.56-01 101-4001-415.56-01 101-4001-415.56-01 101-4001-415.56-01 101-4001-415.56-01 101-4002-415.56-07 101-5002-424.56-01 101-5002-424.56-01 101-5002-424.56-01 101-7001-431.56-01 101-7002-431.56-02 101-7006-431.56-02 101-0000-203.05-00 101-4000-341.30-00 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.33-43 00 04/11/2006 101-6000-343.33-00 ICE MACHINE/HVAC ICE MACHINE/HVAC VENDOR TOTAL FACILITY DEPOSIT REFUND VENDOR TOTAL * OVERPAYMENT A/L RABIES VENDOR TOTAL FILE FOLDERS,TAPE CREDIT MEMO HANGING FOLDERS,STORAGE LATERAL FILE CABINETS FILES, FOLDERS PAPER BUS CARDS,TONER,FOLDERS TONER FILES, TONER STAPLES, FILES, PENS OFFICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES VENDOR TOTAL BUS PASSES SOLD BUS PASSES SOLD VENDOR TOTAL INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT VENDOR TOTAL REFUND -OVERPAYMENT -FEES VENDOR TOTAL 0000057 980016 TOPS'N BARRICADES INC 000989 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-46 SIGNS 980114 000989 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-46 SIGNS 980187 000989 00 04/11/2006 101-7003-431.56-46 SIGN POST VENDOR TOTAL 0000424 CT53522 TORRENCE'S FARM 000989 IMPLEMENTS 00 04/11/2006 501-0000-511.43-46 SWEEPER VENDOR TOTAL * 0000058 TRAFFEX ENGINEERS INC 81.89 220.29 302.18 508.00 508.00 4.00 4.00 159.17 79.33- 123.99 1,659.32 66.08 42.88 150.70 31.78 210.31 102.59 32.27 29.53 2,529.29 474.00 23.75- 450.25 84.00 84.00 75.00 75.00 105.81 210.87 346.20 662.88 78.98 78.98 PREPARED 04L11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 14 PROGRAM: GM339L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA --------____-_--------------- ------------------ --------------------------------------- -- -------------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO VENDOR NAME ITEM CHECK HAND -ISSUED INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT AMOUNT NO ----------------------------------------------------- NO NO DATE NO 0000058 TRAFFEX ENGINEERS INC 23 000989 00 04/11/2006 0000715 TRAINING NETWORK, THE 7475 000989 00 04/11/2006 0000426 TRI LAKE CONSULTANTS INC 4061 000990 00 04/11/2006 0000062 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT 320060349 000989 00 04/11/2006 0001074 UNITED STATES POSTAL SVC 032806 000977 00 04/11/2006 0001777 VALLEY ANIMAL MEDICAL CENTER 327018 000985 00 04/11/2006 0000874 VALLEY CRIME STOPPERS 100 000989 00 04/11/2006 101-7002-431.32-10 SERVICES 101-7003-431 . 51-01 101-7006-431.32-07 101-7002-431.32-07 101-3001-451.51-31 101-5006-426.56-28 101-5054-421.36-40 0000430 VALLEY PARTNERSHIP, THE MARCH 06 000985 00 04/11/2006 101-1004-413.32-07 0000335 VALLEY PLUMBING 171742 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-5008-419.43-88 0000431 030606 VIDEO DEPOT INC 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.56-02 040506 000985 00 04/11/2006 101-3002-451.56-02 0002643 15519 VIGRA, JILL 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 0002431 SI-37780 VINTAGE ASSOCIATES 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 SI-38001 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 SI-38043 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 SI-38220 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 C W VENDOR TOTAL TRAINING MATERIAL VENDOR TOTAL INSPECTOR SERVICES VENDOR TOTAL TICKETS -DIG ALERTS VENDOR TOTAL BULK MAIL -POSTAGE VENDOR TOTAL SUPPLIES VENDOR TOTAL ANNUAL CONTRIBUTION VENDOR TOTAL EAP SERVICES VENDOR TOTAL MAINTENANCE VENDOR TOTAL MOVIE RENTALS MOVIE RENTALS VENDOR TOTAL REFUND -LOW ENROLLMENT VENDOR TOTAL REPLACEMENT PLANTS REPLACEMENT PLANTS REPLACEMENT PLANTS REPLACEMENT PLANTS 4,990.67 4,990.67 444.80 444.80 14,715.00 14,715.00 100.80 100.80 5,000.00 5,000.00 16.94 16.94 2,000.00 2,000.00 160.00 160.00 194.80 194.80 17.20 17.20 34.40 2.00 2.00 152.40 127.66 182.87 191.77 PREPARED 04 11/2006, 7:18:37 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/11/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/11/2006 PAGE 15 PROGRAM: GM 39L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ------------------ -- -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO -------------------------------------------------------------- NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION 0002431 VINTAGE ASSOCIATES SI-38372 000990 00 04/11/2006 101-7004-431.56-02 SI-37671 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-7005-431.34-04 0000499 WEBSITES 2000 16118 000977 00 04/11/2006 101-5054-421.36-49 0000085 XEROX CORORATION 7405 194487319 000990 00 04/11/2006 0000086 XEROX CORPORATION 7413 016435701 000985 00 04/11/2006 0001495 YEAGER SKANSKA INC 01286 000968 00 04/11/2006 101-4002-415.56-07 PLANT REPLACEMENT MONTHLY PARK MAINTENANCE VENDOR TOTAL ANNUAL MAINTENANCE VENDOR TOTAL SUPPLIES VENDOR TOTAL * 101-4002-415.43-19 DIGITAL COPIER BASE CHG VENDOR TOTAL 401-1732-551.45-01 PP5 2001-07 VENDOR TOTAL HAND ISSUED TOTAL *** TOTAL EXPENDITURES **** GRAND TOTAL ******************** 304.47 29,067.00 30,026.17 1,140.00 1,140.00 229.51 229.51 1,424.67 1,424.67 135,723.15 135,723.15 3, 610, 984.12 135,758.02- 135,758.02- 3,475,226.10 PREPARED04/06/2006, 10:54:36 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 1 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 84 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK ------------------------------------------ CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ------------------------------------------------------------- VOUCHER P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO NO NAME NO NO ------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- 67985 2397 LA QUINTA PALMS REALTY 000983 000984 04/07/2006 04/07/2006 401-1737-551.45-10 401-1737-551.45-10 670.00 670.00 1,340.00 * 1,340.00 BANK/CHECK TOTAL 1,340.00 1,340.00 ALL BANKS/CHECKS TOTAL 1,340.00 1,340.00 PREPARED 04L06/2006, 10:44:04 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/07/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/07/2006 PAGE 1 PROGRAM: GM339L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- EFT VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT IT CHECK AMOUNT HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO --------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION 0002397 LA QUINTA PALMS REALTY RSG000700045000000983 00 04/06/2006 RS0000700045000000984 00 04/06/2006 401-1737-551.45-10 TEMP RENTAL/INTERIM PYMNT 401-1737-551.45-10 TEMP RENTAL/INTERIM PYMNT VENDOR TOTAL TOTAL EXPENDITURES **** GRAND TOTAL ******************** 670.00 670.GO 1,340.00 1,340.00 1,340.00 PREPARED04/06/2006, 9:33:48 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 1 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L. REPORT NUMBER 83 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK ---------------------- CHECK VENDOR ------ -------------- VENDOR -------------- VOUCHER ----------------------------------------------- P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO ----------------- NO NAME -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NO 67957 2667 CALIFORNIA DEBT AND INVES 000981 04/07/2006 101-1001-411.51-01 125.00 125.00 * 125.00 67958 133 CALPERS LONG-TERM CARE PR PR0407 04/07/2006 101-0000-209.49-00 59.08 59.08 * 59.08 67959 6 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER 000978 000978 04/07/2006 04/07/2006 401-1694-551.45-01 101-7004-431.32-01 126,475.00 7,740.52 134,215.52 * 134,215.52 67960 653 COACHELLA, CITY OF 000978 04/07/2006 101-4001-415.51-01 15.00 15.00 * 15.00 67961 575 FALCONER, JOHN 000978 04/07/2006 101-4001-415.51-01 434.19 434.19 * 434.19 67962 168 GALARZA, JOSE I 000981 04/07/2006 101-3003-451.33-46 220.00 0.00 * 220.00 67963 136 GAS COMPANY, THE 000978 000978 04/07/2006 04/07/2006 101-5008-419.41-13 101-5055-422.41-13 1,300.18 119.75 000981 04/07/2006 101-3004-451.41-13 644.56 000981 04/07/2006 101-3002-451.41-13 362.89 2,427.38 * 2,427.38 67964 503 GATEWAY 000978 04/07/2006 101-0000-135.00-00 750.00 1,750.00 * 1,750.00 67965 2666 ICMA 000981 04/07/2006 101-1002-413.53-03 1,400.00 1,400.00 * 1,400.00 67966 269 IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DIST 000981 000981 04/07/2006 04/0.7/2006 101-7005-431.40-18 101-5055-422.41-01 11.33 652.78 000981 04/07/2006 101-5055-422.41-01 1,590.11 * 1,254.22 67967 1830 LIUNA PR0407 04/07/2006 101-0000-209.80-00 741.00 41.00 * 741.00 67968 2664 LOPEZ, JUAN 000981 04/07/2006 101-3003-451.33-46 165.00 165.00 * 165.00 67969 2665 LOPEZ, VICTOR 000981 04/07/2006 101-3003-451.33-46 55.00 55.00 * 55.00 67970 40 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 000978 04/07/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 670.18 1,670.18 * 1,670.18 -67971 175 NUNEZ, ANICETO 000981 04/07/2006 101-3003-451.33-46 55.00 55.00 * 55.00 PREPARED04/06/2006, 9:33:48 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 2 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 83 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK --------------------------------------------------- CHECK VENDOR VENDOR VOUCHER ---------- ------------------------------------------- P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO NO NAME NO NO ------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- 67972 2291 PENA, YOLANDA 000978 000979 04/07/2006 04/07/2006 401-1737-551.45-10 401-1737-551.45-10 670.00 0.00 167 ,0.00 * 1,340.00 67973 2387 PHSI PURE WATER FINANCE 000979 04/07/2006 101-4002-415.56-29 52.80 * 52.80 67974 157 POWER STAFFING SOLUTIONS 000979 000981 04/07/2006 04/07/2006 101-5002-424.10-05 101-3003-451.10-05 927.81 65248 1,580.29 * 1,580.29 67975 2663 RAMIREZ, JOSE 000981 04/07/2006 101-3003-451.33-46 55.00 55.00 * 55.00 67976 1338 RIVERSIDE COUNTY COMMUNIT 000979 04/07/2006 401-1694-551.32-10 259.00 59.00 * 259.00 67977 283 SOUL OF CHINA 000980 04/07/2006 101-1001-411.51-01 229.03 9.03 * 229.03 67978 49 SPRINT 000979 04/07/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 780.41 0.41 * 780.41 67979 56 TIME WARNER CABLE 000979 04/07/2006 502-0000-512.30-03 699.95 699.95 * 699.95 67980 63 UNITED WAY OF THE DESERT PR0407 04/07/2006 101-0000-209.81-00 152.00 152.00 * 152.00 67981 2290 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 000979 000979 04/07/2006 04/07/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 101-4002-415.41-22 354.03 3,115.92 000979 04/07/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 90.06 000979 04/07/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 28.40 000979 04/07/2006 101-7005-431.40-04 30.96 000979 04/07/2006 101-5054-421.41-22 504.05 000980 04/07/2006 101-7005-431.40-16 35.89 000981 04/07/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 20.41 000981 04/07/2006 101-7005-431.40-18 2 498 ,28.* 4,208.70 67982 2157 VERIZON ON LINE 000981 04/07/2006 101-3001-451.42-30 82.70 * 82.70 67983 2259 VERIZON WIRELESS 000979 04/07/2006 101-4002-415.41-25 128.34 1,128.34 * 1,128.34 67984 1742 VISION SERVICE PLAN - (CA 000981 04/07/2006 101-0000-209.45-00 334.16 1,334.16 * 1,334.16 BANK/CHECK TOTAL 156,488.95 156,488.95 C) PREPARED04/06/2006, 9:33:48 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 3 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/10 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 83 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK ----------- ----------- -------------------- -------- ------------------------------------------------------ CHECK VENDOR VENDOR VOUCHER P.O. DATE REMITTANCE AMOUNT CHECK NO NO NAME NO NO ACCOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) TOTAL -------------------------------------------------------------- ALL BANKS/CHECKS TOTAL 156,488.95 156,488.95 PREPARED 04 06/2006, 9:20:00 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/07/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/07/2006 PAGE 1 PROGRAM: GM 39L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA -------------------------------- --------------------- ------------------------------------------------ EFT OR VEND NO VENDOR NAME INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO NO NO ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE NO DESCRIPTION -- 0002667 CALIFORNIA DEBT AND INVESTMENT 04/06/2006 101-1001-411.51-01 CONFERENCE 125.00 040606 000981 00 VENDOR TOTAL * 125.00 0000133 CALPERS LONG-TERM CARE 20060407 PR0407 00 PROGRAM 04/07/2006 101-0000-209.49-00 PAYROLL SUMMARY 59.08 VENDOR TOTAL * 59.08 0000006 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER 000978 00 04/06/2006 101-7004-431.32-01 PM10 7,740.52 22327 19126 000978 00 04/06/2006 401-1694-551.45-01 WATER SYSTEM 126,475.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 134,215.52 0000653 COACHELLA, CITY OF 040406 000978 00 04/06/2006 101-4001-415.51-01 APRIL CSMFO LUNCHEON 15.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 15.00 0000575 FALCONER, JOHN 040306 000978 00 04/06/2006 101-4001-415.51-01 AIR TRAVEL- CONFERENCE 434.19 VENDOR TOTAL * 434.19 0000168 GALARZA, JOSE I 31206 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-3003-451.33-46 SOCCER OFFICIAL 220.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 220.00 0000136 GAS COMPANY, THE 09422738006 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-3002-451.41-13 GAS SVC 362.89 644.56 15294440449 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-3004-451.41-13 GAS SVC 1,300.18 02692565001 000978 00 04/06/2006 101-5008-419.41-13 GAS SVC 119.75 16568248591 000978 00 04/06/2006 101-5055-422.41-13 GAS SVC VENDOR TOTAL * 2,427.38 0000503 GATEWAY 040506 000978 00 04/06/2006 101-0000-135.00-00 COMPUTER PURCHASE -SAWYER 1,750.0 VENDOR TOTAL * 1,750.00 0002666 ICMA 040606 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-1002-413.53-03 DUES 1,400.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 1,400.00 0000269 IMPERIAL IRRIGATION 84144489 000981 DIST 00 04/06/2006 101-5055-422.41-01 ELECTRIC SVC 652.78 590.11 104139383 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-5055-422.41-01 ELECTRIC SVC 11.33 114130797 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-7005-431.40-18 ELECTRIC SVC VENDOR TOTAL * 1,254.22 0001830 LIUNA 20060407 PR0407 00 04/07/2006 101-0000-209.80-00 PAYROLL SUMMARY 741.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 741.00 0G02664 LOPEZ, JUAN PREPARED 04/06/2006, 9:20:00 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/07/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/07/2006 PAGE 2 PROGRAM: GM 39L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ------------------------------------------------------- ------ ------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO ----------------- NO NO ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DATE NO DESCRIPTION 0002664 31208 LOPEZ, JUAN 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-3003-451.33-46 SOCCER OFFICIAL 165.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 165.00 0002665 31209 LOPEZ, VICTOR 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-3003-451.33-46 SOCCER OFFICIAL 55.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 55.00 0000040 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 916525027-044 000978 00 04/06/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 PHONE SVC 1,670.18 VENDOR TOTAL * 1,670.18 0000175 31210 NUNEZ, ANICETO 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-3003-451.33-46 SOCCER OFFICIAL 55.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 55.00 0002291 RSG000700045000000978 PENA, YOLANDA 00 04/06/2006 401-1737-551.45-10 TEMP RENTAL ASST/INTERIM 670.00 670.00 RSG000700045000000979 00 04/06/2006 401-1737-551.45-10 TEMP RENTAL ASST/INTERIM VENDOR TOTAL * 1,340.00 0002387 815647 PHSI PURE WATER FINANCE 000979 00 04/06/2006 101-4002-415.56-29 WATER 52.80 VENDOR TOTAL * 52.80 0000157 18807 POWER STAFFING SOLUTIONS INC 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-3003-451.10-05 CONTRACT SVC .48 652652.81 18808 000979 00 04/06/2006 101-5002-424.10-05 CONTRACT SVC VENDOR TOTAL * 1,580.29 0002663 31207 RAMIREZ, JOSE 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-3003-451.33-46 SOCCER OFFICIAL 55.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 55.00 0001338 RIVERSIDE COUNTY COMMUNITY 00 HEALTH 04/06/2006 401-1694-551.32-10 ANNUAL OPERATION PERMIT 259.00 040506 000979 VENDOR TOTAL * 259.00 0000283 040406 SOUL OF CHINA 000980 00 04/06/2006 101-1001-411.51-01 CITY COUNCIL DINNER 229.03 VENDOR TOTAL * 229.03 0000049 SPRINT 843721584 000979 00 04/06/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 PHONE SVC 780.41 VENDOR TOTAL * 780.41 0000056 0178583 TIME WARNER CABLE 000979 00 04/06/2006 502-0000-512.30-03 INTERNET ACCESS 699.95 VENDOR TOTAL * 699.95 0000063 UNITED WAY OF THE DESERT PREPARED 134/06/2006, 9:20:00 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/07/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/07/2006 PAGE 3 PROGRAM: GM339L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA -------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO VENDOR NAME INVOICE VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO ---------------------------------- NO NO DATE ----------- NO ---------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION 0000063 UNITED WAY OF THE DESERT 20060407 PR0407 00 04/07/2006 101-0000-209.81-00 PAYROLL SUMMARY 152.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 152.00 0002290 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 7605640096 000979 00 04/06/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 PHONE SVC 354.03 3,115.92 7605643127 000979 00 04/06/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 PHONE SVC 90.06 7605649188 000979 00 04/06/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 PHONE SVC 28.40 7607710955 000979 00 04/06/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 PHONE SVC 20.41 7609119999 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 PHONE SVC 504.05 760UH02778 000979 00 00 04/06/2006 04/06/2006 101-5054-421.41-22 101-7005-431.40-04 PHONE SVC IRRIGATION MODE 30.96 7607719026 7607714347 000979 000980 00 04/06/2006 101-7005-431.40-16 PHONE SVC 35.89 28.98 7605649209 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-7005-431.40-18 PHONE SVC VENDOR TOTAL * 4,208.70 0002157 80104727 VERIZON ON LINE 000981 00 04/06/2006 101-3001-451.42-30 SECURITY MONITORING 82.70 VENDOR TOTAL * 82.70 0002259 2026212897 VERIZON WIRELESS 000979 00 04/06/2006 101-4002-415.41-25 PHONE SVC 1,128.34 VENDOR TOTAL * 1,128.34 0001742 VISION SERVICE PLAN 10194440001 000981 - 00 (CA) 04/06/2006 101-0000-209.45-00 VISION INSURANCE 1,334.16 VENDOR TOTAL * 1,334.16 TOTAL EXPENDITURES **** 156,488.95 156,488.95 GRAND TOTAL ******************** PREPARED04/04/2006, 13:30:19 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 1 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/1 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 82 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK ---------------- ----------------------------- CHECK VENDOR ----------------------------------------------------------------- VENDOR VOUCHER P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO NO NAME NO NO ----------------------------------------------- 67956 274 WELLS FARGO BUSINESS CARD 000969 04/04/2006 04/04/2006 101-1001-411.51-01 101-1001-411.56-01 389.68 71.12 000970 000971 04/04/2006 101-1002-413.51-01 244.51 000972 04/04/2006 101-3003-451.56-01 101-6001-463.51-01 820.00 2,940.00 000973 000974 04/04/2006 04/04/2006 101-1001-411.51-01 4,325.33 * 4,325.33 BANK/CHECK TOTAL 4,325.33 4,325.33 ALL BANKS/CHECKS TOTAL 4,325.33 4,325.33 PREPARED 2006, 13:20:26 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 04/04/2006 CHECK DATE: 04/04/2006 PAGE 1 PROGRAM: GM39 GM L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ----------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO -------------------------------------------- NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION ---------- 0000274 WELLS FARGO BUSINESS 000969 CARD 00 04/04/2006 101-1001-411.51-01 MEETINGS 389.68 71.12 022806 022806 000970 00 04/04/2006 101-1001-411.5 SUPPLIES 139.98- 022806 000974 00 00 04/04/2006 04/04/2006 101-1001-411.51-01 -01 101-1002-413.51-01 CREDIT MEETINGS/SUPPLIES 244.51 820.00 022806 022806 000971 000972 00 04/04/2006 101-3003-451.56-01 EXCURSION 2,940.00 022806 000973 00 04/04/2006 101-6001-463.51-01 CONFERENCE VENDOR TOTAL * 4,325.33 TOTAL EXPENDITURES **** 4,325.33 4,325.33 GRAND TOTAL ******************** PREPARED03/30/2006, 10:43:19 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 1 ACCOUNTING PERIOD 2006/09 PROGRAM: GM346L REPORT NUMBER 81 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR VOUCHER _ P.O. DATE ACCOUNT REMITTANCE AMOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) CHECK TOTAL NO NO NAME -------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NO ----------------- 62135* 1567 WHITE, PAMELA 005271 01/26/2005 101-3000-342.70-00 30.00- * VOIDED 67457* 856 CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS 1000800 000788 02/28/2006 02/28/2006 101-7003-431.51-01 101-1004-413.51-01 100.00- 200.00- * VOIDED 67945 1737 CINGULAR WIRELESS 000967 03/31/2006 101-4002-415.41-25 20.76 * 20.76 67946 268 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DI 000963 000963 03/31/2006 03/31/2006 401-1710-551.45-01 401-1726-551.45-01 455.00 227.50 000963 03/31/2006 401-1733-551.45-01 23.90 000963 03/31/2006 401-1733-551.45-01 32.18 000963 03/31/2006 401-1714-551.45-01 46.67 000965 03/31/2006 101-3004-451.41-16 18.00 000965 03/31/2006 101-3004-451.41-16 818.00 * 821.25 67947 2053 EMBROIDERY ETCETERA, INC 000963 03/31/2006 101-3003-451.56-02 261.59 61.59 * 261.59 67948 1 IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTR 000963 03/31/2006 401-1733-551.45-01 68.65 68.65 * 68.65 67949 2649 LA QUINTA COMMUNITY CHURC 000966 03/31/2006 101-3000-342.60-00 150.00 150.00 * 150.00 67950 157 POWER STAFFING SOLUTIONS 000963 000965 03/31/2006 03/31/2006 101-3003-451.10-05 101-3003-451.10-05 815.60 734.04 000967 03/31/2006 101-5002-424.10-05 2,951.60 * 2,501.24 67951 150 SPARKLETTS 000963 000963 03/31/2006 03/31/2006 101-7006-431.56-02 101-7003-431.56-52 29.31 3961 1. * 168.92 67952 56 TIME WARNER CABLE 000963 03/31/2006 502-0000-512:30-03 89.95 * 89.95 67953 2646 US TREASURY 000964 03/31/2006 101-3003-451.51-33 300.00 300.00 * 300.00 67954 2290 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 000963 03/31/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 140.71 140.71 * 140.71 67955 1567 WHITE, PAMELA 000963 03/31/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 30.00 30.00 * 30.00 BANK/CHECK TOTAL 4,323.07 4,553.07 CC) 00 PREPARED03/30/2006, 10:43:19 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER BY BANK NUMBER PAGE 2 PROGRAM: GM346L ACCOUNTING PERIOD 200 6/09 CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA REPORT NUMBER 81 BANK 00 WELLS FARGO BANK ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CHECK VENDOR VENDOR VOUCHER P.O. DATE REMITTANCE AMOUNT CHECK NO ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ NO NAME NO NO ACCOUNT (NET OF DISC/RETAIN) TOTAL ALL BANKS/CHECKS TOTAL 4,323.07 4,553.07 PREPARED %30/2006, 10:32:27 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 03/31/2006 CHECK DATE: 03/31/2006 PAGE 1 PROGRAM: 39L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ------"'-"' ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK HAND -ISSUED AMOUNT NO -----------------------------=---------------------------------------- NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 0000856 CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS INSURANCE 3114 000788 00 02/28/2006 101-1004-413.51-01 3113 000800 00 02/28/2006 101-7003-431.51-01 0001737 CINGULAR WIRELESS 7604859858 000967 00 03/30/2006 101-4002-415.41-25 0000268 COACHELLA VALLEY 60706301010 000965 WATER 00 DIST 03/30/2006 101-3004-451.41-16 60706301010 000965 00 03/30/2006 101-3004-451.41-16 7023 000963 00 03/30/2006 401-1710-551.45-01 50731250000 000963 00 03/30/2006 401-1714-551.45-01 7010 000963 00 03/30/2006 401-1726-551.45-01 50731207720 000963 00 03/30/2006 401-1733-551.45-01 50731331800 000963 00 03/30/2006 401-1733-551.45-01 0002053 EMBROIDERY ETCETERA, INC 032406 000963 00 03/30/2006 0000001 IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT 104136344 000963 00 03/30/2006 0002649 LA QUINTA COMMUNITY CHURCH 14815 000966 00 03/30/2006 101-3003-451.56-02 NO SHOW PAYMENT TRAINING VENDOR TOTAL COVE EMERGENCY CALL BOX VENDOR TOTAL * WATER SVC WATER SVC INSPECTION FEE WATER SVC INSPECTION FEE WATER SVC WATER SVC VENDOR TOTAL T-SHIRTS VENDOR TOTAL * 401-1733-551.45-01 ELECTRIC SVC 101-3000-342.60-00 0000157 POWER STAFFING SOLUTIONS INC 18649 000963 00 03/30/2006 101-3003-451.10-05 18726 000965 00 03/30/2006 101-3003-451.10-05 18727 000967 00 03/30/2006 101-5002-424.10-05 0000150 SPARKLETTS 4282032 000963 00 03/30/2006 101-7003-431.56-52 4281072 000963 00 03/30/2006 101-7006-431.56-02 0000056 TIME WARNER CABLE 0277799 000963 00 03/30/2006 502-0000-512.30-03 0002646 US TREASURY 032706 000964 0002290 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 00 03/29/2006 101-3003-451.51-33 VENDOR TOTAL FACILITY REFUND VENDOR TOTAL CONTRACT SVC CONTRACT SVC CONTRACT SVC VENDOR TOTAL DRINKING WATER DRINKING WATER VENDOR TOTAL INTERNET ACCESS VENDOR TOTAL BAND TRANSPORTATION COST VENDOR TOTAL * CHECK #: 67457 100.00- CHECK #: 67457 100.00- .00 200.00- 20.76 20.76 18.00 18.00 455.00 46.67 227.50 23.90 32.18 821.25 261 .59 261.59 68.65 68.65 150.00 150.00 815.60 734.04 951.60 2,501.24 139.61 29.31 168.92 89.95 89.95 300.00 300.00 e ll PREPARED 03/30/2006, 10:32:27 EXPENDITURE APPROVAL LIST AS OF: 03/31/2006 CHECK DATE: 03/31/2006 PAGE 2 PROGRAM: GM339L CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EFT OR VEND NO INVOICE VENDOR NAME VOUCHER P.O. BNK CHECK/DUE ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK AMOUNT HAND --ISSUED AMOUNT NO ---------------------------------------------------------------------- NO NO DATE NO DESCRIPTION 0002290 7605641031 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 000963 00 03/30/2006 101-4002-415.41-22 PHONE SVC 140.71 VENDOR TOTAL * 140.71 0001567 2598 WHITE, PAMELA 005271 00 01/26/2005 101-3000-342.70-00 REFUND CLASS CHECK #: 62135 30.00- 2598 000963 00 03/30/2006 101-3000-342.70-00 REFUND -CLASS CANC 30.00 VENDOR TOTAL * 30.00 30.00- HAND ISSUED TOTAL *** 230.00- TOTAL EXPENDITURES **** 4,553.07 230.00- GRAND TOTAL ******************** •4,323.07 rn < v, s CD = = o o a a. 3 c� 0 0 n �� -� N c c -h CD < O '+ o o a� CDQ 0 0 v n 0 s o m D a O C 3 CD •< ; � c;�� v �� o 33N D CD°+ m i rn Z O x ,-+ cn c o O" m m c c O � 2. w D CD -4 C m ,..�. ��--11 c N C :3 r-F u J .0 O " CD c� m rn -o m rn < rn ' rn CL `D 3 c 3 c� W= CL n" rn p ,-+ cn 00 n rn CD r+ 0 O Cl)-n O Q CD a c. p CD= -cr , cn fl: + (n -o O c CO �� 0 p W c c 0) o 0 :3� N 00 CDfl. . 00 Ln W N p�cOn O < v CD 0 N a N N N r+ � � 3 a) rn a.. n CL — c a �. o cn r- o CDm Co p w CA l.-40 p -n 0 Fn o rn D rn r CL -n r c� D rn O ahCh z c /� V• CD c rn -0 O 0) 0 CL -n a cr I c 00 O O O O r+ rn 0 r 0 m 0 n LD• O CD Iv � a m _ z rn O z N H n r o 04 CD y t� a' r c ,v y C 00 CD. H c� o � � �aCD y •l •J cn OD � D m c rn N N CD O O 0) CITY 0 n ' Fk 0 d� sir o� Y O C�7 GJ I� r+ n 3 CD CD N CD C CD Cn CD .a O O r w p c w D o CL CD o CD Cn � c < ' \, c' CD Cn N. CD Cn cr sv cc CD C_ O -n C7 O O CD TI O O O 0 CD 0 CD 0 O m m CD Cn CD 0 r+ C Cn C cr CD a N v 3 .- -n a�- o m o -0 -+ CD 0 CD CD o < CD CD n) 3 3 (nC Cn O v, O cn--I c 3 c O N A 0 CD O CD w W m =3 + —o c O c O v O CD a) CD a O 3 7 m QCD . CD O CD CD CD CD N A tli A O N ?CD CD .O. `G 3 CD CD .+ CCDD (0 O a) -0 O_ CC CD (SD O < 3 CD < CD 7 O � v CD v Q -n y .a (Q 7 ; CD `< ACD 0 CD CD CD `< .O+ y CL v =r '. CD cn CD CD N-. CD CD (D N CD N M O cnN O t<D cr a- CD CO j O cn O CD U) CD v _ 3 a CD 3 O N Q a CD c O � C N E O =3 3 Cn CD CD N O 3 O CD CD cn 3 CD 7 N p -nCu CD A C) 0 O 7 (D 1 � co v cn Or @ D < ' --1 N< to N N CD� c m m sO: v CD -n 0 CD (0 CD CD < 7 CD y CD 0 C2 Cu �' 3 CD C C O— cn Qcn N O CD CD .. 4 O = 0; C)- C O0 O N A O cD a)3 3 CD m y W CD cn m r- 0CD0O 3:30:3 c 3 0 0. O 00 0 o CD r 0= 0 O. CCD � CD o 77 CD 3 r C) CD a) - 3 mCD a 33w CD O O O -' X 3 c a o, CD a O 3 COD = O — to CD O C A Cn � 3 a. 03 = CD m m (D CD X CD :3 O 0 w N CAD O " 3 CD cn CS �: C N CD CD CO m C �< n a 0 CD <1 7 (D N a c �•N CL0) CD 0 C L .0+3-, .«yam O ? CD CD cn C < (_ny, cn to O O <(D 0) CD 3 m Cb (D cn C O. CD CDy. � O N to O CD r_n 0) fl:N CD (OD Ov 3 a(n� oN(n OO.r CD 3 Q -Ow O O O O r+ O O Q N CCDD O. O C O mCAD O. CD a m A E CD CO 0 -a N O CD O `< CD CL 0 CLo (D Cn C1 cn O CD CA (D CA 0 CD CS) -��C�C�CCrn oc oochch> < fl, _a)03 c-d 3 ��In CD ch c -n o m C CD A C O 0 tin O O fD N CD O 1 CD v a m CU M. CD y N � W C) _ w CD (n 0) co (D — OD O) _ U) CD -1 Cb (D A (D -4 -4 O co (D .A (A A -4 OD N (D cn 7 C)(D Lo N (n -4 A N ALn OCbCANCi.) .69 N -. 4 -P� cn 0) C 0 v� C)OOVD °, N 4 O O O O) 0. N W O O (D Z O CD a ffl Cn O N CD (D O O O O O O N O O O O C (D 0' O O O O EA ? N� N O W N CJ) 0) CD PO U�1 D(D Efl N � A ' A N m (D CI1 v N CA N v W W Cb CDN O) � W Cb N —1 N M O0D C) C) C) cn Cll V U1 (D O W -I O 7 OD CJ) -1 O N O -4 (D 4 Cn 0) O OD CD O W m O O) O) O -I v — O CA W W O O) OD (D O (D D cn � 0 m D C no --I m co `m O C7 CL O N C � 7 n (D L (D N CD O iv 06) 0) 3 � � p 0 :T CA 3 7 N N N CD v, v w C) � ;aOO CCDD O G CD CD O O -n Cv �' O O O 3 C) (D T A CD CD a CO) CD �.3 CD v �O O. (D OD A o 0 m w CL N 0 7 � O C)CD CD a) O -n c c CD C7 m CD y�N N `Z 0 N 0 OD O - o y O CD x -� cr CD =r (D CD 0 T N cn O Cn A C CD CT 03 CD = N p• 3 0 CD O W CITY OF LA QUINTA AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS AND DIVERSIFICATION February 28, 2006 The City Treasurer will be permitted to invest in the following types of investments subject to the maximum percentage compliance limits and bid process requirements: All maturities must be less than the maximum allowed. Type of Investments Checking/Savings and other time accounts Certificate of Deposits, with interest earnings paid monthly. U.S. Treasury Bills, Strips, Notes and Bonds. Government Securities ( except any collateralized mortgage obligation (CMO) or structured note which contains embedded rate options): - Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) - Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) - Federal Home Loan Bank Notes & Bonds (FHLB) - Federal Farm Credit Bank (FFCB) - Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC) Prime Commercial Paper Corporate Notes Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) Money market mutual funds regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission and whose portfolio consists only of US Agency Securities maintaining a par value per share of $1. Investment Agreements for bond proceeds and/or reserve tunas. Total All Funds Maximum All Funds Actual % All Funds Over (Under) 85% 0.60%-84.40% 60% 0.00%-60.00% 100% 64.50% -35.50% 100% 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 16.93% $ - 10,000,000 17,500,000 5,000,000 2,500,000 n/a - 7,500,000 (5,000,000) 7,500,000 40,000,000 $ 35,000,000 $ 5,000,000 30% 0.00% 30.00% 15% --15.00% 25% 12.54% -12.46% 60% 5.44% -54.56% N/A 0.00% N/A 100.00% Annualized Earnings of Pooled Cash Investments 4.143% Annualized Earnings of Fiscal Agent Investments 4.013% Annualized Earnings of All Investments 4.086% Six Month Treasury Bill Rate 4.580% Surplus Maximum Surplus % Surplus Over (Under) 85% 0.01 %-84.99% 600/6 0.00%-60.00% 100% 64.69% -35.31 % 100% 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 16.98% $ - 10,000,000 17,500,000 5,000,000 2,500,000 n/a - 7,500,000 (5,000,000) 7,500,000 40,000,000 $35,000,000 $ 5,000,000 30% 0.00% 30.000 15% --15.0006 250/c 12.87% -12.13% 20% 5.45%" -14.55% N/A 0.00% N/A 100.00% Restrictions Maximum Maturit Credit Quality Exceptions <=$99,000 per institution 2 years FDIC Insured None <=$99,000 per institution 2 years FDIC Insured None Except no more than $8 million may be invested over 2 years 5 years None Restricted to per -issuer limits below: 100% $10.0 million $10.0 million $10.0 million $10.0 million $10.0 million 2 years None 15% Addition 15% WAM <=31 $3,000,000 per Issuer 90 days Standard & Poors/Moody's A-1, P-1 None $3,000,000 per Issuer 2 years at least Standard &Poors "AA" None $40,000,000 per account Utilize DVP 2 years Unrated None Maintain $1 per share par value. Utilize DVP 60 days AAA by two of three rating None agencies or assets of $500 million and investor SEC licensed > 5 yrs None .4- City of La Quinta Summary of Holdings City, Redevelopment Agency and Financing Authority February 28, 2006 City Cash & Investments Bank Accounts Interest Accrued Unrealized Market Name - Availability Surplus Type Rank Rate Book Interest Gain Loss Value Bank Wells Fargo -Demand Yes Checking 1 0.00% $ 1,211,660 N/A N/A $ 1,211,660 $ 7,389,008 Petty Cash- Demand No WA 1 N/A 11000 N/A N/A 1,000 1.000 Wells Far o/Housin -Demand Yes Checking 1 0.00% 20,086 N/A N/A 20,086 44.200 Total - Bank Accounts $ 1,232,746 $ 1,232,746 $ 7,434,208 U. S. Government Sponsored Enterprise Custodian - Availability Surplus Issuer/Type Rank Discount/ Rate Amortized Value Accrued Interest Unrealized Gain Loss Markel Value Days to Maturity Par Value Settlement Date Maturity Date Original Days to Maturity Yield to Maturity Market Value Source Bank of New York - Demand Yes FHLB 1 2.7500% $4,969,932 $28,176 (52,745) $4.945.363 290 5,000,000 11/15/05 12/15/06 395 4.63 % Bank of New York Bank of New York - Demand Yes FHLB-Discount 1 2.625% 2.895,951 (38.961) 2,856.990 282 3,000,000 12/15/2005 12/7/2006 357 4,656 % Bank of New York Bank of New York - Demand Yes FHLB 1 3.B00% 1,986,723 11,452 (4,223) 1,993,952 297 2,000.000 1/4/2006 12/22/2006 352 4.643% Bank of New York Bank of New York - Demand Yes FHLB 1 4.625% 7,497,946 45,286 (16,696) 7,526,536 318 7,500,000 1/18/2006 1/12/2007 359 4,657% Bank of New York Bank of New York - Demand Yes FNMA 1 5.500% 4,954,784 116,667 (1,659) 5,069,792 365 5,000,000 2/15/2006 2/28/2007 378 4.934% Bank of New York Bank of New York - Demand Yes FHL Mortgage 1 5.500% 2,513,478 16.805 (8,009) 2,522,274 137 2,500,000 7/26/2005 7/15/2006 354 4.015% Bank of New York Bank of New York - Demand Yes FARM CREDIT 1 2.125°% 4,971,863 (23.426) 4,948,437 139 5,000,000 5/31 /2005 7/17/2006 412 3.650% Bank of New York Bank of New York -Demand Yes FNMA 1 4.483% 4,912,693 12,396 29,099 4,895,990 141 5,000,000 AMON 1/20/2006 7/19/2006 180 4.649% Bank of New York Total - U.S. Govemment Securities S34,703,370 $230,782 $174,818 $34,759,334 $ 000 U. S. Treasury Notes Custodian - Availability Surplus Issuer/Type Rank Discount/ Rate Amortized Value Accrued Interest Unrealized Gain Loss Market Value Days to Maturity Par Value Settlement Date Maturity Date Original Days to Maturity Yield to Maturity Market Value Source Bank of New York - Demand Yes U.S. Treasury Bill 1 1.625% 8,941,603 (127,622 8,813,981 58 9.000.000 10/31/2005 4/27/2006 178 4.190% Bank of New York Bank of New York - Demand Yes U.S. Treasury Bill 1 4.140°% 9,917,652 (132,548 9,785,104 72 10.000,000 11/10/2005 5/11/2006 182 4.287% Bank of New York Bank of New York - Demand Yes U.S. Treasury Bill 1 4.130% 4.950,948 (55,622) 4,895,326 86 5,000,000 11/30/2005 5/25/2006 176 4.274% Bank of New York Bank of New York - Demand Yes U.S. Treasury Bill 1 4.095% 9,926,468 (138,081) 9,788,3B7 65 10,000,000 11/4/2005 5/4/2006 181 4.239% Bank of New York Bank of New York - Demand Yes U.S. Treasury Note 1 3.125% 3,954,026 19,126 (11,226) 3,961,926 337 4,000,000 1/3/2006 1/31/2007 393 4.415 % Bank of New York Bank of New York - Demand Yes U.S. Treasury Note 1 1.875 % 4,944,615 24,247 (16,115) 4,952,747 306 5,000,000 12/15/2005 12/31/2006 381 4.369% Bank of New York Bank of New York - Demand Yes U.S. Treasury Note 1 1,500% 4.990,206 30,942 (2,506) 5,018,642 31 5,000.000 9/30/2005 3/31/2006 182 3.857% Bank of New York Bank of New York - Demand Yes U.S. Treasury Note 1 2.500% 5,000,443 30,738 (27,006) 5,004,175 92 5,000,000 06/01/2004 5/31/2006 729 2.464% Bank of New York Bank of New York •Demand Yes U.S. Treasury Note 1 2.750% 4,988 021 28,253 18,871 4,997,403 122 5 000,000 6/30/2005 6/30/2006 365 3.488% Bank of New York Total- U.S. Treasu $ 57.613,982 $ 133,306 S 529,597 $ 57!217!691 1 $ 58,000,000 Local Agency Investment Fund Interest I I Accrued Unrealizable Market Days to Actual Management Statutory Management Name - AvailabilitySurplus T Rank Rate Book Interest Gain! Loss Value MaturityFees Char ed Fees Allowed LAIF - City - Demand Yes State Pool N/A 4.04% $ 21,998,012 N/A N/A N/A 1 .29 of 1 % - Qtr ending 12/31 /OS .50 of 1 % LAIF - RDA - Demand Yes State Pool N/A 4.04% 3 701 240 N/A N/A N/A 1 .29 of 1 % - Qtr ending12/31 /05 .50 of 1 % Total - State Pool 1 $ 25.699,252 1 $ Total City Investments Total City Cash & Investments $118,016,604 S 364,088 S 704.415 N/A $ 119,249,3501 S 364,088 1 $ (704,415H N/A City of La Ouinta Summary of Holdings City, Redevelopment Agency and Financing Authority February 28, 2006 01...I A-t 1-tments Portfolio -RDA Investments Interest Amortized Accrued Unrealized Market Days Par Settlement Maturity Date Original Days to Meturi Yield to Maturity Market Value Source Custodian - AvailabilitySurplus Issuer/TypeRank Rate Value Interest Gain Loss Value to Maturity 114 Value E 10,209,000 Date 12/22M OB/22/06 182 4.2030% U.S.Bank 2002 RDA U.S. Bank-CIP Yes U.S.Treasury Bill 1 3.456% E 10,078,464 E E (12,188) E 10,068,278 121 30,000,000 01/03/06 06/29/06 177 4.2640% U.S.Bank 20D4 Finance Authority -CIP Yes U.S.Treasury BID 1 4.264% 29,586,901 (32,101) 29,554,800 23 10,000,000 09W05 03/23/06 182 3.7600% U.S.Bank 2004 Finance Authority -CIP Yes U.S.Treasury Bill 1 3,760% 9.976,872 (3,372) 9,973,500 31 25,000,000 09/30/05 03/31l06 182 3.7800% U.S.Bank 2004 Finance Authority-CIP Yes U.S.Treasu Note 1 1.500% 24,952,616 154,713 (168,829) 24,938,500 E 75 209,000 Total - U.S. Treasu E 74,594 853 E 154,713 E 216,488 E 74 533,078 Portfolio - Money Mrid Mutual Funds Money Market Accrued Unrealizable Market Days to Management Fees Trustee - Availability Surplus Mutual Fund Rank Rate Book Interest GairV Loss Value Maturity Bond Issue Civic Center U.S. Bank - Debt Svc Yes 1st American 1 3.920% 177 NIA 177 1 1996 City Hall Revenue Bonds 1994 RDA U.S. Bank -Debt Svc Yes 1st American 1 3.920% 516,293 N/A 516,293 1 1 1994 Series Bonds -RDA 1 1995 Housing Bonds - RDA 1 8 2 1995 RDA U.S.Bank - CIP Yes 1 at American 1 3.920% N/A 1 1995 Housing Bonds - RDA 1 8 2 1995 RDA U.S.Bank - Special Fund Yes 1 at American 1 3.920% NIA 2,212,978 1 2004 Financing Authority 2004 Fin Auth -1995 US Bank - Escrow Yes 1 at American 1 3.920% 2,212,978 NIA 1 1998 Series Bonds - RDA 1 1998 RDA U.S.Bank - CIP Yes 1st American 1 3.920% 409,760 N/A N/A 409,760 1 1998 Series Bonds - RDA 2 1998 RDA U.S.Bank • Obt Svc Yes 1 at American 1 1 3.920% 3.920% 158,521 N/A 158,521 1 1995 Housing Bonds - RDA 1 & 2 1998 RDA U.S.Bank - Special Fund Yes 13t American N/A - 1 1998 Series Bonds - RDA 2 1998 RDA U.S.Bank - CIP Yes 1 at American 1 3,920% 3.920% 1,215,360 N/A 1,215,360 1 2001 Series Bonds - RDA 1 2001 RDA U.S. Banc - Dbt Svc Yes 1st American 1 N/A 1 2001 Series Bonds - RDA 1 2001 RDA U.S. Bank - CIP Yes 1st American 1 1 3.920% 3.920% - 937,671 N/A 937,671 1 2002 Series Bonds - RDA 1 2002 RDA U.S. Banc - Dbt Svc Yes 1 at American 1 3.920% 937,367 N/A 937,367 1 2002 Series Bonds • RDA 1 2002 RDA U.S. Bank - CIP Yes 1st American 1 3.920% 788,509 NIA 788,509 1 2003 Series Bonds - RDA 1 2003 Taxable RDA U.S. Bank - DS Yes 1 at American N/A 1 2003 Series Bonds - RDA 1 2003 Taxable RDA U. S. Bank -COI Yes 1 at American 1 3.920% 1 2003 Series Bonds - RDA 1 2003 Taxable RDA U. S. Bank-CIP Yes 1 at American 1 3.920% NIA 2004 FinancingAuthority 2004 Fin Auth US Bank CIP Yes tat American 1 3.920% 3 958 822 NIA 3 856 822 1 Subtotal -Mutual Fund E 11,133 458 E E E 11 133 458 Total Fiscal Agent Investments Grand Total Average Maturity E 115,728,311111 E 164,713 1 E (2116,488111E 86,666,636 E 204,977,6611 E 618,801 E (920,903)1 WA 98 Da -0.46%. City of La Quinta Summary of Investment Activities City, Redevelopment Agency and Financing Authority February 28, 2006 Investments Purchased Yield Name Type Principal Date to Maturity Par Checking & Savings - Net Change Checking & Savings 1,678,669 N/A N/A US Treasury T-Note - US Treasury T-Bill - GES FNMA 5,000,000 2/15/2006 4.934% 5,000,000 LAIF-CITY State Pool 400,000 2/1/2006 400,000 LAIF-CITY State Pool 600,000 2/8/2006 600,000 LAIF-CITY State Pool 700,000 2/9/2006 700,000 LAIF-CITY State Pool 1,000,000 2/16/2006 1,000,000 LAIF-CITY State Pool 5,000,000 2/17/2006 5,000,000 LAIF-CITY State Pool 9,000,000 2/21/2006 9,000,000 Mutual Funds - Net Change U.S. Treasury Mutual Funds 4,559,103 Total Investments Purchased 27,937,772 Investments Sold/Matured Yield Name Type Principal Date to Maturity Par Checking & Savings - Net Change Checking & Savings - GES FNMA (5,000,000) 2/15/2006 3.140% 5,000,000 GES FARM CREDIT (5,000,000) 2/17/2006 4.303% 5,000,000 Commercial Paper General Electric Co (3,000,000) 2/21/2006 4.397% 3,000,000 Commercial Paper Nestle Capital Corp (3,000,000) 2/21/2006 4.392% 3,000,000 Commercial Paper CitiGroup Funding Inc (3,000,000) 2/21/2006 4.417% 3,000,000 LAIF - CITY State Pool (10,000,000) 2/27/2006 10,000,000 Mutual Funds - Net Change U.S. Treasury Mutual Funds - N/A Total Investments Sold/Matured (29,000,000) Unamortized Premium/Discount Change $343,765 Investment Change Prior Month Ending Balance $ 205,696,124 Plus: Investments Purchased 27,937,772 Less: Investments Sold (29,000,000) Unamortized Premium/Discount change 343,765 Month Ending Balance $ 204,977,661 v N _ O nOopp 0 0 0 O A1M'.mw N N W O _t0A A-'t11 gNg to A atODO A" o Ta5ofw02M,DAD1ppO� F m DCDCD(n r otD oOOOCnCInc m CD �CC� (nC 00 cnC . �DDyW<I>> U)(/��WmN<c»NCCC W dWdT7w-.wG> > d d nci(n U) Cn jDr7x (n7�Cx F d. = Cd Q Ta, ca d d� Q� Q n Q n sQ O 7 (co T(n'O f1fnN toc ^ nxx nn 2��U) n o3E {{{{{{{{{ mw { fn cmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmcD fn U) o w U) In U) w U) U) o w w UU) U) C y y.. y.�y. D D D D D D D D D D D D D➢➢ D D D D 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 g 3 3 g 3 3 3 3 3 3 tD lD (� N tD N (D (D tD tD m m tD tD lD c R d T nn000 00niin000 n n000ncd 4Wi A w N O V w w A OUD V V U W O N W W U W W W U V t0 N 10 V. O r O. OD . . W v < d O A F w N t0 V CD tO AUi tp W U OD W w W O W W W V V U W (0 N W A W (T tJ T twl f)N V O N -+ U N O W J W N W V W V y { C V y N n O V w w A 00 W 01 m V J U W 1p N W A t) U W W w U O W J W N W V O J W . N . . t0 J + . O . -� O . 0) . . W V U) N C y U) z; O C i U) Z C 0 v fC/1 X. W U o n A p o D D = to (n (D C 0 C y I Il 0>IL 0O>>orDc> O > 4's m 7y 3 3am noN N tD tD N y y y ` CC CI (n U) V) N 1 N 1 1 1 H N N Dd C C C C y m Z � � o O) Q? W ID — -- A A O t0 O N C), mmIDOP) W N A In< V N N A A t0 O O D 3 d G y { C t0 O N o O A W C. (T t0 tO U O 10 U V W J A N W W W ODp m co W W N A (D y C y a'o .00 O O A to V V A A tD tNcn 0 O tD IDOD U { C y y 0 AU j V W w W D D_ W J C T \ n y U w w : a WII W JI N C P. F. O U 1" tD O V t0 O U f0 A t0 W tp { W W. H y c 4piN� W A�m(0)N tDy y W A tJ W A -I tO -) t0 10 V 0 W V W A N U w D N cfDit n D n n J V N w (n ON) W N{ C { C A A A N A V N A{ C N J U CD (D 'O J t0 tD j O A O W t0 (D O A 0 W y C y C W N W A v m COT tD y y m y W N W W W W A -W,W A t0 N V O tDW W A N V t0 W V O O t0 O W W W A W W N U) C o� N U) C OD C y U) ZC O10 N n n a U) C O N y C 0 a N U) C O C y TM, LZZZZZZ0i£iiifE (f) � 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 1 x x F x x x x F m D 3 < d d. c w00000v000 d-� c 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 n n a o n n n n a N N A N N N m m N y y y y y y y y V1 U) C C y C C C C C C C C C u! U) U) (A y U) in (n 11 11 -11111 �^ c c c c c Q 42 Q Q 42 z Z Z Z z z.2 0 0 0 0 o co W W W m ID V A U P A W t0 A t0 co W t0 O �ttDpp tD t0 �O 0 t0 (O A W C�1ONm ]ICDNM A UO N -+ w W U W WmN w 4 A U A P w w A O W -< C W t0 O t0 O tD t0 t�0 O (D �^ W O W A U N U t W W O O A A W O V y N O O P N W O A t0 W W W N A O N C A U O N -+ W W U W W W N w a U) to V A U A A W t0 A tD { C +t W O t0 A( N (0)t A N D w OD O 0 A A W O J C y 0O A Npp W O P <O Of O N N W W U W m OODD N W CI a y Z� O N D D O D D rn D D D D a A D p > (0 A— A— U C T O C T W N C O d C N C w y o I N I I O O W (nW ly (n { N W y O y C U y C A N y N �! y a y y o •• City of La Quinta Cash Flow Analysis FY 05/06 Beginning Cash Balance Actual Forecasted Forecasted Forecasted Forecasted Forecasted Forecasted Total YTD Through 2/28/2006 March-06 April-06 May-06 June-06 July-06 August-06 184,384,135 204,978,873 196,968,848 192,101,979 208,237,021 203,003,120 203,148,172 184,384,135 Property Tax/ Tax Increment Transient Occupancy Tax Sales Tax Other revenues 38,166,745 2,564,272 4,335,736 43,790,648 297,400 534,053 446,760 2,160,226 401,363 534,053 446,760 2,157,471 26,136,667 492,972 578,160 2,780,771 616,127 246,486 525,600 5,756,907 0 205,405 341,640 5,161,856 0 102,703 315,360 4,017,780 65,618,302 4,679,944 6,990,016 65,825,659 Revenues 88,857,400 3,438,440 3,539,646 29,988,570 7,145,120 5,708,901 4,435,843 143,113,920 Expenditures Salaries & Fringe Benefits Redevelopment Agency Other expenditures Capital Projects Debt Service (Principal/Interest/Pass Through) 4,762,452 2,730,909 12,945,689 16,153,296 29,632,876 856,621 154,798 2,094,758 1,936,000 6,406,287 571,081 167,093 2,393,902 1,936,000 3,338,440 571,081 98,247 2,403,742 1,936,000 8,844,459 571,081 237,716 2,510,125 1,936,000 7,124,098 856,621 124,411 2,112,970 1,936,000 533,847 571,081 131,974 2,400,520 1,936,000 167,195 8,760,018 3,645,148 26,861,706 27,769,296 56,047,202 Total Expenditures 66,225,222 11,448,465 8,406,516 13,853,529 12,379,020 5,563,849 5,206,769 123,083,369 Net Revenues/Expenditures 22,632,178 (8,010,025) (4,866,869) 16,135,042 (5,233,901) 145,052 (770,926) 20,030,551 Changes in Assets/Liabilities (2,037,440) (2,037,440) Ending Cash Balance 204,978,873 196,968,848 192,101,979 208,237,021 203,003,120 203,148,172 202,377,246 202,377,246 Net Change in Cash before Maturing Investments 20,594,738 (8,010,025) (4,866,869) 16,135,042 (5,233,901) 145,052 (770,926) 171993,111 Projected (Sources)/Uses of Cash - City Pooled LAIF Maturinq Investments - Pooled Cash (165,067) 5,000,000 2,759,624 9,000,000 (18,071,042) 5,000,000 3,297,901 5,000,000 (2,081,052) 12,500,000 (14,717,074) 0 Total 5,165,067 6,240,376 23,071,042 1,702,099 14,581,052 14,717,074 Proiected (Sources)/Uses of Cash - Fiscal Aaent Bond Money Market 1,936,000 1,936,000 1,936,000 1,936,000 1,936,000 15,488,000 Bond Sale Proceeds 0 0 0 0 0 0 Maturing Investments (35,000,000) 0 0 (10,209,000) 0 0 Debt Service Money Market 6,239,092 171,245 0 0 0 0 Total 26,824,908 2,107,245 1,936,000 8,273,000 1,936,000 15,488,000 Net Change in Cash after Maturing Investments (31,989,975) 1 (4,133,131) 1 (21,135,042 (9,975,099) 1 (12,645,052) 770,926 Projected Liquid Cash Balances if no investments made LAIF Balance 21,998,012 27,163,079 33,403,455 56,474,496 58,176,595 72,757,648 87,474,722 Bond Capital Project Money Market 3,701,240 36,765,240 34,829,240 32,893,240 41,166,240 39,230,240 23,742,240 Debt Service Money Market 11,133,458 4,894,366 4,723,121 4,723,121 4,723,121 4,723,121 4,723,121 Major Changes in Cash Flow Analysis from Prior Report Revenue: None Expenditures: None City of La Quinta Distribution of Cash & Investments & Balances February 28, 2006 Distribution of Cash & Investments city Totals General Fund $ 45,287,362 Gas Tax Fund 286,548 Quimby Fund 6,874,479 Infrastructure Fund 647,391 Developer Impact fees 10,444,124 Art in Public Places 1,089,838 Special Revenue 587,168 1,110,605 Interest Fund 558,882 Capital Project Fund AD 2000-1 Construction Fund 2,80 289 Equipment Replacement Fund ,364 Information Technology Fund 510,409 Park Equipment & Facility 04,24E {237,081 Landscape & Lighting Fund (1,, SilverRock Resort Trust & Agency Funds 629,601 629 Subtotal 5 70,362,731 Redevelopment Agency Totals Project Area 1 Project Area 2 Capital Improvement Funds $ 80,541,626 20,256,734 60,284,892 Debt Service Funds 21,330,916 12,072,322 $ 33,403,238 Low & Moderate Income Funds 10,128,123 10,542,011 $ 20,670,134 Subtotal $ 51,715,773 $ 82,899,225 $ 134,614,998 Financing Authority Project Funds 7,029 Debt Service Funds $ 7,097 Subtotal $ (68) Total $ 204,977,661 Cash Balances September $122,841 $34,558,208 October $3,420,223 $39,009,320 November $61,346 $19,559,320 December ($457,277) $17,209,320 January 06 ($445,923) $18,999,252 February $1,232,746 $25,699,252 March Aril May June Tvpe July 05 August Cash & Investments ($296,745) $14,408,288 $25,858,208 State Pool U.S. Treasury Bills/Notes $34,858,208 $115,521,014 $115,675,363 $107,219,691 $107,199,131 $126,921,553 $132,200,167 $131,882,016 $132,208,835 U.S. Government Sponsored Enterprises $28,591,456 $28,570,797 $28,550,804 $28,530,146 $30,974,281 $29,837,557 $39,708,748 $34,703,370 Prime Commercial Paper - - 8,977,676 Corporate Notes Mutual Funds - 3,561,182 - 3,569.020 - 8,182,129 $ 176,633,673 - 7,686,506 $ 185,845,326 1 7.706.8131 $ 185,223,313 51722,7561 $ 184 512,523 6,574,355 $ 205,696,124 11,133,45E $ 204,977,661 Total $ 182,235,115 $ 188,081,676 Type July 04 Cash & Investments $ (2,991,545 State Pool 21,553,263 U.S. Treasury Bills/Notes 132,380,612 U.S. Government Sponsored Enterprises 27,396,29E Prime Commercial Paper - Corporate Notes - Mutual Funds 6,073,884 Total $ 184,412 51 11 Auoust I September $ 3,884,181 9,303,263 October 639,205 9,673,572 November 1,120,216 9,373,572 December $290,478 14,673,572 Janual 05 $854,155 32,531,755 February $6,271,062 26,356,755 March ($391,648) 24,756,755 Aril ($3,809,062) 25,463,448 May $1,073,658 38,963,448 June ($2,933,838 39,863,448 8386876 9803263 132507373 122,522,588 122,653,488 122,780,160 120,233,436 120,401,277 120,552,878 120,158,854 120,350,114 23,646,249 115,547,749 28,543,877 115,366,669 28,531,600 27379840 27,363,913 27,347,457 27,331,529 27,301,903 26,953,437 23,683,587 23,664,612 0 - 0 0 (8,977,676 - - (8,977,676 - - 0 4577404 7,925,4971 $ 170,999,442 0 7,428,469 $ 167,742,191 0 6,029,092 $ 166,634,569 7,374 099 $ 160,895,812 6,085,915 $ 186,8261539 5,545,104 $ 182,409,386 6,092 339 $ 165,303,236 5,921,150 $ 171,571,899 5,931,380 $ 190,060,112 3,556258 , $ 184,384,137 $ 182,654,756 A lust September $ (115,765 17,104,884 October $ 117,749 26,370,608 November $ 171,712 25,620.608 December $ 393,313 26,195,608 January 03 $ 240,310 28,941,285 February $ 75,139 32,441,285 March $ (102,723) 33,441,285 Aril (1,178,885 28,949,469 May $ 372,199 29,249,469 June $ 766,613 749469 ,, Type Jul 03 Cash &Investments $ (204,843 24,654,884 $ (280,692 16,754,884 State Pool U.S. Treasury Bills/Notes 57,039,588 57,062,903 67,063,477 72,131,024 72,128,268 69,930,924 79.951,640 30,094,727 69,982,902 30,078,982 70,031,843 30,061,700 70,056,768 30,045,439 80,039,567 30,028,640 51 132 ,25353,851 27,511,851 U.S. Government Sponse"Enterprises 27,364,415 27,390,175 27,415,104 27,494,166 27,513,320 27,392,009 Prime Commercial Paper Mutual Funds - 1,016.899 - 7,405,448 16,133,778 $ 127,601,478 372,093 $ 126,485,640 372,987 $ 125,806,895 21497,708 $ 126,409,562 2,497.970 $ 141,725,932 7,131,996 $ 139,710,304 2,392,507 $ 135,824,612 21393,434 $ 130,266,225 2,394,290 $ 142,084,165 6,111,182 $ 187,392,966 otal $ 109,870,943 $ 108,332,718 U City of La Quinta Historical Information February 28, 2006 Annualized Earnings of Pooled Cash Investments Annualized Earnings of Fiscal Agent Investments Annualized Earnings of All Investments Six Month Treasury Bill Rate Average Maturity (days) LAIF Rate Annualized Earnings of Pooled Cash Investments Annualized Earnings of Fiscal Agent Investments Annualized Earnings of All Investments Six Month Treasury Bill Rate Average Maturity (days) LAIF Rate Annualized Earnings of Pooled Cash Investments Annualized Earnings of Fiscal Agent Investments Annualized Earnings of All Investments Six Month Treasury Bill Rate Average Maturity (days) LAIF Rate Annualized Earnings of Pooled Cash Investments Annualized Earnings of Fiscal Agent Investments Annualized Earnings of All Investments Six Month Treasury Bill Rate Average Maturity (days) LAIF Rate Annualized Earnings of Pooled Cash Investments Annualized Earnings of Fiscal Agent Investments Annualized Earnings of All Investments Six Month Treasury Bill Rate Average Maturity (days) LAIF Rate Annualized Earnings of Pooled Cash Investments Annualized Earnings of Fiscal Agent Investments Annualized Earnings of All Investments Six Month Treasury Bill Rate Average Maturity (days) LAIF Rate July 05 August Set Oct Nov Dec Jan 06 Feb March Aril May June 2.65% 2.64% 3.07% 3.33% 3.70% 3.81 % 4.11 % 4.14% 3.11% 3.11% 3.48% 3.51% 3.53% 3.63% 4.00% 4.01% 2.87% 2.81% 3.20% 3.34% 3.55% 3.67% 4.06% 4.09% 3.54% 3.69% 3.75% 3.75% 4.16% 4.20% 4.44% 4.58% 73 84 76 65 96 68 112 98 3.083% 3.179% 3.324% 3.458% 3.636% 3.808% 1 3.955% 1 4.043% July 04 August Set Oct Nov Dec Jan 05 Feb March Aril May June 1.73% 1.73% 1.79% 1.79% 1.79% 1.89% 2.00% 2.16% 2.16% 2.27% 2.47% 2.59% 0.50% 0.50% 1.07% 1.14% 1.43% 2.23% 2.25% 2.26% 2.67% 2.69% 2.70% 3.10% 1.68% 1.57% 1.68% 1.72% 1.73% 2.08% 2.12% 2.22% 2.43% 2.49% 2.58% 2.83% 1.74% 1.78% 1.95% 2.04% 2.37% 2.56% 2.56% 2.85% 2.85% 3.09% 3.11% 3.22% 214 172 167 112 113 145 109 104 120 93 64 113 1.604% 1 1.672% 1 1.771 % 1 1.890% 1 2.003% 4.043% 1 2.264% 1 2.368% 2.368% 1 2.724% 1 2.856% 2.967% July 03 August Set Oct Nov Dec Jan 04 Feb March Aril May June 1.66% 1.65% 1.65% 1.59% 1.64% 1.67% 1.58% 1.65% 1.50% 1.50% 1.54% 1.69% 0.52% 0.45% 0.49% 0.48% 0.48% 0.57% 0.30% 0.30% 0.50% 0.50% 0.50% 0.47% 1.43% 1.35% 1.26% 1.36% 1.38% 1.41 % 1.37% 1.38% 1.33% 1.33% 1.36% 1.62% 0.98% 1.06% 1.01 % 1.04% 1.03% 0.99% 1.00% 1.01 % 1.01 % 1.19% 1.38% 1.73% 131 110 80 121 98 117 140 120 155 137 137 209 1.650% 1 1.632% 1 1.640% 1 1.596% 1.572% 1.545% 1.528% 1 1.440% 1.474% 1.445% 1.426%1 1.426% July 02 August Set Oct Nov Dec Jan 03 Feb March Aril May June 2.46% 2.45% 2.46% 2.41 % 2.32% 2.23% 2.11 % 1.99% 2.01 % 1.98% 1.86% 1.73% 1.00% 1.27% 1.26% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 0.80% 0.59% 0.75% 0.72% 0.73% 0.49% 2.05% 2.07% 2.10% 2.08% 2.02% 1.80% 1.62% 1.74% 1.78% 1.76% 1.54% 1.40% 1.73% 1.64% 1.62% 1.55% 1.29% 1.27% 1.16% 1.20% 1.18% 1.17% 1.10% 0.86% 172 172 139 121 109 163 137 131 117 92 74 123 2.71% 2.59% 1 2.60% 1 2.49% 1 2.30% 1 2.31% 1 2.10% 1 1.95% 1 1.98% 1 1.86% 1 1.80% 1.70% July 01 August Set Oct Nov Dec Jan 02 Feb March Aril May June 4.79% 4.90% 4.63% 4.04% 3.05% 2.83% 2.37% 2.26% 2.25% 2.35% 2.59% 2.42% 3.40% 3.20% 3.20% 2.20% 1.70% 1.40% 1.60% 1.50% 1.50% 1.50% 1.00% 1.00% 4.58% 3.91% 3.98% 3.57% 2.49% 2.34% 1.97% 1.95% 1.99% 2.05% 1.78% 1.93% 3.49% 3.39% 3.39% 2.01 % 1.99% 1.85% 1.83% 1.85% 2.16% 1.92% 1.89% 1.77% 48 51 43 27 62 44 27 53 35 79 122 132 4.64% 4.50% 1 4.29% 1 3.79% 1 3.53% 1 3.26% 1 3.07% 2.97% 1 2.86% 1 2.85% 1 2.85% 2.69% July 00 August Set Oct Nov Dec Jan 01 Feb March April May June 6.37% 6.43% 6.34% 6.45% 6.46% 6.46% 6.36% 6.31% 5.89% 5.86% 5.20% 4.98% 6.17% 6.11 % 6.23% 6.20% 6.20% 5.97% 5.03% 5.06% 4.82% 4.10% 3.60% 3.50% 6.31 % 6.35% 6.31 % 6.39% 6.40% 6.38% 6.04% 6.08% 5.75% 5.53% 4.96% 4.70% 6.28% 6.38% 6.26% 6.33% 6.32% 5.74% 5.03% 4.66% 4.27% 3.79% 3.55% 3.34% 220 232 231 202 181 158 124 110 101 80 76 65 6.44% 1 6.51 % 1 6.50% 1 6.52% 6.54% 1 6.35% 1 6.37% 1 6.17% 1 5.98% 1 5.76% 1 5.33% 4.96% � • 1 City of La Quinta Chart of Interest Rates September 2005 through February 2006 5.00% 4.50% At 3.50% 3.00% Percent 2.50% 2.00% 1.50% 1.00% 0.50% 0.00% Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb — — -Annualized Earnings of Pooled Cash Investments ----Annualized Earnings of Fiscal Agent Investments ■ Annualized Earnings of All Investments —*--Six Month Treasury Bill Rate r"I'l Sep QuiKraj OF TKti AGENDA CATEGORY: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: A p ri 1 18, 2 0 0 6 BUSINESS SESSION: ITEM TITLE: Receive and File Revenue and Expenditure Report for February 28, 2006 and CONSENT CALENDAR: Investment Summary Report for the Quarter Ending March 31, 2006 STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: RECOMMENDATION: Receive and File. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Receive and File the Statement of Revenue and Expenditures for February 28, 2006 and Investment Summary Report for the Quarter ending March 31, 2006 for the City of La Quinta. (64 Respectfully submitted, John M. oner, Finance Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1. Revenue and Expenditures for February 28, 2006 and Investment Summary Report dated March 31, 2006 6 G 5 2 CITY OF LA QUINTA REVENUES - ALL FUNDS 07/01/2005 - 02/28/06 FUNDS BUDGET RECEIVED RECEIVED General $28,500,703.00 $19,696,745.89 69.10% Library 1,530,800.00 (981,94) -0.10% Gas Tax Revenue 628,617.00 481,156.77 76.50% Federal Assistance 517,307.00 306,663.69 59.30% Urban Forestry 1,100.00 0.00 0.00% Slesf (Cops) Revenue 100,700.00 100,321.87 99.60%° Local Law Enforcement 0.00 0.00 0.00% Indian Gaming 201,142.00 180,714.93 89.80% Lighting & Landscaping 842,200.00 421,810.98 50.10% RCTC 2,056,829.00 383,719.21 18.70% Development Funding 408,000.00 0.00 0.00% Quimby 4,715,015.00 5,219,276.83 110.70% Infrastructure 20,000.00 10,224.10 51.10% Village Parking 0.00 0.00 0.00% South Coast Air Quality 42,200.00 33,223.01 78.70% Cmaq/lstea 0.00 0.00 0.00% Transportation 1,261,200.00 2,138,654.93 169.60% Parks & Recreation 446,000.00 636,106.61 142.60% Civic Center 306,000.00 433,354.75 141.60% Library Development 177,500.00 274,030.00 154.40% Community Center 54,600.00 110,044.81 201.50% Street Facility 48,000.00 43,265.24 90.10% Park Facility 12,000.00 9,865.30 82.20% Fire Protection Facility 74,500.00 124,654.17 167.30% Library Development (County) Facili 0.00 (0.46) 0.00% Arts In Public Places 120,500.00 218,922.29 181.70% Interest Allocation 0.00 1,110,605.21 0.00% Capital Improvement 73,517,806.00 16,315,514.05 22.20% Assessment District 2000-1 3,608.00 3,607.77 100.00% Equipment Replacement 397,000.00 365,365.06 92.00% Information Technology 443,000.00 435,888.27 98.40% Park Equipment & Facility 256,300.00 255,844.39 99.80% SilverRock Golf 3,720,155.00 1,754,022.80 47.10% SilverRock Golf 69,353.00 106.60 0.20% LQ Public Safety Officer 2,100.00 2,122.60 101.10% La Quinta Financing Authority 5,867,556.00 3,468,101.03 59.10% RDA Project Area No. 1 51,343,200.00 28,539,458.40 55.60% RDA Project Area No. 2 41,537,407.00 29,957,424.00 72.10% Total 1 $219,222 398.00 1 $113 029,833.16 51.60% CITY OF LA QUINTA EXPENDITURES -ALL FUNDS 07/01/2005 - 02/28/06 FUNDS BUDGET EXPENDITURES ENCUMBERED REMAINING BUDGET PERCENT General $30,491,874.00 $13,503,012.20 $109,851.18 $16,879,010.62 44.3% Library 1,352,978.00 483,243.57 0.00 869,734.43 35.7% Gas Tax 724,732.00 416,082.04 0.00 308,649.96 57.4% Federal Assistance 517,307.00 129,352.31 0.00 387,954.69 25.0% Urban Forestry 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Slesf (Cops) Revenue 101,400.00 0.00 0.00 101,400.00 0.0% Local Law Enforcement 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Indian Gaming 344,082.00 37,338.85 0.00 306,743.15 10.9% Lighting & Landscaping 842,200.00 561,466.64 0.00 280,733.36 66.7% RCTC 2,056,829.00 368,999.21 0.00 1,687.829.79 17.9% Development Agreement 408,000.00 0.00 0.00 408,000.00 0.0% Quimby 645,133.00 338,699.07 0.00 306,433.93 52.5% Infrastructure 721,353.00 231,423.15 0.00 489,929.85 32.1 % Village Parking (1,893.00) 0.00 0.00 (1,893.00) 0.0% South Coast Air Quality 26,600.00 9,723.97 0.00 16,876.03 36.6% Cmaq/lstea 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Transportation 7,322,318.00 2,841,719.68 0.00 4,480,598.32 38.8% Parks & Recreation 223,358.00 163,183.58 0.00 60,174.42 73.1% Civic Center 3,350,291.00 189,749.68 0.00 3,160,541.32 5.7% Library Development 82,000.00 38,713.13 0.00 43,286.87 47.2% Community Center 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Street Facility 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Paris Facility 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Fire Protection 37,000.00 17,312.45 0.00 19,687.55 46.8% Library County DIF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Arts In Public Places 514,978.00 24,428.92 0.00 490,549.08 4.7% Interest Allocation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Capital Improvement 73,517,806.00 16,315,514.05 75,034.10 57,127,257.85 22.2% Proposed Assessment Dh 17,316.00 315,168.32 0.00 (297,852.32) 1820.1% Equipment Replacement 1,116,585.00 177,475.27 42,947.09 896,162.64 15.9% Information Technology 648,043.00 110,908.77 0.00 537,134.23 17.1% Park Maintenance Facility 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% SilverRock Golf 4,306,662.00 2,756,141.48 0.00 1,550,520.52 64.0% Lq Public Safety Officer 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 2,000.00 0.0% La Quinta Financing Authc 5,867,556.00 3,478,548.13 0.00 2,389,007.87 59.3% RDA Project Area No. 1 69.649,534.00 27,997,440.19 0.00 41,652,093.81 40.2% RDA Project Area No. 2 92,345,500.00 19,892,010.38 0.00 72,453,489.62 21.5% Total 297,231,542.00 90,397,655.04 $227,832.37 206,6067054.59 30.4% 067 CITY OF LA QUINTA 07101/2005 - 02/28/06 GENERAL FUND REVENUES DETAIL REMAINING BUDGET RECEIVED BUDGET TAXES: Property Tax 1,167,900.00 775,869.18 392,030.82 No Low Property Tax Distribution 1,545,000.00 879,973.18 665,026.82 Sales Tax 5,256,000.00 3,419,955.72 1,836,044.28 Sales Tax Reimbursement 1,752,000.00 915,779.98 836,220.02 Document Transfer Tax 797,800.00 704,782.48 93,017.52 Transient Occupancy Tax 4,108,100.00 1,986,771.69 2,121,328.31 Transient Occupancy Tax - Mitigatio► 437,500.00 577,500.00 (140,000.00) Franchise Tax 916 200.00 381,988.64 _534,211.36 TOTAL TAXES 15,980,500.00 9,642,620.87 6,337,879.13 LICENSE & PERMITS: Business License 274,100.00 149,442.30 124,657.70 Animal License 14,800.00 9,758.50 5,041.50 Building Permits 493,800.00 1,311,713.33 (817,913.33) Plumbing Permits 84,400.00 220,625.10 (136,225.10) Mechanical Permits 43,100.00 123,879.20 (80,779.20) Electrical Permits 85,000.00 185,617.46 (100,617.46) Garage Sale Permits 11,800.00 9,190.00 2,610.00 Misc. Permits 86,200.00 160,973.72 (74,773.72) TOTAL LICENSES & PERMITS 1,093,200.00 2,171,199.61 (1,077,999.61) FEES: Sale of Maps & Publications Community Services Fees Finance 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 Federal Govt Grants County of Riverside Grant State of,Califomia Grant Fire Services Credit CSA152 Assessment TOTAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL INTEREST MISCELLANEOUS Miscellaneous Revenue Assmnt Dist Surplus Other Mitigation Measures Litigation settlement Cash Over/(Short) TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS TRANSFERIN TOTAL GENERAL FUND 13,200.00 3,339.25 9,860.75 264,500.00 244,733.72 19,766.28 0.00 110,906.88 (110,906.88) 377,100.00 747,844.57 (370,744.57) 222,400.00 231,055.69 (8,655.69) 584 400.00 1,500,423.00 (916,023.00) 1,461,600.00 2,838,303.11 (1,376,703.11) 1,726,200.00 1,386,162.48 340,037.52 94,000.00 60,451.70 33,548.30 27,700.00 12,841.00 14,859.00 175,874.00 110,055.96 65,818.04 120,687.00 0.00 120,687.00 0.00 5,793.00 (5,793.00) 16,719.00 16,719.29 (0.29) 8,600.00 14,013.93 (5,413.93) 4,337,893.00 883,239.53 3,454,653.47 174 200.00 202,363.08 (28,163.08) 6,681,873.00 2,691,639.97 3,990,233.03 2,747,400.00 2,010,037.06 737,362.94 7,149.00 4,639.12 2,509.88 0.00 287,497.98 (287,497.98) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51.00 20.84 30.16 7,200.00 292,157.94 (284,957.94) 528,930.00 50,787.33 478,142.67 28,500,703.00 19,696,745.89 8,803,957.11 Gf6 -01 CITY OF LA QUINTA ALL OTHER FUNDS REVENUE DETAIL REMAINING BUDGET RECEIVED BUDGET LIBRARY: County of Riverside 1,527,800.00 0.00 1,527,800.00 Contributions 0.00 0.00 0.00 Interest 3,000.00 (981.94) 3,981.94 TOTAL LIBRARY 1,530,800.00 (981.94) 1,531,781.94 GAS TAX REVENUE: Section 2105 189,300.00 130,723.77 58,576.23 Section 2106 147,000.00 90,891.56 56,108.44 Section 2107 233,700.00 177,108.35 56,591.65 Section 2107.5 6,200.00 6,000.00 200.00 Traffic Congestion Relief 44,817.00 73,338.96 (28,521.96) Interest 7,600.00 3,094.13 4,505.87 TOTAL GAS TAX 628,617.00 481,156.77 147,460.23 FEDERAL ASSISTANCE REVENUE: CDBG Grant 517,307.00 306,663.69 210,643.31 Interest 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL FEDERAL ASSISTANCE 517,307.00 306,663.69 210,643.31 URBAN FORESTRY Grant Revenue Interest TOTAL URBAN FORESTRY SLESF(COPS)REVENUE: SLESF (Cops) Funding Interest TOTAL SLESF (COPS) LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT REVENUE: 1,100.00 0.00 1,100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,100.00 0.00 1,100.00 100,000.00 100,000.00 0.00 700.00 321.87 378.13 100,700.00 100,321.87 378.13 LLEBG Funding 0.00 0.00 0.00 Interest 0.00 0.00 0.00 Transfer in 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL LLEBG 0.00 0.00 0.00 INDIAN GAMING Grant revenue 198,942.00 177,250.00 21,692.00 Interest 2,200.00 3,464.93 (1,264.93) TOTAL INDIAN GAMING 201,142.00 180,714.93 20,427.07 LIGHTING & LANDSCAPING REVENUE: Assessment 842,200.00 421,810.98 420,389.02 Developer 0.00 0.00 0.00 Interest 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL LIGHTING & LANDSCAPIN 842,200.00 421,810.98 420,389.02 RCTC RCTC Funding 2,056,829.00 383,719.21 1,673,109.79 Transfer in 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL RCTC 9.21 1,673,109 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FUND Mitigation Measures Interest Transfer in TOTAL DEV AGREEMENT QUIMBY REVENUE: Quimby Fees Interest TOTAL QUIMBY 408,000.00 0.00 408,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 408,000.00 0.00 408,000.00 4,605,015.00 5,164,653.13 (559,638.13) 110 000.00 54 623.70 55,376.30 4,715,015-00 3 INFRASTRUCTURE REVENUE: Utility refund 0.00 2,500.00 (2,500.00) Interest 20,000.00 7,724.10 12,275.90 Transfer in 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE 20,000.00 10,224.10 9,775.90 VILLAGE PARKING REVENUE: Interest 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL VILLAGE PARKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 CITY OF LA QUINTA ALL OTHER FUNDS REVENUE DETAIL REMAINING BUDGET RECEIVED BUDGET SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY REVENUE: S.C.A.Q. Contribution MSRC Funding Street Sweeping Grant Interest TOTAL SCAQ CMAQ/ISTEA CMAQ/ISTEA Grant Interest TOTAL CMAQ/ISTEA 39,900.00 31,399.62 8,500.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,300.00 1,823.39 476.61 42,200.00 33,223.01 8,976.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRANSPORTATION Developer fees 1,096,200.00 2,056,621.49 (960,421.49) Interest 165,000.00 82,033.44 82,966.56 Transfer in 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL TRANSPORTATION 1,261,200.00 2,138,654.93 (877,454.93) PARKS & RECREATION Developer fees 446,000.00 633,654.00 (187,654.00) Interest 0.00 2,452.61 (2,452.61) Transfer in 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL PARKS S RECREATION 446,000.00 636,106.61 (190,106.61) CIVIC CENTER Developer fees 256,000.00 406,691.30 (150,691.30) Interest 50,000.00 26,663.45 23,336.55 Transfer in 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL CIVIC CENTER 306,000.00 433,354.75 (127,364.75) LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT Developer fees 177,500.00 274,030.00 (96,530.00) Interest 0.00 0.00 0.00 Transfer in 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT 177,500.00 274,030.00 (96,530.00) COMMUNITY CENTER Developer fees 37,000.00 100,134.00 (63,134.00) Interest 17 600.00 9,910.81 7,689.19 TOTAL COMMUNITY CENTER 54,600.00 110,044.81 (55,444.81) STREET FACILITY Developer fees Interest TOTAL STREET FACILITY PARK FACILITY Developer fees Interest TOTAL PARK FACILITY 44,100.00 40,976.28 3,123.72 3,900.00 2,288.96 1,611.04 48,000.00 43,265.24 4,734.76 11,000.00 9,303.00 1,697.00 1000.00 562.30 437.70 12,000.00 9,865.30 2,134.70 FIRE PROTECTION FACILITY Developer fees 74,500.00 124,654.17 (50,154.17) Interest 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION FACILI 74,500.00 124,654.17 (50,154.17) LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT (COUNTY) FACILITY Developer fees 0.00 0.00 0.00 Interest 0.00 (0.46) 0.46 TOTAL LIBRARY DEV (COUNTY) 0.00 (0.46) 0.46 ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES REVENUE: Arts in Public Places 97,500.00 207,391.55 (109,891.55) Arts in Public Places Credits Applied 0.00 0.00 0.00 Interest 23,000.00 11,530.74 11,469.26 TOTAL ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES 120,500.00 218,922.29 (98,422.29) INTEREST ALLOCATION FUND: Pooled Cash Allocated Interest 0.00 1,110,605.21 (1,110,605.21) Transfer In 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL INTEREST ALLOCATION 0.00 1,110,605.21 (1,110,605.21) 070 CITY OF LA QUINTA ALL OTHER FUNDS REVENUE DETAIL REMAINING BUDGET RECEIVED BUDGET CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND: CVAG CVWD County of Riverside Surface Transportation Funding City of Indio DSUSD SB300 Funding RCTC SB821-Bicycle Path Grant State of California APP Contribution Developer Agreement Funding Litigation Settlements Transfers in From Other Funds TOTAL CIP REVENUE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2000-1 Interest Assessment Bond Proceeds Prepayments -sewer assessments Transferin TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 23,413,062.00 4,720,480.94 18,692,581.06 848,479.00 0.00 848,479.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 472,800.00 19,170.00 453,630.00 2,847,122.00 0.00 2,847,122.00 82,656.00 0.00 82,656.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 52,887.00 62,991.00 (10,104.00) 373,575.00 0.00 373,575.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 306,250.00 0.00 306,250.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 45 120 975.00 11 512,872.11 33,608,102.89 73,517,806.00 16,315,514.05 57,202,291.95 3,608.00 3,607.77 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,608.00 3,607.77 0.23 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND: Equipment Charges 331,300.00 331,312.00 (12.00) Capital Contribution 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sale of Fixed Asset 0.00 0.00 0.00 Insurance Recoveries 0.00 0.00 0.00 Interest 65,700.00 34,053.06 31,646.94 Transfers In 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEME 397,000.00 365,365.06 31,634.94 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FUND: Charges for services 426,000.00 426,018.00 (18.00) Capital Contribution 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sale of Fixed Asset 0.00 0.00 0.00 Interest 17,000.00 9,870.27 7,129.73 Transfers In 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL INFORMATION TECHNOL( 443,000.00 435,888.27 7,111.73 PARK EQUIPMENT & FACILITY Charges for services 250,000.00 250,000.00 0.00 Interest 6,300.00 5,844.39 455.61 Capital Contributions 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL PARK EQUIPMENT & FAC 256,300.00 255,844.39 455.61 SILVERROCK GOLF Green fees Range fees Resident Card Merchandise Food & Beverage Allocated Interest Income Transfers In TOTAL SILVERROCK GOLF SILVERROCK GOLF RESERVE Interest Transfers In TOTAL SILVERROCK GOLF LQ PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER FUND Transfer In Interest TOTAL LQ PUBLIC SAFETY 3,175,395.00 1,417,592.91 1,757,802.09 34,470.00 27,792.00 6,678.00 52,500.00 29,552.00 22,948.00 245,790.00 159,085.89 86,704.11 12,000.00 0.00 12,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 200,000.00 120,000.00 80,000.00 3,720,155.00 1,754,022.80 1,966,132.20 0.00 106.60 (106.60) 69 353.00 0.00 69,353.00 69,353.00 106.60 69,246.40 2,000.00 2,000.00 0.00 100.00 122.60 (22.60) 2,100.00 2,122.60 (22.60) 071 GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT 07/01/2006 - 02/28/06 REMAINING BUDGET EXPENDITURES ENCUMBERED BUDGET GENERAL GOVERNMENT: LEGISLATIVE 779,903.00 354,570.19 0.00 425,332.81 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE 1,091,429.00 626,814.70 0,00 464,614.30 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1,195,868.00 856,276.89 0.00 339,591.11 PERSONNEL/RISK MGT 971,909.00 600,381.03 0.00 371,527.97 TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT 4,039,109.00 2,438,042.81 0.00 1,601,066.19 CITY CLERK 530,379.00 329,182.01 0.00 201,196.99 TOTAL CITY CLERK 530,379.00 329,182.01 0.00 201,196.99 COMMUNITY SERVICES PARKS & RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 1,015,764.00 446,467.61 5,584.48 563,711.91 SENIOR CENTER 372,661.00 202,083.35 0.00 170,577.65 PARKS & RECREATION PROGRAMS 190,182.00 112,373.30 0.00 77,808.70 LIBRARY 843,605.00 136,914.72 0.00 706,690.28 TOTAL COMMUNITY SERVICES 2,422,212.00 897,838.98 5,584.48 1,518,788.54 FINANCE: FISCAL SERVICES 765,810.00 467,971.49 0.00 297,838.51 CENTRAL SERVICES 608,182.00 319,193.19 68,521.89 220,466.92 TOTAL FINANCE 1,373,992.00 787,164.68 68,521.89 518,305.43 BUILDING & SAFETY: BUILDING & SAFETY - ADMIN 343,081.00 222,836.89 0.00 120,244.11 BUILDING 1,196,774.00 863,290.43 0.00 333,483.57 CODE COMPLIANCE 680,374.00 363,732.58 0.00 316,641.42 ANIMAL CONTROL 420,986.00 178,517.49 0.00 242,468.51 CIVIC CENTER BUILDING -OPERATIONS 1,024,190.00 762,034.10 0.00 262,155.90 TOTAL BUILDING & SAFETY 3,665,405.00 2,390,411.49 0.00 1,274,993.51 PUBLIC SAFETY: POLICE SERVICES 8,131,228.00 2,658,930.33 23,826.22 5,448,471.45 FIRE .4,428,480.00 943,638.09 0.00 3,484,841.91 EMERGENCY SERVICES 33,650.00 11,463.99 0.00 22,186.01 TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY 12,593,358.00 3,614,032.41 23,826.22 8,955,499.37 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - ADMIN 1,066,402.00 440,479.93 0.00 625,922.07 CURRENT PLANNING 750,389.00 251,447.72 0.00 498,941.28 TOTAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1,816,791.00 691,927.65 0.00 1,124,863.35 PUBLIC WORKS: (389,171.00) PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION 315,854.00 205,911.46 518.59 109,423.95 DEVELOPMENT & TRAFFIC 1,517,213.00 812,119.69 11,400.00 693,693.31 MAINT/OPERATIONS - STREETS 1,334,424.00 649,024.36 0.00 685,399.64 MAINT/OPERATIONS - LTG/LANDSCAPING 1,958,580.00 1,185,411.86 0.00 773,168.14 MAINT/OPERATIONS - PARK MAINTENANCE 1,099,451.00 717,742.04 0.00 381,708.96 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 661,417.00 410,663.70 0.00 250,753.30 TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS 6,886,939.00 3,980,873.11 11,918.59 2,504,976.30 TRANSFERS OUT 2,042,645.00 637,252.06 0.00 1,405,392.94 GENERAL FUND REIMBURSEMENTS (4,878,956.00) (2,263,713.00) 0.00 (2,615,243.00) NET GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES 30,491,874.00 13,503,012.20 109,851.18 16,879,010.62 c►70 CITY OF LA QUINTA 07/01/2005 - 02/28/06 OTHER CITY FUNDS REMAINING EXPENDITURE SUMMARY BUDGET EXPENDITURES ENCUMBERED BUDGET LIBRARY FUND PROJECT EXPENDITURES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 REIMBURSE GENERAL FUND 843,605.00 98,927.04 0.00 744,677.96 TRANSFER OUT 509,373.00 384,316.53 0.00 125,056.47 TOTAL LIBRARY FUND 1,352,978.00 483,243.57 0.00 869,734.43 GAS TAX REIMBURSE GENERAL FUND 583,800.00 389,200.00 0.00 194,600.00 TRANSFER OUT 140,932.00 26,882.04 0.00 114,049.96 TOTAL GAS TAX FUND 724,732.00 416,082.04 0.00 308,649.96 FEDERAL ASSISTANCE FUND: TRANSFER OUT TOTAL FEDERAL ASSISTANCE FUND 517,307.00 129,352.31 0.00 387,954.69 URBAN FORESTRY GRANT TRANSFER OUT TOTAL URBAN FORESTRY GRANT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SLESF (COPS) TRANSFER OUT TOTAL SLESF (COPS) FUND 101,400.00 0.00 0.00 101,400.00 LLEBG FUND TRANSFER OUT TOTAL LLEBG FUND 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INDIAN GAMING FUND TRANSFER OUT 344,082.00 37,338.85 0.00 306,743.15 TOTAL LIBRARY FUND 344,082.00 37,338.85 0.00 306,743.15 LIGHTING & LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DIST: REIMBURSE GENERAL FUND 842,200.00 561,466.64 0.00 280,733.36 TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL LTG/LANDSCAPING FUND 84 ,200.00 561,466.64 0.00 280,733.36 RCTC TRANSFER OUT 2,056,829.00 368,999.21 0.00 1,687,829.79 TOTAL RCTC 2,056,829.00 368,999.21 0.00 1,687,829.79 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FUND CONSTRUCTION 408,000.00 0.00 0.00 408,000.00 REIMBURSE GENERAL FUND 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL DEV AGREEMENT FUND 408,000.00 0.00 0.00 408,000.00 QUIMBY FUND: TRANSFER OUT 645,133.00 338,699.07 0.00 306,433.93 INFRASTRUCTURE FUND CONSTRUCTION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 REIMBURSE GENERAL FUND 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRANSFER OUT 721,353.00 231,423.15 0.00 489,929.85 TOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE 721,353.00 231,423.15 0.00 489,929.85 VILLAGE PARKING TRANSFER OUT TOTAL VILLAGE PARKING FUND (1,893.00) 0.00 0.00 (1,893.00) SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY FUND PROJECT EXPENDITURES 26,600.00 9,723.97 0.00 16,876.03 TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY 26,600.00 5,723.97 0.00 16,876.03 CMAQ/ISTEA TRANSFER OUT TOTAL CMAQ/ISTEA FUND 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CONTRIBUTION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRANSFER OUT 7,322,318.00 2,841,719.68 0.00 4,480,598.32 TOTAL TRANSPORTATION 7,322,318.00 2,841,719.68 0.00 4,480,598.32 PARKS & RECREATION INTEREST ON ADVANCE 110,000.00 51,648.58 0.00 58,351.42 TRANSFER OUT 113,358.00 111,535.00 0.00 1,823.00 TOTAL PARKS & RECREATION 223,358.00 163,183.58 0.00 60,174.42 CIVIC CENTER PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 REIMBURSE GENERAL FUND 204,173.00 136,101.32 0.00 68,071.68 TRANSFER OUT 3,146,118.00 53,648.36 0.00 3,092.469.64 TOTAL CIVIC CENTER 3.350,291.00 189,749.68 0.00 3,160,541.32 LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INTEREST ON ADVANCE 82,000.00 38,713.13 0.00 43,286.87 TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 �J 7 TOTAL LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT 82,000.00 38,713.13 0.00 43,286.87 10 CITY OF LA QUINTA 07/01/2005 - 02/28/08 OTHER CITY FUNDS REMAINING EXPENDITURE SUMMARY BUDGET EXPENDITURES ENCUMBERED BUDGET COMMUNITY CENTER PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL COMMUNITY CENTER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 STREET FACILITY PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL STREET FACILITY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PARK FACILITY PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00. 0.00 TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL PARK FACILITY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 FIRE PROTECTION INTEREST ON ADVANCE 37,000.00 17,312.45 0.00 19,687.55 TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION DIF 37,0 .00 17,312.45 0.00 19,687.55 LIBRARY COUNTY PROGRAM COSTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL LIBRARY COUNTY DIF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ART IN PUBLIC PLACES FUND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES-APP 3,500.00 0.00 0.00 3,500.00 OPERATING EXPENSES-APP 1,800.00 0.00 0.00 1,800.00 ART PURCHASES 282,758.00 24,428.92 0.00 258,329.08 TRANSFER OUT 226,920.00 0.00 0.00 228,920.00 TOTAL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES 514, 78.00 24,428.92 0.00 490,549.08 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND PROJECT EXPENDITURES 72,486,328.00 16,153,296.05 75,034.10 56,257,997.85 PROJECT REIMBURSEMENTS TO GEN FUND 1,031,478.00 162,218.00 0.00 869,260.00 TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 73,517,806.00 16,315,514.05 75,034.10 57,127,257.85 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2000-1 COSTS OF ISSUANCE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CONTR SVCS/REFUND SURPLUS FUNDS 0.00 297,851.90 0.00 (297,851,90) TRANSFER OUT 17,316.00 17,316.42 0.00 (0.42) TOTAL AD 2000-1 17,316.00 315,168.32 0.00 (297,852.32) EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND OPERATING EXPENSES 459,585.00 177,475.27 42,947.09 239,162.64 TRANSFER OUT 657,000.00 0.00 0.00 657,000.00 TOTAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 1,116,585.00 177,475.27 42,947.09 896,162.64 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FUND OPERATING EXPENSES 648,043.00 110,908.77 0.00 537,134.23 TOTAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FUND 648,043.00 110,908.77 0.00 537,134.23 PARK MAINTENANCE FACILITY OPERATING EXPENSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL PARK MAINTENANCE FAC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SILVERROCK GOLF OPERATING EXPENSES 4,237,309.00 2,756,141.48 0.00 1,481,167.52 TRANSFER OUT 69,353.00 0.00 0.00 69,353.00 TOTAL SILVERROCK GOLF 4,306,662.00 2,756,14 .48 0.00 1,550,520.52 SILVERROCK GOLF RESERVE TRANSFER OUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL SILVERROCK GOLF RESERVE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA QUINTA PUBLIC SAFETY CONTRIBUTIONS TOTAL LA QUINTA PUBLIC SAFETY 2,000.00 0.00 0.00 2,000.00 C+'74 11 N O C O O LL i co E O U) c 0) m E 0 p O O > O 0 O N co >, J ` M O U =� C)0 U N O co ci Lowmcowmr`OInLou)titiOCOOd-�O�O .a N M M 't N M d' 0 (D 0— M O N 0 N rn d (OaoM�-��r-�-ON00LfiO)Nr-(ON ONLO N 00 P. O O 06 cM CO 00 N T- M O M 6 O U) CO O 0) r• ti 00 O U) I- (0 Co U) Uo O O O 0) 0) to000000000000)0 f-0 Ed �NtiN �d �-�M000d Od �NMcN�- E E!) d (0 LO LO O O O O d• ct M O O d' O N 0 O O LO m N ti U) 0 0 O 0 d (D LO d' O 0 Nt � > O N O U) O (o co 00 U) dw N 0 CDN O �' Od (6mmmcococMoON- LA.Otic\ o0'1* d U) 00 0 CD LO � 00 r- d' r- 0 M M M O M 0)0� i It ti Q7 m d d N r` N d• d i d cM ao O d NiO d d N cM 69 N d O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 d' N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O N O � O O O 000600 O O D O O N O O 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 O O O O U) U) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0"IL ti, o- Ln Ln M r` N Ln LA N U6 d Oi 00 Ui Ln OD Ln Ui N cli CN.. ffl r-- O 0 r• (D CO 0 0 (D r, O O (0 0 (0 O O >, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m L +�' N N N N N N N N N N N 0 N N N N N oO ! N in ti p ti N .. .-. Q LC) N �- U.) X X N ti eN- ti ti N N(0 e`- � LO� l U) Z Z c (D H E o o m 0 C 0 0 c 5 0 � U a 4 ca co J J-0 �' J J O O=-- O— = O Z Z m_ 02 Q= C m c m m m C m m C m(y6 U- LL LL U- U- LL LL LL I - F- M- H i �- I l I �- F- F- (!) U*') C C LL LL O O E E c � a a > > C W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cn v� cn cn co cu cu cu cu a) N o U m co QQ��mmF-F-F-F-F-F-F-F-F-aQ o m 7 ��JJJ�JJ(n(n(nfnUj(!j(/j(/j(/j o U� N LL LL LL LL LL LL LL U- J J w Uq O L Q O C U Q co � O LL 00 a� a� coo coo Q Q 0 0 N N J J c C: O c U (o Co J � O N >, U -0 Cl)cu Q .rZ L co O O O cu U p C U N 0 O O c E co c O a� -ao� � a U 0 cn O o C = O O E }; °" In O 'O O O O > O cn c U co U m Co O N N O O = �> 0 F- o Lco U T- Co N p� 0 c Y O U o LL � U 1i75 12 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 18, 2006 ITEM TITLE: Acceptance of Improvements Associated with Tract Map No. 29347, Las Ventanas, California Cove Communities RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Accept improvements associated with Tract Map No. 29347, Las Ventanas, California Cove Communities, LLC and authorize staff to release performance securities upon receipt of warranty securities. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. No public improvements were constructed with this development; therefore, no additional maintenance expenses will be incurred by the City. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Tract Map No. 29347 is generally located on the west side of Monroe Street, north of Airport Boulevard (Attachment 1). All obligations of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement and the Conditions of Approval have been satisfied. Attachment 2 is a Table of Values indicating securities to be released after the City receives the warranty securities. 076 FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Accept improvements associated with Tract Map No. 29347, Las Ventanas, California Cove Communities, LLC and authorize staff to release performance securities upon receipt of warranty securities; or 2. Do not accept improvements associated with Tract Map No. 29347, Las Ventanas, California Cove Communities, LLC and do not authorize staff to release performance securities upon receipt of warranty securities; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, T' othy R. Aasso .EPublic Workrector/City Engineer Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1 . Vicinity Map 2. Table of Values 0 7'7 T:\PWDEPT\COUNCIL\2006\04-18-06\TM 29347.doc 2 TRACT NO. 29347�TTACHMENT 1 H W W- H En z O Ea A E4 AVENUE 54 TRACT_ NO* I, H W W W4 H W O Z O ATTACHMENT 2 Exhibit A SECURITY - TRACT MAP 29347 ON -SITE IMPROVEMENTS Performance Security' Improvement Description Labor & Materials 2 Original Amount Warranty Security Reduction (Percent) Warranty Security Amount 3 ON -SITE IMPROVEMENTS Street/Drainage $244,520 $244,520 90% $24,452 Water $36,214 $36,214 90% $3,621 Sewer $21,457 $21,457 90% $2,146 Underground Electrical Monumentation $10,725 $0 $10,725 $4,940 90% 100% $1,073 $0 On -Site Construction Sub -Total $312,916 $317,856 $31,292 ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION SUB -TOTAL $312,916 $317,856 $31,292 TOTAL $312,916 $317,856 $31,292 - 1. Performance Security shall be released immediately alter City Council accePLd we. 2. Labor & Materials Securityto remain in place for 90 days after City Council acceptance. 3. Warranty Security shall be received by City staff prior to being placed on the agenda for City Council. G79 N COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 18, 2006 ITEM TITLE: Authorization for Overnight Travel for the Public Works/Engineering Assistant Engineer II to Attend the Aries Closed Loop System Training to be held in Anaheim, California, April 27, 2006 through April 28, 2006. RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Authorize overnight travel for the Assistant Engineer II to attend the Aries Closed Loop System Training to be held in Anaheim, California, April 27, 2006 through April 28, 2006. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The Fiscal Year 2005/2006 Budget (Account No. 101-7002-431.51-01) has allocated funds for travel, training and meetings for staff. Attendance at this conference is estimated to be $373 based on the following costs: Hotel (2 nights x $100) _ $200 Meals = $ 75 Travel (220 roundtrip miles x $0.445) _ $ 98 Total $373 CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Econolite Control Products is providing operational training on the Aries Closed Loop System. This is a two-day "hands on" interactive course that covers software applications and field troubleshooting techniques. The course will be held April 27, 2006 through April 28, 2006 in Anaheim, California. If approved, the Assistant Engineer II will attend this training course. The course description is included -as Attachment 1. It) 139 FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: Authorize overnight travel for the Assistant Engineer II to attend the Aries Closed Loop System Training to be held in Anaheim, California, April 27, 2006 through April 28, 2006; or 2. Do not authorize overnight travel for the Assistant Engineer II to attend the Aries Closed Loop System Training to be held in Anaheim, California, April 27, 2006 through April 28, 2006; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. RPcnP-rtfi illxi -q ihmittPrl dR imothA J sson, P.E. Public VMrks erector/ City Engineer Approved for submission by: (I- �141'c �' /� Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachment: 1 . Econolite System Training Course Description 2 081 ATTACHMENT 1 2006 Econolite SysUeiv Training Courses 2006 Schedule • April 25-26 - Sales - ics' Closed Loop System - Anaheim, CA • April 27-28 - Technical - JU s' Closed Loop System - Anaheim, CA • May 22-23 - Sales - F% RdMIDS TM System- Colorado Springs, CO • May 24 - Sales/Technical - TransUnk 32 - Colorado Springs, CO • May 25-26 - Technical - PYFbWIDSTI System - Colorado Springs, CO • October 16-17 - Sales - icons® - Anaheim, CA • October 18-20 - Technical - icons® - Anaheim, CA TIME: Classes will begin at 7:30am on the first morning of the course and will end on the last day at 4:00pm. RSVP: If you would like to attend a class, please complete the form below and email to Ijimenez@econolite.com. o Yes, I/we would like to attend the class Date(s): Name: Address: Email: Phone: Additional attendee name(s): Agency: Course Descriptions • Technical PowerPoint presentation Sales - ^r s' Closed Loop System This is a two-day interactive course. Please bring your laptop to load the YU C ' presentation. Topics include: • Concept sales training using a PowerPoint presentation • Technical presentation • Strengths and weaknesses of the product • Competitor strengths and weaknesses • Student presentations - In order to pass this course, the student will be required to prepare and present an /1 Rics' PowerPoint presentation to the class This class is available to sales and distributor personnel only Technical - ^j?ics' Closed Loop System This is a two-day interactive. course. Please bring your laptop to load the ^� s' software. Topics include: • Operational training • Perform hands-on setup of a simple "Pleasantville, USA" system • Review simple applications of the software (configurations and communications mediums) • Field troubleshooting techniques • Exam This class is available to technicians and customers Sales - iconA System This is a two-day interactive course. Please bring your laptop to load the icons presentation. Topics include: • Strengths and weaknesses of the product • Competitor strengths and weaknesses • Student presentations - In order to pass this course, the student will be required to prepare and present an icons PowerPoint presentation to the class This class is available to sales and distributor personnel only Technical - icons® System This is a three-day interactive course. Topics include: • Introduction to icons • System overview and executive summary • Set-up and installation of software • Using the icons Advanced Traffic Management System • Using the Graphic Editor • Exam This class is available to technicians and customers Sales/Technical - Transl_ink 32 This is a one -day interactive course, oriented in demonstrating features and functionality to beginner level operators and sales personnel. Please bring your laptop to load the software. Topics include: • Operational training • Perform hands-on setup of a simple "Pleasantville, USA" system • Review simple applications of the software (configurations and com- munications medium) • Field troubleshooting techniques This class is available to sales, tech- nicians, and customers Sales - PYRdAfODS' System This is a two-day interactive course. Please bring your laptop to load the PYRAMIDS' presentation. Topics include: • Concept sales training using a PYRAMIDS' PowerPoint presenta- tion • Technical PowerPoint presentation • Strengths and weaknesses of the product • Competitor strengths and weaknesses • Student presentations - In order to pass this course, the student will be required to prepare and present a PowerPoint presentation on PYRANBDS'M to the class • Exam This class is available to sales and distributor personnel only Technical - PYRdN11DS'" Syatern This is a two-day interactive course. Topics include: • Introduction to P'YRANUDS' • System overview and executive summary • Set-up and installation of software • Using the PYRAMIDS' Advanced Traffic Management System • Creating maps for PYRAMIDS' • Exam This class is available to technicians and customers • Exam ® 2006 Econolite. All Rights Reserved. Econolite reserves • Concept sales training using an the right to change or update these classes at any time without icons PowerPoint presentation prior notification. 83 EC N LITE 4 WX Gam' S OF AGENDA CATEGORY: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 18, 2006 BUSINESS SESSION: ITEM TITLE: Approval to Extend a Professional Services CONSENT CALENDAR: Agreement with NAI Consulting to Provide Project Management and Contract Administrative Support STUDY SESSION: Services for Fiscal Year 2006/2007 PUBLIC HEARING: RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the City Manager to extend a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) for a period of one-year with the firm of Nickerson & Associates, Inc. (NAI Consulting) in an amount not -to -exceed $178,350, to provide Project Management and Contract Administrative Support services. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Sufficient funding is available to support the approval of a PSA in the amount of $178,350. The agreement budget is based on the following NAI Consulting manhours and billing rates: Contract Position Man Hours Hourly Rate Total Project Manager 1,050 $1 15 $120,750 Administrative Support 800 $45 $36,000 Professional Civil Engineer 180 $120 $21,600 Total $178,350 The professional services associated with the proposed agreement are charged on a time and materials basis and are assigned directly to the assigned capital improvement projects worked on during each billing cycle. The Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Capital Improvement Plan has budged an amount of $3,964,067 toward Engineering and Professional Services. It is anticipated that $138,350 of this funding will be used to pay the time and materials charged for project management and contract administration of the new projects for next fiscal year. The remaining $40,000 has been set aside for the development of the new capital improvement plan for Fiscal Years 2007/2008 through 2001 1 /2012, the continued management of carryover capital projects, and other special projects and will be paid through account 101-7002-431.32-10. L► 8 4 CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: In the spring of 1997, the Public Works/Engineering Department retained the part-time professional services of Lloyd "Nick" Nickerson, owner of the Nickerson and Associates, Inc. engineering firm (NAI Consulting) to augment existing engineering staff in the Capital Improvement Division. Mr. Nickerson was retained via an interim contract to provide key professional support with respect to contract administration and project management duties through the balance of the 1996/1997 Fiscal Year. In the subsequent fiscal year, the City Council directed staff to request proposals from firms in the engineering community for the type of engineering services performed by Mr. Nickerson. Two proposals were received and evaluated with the City Council awarding a two-year contract to NAI Consulting. In June 1999, the City Council authorized the City Manager to bypass the competitive selection procedure and negotiate directly with NAI Consulting for a continuation of the professional support services provided by Mr. Nickerson. Each year since 1999, the City Council has renegotiated its professional services contract with NAI Consulting for the part-time services provided by Mr. Nickerson. During the past three year's, NAI Consulting's contract also included professional engineering design services on a time and material basis, as needed, to provide engineering staff with an efficient means to initiate and administer minor design projects (primarily remedial maintenance projects) that surface unexpectedly in response to concerns voiced by La Quinta residents. As in past years, the renewed contract is based on hourly fees, with an amount of $1 1 5 per hour for professional project management services, $120 per hour for a professional registered civil engineer, $85 per hour for a design engineer and $45 per hour for administrative support. The proposed rates for the design engineer and for administrative support have not increased over those provided to the city during the past 3 years. The proposed hourly rates the project manager and professional registered civil engineer are slightly higher than the rates provided during the previous 3 years. The increase in costs for the project manager and registered engineer are attributed to the increased costs of professional liability insurance, general liability and automobile liability insurance. NAI Consulting has also agreed to continue providing any reimbursable expenses at cost without markup. Reimbursable expenses include the direct cost of sub -consultant services, printing, postage and/or courier services, etc. 2 Typical services provided by NAI include, but are not limited to: • Prepare and submit necessary documents, and coordinate with various regional, county, state and federal funding agencies to acquire and maintain funding approval. • Prepare and track project schedules. • Prepare correspondence, reports, and memorandums necessary to administer various City capital improvement projects. • Assist with bidding procedures, prepare bid summary comparisons in a table format, and make recommendations for City Council consideration to award Public Works contracts for construction. • Prepare and conduct informal request for proposals to construction support sub - consultants, summarize proposals received and make recommendations for award of Professional Services Agreements. • Monitor and report on project status, budget vs. actual expenditures, and contract time vs. actual time. • Prepare staff reports for City Council and/or Planning Commission consideration, as necessary. • At the direction of staff, prepare annual 5-year Capital Improvement Program document for City Council comment and approval. NAI Consulting provides a unique service, an RFP for which staff believes is unlikely to generate comparable proposals from other local consultants at this time. Additionally, NAI's intimate knowledge of the City makes it unlikely that another consultant could provide the same services to the City at a lower cost. Staff therefore recommends extension of this contract. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1 . Authorize the City Manager to renew a Professional Services Agreement for a period of one year with the firm of NAI Consulting in an amount not -to -exceed $178,350, to provide Project Management and Contract Administrative Support services; or 2. Do not authorize the City Manager to renew a Professional Services Agreement for a period of one year with the firm of NAI Consulting in an amount not -to - exceed $178,350, to provide Project Management and Contract Administrative Support services; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. G1 3 i nomas r. venovese, city ivianager Respectfully submitted, !mothy R. 6na on, P.E. Public Works Di ctor/City Engineer Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachment: 1. Professional Services Agreement 0, 8" PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES (the "Agreement") is made and entered into by and between the CITY OF LA QUINTA, ("City"), a California municipal corporation, and NAI Consulting ("Consultant"). The parties hereto agree as follows: 1.0 SERVICES OF CONSULTANT 1.1 Scope of Services. In compliance with all terms and conditions of this Agreement, Consultant shall provide those services related to PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC SERVICES, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, PROJECT MANAGEMENT, CONTRACT MANAGEMENT, AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007 as specified in the "Scope of Services" attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference (the "services" or "work"). Consultant warrants that all services will be performed in a competent, professional and satisfactory manner in accordance with the standards prevalent in the industry for such services. 1.2 Compliance with Law. All services rendered hereunder shall be provided in accordance with all ordinances, resolutions, statutes, rules, regulations and laws of the City of La Quinta and any Federal, State or local governmental agency of competent jurisdiction. 1.3 Licenses, Permits, Fees and Assessments. Except as otherwise specified herein, Consultant shall obtain at its sole cost and expense such licenses, permits and approvals as may be required by law for the performance of the services required by this Agreement. Consultant shall have the sole obligation to pay for any fees, assessments and taxes, plus applicable penalties and interest, which may be imposed by law and arise from or are necessary for the performance of the services required by this Agreement. 1.4 Familiarity with Work. By executing this Agreement, Consultant warrants that (a) it has thoroughly investigated and considered the work to be performed, (b) it has investigated the site of the work -and fully acquainted itself with the conditions there existing, (c) it has carefully considered how the work should be performed, and (d) it fully understands the facilities, difficulties and restrictions attending performance of the work under this Agreement. Should Consultant discover any latent or unknown conditions materially differing from those inherent in the work or as represented by City, it shall immediately inform City of such fact and shall not proceed except at Consultant's risk until written instructions are received from the Contract Officer (as defined in Section 4.2 hereof) . 1.5 Care of Work. Consultant shall adopt reasonable methods during the life of the Agreement to furnish continuous protection to the work performed by Consultant, and the equipment, materials, papers and other components thereof to prevent losses or damages, and shall be responsible for all such damages, to persons or property, until acceptance of the work by City, except such losses or damages as may be caused by City's own negligence. The performance of services by Consultant shall not relieve Consultant from any obligation to correct any incomplete, inaccurate or defective work at no further cost to City, when such inaccuracies are due to the negligence of Consultant. I ( -)' 8 9 1.6 Additional Services. In accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Consultant shall perform services in addition to those specified in the Scope of Services when directed to do so by the Contract Officer, provided that Consultant shall not be required to perform any additional services without compensation. Any addition in compensation not exceeding five percent (5%) of the Contract Sum may be approved by the Contract Officer. Any greater increase must be approved by the City Council. 1.7 . Special Requirements. Additional terms and conditions of this Agreement, if any, which are made a part hereof are set forth in Exhibit "D" (the "Special Requirements"). In the event of a conflict between the provisions of the Special Requirements and any other provisions of this Agreement, the provisions of the Special Requirements shall govern. 2.0 COMPENSATION 2.1 Contract Sum. For the services rendered pursuant to this Agreement, Consultant shall be compensated in accordance with Exhibit "B" (the "Schedule of Compensation") in a total amount not to exceed ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY-EIGHT THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS ($178,350) (the "Contract Sum"), except as provided in Section 1.6. The method of compensation set forth in the Schedule of Compensation may include a lump sum payment upon completion, payment in accordance with the percentage of completion of the services, payment for time and materials based upon Consultant's rate schedule, but not exceeding the Contract Sum, or such other methods as may be specified in the Schedule of Compensation. Compensation may include reimbursement for actual and necessary expenditures for reproduction costs, transportation expense, telephone expense, and similar costs and expenses when and if specified in the Schedule of Compensation. 2.2 Method of Payment. Any month in which Consultant wishes to receive payment, Consultant shall submit to City no later than the tenth (10th) working day of such month, in the form approved by City's Finance Director, an invoice for services rendered prior to the date of the invoice. Such invoice shall (1) describe in detail the services provided, including time and materials, and (2) specify each staff member who has provided services and the number of hours assigned to each such staff member. Such invoice shall contain a certification by a principal member of Consultant specifying that the payment requested is for work performed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. City will pay Consultant for all expenses stated thereon which are approved by City pursuant to this Agreement no later than the last working day of the month. 3.0 PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE 3.1 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement. 3.2 Schedule of Performance. All services rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be performed diligently and within the time period established in Exhibit "C" (the "Schedule of Performance"). Extensions to the time period specified in the Schedule of Q Performance may be approved in writing by the Contract Officer. c� 0 3.3 Force Majeure. The time period specified in the Schedule of Performance for performance of the services rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be extended because of any delays due to unforeseeable causes beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of Consultant, including, but not restricted to, acts of God or of the public enemy, fires, earthquakes, floods, epidemic, quarantine restrictions, riots, strikes, freight embargoes, acts of any governmental agency other than City, and unusually severe weather, if Consultant shall within ten (10) days of the commencement of such delay notify the Contract Officer in writing of the causes of the delay. The Contract Officer shall ascertain the facts and the extent of delay, and extend the time for performing the services for the period of the forced delay when and if in his or her judgment such delay is justified, and the Contract Officer's determination shall be final and conclusive upon the parties to this Agreement. 3.4 Term. Unless earlier terminated in accordance with Sections 7.7 or 7.8 of this Agreement, this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect until completion of the services, except as otherwise provided in the Schedule of Performance. 4.0 COORDINATION OF WORK 4.1 Representative of Consultant. The following principals of Consultant are hereby designated as being the principals and representatives of Consultant authorized to act in its behalf with respect to the work specified herein and make all decisions in connection therewith: a. Lloyd "Nick" Nickerson Jr., President It is expressly understood that the experience, knowledge, capability, and reputation of the foregoing principals were a substantial inducement for City to enter into this Agreement. Therefore, the foregoing principals shall be responsible during the term of this Agreement for directing all activities of Consultant and devoting sufficient time to personally supervise the services hereunder. The foregoing principals may not be changed by Consultant and no other personnel may be assigned to perform the service required hereunder without the express written approval of City. 4.2 Contract Officer. The Contract Officer shall be Timothy R. Jonasson, Public Works Director/City Engineer or such other person as may be designated by the City Manager of City. It shall be Consultant's responsibility to assure that the Contract Officer is kept informed of the progress of the performance of the services and Consultant shall refer any decisions, which must be made by City to the Contract Officer. Unless otherwise specified herein, any approval of City required hereunder shall mean the approval of the Contract Officer. 4.3 Prohibition against Subcontracting or Assignment. The experience, knowledge, capability and reputation of Consultant, its principals and employees were a substantial inducement for City to enter into this Agreement. Except as set forth in this'j 9 Agreement, Consultant shall not contract with any other entity to perform in whole or in 7 part the services required hereunder without the express written approval of City. In addition, neither this Agreement nor any interest herein may be assigned or transferred, voluntarily or by operation of law, without the prior written approval of City. 4.4 Independent Contractor. Neither City nor any of its employees shall have any control over the manner, mode or means by which Consultant, its agents or employees, perform the services required herein, except as otherwise set forth. Consultant shall perform all services required herein as an independent contractor of City and shall remain at all times as to City a wholly independent contractor with only such obligations as are consistent with that role. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its agents or employees are agents or employees of City. 4.5 City Cooperation. City shall provide Consultant with any plans, publications, reports, statistics, records or other data or information pertinent to services to be performed hereunder which are reasonably available to Consultant only from or through action by City. 5.0 INSURANCE, INDEMNIFICATION AND BONDS. 5.1 Insurance. Consultant shall procure and maintain, at its cost, and submit concurrently with its execution of this Agreement, personal and public liability and property damage insurance against all claims for injuries against persons or damages to property resulting from Consultant's acts or omissions rising out of or related to Consultant's performance under this Agreement. The insurance policy shall contain a severability of interest clause providing that the coverage shall be primary for losses arising out of Consultant's performance hereunder and neither City nor its insurers shall be required to contribute to any such loss. A certificate evidencing the foregoing and naming City and its officers and employees as additional insured shall be delivered to and approved by City prior to commencement of the services hereunder. The amount of insurance required hereunder shall be determined by the Contract Sum in accordance with the following table: Contract Sum Less than $ 50,000 $ 50,000 - $ 300,000 Over $ 300,000 Personal Injury/Property Damage Coverage $100,000 per individual; $300,000 per occurrence $250,000 per individual; $500,000 per occurrence $ 500,000 per individual; $1,000,000 per occurrence Consultant shall carry automobile liability insurance of $500,000 per accident against all claims for injuries against persons or damages to property arising out of the use of any automobile by Consultant, its officers, any person directly or indirectly employed by Consultant, any subcontractor or agent, or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, arising directly or indirectly out of or related to Consultant's performance under this Agreement. The term "automobile" includes, but is not limited to, a land motor vehicle, trailer or semi -trailer designed for travel on public roads. The automobile insurance policy shall contain a severability of interest clause providing that coverage shall be primary for losses arising out of Consultant's performance hereunder and neither City nor its insurers shall be required to contribute to such loss. A certificate evidencing the foregoing and naming City and its officers and employees as additional insured shall be delivered to and 091 approved by City prior to commencement of the services hereunder. Consultant shall carry Workers' Compensation Insurance in accordance with State Worker's Compensation laws. Consultant shall procure professional errors and omissions liability insurance in an amount acceptable to City. All insurance required by this Section shall be kept in effect during the term of this Agreement and shall not be cancelable without thirty (30) days written notice to City of proposed cancellation. The procuring of such insurance or the delivery of policies or certificates evidencing the same shall not be construed as a limitation of Consultant's obligation to indemnify City, its officers, employees, contractors, subcontractors, or agents. 5.2 Indemnification. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, representatives and agents ("Indemnified Parties"), from and against those 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 City) and for errors and omissions committed by Consultant, its officers, employees and agents, which arise out of Consultant's negligent performance under this Agreement, except to the extent of such loss as may be caused by City's own negligence or that of its officers or employees. In the event the Indemnified Parties are made a party to any action, lawsuit, or other adversarial proceeding in any way involving such claims, Consultant shall provide a defense to the Indemnified Parties, or at the City's option, reimburse the Indemnified Parties their costs of defense, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred in defense of such claim. In addition, Consultant shall be obligated to promptly pay any final judgment or portion thereof rendered against the Indemnified Parties. 5.3 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies City may have if Consultant fails to provide or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, City may, at its sole option: a. Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance from any sums due under this Agreement. b. Order Consultant to stop work under this Agreement and/or withhold any payment(s) which become due to Consultant hereunder until Consultant demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof. C. Terminate this Agreement. Exercise of any of the above remedies, however, is an alternative to any other remedies City may have. The above remedies are not the exclusive remedies for Consultant'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 Consultant may be held responsible for payments of damages to persons or property resulting from Consultant's or its subcontractors' performance of work under this Agreement. 6.0 RECORDS AND REPORTS. 6.1 Reports. Consultant shall periodically prepare and submit to the Contract Officer such reports concerning Consultant's performance of the services required by this Agreement as the Contract Officer shall require. 6.2 Records. Consultant shall keep such books and records as shall be necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement and enable the Contract Officer to evaluate the cost and the performance of such services. Books and records pertaining to costs shall be kept and prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principals. The Contract Officer shall have full and free access to such books and records at all reasonable times, including the right to inspect, copy, audit, and make records and transcripts from such records. 6.3 Ownership of Documents. Originals of all drawings, specifications, reports, records, documents and other materials, whether in hard copy or electronic form, which are prepared by Consultant, its employees, subcontractors and agents in the performance of this Agreement, shall be the property of City and shall be delivered to City upon termination of this Agreement or upon the earlier request of the Contract Officer, and Consultant shall have no claim for further employment or additional compensation as a result of the exercise by City of its full rights of ownership of the documents and materials hereunder. Consultant shall cause all subcontractors to assign to City any documents or materials prepared by them, and in the event Consultant fails to secure such assignment, Consultant shall indemnify City for all damages suffered thereby. In the event City or any person, firm or corporation authorized by City reuses said documents and materials without written verification or adaptation by Consultant for the specific purpose intended and causes to be made or makes any changes or alterations in said documents and materials, City hereby releases, discharges, and exonerates Consultant from liability resulting from said change. The provisions of this clause shall survive the completion of this Contract and shall thereafter remain in full force and effect. 6.4 Release of Documents. The drawings, specifications, reports, records, documents and other materials prepared by Consultant in the performance of services under this Agreement shall not be released publicly without the prior written approval of the Contract Officer or as required by law. Consultant shall not disclose to any other entity or person any information regarding the activities of City, except as required by law or as authorized by City. 7.0 ENFORCEMENT OF AGREEMENT. 7.1 California Law. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted both as to validity and to performance of the parties in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Legal actions concerning any dispute, claim or matter arising out of or in relation to this Agreement shall be instituted in the Superior Court of the County of Riverside, State of California, or any other appropriate court in such county, and Consultant covenants and agrees to submit to the personal jurisdiction of such court in the event of such action. 0 0 3 10 7.2 Disputes. In the event of any dispute arising under this Agreement, the injured party shall notify the injuring party in writing of its contentions by submitting a claim therefor. The injured party shall continue performing its obligations hereunder so long as the injuring party commences to cure such default within ten (10) days of service of such notice and completes the cure of such default within forty-five (45) days after service of the notice, or such longer period as may be permitted by the Contract Officer; provided that if the default is an immediate danger to the health, safety and general welfare, City may take such immediate action as City deems warranted. Compliance with the provisions of this section shall be a condition precedent to termination of this Agreement for cause and to any legal action, and such compliance shall not be a waiver of any party's right to take legal action in the event that the dispute is not cured, provided that nothing herein shall limit City's right to terminate this Agreement without cause pursuant to Section 7.8. 7.3 Retention of Funds. City may withhold from any monies payable to Consultant sufficient funds to compensate City for any losses, costs, liabilities, or damages it reasonably believes were suffered by City due to the default of Consultant in the performance of the services required by this Agreement. 7.4 Waiver. No delay or omission in the exercise of any right or remedy of a non -defaulting party on any default shall impair such right or remedy or be construed as a waiver. City's consent or approval of any act by Consultant requiring City's consent or approval shall not be deemed to waive or render unnecessary City's consent to or approval of any subsequent act of Consultant. Any waiver by either party of any default must be in writing and shall not be a waiver of any other default concerning the same or any other provision of this Agreement. 7.5 Rights and Remedies are Cumulative. Except with respect to rights and remedies expressly declared to be exclusive in this Agreement, the rights and remedies of the parties are cumulative and the exercise by either party of one or more of such rights or remedies shall not preclude the exercise by it, at the same or different times, of any other rights or remedies for the same default or any other default by the other party. 7.6 Legal Action. In addition to any other rights or remedies, either party may take legal action, at law or at equity, to cure, correct or remedy any default, to recover damages for any default, to compel specific performance of this Agreement, to obtain injunctive relief, or to obtain any other remedy consistent with the purposes of this Agreement. 7.7 Termination Prior To Expiration Of Term. This section shall govern any termination of this Agreement, except as specifically provided in the following Section 7.8 for termination for cause. City reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at any time, with or without cause, upon thirty-day's written notice to Consultant. Upon receipt of any notice of termination, Consultant shall immediately cease all services hereunder except such as may be specifically approved by the Contract Officer. Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for all services rendered prior to receipt of the notice of termination and for any services authorized by the Contract Officer thereafter in accordance with the Schedule of Compensation or such as may be approved by the Contract Officer, except as 0 11 provided in Section 7.3. 7.8 Termination For Default of Consultant. If termination is due to the failure of Consultant to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, City may, after compliance with the provisions of Section 7.2, take over work and prosecute the same to completion by contract or otherwise, and Consultant shall be liable to the extent that the total cost for completion of the services required hereunder exceeds the compensation herein stipulated (provided that City shall use reasonable efforts to mitigate such damages), and City may withhold any payments to Consultant for the purpose of set off or partial payment of the amounts owed City as previously stated in Section 7.3. 7.9 Attorneys' Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit from the losing party. 8.0 CITY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES; NON-DISCRIMINATION. 8.1 Non -liability of City Officers and Employees. No officer or employee of City shall be personally liable to Consultant, or any successor in interest, in the event or any default or breach by City or for any amount which may become due to Consultant or to its successor, or for breach of any obligation of the terms of this Agreement. 8.2 Conflict of Interest. No officer or employee of City shall have any personal interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement nor shall any such officer or employee participate in any decision relating to the Agreement which affects his or her personal interest or the interest of any corporation, partnership or association in which she or he is, directly or indirectly, interested, in violation of any State statute or regulation. Consultant warrants that it has not paid or given and will not pay or give any third party any money or general consideration for obtaining this Agreement. 8.3 Covenant against Discrimination. Consultant covenants that, by and for itself, its heirs, executors, assigns, and all persons claiming under or through them, that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin or ancestry in the performance of this Agreement. Consultant shall take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin or ancestry. 9.0 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 9.1 Notice. Any notice, demand, request, consent, approval, communication either party desires or is required to give the other party or any other person shall be in writing and either served personally or sent by prepaid, first-class mail to the address set forth below. Either party may change its address by notifying the other party of the change of address in writing. Notice shall be deemed communicated forty-eight (48) hours from the time of mailing if mailed as provided in this section. 095 12 To City: CITY OF LA QUINTA ATTN: Timothy R. Jonasson 78-495 Calle Tampico P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92253 To Consultant: NAI Consulting ATTN: Nick Nickerson 68-955 Adelina Road Cathedral City, California 92234 (760) 323-5344 Fax 323-5699 9.2 Integrated Agreement. This Agreement contains all of the agreements of the parties and all previous understanding, negotiations and agreements are integrated into and superseded by this Agreement. 9.3 Amendment. This Agreement may be amended at any time by the mutual consent of the parties by an instrument in writing signed by both parties. 9.4 Severability. In the event that any one or more of the phrases, sentences, clauses, paragraphs, or sections contained in this Agreement shall be declared invalid or unenforceable by a valid judgment or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, sentences, clauses, paragraphs, or sections of this Agreement which are hereby declared as severable and shall be interpreted to carry out the intent of the parties hereunder. 9.5 Authority. The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said parties and that by so executing this Agreement the parties hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement. 13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of May 18, 2005. CITY OF LA QUINTA, a California municipal corporation Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager ATTEST: June Greek, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. Katherine Jenson, City Attorney CONSULTANT, NAI Consulting. Lloyd Nickerson Jr., President 68-955 Adelina Road Cathedral City, California 92234 (760) 323-5344 (Fax) 323-5699 Ci97 14 Exhibit A Scope of Services 1 As directed by City Staff, the consultant's services shall include, but are not limited to the performance of the following assignments, duties and tasks: Prepare and submit necessary documents to, and coordinate with various regional, county, state and federal funding agencies to acquire and maintain funding approval. Preparation and tracking of project schedules using Microsoft Project 2000 or higher version. Preparation of necessary correspondence, reports, and memos necessary to administer various City capital improvement projects, using Word Perfect 6.0/6.1 or higher and/or Microsoft Word 7.0 or higher version word processing program. Assist with bidding procedures, prepare bid summary comparisons in a table format, make recommendations for City Council consideration to award Public Works contracts for construction. Prepare and conduct informal request for proposals to construction support sub - consultants, summarize proposals received and make recommendation for award of Professional Services Agreements. Monitor and report on project(s) status; budget vs. actual expenditures; contract time vs. actual time. As necessary, prepare Staff Reports for City Council and/or Planning Commission consideration. Act as an extension of Public Works staff while in the performance of the above referenced tasks. At the direction of staff, prepare the annual 5-year Capital Improvement Program document for review and approval by the City Council. 15 Exhibit B Schedule of Compensation Payment shall be in full at the rates listed in the Schedule of Billing Rates attached herewith for the actual hours submitted in conformance with Section 2.2 of the Agreement. Total compensation for all work under this contract shall not exceed ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY-EIGHT THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS ($178,350) except as specified in Section 1.6 - Additional Services of the Agreement. Services will be billed on a monthly basis for time and materials expended, time cards will be submitted on a weekly basis for review and approval by City staff. All man-hour costs to be billed as follows and per the attached consultant's statement of personnel hourly billing rates. Project Manager/Administrator $1 15.00 per hour Professional Civil Engineer/Traffic Engineer $120.00 per hour CAD Draftsman $85.00 per hour Secretarial Support $45.00 per hour All reimbursables to be paid at cost, without mark-up or additional overhead. ALLOWABLE BUDGET: Administration Division: Capital Improvement Plan Preparation and Specialty Projects $ 25,000 Engineering & Traffic Services Division: Contract Services $153,350 rss 16 Exhibit C Schedule of Performance Consultant shall complete all services within TIME LINE ALLOWED BY THE TOTAL CONTRACT SUM. 100 17 Exhibit D Special Requirements None. 101 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 18, 2006 ITEM TITLE: Consideration of a Resolution Approving the Preliminary Engineer's Report for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1, for Fiscal Year 2006/2007, and a Resolution Declaring Intent to Levy Annual Assessments for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1, and Giving Notice Thereof RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: / CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving the Preliminary Engineer's Report for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 ("District"), Fiscal Year 2006/2007; and Adopt a Resolution of the City Council declaring intention to levy annual assessments for maintenance and servicing landscape and lighting improvements within the boundaries of the territory included in the Citywide Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1, and giving notice thereof. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Adoption of the Resolutions is required in order to levy the annual assessment for the District. The estimated total cost for Fiscal Year 2006/2007 is $1,225,100 for maintenance of public streets, traffic signals, medians, and parkways. Park maintenance costs have been separated from the District costs. The estimated assessment levy is $890,860, therefore the General Fund will be required to fund approximately $334,240 of the District cost in Fiscal Year 2006/2007. The parks maintenance cost is estimated to be $861,800 for Fiscal Year 2006/2007. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: In 1989, the City Council formed a Citywide Landscape and Lighting Assessment District to fund costs associated with the maintenance, construction and servicing of landscape areas, street lights and traffic signals. Pursuant to the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, the City must annually perform a series of activities associated with the District, as outlined in Attachment 1. An Annual Engineer's Report is required by the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 and must include the following information: 1 . A description of the services to be provided throughout the District; 2. Total costs necessary to provide all services described in the Engineer's Report; 3. A diagram showing the boundaries of the District, including special benefit zones; and 4. An assessment schedule. The Preliminary Engineer's Report, prepared by City staff and MuniFinancial with parcel reconciliation support by MuniFinancial, provides the required information for the District for Fiscal Year 2006/2007. The Preliminary Engineer's Report projects the following for Fiscal Year 2006/2007 in comparison to the Fiscal Year 2005/2006 Engineer's Report: FY 2005/2006 Citywide Benefit Zone Yes Number of Local Benefit Zones 6 Number of Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's) 24,037 EDU Rate $35.60/EDU District Revenue $855,707 FY 2006/2007 Yes 6 25,025 $35.60/EDU $890,860 These calculations will be finalized for the Final Engineer's Report in order to provide the most accurate assessment possible. In accordance with previous City Council direction, all residents, including those within the six (6) local benefit zones, will be assessed at a flat rate. The methodology has remained the same under the provisions of Proposition 218. At this time, the estimated Fiscal Year 2006/2007 District exempt cost is $1,225,100. Based on this estimate, the citywide benefit assessment would be $48.96/EDU. The current assessment is $35.60. Since the last engineer's report, staff has estimated that at the current City limits at buildout the City would receive approximately $1,315,000 from 36,950 EDU's while expenditures would increase to approximately $1,617,000 for an anticipated approximate deficit of $304,000/year in 2025. This information was included with the 2005/2006 Financial Management Review. 103 Proposition 218 does not allow for assessment increases unless approved by a 2/3 majority in a public vote. Balloting to raise the assessment can be initiated by City Council at any time. City Council may also want to consider in the future a special tax for parks that could be levied that would require only a simple majority of the residents to approve. City staff will monitor the progress of existing and future legislation clarifications and/or litigation to determine if a different methodology or other finance methods may be utilized in the subsequent fiscal years. The City Council is required to approve the preliminary Engineer's Report and schedule a Public Meeting and Public Hearing date to allow affected property owners an opportunity to provide public testimony regarding the proposed changes. Approval of the Preliminary Engineer's Report does not obligate the City to the fees proposed. Only after the Public Meeting and Public Hearing are conducted, can the City Council adopt assessment fees for Fiscal Year 2006/2007. The Public Meeting and Public Hearing are scheduled for the May 2, 2006 City Council Meeting. Upon conclusion of the Public Hearing, the City Council may approve the assessment levels based upon testimony received at the Public Meeting and Hearing. The Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 allows the option of noticing the Public Meeting/Hearings for citywide districts through the newspaper or by individual notices. The estimated cost to provide individual notices is approximately $5,000. For the Fiscal Year 2005/2006, the City Council opted to notice the Public Meeting and Hearing in the newspaper, thus avoiding the $5,000 in estimated costs. The cost to notice in the newspaper is approximately $250. Attachment 2 is the proposed notice. To proceed with the recommended changes proposed in the preliminary Engineer's Report (Attachment 3) for the District, the City Council must: Adopt a resolution approving the Preliminary Engineer's Report for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1, Fiscal Year 2006/2007; and Adopt a resolution declaring intention to levy annual assessments for construction, maintenance and servicing landscape and lighting improvements within the boundaries of the territory included in the Citywide Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1, and giving notice thereof. A Public Meeting and Hearing will be scheduled to allow public testimony before the City Council. The Public Meeting and Hearing dates will be noticed through the newspaper unless otherwise directed by the City Council. Upon conclusion of the Public Hearing, the City Council may adjust the assessment levels as necessary and adopt a resolution confirming the assessment diagram and assessment level. 104 S:\CityMgr\STAFF REPORTS ONLY\B1 L&L 89-1.doc 3 FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1 . Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving the Preliminary Engineer's Report for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1, for Fiscal Year 2006/2007 and adopt a Resolution of the City Council declaring intention to levy annual assessments for maintenance and servicing landscape and lighting improvements within the boundaries of the territory included in the Citywide Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1, and giving notice thereof; or 2. Reject the Preliminary Engineer's Report and provide staff with possible revisions to the report for future consideration; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, R T' othy R. o asso E. ublic Works irect /City Engineer Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1 . Annual Activities 2. Notice of Public Meeting 3. Preliminary Engineer's Report 105 S:\CityMgr\STAFF REPORTS ONLY\B1 L&L 89-1.doc 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2005-(Clerk's Office will enter) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006/2007 IN CONNECTION WITH LA QUINTA LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 89-1 WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared and filed with the City Clerk of the City of La Quinta and the City Clerk has presented the City Council such report entitled "La Quinta Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1, Preliminary Engineer's Report" (the "Report"); and WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully examined and reviewed such Report. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: SECTION 1. The Report, as filed, is hereby approved. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 18t" day of April 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES:Council Members (Clerk's Office will enter) NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None DON ADOLPH, Mayor City of La Quinta, California 106 5 Resolution No. 2005- Landscape and Lighting Assessment District No. 89-1 Adopted: April 4, 2006 Page 2 ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC, CITY CLERK City of La Quinta, California (City Seal) APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 107 RESOLUTION NO. 2005-(Clerk's Office will enter) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, AND SERVICING LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE TERRITORY INCLUDED IN THE CITYWIDE LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 89-1 AND TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND GIVING NOTICE THEREOF WHEREAS, the City Council, by its Resolution No. 89-9, initiated proceedings pursuant to provisions of the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, being Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code, commencing with Section 22500 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"'), for the formation of a Landscape and Lighting Assessment District designated "La Quinta Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1," shall include all of the territory located within the boundaries of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to levy and collect assessments within Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 for the Fiscal Year commencing July 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2007 to pay the costs and expenses of constructing, operating, maintaining, and servicing landscaping, lighting and appurtenant facilities located within public places in the City; and WHEREAS, the Engineer selected by the City Council has prepared and filed with the City Clerk of the City of La Quinta and the City Clerk has presented to the City Council a report in connection with the Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 and the City Council did by previous Resolution approve such report. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City. of La Quinta, California, as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council has previously formed Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Part 2 of Division 15 of the 108 7 Resolution No. 2005- Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 2 California Streets and Highways Code, commencing with Section 225500 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). SECTION 2. The City Council hereby finds that the maintenance and operation of projects identified in the Preliminary Engineer's report for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 consisting solely of exempt items of sidewalks, streets, sewers, water, flood control, and/or drainage pursuant to Article 13D Section 5(a) of the California Constitution, that the public interest requires the maintenance of the improvements, and declares its intention to levy and collect assessments for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2007 to pay for the costs and expenses of the improvements described in Section 4 hereof. SECTION 3. The territory included within the boundaries of the Assessment District includes all of the land included within the boundaries of the City. SECTION 4. Reference is hereby made to the report of the Engineer on file with the City Clerk of the City of La Quinta for a full and fair description of the improvements, the boundaries of the Assessment District and any zones therein and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within the Assessment District. SECTION 5. Notice is hereby given that May 2, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California, 92253, is the time and place fixed for a Public Meeting by the City Council to allow public testimony regarding the proposed increased assessment. SECTION 6. Notice is hereby given that May 2, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California, 92253, is the time and place fixed for a Public Hearing by the City Council on the question of the levy of the proposed assessment for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 . Any interested person may file a written protest with the City Clerk prior to the conclusion of the hearing, or, withdrawal of the protest. A written protest shall state all grounds of objections and a protest by a property owner shall contain a description sufficient to identify the property owned by such property owner. At the hearing, all interested persons shall be afforded the opportunity to hear and be heard. SECTION 7. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to give notice of such hearings as provided in the Act. A Resolution No. 2005- Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 3 SECTION 8. The City Council hereby designates the Desert Sun as the newspaper in which notice of the Public Hearing shall be published. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 18t" day of April 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES:Council Members (Clerk's Office will enter) NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None DON ADOLPH, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CIVIC, CITY CLERK City of La Quinta, California (City Seal) APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 11 0 ATTACHMENT 1 ANNUAL ACTIVITIES LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT Adopt the following Resolutions: 1 . Approve Preliminary Engineer's Report (April 18, 2006) 2. Intention to levy annual assessment and notice of Public Meeting/Hearing (April 18, 2006) 3. Conduct a Public Meeting to allow testimony regarding the proposed assessments prior to Public Hearing (May 2, 2006) 4. Conduct a Public Hearing to allow written protests of the proposed assessment to be considered by the City Council prior to adoption of the final assessments (May 2, 2006) III 10 ATTACHMENT 2 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING AND HEARING BY THE CITY OF LA QUINTA LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO PUBLIC HEARING/MEETING: May 2, 2006 TIME: 7:00 p.m. TO CONSIDER: The Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Annual Assessment for Landscape and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 . Maintenance of landscape improvements in roadways and drainage facilities is a very important service in our community. Landscaping, if well maintained, provides beautification and enhancement to the surroundings, along with a positive effect on property values. Adequate street lighting and traffic signals are considered imperative for their contribution to public convenience and safety. At the Public Meeting, City staff will present the proposed assessment levy and will accept questions thereon. At the Public Hearing, the City Council will hear comments in support of and protests against the annual levy prior to acting on the levy of assessments for Fiscal Year 2006/2007. Any property owner may mail a protest against the assessment to the City of La Quinta, Timothy R. Jonasson, Public Works Director/City Engineer, P.O. Box 1504, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253. The Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District 89-1 is divided into zones based on the level of benefit. Citywide Benefits enhance the value of all properties within the District, and include the maintenance of medians, traffic signals and safety lighting in areas zoned commercial, on major thoroughfares, including all roadways that may be four lanes and greater, retention basins, bike trails and sidewalks. The costs of the City to administer these facilities are also considered a citywide benefit. Local Benefits include the operation, servicing and maintenance of the facilities serving only properties within localized areas, including maintenance of medians, back up landscaping, traffic signals and safety lighting on localized streets, which include all roadways that are two lanes. The facilities proposed to be maintained include local landscaping at La Quinta Highlands, Rancho Ocotillo, Cactus Flower, Acacia Homes, La Quinta del Oro and Topaz. The costs of the City to administer these facilities are also considered a local benefit. The assessment rates for Fiscal Year 2005/2006 are based upon Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU's). The subdivided single-family residential lots less than one acre in size have been selected as the basic unit for calculation of the benefit assessments. All single-family residential parcels less than one acre in size are assigned 1.00 EDU. In determining the EDU's for improved nonresidential properties and residential properties larger than one acre, parcels are assigned 5.00 EDU per acre, based on the average number of typical single-family residential lots per acre. Rural/Estate Residential is defined as "underdeveloped residential." This describes land zoned as residential which is greater than 1 acre in size, but has one residential unit. The first acre will be considered as one equivalent dwelling unit with a rate applied of 0.33 EDU's for each acre or portion thereof above and beyond the initial acre. Golf courses are assessed at the rate of 10% of developed nonresidential properties, or 0.50 EDU per acre with a minimum of 1.00 EDU per parcel. Properties with agricultural classifications are assessed at the rate of 5% of developed nonresidential properties or 0.25 EDU per acre with a minimum of 1 .00 EDU per parcel. Parcels of land located in areas zoned Hillside Conservation will be assessed on the basis of allowable development, or 0.10 EDU per acre. Vacant property is assessed at the rate of 33% of developed property. Vacant residential parcels (single-family residential parcels less than one acre in size, which do not have structures on them) are assigned 0.33 EDU per parcel. Vacant nonresidential parcels (parcels which are not single-family residential parcels, and which do not have structures on them) are assessed based on their parcel size. Vacant nonresidential parcels in Annexation Area No. 9 will be assessed at a rate of 50% of those parcels located outside Annexation Area No. 9. The annual assessments generated by the existing 1972 Act City of La Quinta Landscaping and Lighting District will fund the cost of providing installation, servicing, maintenance, and operation of landscaping, lighting and appurtenant facilities within the City of La Quinta that are exempt under provisions of Proposition 218 voted in by the California residents during the November 1996 election. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, CONTACT MR. TIMOTHY R. JONASSON, P.E., PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER AT (760) 777-7042. 113 12 City of La Quints ENGINEER'S ANNUAL LEVY REPORT Lighting and Landscape District No. 89=1 Fiscal Year 2006/2007 INTENT MEETING: April 18, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING: May 2, 2006 Corporate Office: 27368 Via Industria Suite 110 Temecula, CA 92590 Tel: (951) 587-3500 Tel: (800) 755-MUNI (6864) Fax: (951) 587-3510 Office Locations: Anaheim, CA Lancaster, CA Los Angeles Regional Office Oakland, CA www.muni.com Phoenix, AZ Sacramento, CA Seattle, WA 114 13 ENGINEER'S REPORT AFFIDAVIT Establishment of Annual Assessments for the: City of La Quinta Street Lighting and Landscape District No. 89-1 Riverside County, State of California This Report and the enclosed diagrams show the exterior boundaries of the District as they existed at the time of the passage of the Resolution of Intention. Reference is hereby made to the Riverside County Assessor's maps for a detailed description of the lines and dimensions of parcels within the District. The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed Report as directed by the City Council. Dated this day of Aipri , 2006. MuniFinancial Assessment Engineer On Behalf of the City of La Quinta By: �� Q Adina Vazquez, Project M n �er C) District Administration Services By: Richard Kopecky R. C. E. # 16742 NO. M7rt �Y lv 3e � 115 14 ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF LA QUINTA LIGHTING AND LANDSCAPE DISTRICT NO. 89-1 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together with Assessment Roll thereto attached was filed with me on the day of , 2006. BY: June S. Greek, City Clerk City of La Quinta Riverside County, California HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together with Assessment Roll thereto attached, was approved and confirmed by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, on the day of , 2006. BY: June S. Greek, City Clerk City of La Quinta Riverside County, California I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Assessment Roll was filed with the County Auditor of the County of Riverside, on the day of , 2006. BY: June S. Greek, City Clerk City of La Quinta Riverside County, California its 15 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. OVERVIEW...........................................................................................1 A. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................... . B. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND LEGISLATION...........................................................2 II. DESCRIPTION OF THE DISTRICT......................................................2 A. DISTRICT BOUNDARIES AND SPECIFIC AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT ................................2 B. IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE DISTRICT.....................................................................2 III. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT.....................................................3 A. GENERAL..............................................................................................................3 B. BENEFIT ANALYSIS.................................................................................................4 C. METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................5 IV. DISTRICT BUDGETS........................................................................8 A. DESCRIPTION OF BUDGET ITEMS.............................................................................8 B. 2006/2007 DISTRICT BUDGET................................................................................9 APPENDIX A - DISTRICT ASSESSMENT DIAGRAMS ..........................12 APPENDIX B - 2006/2007 ASSESSMENT ROLL...................................13 117 16 miry or La yumta Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Engineer's Annual Levy Report Lighting and Landscape District No. 89-1 I. Overview A. Introduction The City of La Quinta (the "City") annually levies and collects special assessments in order to provide and maintain the facilities, improvements and services within Lighting and LandscapeDistrict No. 89-1 (the "District"). The District was formed in 1989 pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (the 1972 Act"), Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code and authorizes the Agency to annually levy and collect assessments to maintain the services and improvements related thereto. This Engineer's Annual Levy Report (the "Report") describes the District, any changes to the District, and the proposed assessments for Fiscal Year 2006/2007. The proposed assessments are based on the estimated cost to maintain improvements that provide special benefit to properties assessed within the District. The various improvements within the District and the costs of those improvements are identified and budgeted separately, including expenditures, deficits, surpluses, revenues, and reserves. The word "parcel," for the purposes of this Report, refers to an individual property assigned its own Assessor Parcel Number ("APN") by the Riverside County Assessor's Office. The Riverside County Auditor/Controller uses Assessor Parcel Numbers and specific fund numbers on the tax roll to identify properties assessed for special district benefit assessments. Each parcel within the District is assessed proportionately for those improvements provided by the District and from which the parcel receives special benefit. Following consideration of public comments, written protests at a noticed public hearing and review of the Report, the City Council may order amendments to the Report or confirm the Report as submitted. Following final approval of the Report, and confirmation of the assessments, the Council may order the levy and collection of assessments for Fiscal Year 2006/2007 pursuant to the 1972 Act. In such case, the assessment information will be submitted to the County Auditor/Controller, and included on the property tax roll for each benefiting parcel for Fiscal Year 2006/2007. 118 MuniFinancial Page 1 17 City of La Quinta Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Engineer's Annual Levy Report Lighting and Landscape District No. 89-1 B. Historical Background and Legislation The assessments for the District provide a special benefit to the parcels assessed, and the City utilizes General Fund Revenues to fund improvements and services that are considered general benefit. This District was formed pursuant to the 1972 Act, which permits the establishment of assessment districts by cities for the purpose of providing for the maintenance of certain public improvements, which include the facilities existing within the District, as those improvements provide a special benefit to parcels. The City Council reviews the current and projected years' costs for the construction, operation, maintenance, and servicing of the District facilities and sets the assessment for the ensuing fiscal year, which runs between July 1 and June 30. II. Description of the District A. District Boundaries and Specific Areas of Improvement The boundaries of the District are coterminous with the boundaries of the City. The Diagram of the District showing the exterior boundaries has been submitted to the City Clerk at the City and is included by reference. B. Improvements Within the District The District improvements are the operation, servicing and maintenance of landscaping, lighting and appurtenant facilities, including, but not limited to, personnel, electrical energy, water, materials, contracting services, and other items necessary for the satisfactory operation of these services described as follows: • Landscaping and Appurtenant Facilities include, but are not limited to, landscaping, planting, shrubbery, trees, irrigation systems, hardscapes, fixtures, sidewalk maintenance and appurtenant facilities, located within the public street rights -of -way, parkways, medians, trails, and dedicated street, drainage or sidewalk easements within the boundary of the District. • Lighting and Appurtenant Facilities include, but are not limited to, poles, fixtures, bulbs, conduits, equipment including guys, anchors, posts and pedestals, metering devices, controllers and appurtenant facilities as required to provide safety lighting and traffic signals within public street rights -of -way and easements within the boundaries of the District. 11.9 MuniFinancial Page 2 18 City of La dumta Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Engineer's Annual Levy Report Lighting and Landscape District No. 89-1 • Maintenance is defined as the furnishing of services and materials for the operation and usual maintenance, operation and servicing of the landscaping, public lighting facilities and appurtenant facilities, including repair, removal or replacement of landscaping, public lighting facilities, or appurtenant facilities; providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of the landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing and treating for disease or injury; and the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste. • Servicing is defined as the furnishing of water for the irrigation of the landscaping and the furnishing of electric current or energy, gas or other illuminating agent for the public lighting facilities, or for the lighting or operation of landscaping or appurtenant facilities. The plans and specifications for the improvements are on file in the office of the City Engineer and are by reference made a part of this report. III. Method of Apportionment A. General The 1972 Act permits the establishment of assessment districts by agencies for the purpose of providing certain public improvements that include the construction, maintenance and servicing of public lights, landscaping and appurtenant facilities. The 1972 Act further requires that the cost of these improvements be levied according to benefit rather than assessed value: "The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements." The formula used for calculating assessments in this District therefore reflects the composition of the parcels, and the improvements and services provided, to apportion the costs based on benefit to each parcel. MuniFinancial Page 3 19 City of La tlumta Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Engineer's Annual Levy Report Lighting and Landscape District No. 89-1 B. Benefit Analysis Properties within the District boundary are found to derive a special benefit from the improvements provided by the District. These properties include single family residential, non-residential, vacant residential and non-residential, golf courses, agricultural and hillside conservation properties, vacant and remote non-residential and rural and estate residential properties. Special Benefits The method of apportionment (method of assessment) is based on the premise that each assessed parcel receives special benefit from the improvements maintained and funded by the assessments, specifically, landscaping and lighting improvements installed in connection with the development of these parcels. The desirability of properties within the District is enhanced by the presence of well -maintained parks, landscaping and lighting improvements in close proximity to those properties. The annual assessments outlined in this Report are based on the estimated costs to provide necessary services, operation, administration, and maintenance required to ensure the satisfactory condition and quality of each improvement. The special benefits associated with the parks and landscaping improvements are specifically: • Enhanced desirability of properties through association with the improvements. • Improved aesthetic appeal of properties within the District providing a positive representation of the area. • Enhanced adaptation of the urban environment within the natural environment from adequate green space and landscaping. • Environmental enhancement through improved erosion resistance, and dust and debris control. • Increased sense of pride in ownership of property within the District resulting from well -maintained improvements associated with the properties. • Reduced criminal activity and property -related crimes (especially vandalism) against properties in the District through well -maintained surroundings and amenities. • Enhanced environmental quality of the parcels by moderating temperatures, providing oxygenation and attenuating noise. 1"1 Page 4 MuniFinancial 20 uity of La tluinta Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Engineer's Annual Levy Report Lighting and Landscape District No. 89-1 The special benefits of street lighting are the convenience, safety, and security of property, improvements, and goods, specifically: • Enhanced deterrence of crime — an aid to police protection. • Increased nighttime safety on roads and highways. • Improved visibility of pedestrians and motorists. • Improved ingress and egress to and from property. • Reduced vandalism, damage to improvements or property, and other criminal acts. • Improved traffic circulation and reduced nighttime accidents and personal property loss. • Increased promotion of business during nighttime hours in the case of commercial properties. The preceding special benefits contribute to a specific enhancement and desirability of each of the assessed parcels within the District. C. Methodology Pursuant to the 1972 Act, the costs of the District may be apportioned by any formula or method that distributes the net amount to be assessed among the assessable parcels in proportion to the estimated special benefits to be received by each such parcel from the improvements. The special benefit formula used within the District should reflect the composition of the parcels - and the improvements and services provided therein - to apportion the costs based on estimated special benefit to each parcel. The cost to provide maintenance and service of the improvements within the District shall be equitably distributed among each assessable parcel based on the estimated special benefit received by each parcel. Equivalent Dwelling Units To equitably spread special benefit to each parcel, it is necessary to establish a relationship between the various types of properties within the District and the improvements that benefit those properties. Each parcel within the District is assigned an Equivalent Dwelling Unit ("EDU") factor that reflects its land use, size and development, or development potential. Parcels that receive special benefit from the various District improvements are proportionately assessed for the cost of those improvements based on their calculated EDU. The EDU method assessment for this District uses the Single Family Residential parcel as the basic unit of assessment. A Single Family Residential("SFR') parcel equals one EDU. Every other land -use is assigned an EDU factor based on an assessment formula that equates the property's specific land -use and relative special benefits compared to the Single Family Residential parcel. 122 MuniFinancial Page 5 21 Lity or La yuinta Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Engineer's Annual Levy Report Lighting and Landscape District No. 89- l The EDU method of apportioning special benefits is typically seen as the most appropriate and equitable assessment methodology for districts formed under the 1972 Act, as the benefits to each parcel from the improvements are apportioned as a function of land use type, size, and development. The following table provides a listing of land use types, the EDU factors applied to that land use and the multiplying factor used to calculate each parcel's individual EDU for each improvement provided in the District. During the formation of the District, a methodology was developed to calculate the EDUs for other residential and non-residential land use parcels, which are outlined below for reference. Every land use is assigned EDUs based on the assessment formula approved for the District. Parcels which have been determined to receive greater benefit than the SFR parcel are assigned more than 1 EDU and parcels that are determined to receive lesser benefit than SFR parcels are assigned less than 1 EDU as reflected in the Assessment Methodology. Land Use EDU Factor Exempt Parcels 0.0 Single Family Residential Parcels 1.0 per unit Non -Residential Parcels 5.0 per acre; 1.0 minimum Vacant Residential Parcels 0.33 per unit Vacant Non -Residential Parcels 1.65 per acre for first 20 acres only Golf Course Parcels 0.50 per acre; 1.0 minimum Agricultural Parcels 0.25 per acre; 1.0 minimum Hillside Conservative Zone Parcels 0.10 per acre Vacant & Remote Parcels 0.825 per acre for first 20 acres only Rural/Estate Residential 1.0 + 0.33 per acre in excess 1 acre Single -Family Residential The City's General Plan allows up to one acre of area for subdivided residential lots. The subdivided single family lot equal to or less than one acre in size is the basic unit for calculation of the benefit assessments. Parcels less than one acre in size zoned for single-family residential use are assessed one (1) EDU. Non -Residential The factor used for converting nonresidential is based on the average number of typical single-family residential lots of five per acre. Therefore, non-residential parcels will be assessed five (5) EDUs per acre with a minimum number per parcel of one (1) EDU. 123 MuniFinancial Page 6 22 Lity or La yuinta Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Engineer's Annual Levy Report Lighting and Landscape District No. 89-1 Vacant Residential Parcels defined as single family residential parcels less than one acre and having no structure will be assessed 33 percent (33%) of a single-family dwelling, or 0.33 EDU per parcel. Vacant Non -Residential Parcels not considered single family residential parcels less than one acre, and having no structure will be assessed based on acreage. The typical development in La Quinta occurs in increments of twenty (20) acres or less. The first twenty (20) acres of a Vacant Non -Residential parcel will be assessed at a rate of 33 percent (33%) of developed nonresidential properties, or 1.65 EDU per acre or any portion of an acre. The minimum number of EDUs per parcel is one (1) EDU. Any parcel of land greater than twenty (20) acres is considered open space and exempt from assessment until such time as parcel subdivision or development occurs. Golf Courses Properties identified as golf courses will be assessed a rate of 10 percent (10%) of the developed nonresidential properties, or 0.50 EDU, per acre or any portion of an acre. The minimum number per parcel is one (1) EDU. Agricultural Properties identified as agricultural will be assessed a rate of 5 percent (5%) of developed nonresidential properties, or 0.25 EDU per acre or any portion of an acre. The minimum number per parcel. is one (1) EDU. Hillside Conservation Parcels located in areas zoned Hillside Conservation per the City's Official Zoning Map will be assessed on the basis of allowable development within the Hillside Conservation Zone. The parcel will be assessed as one dwelling unit per ten (10) acres or 0.10 EDU per acre or any portion of an acre. Vacant and Remote Non -Residential Parcels (Annexation No. 9) Parcels not considered single family residential parcels less than one (1) acre and do not contain structures, will be assessed based on acreage. The City defines Vacant and Remote Non -Residential as parcels physically separated from City services and not readily able to develop due to difficult access and utility limitations. The land values are typically one half the value of other Vacant Non -Residential parcels because of the high cost of constructing appropriate access and utility infrastructures necessary. The Vacant and Remote Non -Residential parcels are assessed a rate of 0.825 EDUs per acre or portion thereof, for the first twenty (20) acres, with a minimum of one (1) EDU per parcel. 1w4 MuniFinancial Page 7 23 �,;iry or La yumia Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Engineer's Annual Levy Report Lighting and Landscape District No. 89-1 Rural/Estate Residential Parcels of one acre or more in size, but having only one residential unit are identified as Rural/Estate Residential. These parcels will be assessed a rate of one (1) EDU for the first acre and 0.33 EDUs for each additional acre or portion of an acre. Exempt Property Publicly owned property and utility rights -of -way are exempt from assessment, as well as parcels of land shown on the County Assessor's records as Vacant Desert Land, Vacant Mountain Land, Agricultural Preserve and Public Utility owned land. This Report does not propose an increase in the District assessment rates for Fiscal Year 2006/2007 over or above the maximum rate established. The proposed rate per EDU for Fiscal Year 2006/2007 is the same rate assessed for Fiscal Year 2005/2006. The base assessment rate to be approved for Fiscal Year 2006/2007 is $35.60. The maximum assessment rate per EDU may not increase without a vote of the property owners in the District. Therefore, the assessment is proposed to remain at the maximum amount of $35.60 per EDU. This equates to total projected assessment revenue of $890,860. The City proposes the remaining $1,196,040 be funded through a General Fund contribution of $1,096,040 and $100,000 of revenue from CSA 152. IV. District Budgets A. Description of Budget Items The 1972 Act requires that a special fund be established and maintained for the revenues and expenditures of the District. Funds raised by assessment shall be used only for the purposes as stated herein. A contribution to the District by the City may be made to reduce assessments, as the City Council deems appropriate. The following describes the services and costs that are funded through the District, shown in the District Budgets. District Costs Personnel — Reflects relevant City Staff salaries, wages and benefits, and also includes Worker's Comp insurance, Stand -By, and Overtime labor. Contract Services — Includes contracted labor, such as the Riverside County Tax Roll Administration Fees, maintenance and repair of traffic signals, tree trimming, and security service. 1�5 MuniFinancial Page 8 24 Ully UL L'd VUl[ll'd Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Engineer's Annual Levy Report Lighting and Landscape District No. 89-1 Uniform Rental Services — Reflects funds used for the purpose of uniform rental. Vehicle Operations — Includes the maintenance of fleet vehicles. Utilities — Includes the electric, telephone, and water services. Travel Training & Meetings — Reflects the funds used for the purposes of training and meetings. Information Technology — Includes computers, printers, and other related items and services. Operating Supplies — This item includes plant replacement, safety gear, field materials, and the. materials used for the purposes of removing graffiti. Operating Supplies and Software - This item reflects the costs of software programs. Small Tools/Equipment— Includes non -capital small tools and equipment. District Administration — The cost for providing the coordination of District services and operations, response to public concerns and education, as well as procedures associated with the levy and collection of assessments. This item also includes the costs of contracting with professionals to provide any additional administrative, legal or engineering services specific to the District including any required notices, mailings or property owner protest ballot proceedings. B. 2006/2007 District Budget For the purpose of estimating costs for the maintenance and servicing, actual costs are used where possible. However, where the improvements are new, or where actual maintenance experience is lacking, cost estimates will be used to determine costs. The Budget of estimated cost of operation, servicing, and maintenance for Fiscal Year 2006/2007 is summarized on the next page in Table 1. izs MuniFinancial Page 9 25 teary of La yumia Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Engineer's Annual Levy Report Lighting and Landscape District No. 89-1 Table 1 Ficr_al Ypar 2006/2007 Budget . Expenditures Funding Fiscal Year 2006/07 L & L Assessments General Fund -Parks Personnel Salaries -Permanent Full Time Employee Benefits Insurance Benefits Workers Comp Insurance Other Benefits & Deductions Stand By Stand By Overtime Overtime $131,200 $24,100 $20,400 $7,100 $3,300 $4,400 $5,400 $700 $51,200 $9,300 $7,500 $2,900 $1,300 $2,400 $3,300 $500 $80,000 $14,800 $12,900 $4,200 $2,000 $2,000 $2,100 $200 Total Personnel $196,600 $78,400 $118,200 Contract Services Annual Lighting & Landscape Report Landscape Lighting Maintenance Riverside County Tax Roll Admin Fee Citywide Maintenance Contract Traffic Signals Maintenance/Repair Tree Trimming Security Service - Corporation Yard $17,000 $155,300 $3,000 $808,300 $29,700 $55,000 $500 $17,000 $124,200 $3,000 $568,200 $29,700 $48,000 $500 $31,100 $240,100 $7,000 Total Contract Services $1,068,800 $790,600 $278,200 Rental Services Uniforms $1,100 $1,000 $100 Total Rental Services $1,100 $1,000 $100 Vehicle Operations Facilities Charges Fleet Maintenance $250,000 $65,100 $60 500 $250,000 $4,600 Total Vehicle Operations $315,100 $60,500 $254,600 Utilities Electric Phone Water $197,400 $1,900 $158,400 $90,400 $95,300 $107,000 $1,900 $63,100 Total Utilities $357,700 $185,700 $172,000 Travel Training & Meetings $1,200 $1,000 $200 Total Travel Training & Meetings $1,200 $1,000 $200 Information Technology Computers Printers and Services $10,500 $4,200 $6,300 Total Information Technology $10,500 $4,200 $6,300 Operating Plant Replacement $15,900 $11,300 $4,600 Supplies Graffiti Removal Safety Gear Field Materials $2,700 $300 $68,600 $2,600 $200 $46,500 $100 $100 $22,100 Total Operating Supplies $87,500 $60,600 $26,900 Small Tools / Equipment Non -Capital $5,600 $300 $5,300 Total Small Tools/Equipment $5,600 $300 $5,300 Total Landscape Lighting Budget $2,044,100 $1,182,300 $861,800 District Administration Public Works Administration Citywide Administration $14,300 $28,500 $14,300 $28,500 Total District Administration $42,800 $42,800 Total Landscape & Lighting Expenditures $2,086,900 $1,225,100 $861,800 Less CSA 152 Revenue $100,000 Less General Fund Contribution $1,096,040 Balance to Levy $890,860 Total EDU 25,024.72 Levy Per EDU $35.60 127 MuniFinancial Page 1 U miry or La yumia Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Engineer's Annual Levy Report Lighting and Landscape District No. 89-1 The following information was obtained from the Riverside County Assessor's Secured Roll, Assessor's Parcel Maps, and the City's Planning Department. The land use categories were developed to classify the different land use types in the City. Land Use FY 2006/2007 Parcel Count County Acres Prior Year Applied EDU Prior Year Applied Levy FY 2006/2007 EDU FY 2006/2007 Levy Parcels 27 662.46 165.62 $5,895.76 165.62 $5,895.76 -Agricultural Exempt Parcels 1,953 9,713.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Golf Course Parcels 277 3,600.58 1,724.99 61,407.78 1,840.63 65,524.64 Hillside Conservation Parcels 19 758.62 75.86 2,700.50 75.86 2,700.50 Non -Residential Parcels 201 492.94 2,443.30 86,981.48 2,485.55 88,485.40 Rural / Estate Parcels 49 180.52 108.57 3,864.70 108.57 3,864.70 Single Family Residential Parcels 18,173 1,593.98 17,127.00 609,721.20 18,173.00 646,958.80 Vacant / Remote Parcels 29 495.85 307.89 10,960.70 307.89 10,960.70 Vacant Non -Residential Parcels 321 994.22 1,439.59 51,246.52 1,282.51 45,65.4.70 Vacant Residential Parcels 1,773 382.49 644.49 22,928.22 585.09 20,815.02 Total 22,822 18 874.69 24,037.31 $855 706.86 25 024.72 $890 860.22 For Fiscal Year 2006/2007, there was a 987.41 increase in the total EDU assessed. Recently annexed parcels and parcels within the City Boundary that were not previously included were added to this report, accounting for 904.66 EDU. The remaining 82.75 EDU were added due to changes in County Land Use Classifications and development. 128 MuniFinancial Page 11 27 %,,ILY ul La YuiuLa Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Engineer's Annual Levy Report Lighting and Landscape District No. 89- l Appendix A — District Assessment Diagrams The Boundary Diagrams for the original districts have previously been submitted to the Clerk of the City in the format required under the 1972 Act and are made part of this Report by reference. The parcel identification, lines and dimensions of each parcel within the District are those lines and dimensions shown on the Assessor Maps of Riverside County for the year in which this Report was prepared and is incorporated by reference and made part of this Report. 1119 MuniFihancial Page 12 28 kAly 01 La yumia Fiscal Year 2006/2007 Engineer's Annual Levy Report Lighting and Landscape District No. 89-1 Appendix B — 2006/2007 Assessment Roll Parcel identification, for each lot or parcel within the District, shall be the parcel as shown on the Riverside County Assessor Parcel Maps and/or the Riverside County Secured Tax Roll for the year in which this Report is prepared. Non -assessable lots or parcels may include government owned land; public utility owned property, land principally encumbered with public right-of-ways or easements and dedicated common areas. These parcels will not be assessed. A listing of parcels within the District, along with the proposed assessment amounts, has been submitted to the City Clerk and, by reference, is made part of this Report. Upon approval of the Report and confirmation of the assessments, the assessment information will be submitted to the County Auditor/Controller, and included on the property tax roll in Fiscal Year 2006/2007. If the parcels or APNs within the District and referenced in this Report, are re -numbered, re -apportioned or changed by the County Assessor's Office after approval of the Report, the new parcel or APNs with the appropriate assessment amount will be submitted to the County Auditor/Controller. If the parcel change made by the County includes a parcel split, parcel merger or tax status change, the assessment amount submitted on the new parcels or APNs will be based on the method of apportionment and levy amount approved in this Report by the City Council. 1,10 MuniFinancial Page 13 29 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 18, 2006 ITEM TITLE: Consideration of a Resolution Supporting the City's Intention to Take Over State Route 1 1 1 Within the City of La Quinta Jurisdictional Boundaries from the State of California RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: v)- CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Adopt a Resolution supporting the City's intention to take over State Route 1 1 1 within the City of La Quinta jurisdictional boundaries from the State of California. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Caltrans has agreed to a maintenance stipend of $700,000 (Attachment 1) if the City Council decides to proceed with the relinquishment process. Staff estimates the cost for general street maintenance on Highway 111 during the next five years to be approximately $660,000 which includes the cost to maintain 8.5 signals and 10.8 lane miles (2,666,000 square feet of pavement). Slurrying and re -striping the Highway, which will be necessary within the next five years, will cost approximately $373,000 and is included in this maintenance cost. The next phase of Measure A funding, which starts in Fiscal Year 2009 (July 1, 2009), authorizes the use of Measure A funds to be expended for maintenance on regional facilities. However, at this point no formal program has been adopted by CVAG. State Route 1 1 1 is considered a regional facility and would be eligible for funding if approved by CVAG's Executive Committee. Finally, staff estimates the cost to correct the rock fall hazard at Pt. Happy to be between $250,000 and $500,000. Therefore total improvement costs for the facility during the next five years is estimated to be between $910,000 and $1,160,000. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. 131 BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: On October 4, 2005, the City Council considered the advantages and disadvantages associated with assuming control of Highway 111 within the City of La Quinta. Processing of encroachment permits on the highway under the states system for even the most simple of projects requires six to twelve months for Caltrans to process. Signal timing coordination has been difficult through Caltrans as well. Also, under certain conditions Caltrans may opt to relinquish the remaining sections of Highway 1 1 1 to City's without a stipend in the future. During a previous discussion the City Council addressed Caltrans' relinquishment proposal and expressed interest in proceeding with the relinquishment process; however, there was reluctance and concern that the proposed $500,000 maintenance stipend understated the costs of bringing the roadway to a "State of Good Repair." During the past several months, staff has continued negotiations with Caltrans regarding a potential relinquishment settlement package. Caltrans is now offering the City $700,000 if the City choo.ses to proceed with the relinquishment which could be used for repairs or maintenance. While this exceeds the amounts offered for relinquishment of Highway 1 1 1 to the other desert cities, staff believes the cost to mitigate the rock fall hazard to be difficult to estimate at this time. Dramatically rising construction costs may push mitigation estimates much higher by the time the improvements are constructed. Additionally, the $700,000 would be used for slurry sealing the roadway in the next five years at a cost of $373,000. Routine repair work totaling an estimated $287,000 over the next five years would be included starting in the Fiscal Year 2007-2008 operating budget. Therefore the $700,000 stipend would go largely towards maintenance of the roadway over the next five years without addressing the rock fall hazard. If the City Council chooses to proceed, Caltrans requests a Resolution be adopted which supports, the City's intention to take over Route 1 1 1 from the State. Once Caltrans receives the Resolution, it will initiate a capital project to prepare the right-of- way relinquishment maps, obtain environmental clearance, prepare the relinquishment agreement, and program the financial contribution. This process takes approximately twelve months to accomplish. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1 . Adopt a Resolution supporting the City's intention to take over State Route 1 1 1 within the City of La Quinta jurisdictional boundaries from the State of California; or 2. Dismiss the relinquishment concept and let Caltrans continue to be owner of Highway 1 1 1, potentially in perpetuity, or until they decide the highway has to be relinquished to the local jurisdictions in a state of good repair; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. 2 Respectfully submitted, 1(2� Qrjz�� ()ublic othy on on Wo S D ector/City Engineer Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachment: 1 . Stipend Letter 133 2; RESOLUTION NO. 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA SUPPORTING THE CITY'S INTENTION TO TAKE OVER STATE ROUTE 111 WITHIN ITS CORPORATE BOUNDARES FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, Route 111 has been designated as a State Highway before the City of Quinta was incorporated in 1982; and WHEREAS, Route 111 was the main east/west state route through the Coachella Valley; and WHEREAS, Interstate 10 has replaced Route 111 as the main east/west route through the Coachella Valley; and WHEREAS, Route 111 is no longer continuous through the Coachella Valley and has been relinquished to the respective cities in the Cities of Cathedral City and Rancho Mirage; and WHEREAS, the Cities Palm Desert, Indian Wells, and Indio are concurrently requesting to undertake maintenance, liability and control of Route 111 within their City limits; and WHEREAS, Section 71, 73 and 8330.5 of the State Streets and Highways Code provide for relinquishment and/or relocation of State Highway routes when found to be in the best interest of the State. BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: (1) The City of La Quinta supports the Department of Transportation's efforts to relinquish State Route 111 within the City's corporate boundaries to the City of La Quinta; and (2) The City of La Quinta accepts the Department of Transportation's monetary contribution in the amount of $700,000 to bring State Route 111 to a "State of Good Repair"; and (1) The City of La Quinta requests that the California Transportation Commission initiate and undertake all necessary studies, right of way relinquishment maps, obtain environmental approval, prepare the relinquishment agreement, program the State's financial contribution, and 134 4 other actions as required to relinquish Route 1 1 1 within the City limits of the City of La Quinta. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 18th day of April 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC, CITY CLERK City of La Quinta, California (City Seal) APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California .135 01 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 8 DEPUTY DISTRICT DIRECTOR (MS 1267) 464 WEST FOURTH STREET, 6T FLOOR SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92401-1400 PHONE (909) 383-4037 FAX (909) 383-6239 TTY (909) 383-6300 March 23, 2006 Mr. Tim Jonasson Public Works Director City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1540 La Quinta, CA 92247-15 04 Dear Mr. Jonasson: 1 a Flex your power! Be energy efficient! RECEIVED MAR 2 7 2006 PUBLIC WORKS This letter is in response to our phone conversation on March 15, 2006, regarding the relinquishment on State Route 111 (Route) within the City limits of La Quinta (City). As we discussed, the Department of Transportation (Department) is agreeable to an increase in the contribution amount previously offered from $500,000 to a final amount of $700,000, in an effort to expedite the relinquishment process and come to an agreement with the City. As previously requested, please provide us with a City Council Resolution supporting the City's intention to take over the Route within the City limits from the State. Once the Department receives the City Council Resolution, we will initiate a capital project to prepare the right of way relinquishment maps, obtain environmental clearance, prepare the relinquishment agreement, and program the financial contribution- . The Department continues to look forward to working with the City through this 136 "Caltrans improves mobility across California " Mr. Tim Jonasson March 23, 2006 Page 2 relinquishment process, and can assure you of our full support and cooperation. If you should you have questions or need additional information, please contact Roy Wojahn, Design Senior, at (909) 383-4980. Sincerely, Jesu alvan Sup ry ing Transportation Engineer Desi n2ineerinR Services c: RWojahn, Caltrans PRomo "Caltrans improves mobility across California" 1,17 7 T 0 ./df 4 4 Q" COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Sponsorship for Prestige at PGA West RECOMMENDATION: As deemed appropriate by the City Council. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: The Prestige at PGA West is requesting the City of La Quinta to become a "Presenting Level" Sponsor at a funding level of $15,000. Funds were not allocated for this project in the Fiscal Year 2005-06 budget, and would need to be drawn from the General Fund Reserve or another source as directed by the City Council. Alternatively, Council can direct staff to add it to the budget for Fiscal Year 2006-07. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: At the regular meeting of March 21, 2006, the City Council received an item under Written Correspondence concerning a sponsorship request by The Prestige at PGA West to become a Presenting Level Sponsor at a funding level of $15,000 for their 2006 event being held October 14-17, 2006 (Attachment 1). This event will also host a Junior Clinic and a College— Amateur round for collegiate players to join up with local residents. This sponsorship would assist in funding the event that is open to eighteen universities across the United States. 10 (-; Presenting Level Sponsorship — ($15,000) 1. The City of La Quinta will be part of the Tournament Media Campaign and receive local and regional tournament coverage with The Prestige at PGA West television spots on KESQ-TV and KDFX-TV. 2. The City will be named as a co -host sponsor of the 2006 Prestige at PGA West at the Monday night Collegiate Dinner on October 16. The City will have an opportunity for six amateurs to play in the Prestige College -Amateur round on October 15. 3. The City of La Quinta will receive twelve dinner invitations that include six College -Amateur players and six other guests to the Celebration Awards Dinner at the PGA West private clubhouse on Sunday evening October 15. 4. The City of La Quinta will have an opportunity to provide City -related information and promotional brochures for display and distribution to those attending the 2006 Prestige at PGA West. In addition, Mr. Mark Weissman, from The Prestige at PGA West provided staff with an additional sponsorship option for City Council consideration. Subsequent to the March 21, 2006 Mr. Weissman provided staff with the Contributing Level Sponsorship shown below. Contributing Sponsor - ($5,000) 1. This level of sponsorship provides the City of La Quinta with exposure as a Contributing Sponsor for the Tournament Media Campaign and The Prestige Sponsor website. 2. Three playing positions would be made available for The Prestige at PGA West College Amateur Tournament event on Sunday, October 15, 2006. 3. Six dinner invitations to The Prestige at PGA West Celebration Awards dinner for Sunday evening October 15, 2006. The last time the City Council considered a sponsorship for The Prestige at PGA West was in October 2003, requesting support from the City for a similar type of sponsorship. The related staff report is provided as Attachment 2. As noted in the previous staff report, the analysis provided by Kiner Communications and staff determined that a sponsorship package would bring limited exposure and limited economic development impact to the City of La Quinta. The estimated value of the "Contributing Sponsor" for The Prestige at PGA West event was estimated at $1,000; "Supporting Sponsor" $4,130 and "Presenting Sponsor" $6,130. The City Council approved $1,000 for the event in October 2003. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 2 1 . Approve the request from The Prestige at PGA West for a "Presenting Level Sponsor" of $15,000; or 2. Approvethe request from The Prestige at PGA West for a "Contributing Level Sponsor, of $5,000; or 3. Approve funding for The Prestige at PGA West for the $1,000 donation level as supported in 2003; or 4. Do not approve the request for The Prestige at PGA West for a sponsorship in 2006; or 5. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, Edie HVIton, C/mmunity Services Director Approved for submission by: 2� Z-f L�� Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1 . Written Correspondence Dated February 14, 2006 1 . Additional Sponsorship Information Packet 2. Staff Report for City Council Meeting October 21, 2003 3 ATTACHMENT 1 S)> - Additional Prestige at PGA WEST Optional Sponsorship Package for City of La Quinta In addition to previous submission of the Presenting Level Sponsorship for the 2006 Prestige at PGA WEST, the following is a Contributing Sponsorship and the breakdown of the elements therein: A NATIONAL INTERCOLLEGIATE City of La Quinta to receive the following elements: Exposure as Contributing Sponsor as incorporated into Prestige at PGA INVITATIONAL WEST Television Spots on KESQ-TV (ABC) and KDFX —TV in pre- 20(4, H011 t-i?UPtiL t;tiEt; Nc11U5AN t 0U1,S1 Al IVA XVLti I promotion of the tournament. Exposure as Contributing Sponsor as incorporated into The Prestige at PRFFNITM BY PGA WEST Print and Radio Marketing and Advertising Campaign. KOf it BERG KRAVIS ROBERI S & CO. Print ads to run into The Desert Sun and possible Los Angeles area GEM CAR tL„ft.,T;>1iHr,<TtItT�I�t��,EN�,�E, newspapers. NIKL GOLF KSL RESORIS Exposure as Contributing Sponsor as incorporated into Prestige at PGA WEST Website (www.prestige-pgawest.com) City of La Quinta logo to OCTORI R 14-17. 2006 appear on sponsor listing and link to city can be developed. The website is linked to several of the participating university athletic department IA - website's and to the Prestige sponsor websites. IMP, �• Exposure on the Prestige at PGA WEST Junior Clinic special website Rk50KT kCLU6 i page that is developed n cooperation with the Southern California PGA and its SCPGA Junior Golf Program. The City of La Quinta's logo and name will be incorporated onto this special additional website that exposes The Prestige at PGA WEST Junior Clinic on Saturday October 14, 2006 srANFORD uNlvrasLlY I IIE UNIVLRSIIYOF CALIFORNIA. DAVIS Three playing postions in the 2006 Prestige at PGA WEST College -Am event WWW.I'RLSI IGFI'GAWLS F.COM on Sunday October 15, 2006 . Six dinner invitations to the 2006 Prestige at PGA WEST Celebration P.O. BOX 10823 Awards Dinner on Sunday evening October 15th 2006. PALM DESERT. CA 92255 (760) 202-3334 MWA.MKFGOWRIZON.NLT City of La Quinta to be exposed on back of tee major tournament type signage — city logo and or name to be incorporated Cost. $5,000.00 The Prestige at PGA WEST is a non-profit event under the University of 4 California Regents in cooperation with Stanford University. Tax ID will be provided.. Checks are payable to the UC Regents. A NATIONAL INTERCOLLEGIATE INVITATIONAL Z(JO(, 110I CCn!Rsk k 61',i NOFMAN C OuRS1 Al I'GA %Vlk PGA. fFF�ENTFC� f+l' KOIILBURG KRAVIS ROBERFS&Co GEM CAR IHF OM I.Ak vF16H90R"(1Oh FLFi1Ric 1'kF1ww NIKEGOIE KSL RESORIS OCTO B E R 14-17. 2006 CYO k10>Tt D IjY SIANFORD UNIVERSITY TIIF UNIVERSITI( OF CALIEORNIA. DAVIS \tiWW.PRES I IGE-PGAWES LCOM P.O. BOX 10823 VALM DESERT, CA 92255 (W) 202-3334 MWA.MKT-GOVERI ION.N E E The 2006 Prestige at PGA WEST 2006 Participating Universities (Through 4-3-06) Stanford University — co -host UC Davis — co -host UCLA USC UC Berkeley UC Irvine Notre Dame Washington Minnesota BYU Oregon Colorado Kansas Northern Colorado 142 s 2006 Prestige at PGA WEST Sponsor Listing (Through 3/31/06) e Hormel A NATIONAL Farmer John INTERCOLLEGIATE INVITATIONAL GEM Division of Daimler -Chrysler 200o IIOSi C'l\l1R11. k;MG NoltIMAN C"C\I I RNI AI 1'C A Wt'\I � Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & CO. KOIILBFRG KRAVIS ROB LRIS&CO. GFM CAR Nike Golf II -IF 'I 1111At \I. I'M Bi.1Mth'D I I WI RR�\'FTI I' It' NIKL GOI I KSL RFSORI S Avis OC O R E R 14-17. 2006 40; KESQ—TV .10s ILL. $0KI&CLUB "FX TV C.TA ti_ 1I0,I(OBN PGA WEST SFANFORD IINIVIRSI I I HE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. DAVIS WWW.11RFSIIGF-PGAWFSF.C:OM La Quinta Resort Pat & Oscar's 11.0. BOX 10823 f AI M DFSFRT. CA 9225 (7(,0) 202-3334 MVVA.MKTG@VF RI7_ON.N LT 143 A NATIONAL INTERCOLLEGIATE INVITATIONAL 20(lo 110sI c vuR>f C;I1,F6 NoK,%AAN (:0UKSI Al I'C,A 1VlII PGA V4Nr' f RFiFNTfD B) KOIJI.B[RG KRAVIS ROBLRIS&CO. GEM CAR THE Of F11 I.AI �LIi�HHi AIL}{<If r[i IL W1 RIC VLHIiLF HIKE GOII KSL. RLSORI S OCTO NR 14-17, 2006 RLSORI &CLUB Q t,0110SIL06Y' SIANFORD UNIVERSITY I I IL UNIVERSI FY OF CALIFORNIA. DAVIS WWW.PR1.S ► IGF-PGAWISLCOM e0. BOX 10823 I'ALM DESFRL CA 92255 (70)202-3334 MWA.MKFG@VFRILON.NF F 2006 Prestige at PGA WEST Sponsor Listing (Through 3/31/06) Hormel Farmer John GEM Division of Daimler -Chrysler Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & COO Nike Golf Avis KESQ-TV KDFX-TV PGA WEST La Quinta Resort Pat & Oscar's lq4 - USCs Men's Golf Team is coming to The 2006 Prestige at PGA WEST for ., .: their first appearance to the tournament. You can enter The Prestige at PGA WEST J College -Am Event - Three non -collegiate play- i ''` ers are paired with one collegiate player in a -t �' r,Jt special "shamble" format on Sunday, October _ _'�� 15th, followeda 'dry, spec ial dinner and silent auction at�h x s 1N ST' Pr��ate Club- § r t q a house. , A NATIONAL Pi y with an ti a ' I NT the Tin ' sin �n this 54 Bole n�: r ,r ,h r . The 'Prestige sx HIV' i n Y s .Premier iate golf a F $400. person try #is.J ua If and, the lunch, Ahe t. eat and antastic di Guest tick Octorber 14�.� � � or r*r only at each. Greg Nonnan Course ° a" at PGA West:K Te► cUrre y entry - onl . ted numbe av' (able- c ct: icated to Academic and At cellence". Ra� s one of the leading toll" golfing events in the -The Prestige at PGA W .played under PGA `Hark Weiss nn r Tour oorse conditions. The P t, brings together % lournament Gector;, man he nation's top golf teams h , e universities are Prestige at WEST am xhe to in the country in emics. (760j202 . 34 # P n.n �4 k wa.mktg@ve et ka.:7Fi The a at PGA WEST is a non-profit § t " er the University of .prestige-pgest.com C y. d Regents. Contributions are5` ible based to the -Y t.: extent allowed by ap le f r t • + UINVEOSRY O: 1 1 STAMTORD U N4t*WY Of CALNORINA CALIR011 "kDAVIS YRIGNAM YOUU NG U�lIIVERSTTY Of ILLINOIS NIVERSITY OF INYVERSTTY {ERRELEY CO HOST NOTRE DAME U}ItYERS1TY CO - MOST jai& Am 145 lf'k\ AS, 1, 11 N G T -. UNIVERSITY Of CALIFORNIA. ,.. - - LOSANGELLS UNERSST V OT tN MEASITT OT t1N1VERSITY OF KANSAS UlfRfERSRY Ot t11 2003 A 2004 PAIS TWA CALIFORP" 114M NORTNERN COLORADO �GON TEAM CNAMDION ATTACHMENT 2 �0`1& c G��► 9�Sw OF COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: October 21, 2003 ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Sponsorship of The Prestige at PGA West RECOMMENDATION: As deemed appropriate by the City Council. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: The City Council will be considering sponsorship levels that vary from $5,000 to $15,000. If the Council elects to sponsor The Prestige at PGA West golf tournament, funds can be allocated from the Economic Development "Media Promotion" account (#101-103-643-823), which has an available balance of $16,200. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: The City Charter allows the City "to utilize revenues from the general fund to encourage, support and promote economic development." As part of the advertising offered in conjunction with the sponsorship packets, the sponsors are granted several 30-second television spots (local coverage via CBS -Channel 2). For the City of La Quinta, this would mean airing of the City's 30-second economic development spot. Due to an anticipated low rating on CBS2 however, staff feels the economic development returns would be minimal. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: City staff received a request from Mark Weissman, Tournament Director of The Prestige at PGA West, for City sponsorship of The Prestige at PGA West golf tournament taking place November 1-4, 2003 at the La Quinta Resort & Club's Mountain Course (Attachment 1). On October 7, 2003, the City Council considered the request under "Written Correspondence" and referred the item to staff. In order to facilitate further Council consideration, staff has consulted with Kiner Goodsell Advertising, CBS2, and The Prestige at PGA West on this potential advertising investment. The request from The Prestige at PGA West ("The Prestige") includes two sponsorship proposals for the City's consideration. The proposals are summarized below with more detail contained in Attachment 1 (pages 8 and 9 of the staff report): Supporting Sponsor-10,000 - Radio advertising (approximately 180 spots total on KPSI-AM, KDES-FM, and KGAM - City to be mentioned as sponsor and host city) - Newspaper advertising (four ads in The Desert Sun - City to be identified as sponsor and host city) - Television advertising (four, 30-minute programs on CBS2 to include: airing of City's 30-second economic development spot during each program plus an additional 60 seconds of City announcements per program; City logo positioning; and sponsor identification) - Signage, internet marketing, playing positions, dinner invitations, and tee packages Presenting Sponsor—$15,000 - Radio advertising (approximately 180 spots total on KPSI-AM, KDES-FM, and KGAM - City to be mentioned as sponsor/host city) - Newspaper advertising (four ads in The Desert Sun - City to be identified as sponsor and host city) - Television advertising (four, 30-minute programs on CBS2 to include: airing of City's 30-second economic development spot during each program plus an additional two minutes of City announcements per program; City logo positioning; and sponsor identification) - Signage, internet marketing, playing positions, dinner invitations, and tee packages (enhanced in comparison to Supporting Sponsor) Subsequent to his written request, 'Mr. Weissman informed staff of an alternative sponsorship level, which is described in The Prestige brochure (Attachment 2): Contributing Sponsor --$ 5,000 Newspaper advertising (City to be identified as sponsor and host city in four ads in The Desert Sun - radio and television do not apply) - Signage, playing positions, dinner invitations, and tee packages 2 147 Relying on the professional expertise of Kiner Goodsell Advertising, staff evaluated each sponsorship level solely on its advertising value. To that end, the cost for every advertising medium was adjusted to reflect that, in most cases, the City of La Quinta would only be mentioned or identified, not represented exclusively. For example, one of The Prestige '/4page ads in The Desert Sun may cost roughly $1,000, but the value of that ad to the City would be significantly lower given the ad is not entirely dedicated to the City of La Quinta. This being said, the estimated advertising values determined for each sponsorship level are as follows: Contributing Sponsor.- $1,000; Supporting Sponsor - $4,130; and Presenting Sponsor - $6,130. The values of the items which are further removed from direct advertising are difficult to quantify. Some of those items include economic benefits the City may yield, less tangible promotion of the City, and support for a college/community event. The value of the packages may very well increase depending on the significance placed on these other items. For example, Mr. Weissman recently informed staff that, as a sponsor, the City would be able to . provide informational material for distribution to event participants including players, corporate sponsors, business leaders, and out-of-town guests. The Prestige at PGA West is a non-profit event that involves top universities around the nation. It was held in the City of La Quinta last year, but prior to coming here it was held at Desert Willow in the City of Palm Desert. Mr. Weissman informs staff that the City of Palm Desert supported the event with $20,000 ($5,000 cash; $15,000 in -kind, e.g., the golf course). Palm Desert, however, received the added value of exposure given the tournament was played on its own public course (similar to what La Quinta may realize in the future at SilverRock Ranch). Mr. Weissman has advised he will be in attendance to answer any questions the Council may have or provide further information on the event. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1 . Approve sponsorship for The Prestige at PGA West golf tournament in the amount of $5,000 (Contributing Sponsor); or 2. Approve sponsorship for The Prestige at PGA West golf tournament in the amount of $10,000 (Supporting Sponsor); or 3. Approve sponsorship for The Prestige at PGA West golf tournament in the amount of $15,000 (Presenting Sponsor); or 3 4. Do not approve sponsorship for The Prestige at PGA West golf tournament; or 5. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, Mark Weiss, Assistant City Manager Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1 . Request for Sponsorship from The Prestige at PGA West 2. The Prestige at PGA West Brochure M 149 ATTACHMENT 1 Y The Prestige at PGA WEST Presenting Sponsorship Proposal for The City of La Quinta (La Quinta)* 7 La Quinta will receive the following elements as part of a 2006 sponsorship program with The Prestige at PGA WEST: - A NATIONAL INTERCOLLEGIATE La Quinta will be introduced and exposed as a Presenting Level sponsor of the 2006 event. GEM's name will appear in the following: - INVITATIONAL Tournament Letterhead 200" I: I COU 01 On -Course Signage t;RlL; Nt)ILMAN i C`l!1:1t AI IV:\ \VE�i Tournament Media Releases Tournament Website PGA Wr Tournament Related Print Advertising PRIS NrEI)nv - -- - -- - --- Tournament Related Radio Spots KOI I I.BERG KRAVIS ROBEItI S & CO, Tournament Related Television Spots _ C,►.�� t_AI� '.( 1` r11It.`II I..WI4ll. Vf kI WI, SHk 41 I0 \'.Ii;11M: N'KI `'"" Collegiate Dinner Event — October 161h92006 KSl RE5(1R11 La Quinta will be named as a co -host sponsor of the 2006 Prestige at PGA WEST Monday Night Collegiate Dinner Event on October 16th, 2006 OC i O « r K 14-17. 2006 _ The Prestige at PGA WEST College -Am Entries La Quinta will receive six College -Am playing positions in The Prestige College -Am scheduled for October 15th. Three non -collegiate players are -�)Ulil hl paired with one collegiate player. *. The Prestige at PGA WEST Celebration Awards Dinner La Quinta will receive twelve dinner invitations that include the six College - S I -A N (O R D U N I V E RS I FY Am players and six additional invitations for other guests of La Quinta to the ' "' ''""'K"', "' `A' "`RM ^ Celebration Awards Dinner at the PGA WEST Private Clubhouse on Sunday WWW11RESI IGE-I'GAW1:tsI CO evening October 15th. La Quinta Display La Quinta will be encouraged to provide city related information and r.0. B°` 10823 promotional brochures for display and distribution to those attending the 2006 PALM DESIAU. CA 9225' Prestige at PGA WEST (760)202-3334 .-\AWA.INIKI(]@VCR170N.NE, Sponsorship Cost: The total sponsorship cost for this Presenting Level sponsorship is $15,000.00. Payment is made to the University of California, Davis. The Prestige at PGA WEST has non-profit status under the UC Regents in cooperation with Stanford University k �t *In the event that the City of La Quinta is not able to use some of the elements mentioned above, The Prestige at PGA WEST will agree to work with La Quinta to substitute specific benefits. 150 Desert Sun: Document Display Page 1 of 2 Estimated printed pages: 2 March 14, 2006 Section: Sports Page: C 1 Column:Larry Bohannan Desert Sun Prestige narrows its field Larry Bohannan Staff The Desert Sun By Larry Bohannan When a mid -October storm rolled through the Coachella Valley last year, it threw a wrench into the well -laid plans of the college golf tournament organizers of the Prestige at PGA West. Moved from November to October to increase available sunlight for the tournament, organizers had decided to expand the field from 15 teams to 18. When 18 teams had played in the shorter days of November, the teams failed to complete 36 holes on the event's first day. Now it was the rain that was slowing down play and preventing the 36 holes from being completed. So for 2006, long before the first weather forecast for October, organizers are making another change for the tournament's seventh year in the desert. Tournament founder and director Mark Weissmann, along with host coaches Conrad Ray of Stanford and Cy Williams of UC Davis, have decided to go back to the 15-team format. "That's the plan right now, unless there is a viable reason not to change," Weissmann said. Dropping three teams should ensure that Monday's 36-hole format for the- tournament will actually be completed on Monday. That will be followed by 18 holes on Tuesday to complete the event. Fighting the sun The idea is to make the attending schools as comfortable as possible, not adding stress over finishing play Monday or chasing flights home after potential delays on Tuesday to finish Monday's round. "Reducing the field to 15 of the best athletic/academic universities should enable us to finish our Monday 36 holes and provide the best possible conditions in which to compete," Williams said. Weissmann confirmed that UCLA, winner of the last three Prestige titles, will return to the Norman Course at PGA West this October and will face five other Pac-10 rivals in the event. One of those rivals, USC, will be playing the tournament for the first time. Other West Coast teams in the field will include California, Washington, Oregon, Stanford, UC. Davis, and UC Irvine. Notre Dame, Minnesota, Kansas, Illinois, BYU and Northern Colorado are also in the event, with one more team to be added. The tournament will be played Oct. 16 and 17, the two days after the LPGA's Samsung World Championship in Palm Desert, with a junior clinic and a college pro -am the two days before the Prestige. While PGA Tour qualifying on the course will be moved to September from October, Weissmann said he still expects the Norman Course to be in tour -quality shape for the college players. Larry Bohannan covers golf for the Desert Sun. His columns appear Tuesdays, Fridays and Sundays. He can be reached at 778-4633. 1 �1 httn-//nl.newghank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?n action=nrint&n docid=11060E488899D... 3/20/2006 w r f { b O t f W �F .N C L h a) a)LaicN CIO O Y co`�" O O :EO � O X C iw U cu E O cv N C m W a) ..� N v v p a) C01 CU F U >, O ca > C C N m L u O cOC N 0-0 0 T E O o a) cv U _ O L cc _ a ) a� E a) 0 N � a) H « 7 V) N U QO N C i c`a (� F- J � V) a) O' O ca I- � O j N O m i- � M a) p c_n O W U) W T C C cQ � Y O� L .N �- 2 a) 2 a) a) � a) co L U tt:CD O cv Co nq v_ _ V) a) �_ L p cv O m Cn a a U a a -, c� m m cn 0 m m J V) (D z QT O O 4-4 N E C CD cv L +-+ O co CD cv C j Q N � N •O Qi ,� -0 � L �L N _N Q p C) � -C CQ � 3 Q O CO o m 0 O � O U � cv � m CO cv +° z a C � �- a) � O� N o L m m O u- Y> = O7OYOO m U N0CL)= = 0, aa> = .0 o � = w W E o uE o p p o—m co(D m m W J __.! O U T � L Q C O N L N N C C C 0) Q-' T O C a) >, L L ON O cv Cam) O C .0 a) m `= T a) C O �[ 4-+ � 2 � C += U ca p w C �L, 0 L m O U N �� M CO a) V C = L C N O m N� C-C N l� F- -p L) _O L cNv O cn >+ w Y co ~ _ > E m m Lp. -C H x J cv 0 m LL CC O Y U p) -p _, Y �, C O to U to �, > ,_, c� > a) F- C N N a O > E ,= C O Y C Q a) a) -0 w �+ . L W c� O E E EC — � LE L " m —� `° —L N O E C O CO O cv O O O 0 z U —, m (D 0 F- U� F- ►- 0 Q U O =, Q 0 0 U U m V) Q m m Cor) W N CD Q H Y t es Q d '� O L d E y L •�- O �_ � to CD0 >� � U Y w T y C d VA 0 'AN > t m ep m O O F- GD Vf L �- o W 0 O 0 O N � d Y O� L � •- .�C d R J Q: C >> � � >, «+ -1 O O w EE EE —�°,E �, ear oG Hy t �� o ao (9� �- i �- C i `3 1- � -- C C �> •� y y O 402 p L L t0.. C C GO fl- •� O d ca J J Os O D cyv o0 y J y .0 O C i OO O m o O O O O ;� 0 d C� •C .0 C � C> 0 L i 00 x t� v v t C.� = O Cv O N¢ N n z z z Z N v> > a >> O >- H> Do O>> 9 >> > on - Q >e z =z Qm Q Qm Q Qm Q Qm Qm Qm � Q m Q m Q m Q m Q m Q Q m Q Q m C) C) r- N N d d M LO CD CD 1- 1- m 00 N r- r- N CV M Cr) "tr m::r to LO CD r� r� 00 (3) M r- r- r- r- �-- r- r- r- �r- r- r- r- T r- r- I53 C a u a cit V 0 The Prestige At PGA WEST Final Results 1 :i 4 Greg Norman Course at PGA WEST La Quinta, Calif., CA Championship Tee Dates: Oct 17 — Oct 18 The Prestige at PGA WEST GOLFSTAT COLLEGIATE SCORING SYSTEM Mark Laesch COPYRIGHT © 2005, All Rights Reserved, Golfstat rank team scores 1 UCLA 280 291 289 860 —4 2 Brigham Young Univ. 295 291 284 870 +6 3 UC—Irvine 291 292 289 872 +8 4 Illinois 293 291 291 875 +I1 T5 Pepperdine 297 293 290 880 +16 T5 Notre Dame, U. of 296 298 286 880 +16 T7 Texas 297 290 299 886 +22 77 Stanford University 291 296 299 886 +22 9 Northern Colorado 296 299 295 890 +26 10 Colorado 290 308 294 892 +28 T11 Ohio State Univ. 302 298 297 897 +33 T11 Oregon, U. of 298 306 293 897 +33 13 UC Davis 306 291 301 898 +34 14 California, U. of 297 306 302 905 +41 15 UC—Santa Barbara 313 296 298 907 +43 16 Pacific 303 307 300 910 +46 17 Kansas, U. of 309 304 307 920 +56 18 Yale University 295 319 317 931 +67 150 5 The Prestige at PGA WEST 1 The Prestige at PGA WEST Greg Norman Course at PGA WEST GOLFSTAT COLLEGIATE SCORING SYSTEM La Quinta, Calif., CA Mark Laesch Championship Tee COPYRIGHT 02005, All Rights Reserved, Golfstat Dates: Oct 17 - Oct 18 start finish player school scores T4 T1 Tim Cha UC-Irvine 73 70 70 213 -3 T4 T 1 Danny Zimmerman Illinois 70 73 70 213 -3 T8 T3 Erik Flores UCLA 69 75 70 214 -2 T17 T3 Scott Gustafson Notre Dame, U. of 75 72 67 214 -2 T4 T3 Chris Heintz UCLA 70 73 71 214 -2 T8 T6 Jake Ellison Brigham Young Univ. 74 70 71 215 -1 T2 T6 Rob Grube Stanford University 72 70 73 215 -1 T8 T6 DanielIm UCLA 71 73 71 215 -1 T8 T6 Clay Ogden Brigham Young Univ. 73 71 71 215 -1 T8 10 Jon Stecher Northern Colorado 73 71 72 216 E T32 T11 Cole Isban Notre Dame, U. of 76 73 68 217 +1 1 T11 Lucas Lee UCLA 70 70 77 217 +1 T17 T13 Nick Becker Brigham Young Univ. 74 73 71 218 +2 T15 T13 Alex Coe Pepperdine 71 75 72 218 +2 T4 T13 Kyle Hosick Illinois 71 72 75 218 +2 T13 T13 Farren Keenan Texas 73 72 73 218 +2 T2 Ti7 Edward McGlasson Colorado 67 75 77 219 +3 T13 T17 Dan Rush Ohio State Univ. 73 72 74 219 +3 T26 T17 Gary Woodland Kansas, U. of 78 70 71 219 +3 T17 T20 Michael Baird Pepperdine 77 70 73 220 +4 T17 T20 Brian Edick UC-Irvine 72 75 73 220 +4 T26 T20 Colin Wilcox Pepperdine 74 74 72 220 +4 T26 T23 Tim Knight Northern Colorado 70 78 73 221 +5 T17 T23 Jace Moore Texas 73 74 74 221 +5 T32 T23 Mark Ogren Illinois 74 75 72 221 +5 T38 T23 Chris Rosenau Pacific 75 75 71 221 +5 T17 T23 Justin St. Clair Oregon, U. of 75 72 74 221 +5 T32 T28 Michael Jensen California, U. of 75 74 73 222 +6 T17 T28 Garrett Sapp UC-Irvine 72 75 75 222 +6 T43 128 Tony Verna UC-Santa Barbara 80 71 71 222 +6 T32 T28 JJ. Wood Pepperdine 75 74 73 222 +6 T43 132 Colin Biles Ohio State Univ. 76 75 72 223 +7 T50 T32 Kenny Coakley Colorado 76 76 71 223 +7 T15 132 Zack Miller Stanford University 72 74 77 223 +7 T32 732 Matt Mills Texas 78 71 74 223 +7 138 T32 Ramie Sprinkling UC Davis 77 73 73 223 +7 138 T32 Derek Tolan Colorado 74 76 73 223 +7 T17 T38 Louie Bishop UC Davis 77 70 77 224 +8 T57 '138 Derek Uyesaka UC-Irvine 74 79 71 224 +8 T62 T40 Oscar Alvarez Brigham Young Univ. 74 80 71 225 +9 156 The Prestige at PGA WEST 1 T50 T40 Erik Hill UC Davis 75 77 73 225 +9 T43 T40 Andy Mack Illinois 80 71 74 225 +9 T50 T40 Derek Sipe Oregon, U. of 73 79 73 225 +9 T17 T44 Jeff Bell Texas 74 73 79 226 +10 T43 T44 Joey Benedetti Oregon, U. of 75 76 75 226 +10 T26 T44 George Gandranata California, U. of 72 76 78 226 +10 - T32 T44 Mike King Notre Dame, U. of 71 78 77 226 +10 T26 T44 Mark Matza Yale University 68 80 78 226 +10 T43 T44 Matt Savage Stanford University 78 73 75 226 +10 T57 T50 Kyle Gentry Stanford University 74 79 74 227 +11 T62 T50 Jim Grady Colorado 73 81 73 227 +11 T26 T50 Kenny Kim UC—Irvine 76 72 79 227 +11 138 T50 Greg Rodgers Notre Dame, U. of 75 75 77 227 +11 T57 T50 Joe Ryon UC—Santa Barbara 80 73 74 227 +11 - T38 T55 Adam Beckman Pacific 72 78 78 228 +12 T43 T55 Ryan Keefe UC—Santa Barbara 76 75 77 228 +12 T57 T55 Thomas Petersson Pacific 75 78 75 228 +12 T50 T55 Jack Tyler Ohio State Univ. 79 73 76 228 +12 T75 T59 Eric Deutsch Notre Dame, U. of 75 80 74 229 +13 ' T62 T59 Eric Higgins Northern Colorado 79 75 75 229 +13 T62 T59 Pete Krsnich Kansas, U. of 77 77 75 229 +13 T83 T59 Gregg LaVoie Oregon, U. of 79 79 71 229 +13 - T75 T59 Larry Wong California, U. of 77 78 74 229 +13 175 T64 Jesse Barnsley Pepperdine 78 77 75 230 +14 T62 T64 Nick Killpack Brigham Young Univ. 77 77 76 230 +14 T62 T64 Greg Wells UC—Santa Barbara 77 77 76 230 +14 T57 T64 Michael Wilson California, U. of 74 79 77 230 +14 79 T68 Kevin Graberman Ohio State Univ. 78 78 75 231 +15 T62 T68 Michael Haverfield Ohio State Univ. 75 79 77 231 +15 T50 T68 Joakim Renstrom UCLA 73 79 79 231 +15 -- T43 T68 Steve Strong UC Davis 77 74 80 231 +15 T62 172 Patrick Nagle Illinois 78 76 78 232 +16 T62 T72 Nate Pistacchio UC Davis 80 74 78 232 +16 - T80 172 Kyle Sullivan Northern Colorado 82 75 75 232 +16 T50 T72 Luke Trammell Kansas, U. of 79 73 80 232 +16 T62 T72 Jhonatton Vegas Texas 77 77 78 232 +16 T62 177 Matt Ma Oregon, U. of 75 79 79 233 +17 T80 T77 Charles Van Sicklen Pacific 81 76 76 233 +17 — T50 779 Dodge Kemmer Stanford University 73 79 82 234 +18 T62 T79 Dan Levy Yale University 75 79 80 234 +18 T62 T79 Jeff Vetterick California, U. of 76 78 80 234 +18 T80 82 Taylor Hakes Yale University 76 81 79 236 +20 T83 83 Jordan Ensrud Northern Colorado 74 84 79 237 +21 T75 84 Colby Moore Yale University 76 79 83 238 +22 85 85 Zach Pederson Kansas, U. of 75 84 81 240 +24 86 86 AJ. Hohn Pacific 81 79 81 241 +25 T88 T87 Joe Hernandez Yale University 82 81 80 243 +27 J 1q The Prestige at PGA WEST z 87 T87 Marty Melcher UC—Santa Barbara 83 79 81 243 +27 T88 89 Justin Bardgett Colorado 78 85 81 244 +28 90 90 Tyler Docking Kansas, U. of 85 85 85 255 +39 1;i8 0 Golfstac The Prestige at PGA WEST 12/2/05 1 1:4 The Prestige at PGA WEST - Tournament Field Report Oct 17 - Oct 18, 2005 - lnaicates a piayer is participating as an inaiviouai. inaiviauais are ustea last. 1 Alvarez, Oscar - Brigham Young Univ. 31 Hill, Erik - UC Davis 61 Petrsson, Thomas - Pacific 2 Baird, Michael - Pepperdine 32 Hohn, A.J. - Pacific 62 Pistacchio, Nate - UC Davis 3 Bardgett, Justin - Colorado 33 Hosick, Kyle - Illinois 63 Renstrom, Joakim - UCLA 4 Barnsley, Jesse - Pepperdine 34 Im, Daniel - UCLA 64 Rodgers, Greg - Notre Dame, U. of 5 Becker, Nick - Brigham Young Univ. 35 Isban, Cole - Notre Dame, U. of 65 Rosenau, Chris - Pacific 6 Beckman, Adam - Pacific 36 Jensen, Michael - California, U. of 66 Rush, Dan - Ohio State Univ. 7 Bell, Jeff - Texas 37 Keefe, Ryan - UC-Santa Barbara 67 Ryon, Joe - UC-Santa Barbara 8 Benedetti, Joey - Oregon, U. of 38 Keenan, Farren - Texas 68 Sapp, Garrett - UC-Irvine 9 Biles, Colin - Ohio State Univ. 39 Kemmer, Dodge - Stanford University 69 Savage, Matt - Stanford University 10 Bishop, Louie - UC Davis 40 Killpack, Nick - Brigham Young Univ. 70 Sipe, Derek - Oregon, U. of 11 Cha, Tim - UC-Irvine 41 Kim, Kenny - UC-Irvine 71 Sprinkling, Ramie - UC Davis 12 Coakley, Kenny - Colorado 42 King, Mike - Notre Dame, U. of 72 St. Clair, Justin - Oregon, U. of 13 Coe, Alex - Pepperdine 43 Knight, Tim - Northern Colorado 73 Stecher, Jon - Northern Colorado 14 Deutsch, Eric - Notre Dame, U. of 44 Krsnich, Pete - Kansas, U. of 74 Strong, Steve - UC Davis 15 Docking, Tyler - Kansas, U. of 45 LaVoie, Gregg - Oregon, U. of 75 Sullivan, Kyle - Northern Colorado 16 Edick, Brian - UC-Irvine 46 Lee, Lucas - UCLA 76 Tolan, Derek - Colorado 17 Ellison, Jake - Brigham Young Univ. 47 Levy, Dan - Yale University 77 Trammell, Luke - Kansas, U. of 18 Ensrud, Jordan - Northern Colorado 48 Ma, Matt - Oregon, U. of 78 Tyler, Jack - Ohio State Univ. 19 Flores, Erik - UCLA 49 Mack, Andy - Illinois 79 Uyesaka, Derek - UC-Irvine 20 Gandranata, George - California, U. of 50 Matza, Mark - Yale University 80 Van Sicklen, Charles - Pacific 21 Gentry, Kyle - Stanford University 51 McGlasson, Edward - Colorado 81 Vegas, Jhonatton - Texas 22 Graberman, Kevin - Ohio State Univ. 52 Melcher, Marty - UC-Santa Barbara 82 Verna, Tony - UC-Santa Barbara 23 Grady, Jim - Colorado- 53 Miller, Zack - Stanford University 83 Vetterick, Jeff - California, U. of 24 Grube, Rob - Stanford University 54 Mills, Matt - Texas 84 Wells, Greg - UC-Santa Barbara 25 Gustafson, Scott - Notre Dame, U. of 55 Moore, Colby - Yale University 85 Wilcox, Colin - Pepperdine 26 Hakes, Taylor - Yale University 56 Moore, Jace - Texas 86 Wilson, Michael - California, U. of 27 Haverfield, Michael - Ohio State Univ. 57 Nagle, Patrick - Illinois 87 Wong, Larry - California, U. of 28 Heintz, Chris - UCLA 58 Ogden, Clay - Brigham Young Univ. 88 Wood, J.J. - Pepperdine 29 Hernandez, Joe - Yale University 59 Ogren, Mark - Illinois 89 Woodland, Gary - Kansas, U. of 30 Higgins, Eric - Northern Colorado 60 Pederson, Zach - Kansas, U. of 90 Zimmerman, Danny - Illinois http://www.golfstatresults.com/tournamentlhtml/manage/print/report/_field.cfm?tournament_id=656 Page 1 q - The Prestige at PGA WEST Greg Norman Course at PGA WEST GOLFSTAT COLLEGIATE SCORING SYSTEM La Quinta, Calif., CA Mark Laesch Championship Tee COPYRIGHT ©2005, All Rights Reserved, Golfstat Dates: Oct 17 — Oct 18 finish top 20 schools scores 1 UCLA 280 291 289 860 —4 2 Brigham Young Univ. 295 291 284 870 +6 3 UC—Irvine 291 292 289 872 +8 4 Illinois 293 291 291 875 +11 T5 Pepperdine 297 293 290 880 +16 T5 Notre Dame, U. of 296 298 286 880 +16 T7 Texas 297 290 299 886 +22 T7 Stanford University 291 296 299 886 +22 9 Northern Colorado 296 299 295 890 +26 10 Colorado 290 308 294 892 +28 - T11 Ohio State Univ. 302 298 297 897 +33 T11 Oregon, U. of 298 306 293 897 +33 13 UC Davis 306 291 301 898 +34 14 California, U. of 297 306 302 905 +41 15 UC—Santa Barbara 313 296 298 907 +43 • 16 Pacific 303 307 300 910 +46 17 Kansas, U. of 309 304 307 920 +56 18 Yale University 295 319 317 931 +67 finish top 20 players school scores T1 Tim Cha UC—Irvine 73 70 70 213 —3 T1 Danny Zimmerman Illinois 70 73 70 213 —3 T3 Erik Flores UCLA 69 75 70 214 —2 73 Scott Gustafson Notre Dame, U. of 75 72 67 214 —2 T3 Chris Heintz UCLA 70 73 71 214 —2 T6 Jake Ellison Brigham Young Univ. 74 70 71 215 —1 T6 Rob Grube Stanford University 72 70 73 215 —1 T6 Daniellm UCLA 71 73 71 215 —1 T6 Clay Ogden Brigham Young Univ. 73 71 71 215 —1 10 Jon Stecher Northern Colorado 73 71 72 216 E T11 Cole Isban Notre Dame, U. of 76 73 68 217 +1 T11 Lucas Lee UCLA 70 70 77 217 +1 T13 Nick Becker Brigham Young Univ. 74 73 71 218 +2 T13 Alex Coe Pepperdine 71 75 72 218 +2 T13 Kyle Hosick Illinois 71 72 75 218 +2 T13 Farren Keenan Texas 73 72 73 218 +2 T17 Edward McGlasson Colorado 67 75 77 219 +3 T17 ' Dan Rush Ohio State Univ. 73 72 74 219 +3 T17 Gary Woodland Kansas, U. of 78 70 71 219 +3 T20 Michael Baird Pepperdine 77 70 73 220 +4 T20 Brian Edick UC—Irvine 72 75 73 220 +4 1 The Prestige at PGA WEST 1 The Prestige at PGA WEST Greg Norman Course at PGA WEST GOLFSTAT COLLEGIATE SCORING SYSTEM La Quinta, Calif., CA Mark Laesch Championship Tee COPYRIGHT © 2005, All Rights Reserved, Golfstat Dates: Oct 17 — Oct 18 1 UCLA 280 291 289 860 13 Chris Heintz 70 73 71 214 T3 Erik Flores 69 75 70 214 T6 DanielIm 71 73 71 215 T I 1 Lucas Lee 70 70 77 217 T68 Joakim Renstrom 73 79 79 231 2 Brigham Young Univ. 295 291 284 870 T6 Clay Ogden 73 71 71 215 T6 Jake Ellison 74 70 71 215 T13 Nick Becker 74 73 71 218 T40 Oscar Alvarez 74 80 71 225 T64 Nick Killpack 77 77 76 230 3 UC—Irvine 291 292 289 872 T1 Tim Cha 73 70 70 213 T20 Brian Edick 72 75 73 220 T28 Garrett Sapp 72 75 75 222 T38 Derek Uyesaka 74 79 71 224 T50 Kenny Kim 76 72 79 227 4 Illinois 293 291 291 875 TI Danny Zimmerman 70 73 70 213 ' T13 Kyle Hosick 71 72 75 218 T23 Mark Ogren 74 75 72 221 T40 Andy Mack 80 71 74 225 T72 Patrick Nagle 78 76 78 232 T5 Pepperdine 297 293 290 880 T13 Alex Coe 71 75 72 218 T20 Michael Baird 77 70 73 220 T20 Colin Wilcox 74 74 72 220 T28 JJ. Wood 75 74 73 222 T64 Jesse Barnsley 78 77 75 230 T5 Notre Dame, U. of 296 298 286 880 13 Scott Gustafson 75 72 67 214 T11 Cole Isban 76 73 68 217 T44 Mike King 71 78 77 226 T50 Greg Rodgers 75 75 77 227 T59 Eric Deutsch 75 80 74 229 T7 Texas 297 290 299 886 T13 Farren Keenan 73 72 73 218 T23 Jace Moore 73 74 74 221 • T32 Matt Mills 78 71 74 223 T44 Jeff Bell 74 73 79 226 T72 Jhonatton Vegas 77 77 78 232 161 The Prestige at PGA WEST 1 T7 Stanford University 291 296 299 886 T6 Rob Grube 72 70 73 215 T32 Zack Miller 72 74 77 223 T44 Matt Savage 78 73 75 226 T50 Kyle Gentry 74 79 74 227 T79 Dodge Kemmer 73 79 82 234 9 Northern Colorado 296 299 295 990 10 Jon Stecher 73 71 72 216 T23 Tim Knight 70 78 73 221 T59 Eric Higgins 79 75 75 229 T72 Kyle Sullivan 82 75 75 232 83 Jordan Ensrud 74 84 79 237 10 Colorado 290 308 294 892 T17 Edward McGlasson 67 75 77 219 T32 Derek Tolan 74 76 73 223 T32 Kenny Coakley 76 76 71 223 T50 Jim Grady 73 81 73 227 89 Justin Bardgett 78 85 81 244 T 11 Ohio State Univ. 302 298 297 897 T 17 Dan Rush 73 72 74 219 T32 Colin Biles 76 75 72 223 T55 Jack Tyler 79 73 76 228 T68 Kevin Graberman 78 78 75 231 T68 Michael Havetfield 75 79 77 231 Tl 1 Oregon, U. of 298 306 293 897 T23 Justin St. Clair 75 72 74 221 T40 Derek Sipe 73 79 73 225 T44 Joey Benedetti 75 76 75 226 T59 Gregg LaVoie 79 79 71 229 T77 Mau Ma 75 79 79 233 &:=r 13 UC Davis 306 291 301 898 T32 Ramie Sprinkling 77 73 73 223 T38 Louie Bishop 77 70 77 224 T40 Erik Hill 75 77 73 225 T68 Steve Strong 77 74 80 231 772 Nate Pistacchio 80 74 78 232 14 California, U. of 297 306 302 905 T28 Michael Jensen 75 74 73 222 T44 George Gandranata 72 76 78 226 T59 Larry Wong 77 78 74 229 T64 Michael Wilson 74 79 77 230 179 Jeff Vetterick 76 78 80 234 15 UC—Santa Barbara 313 296 298 907 T28 Tony Verna 80 71 71 222 T50 Joe Ryon 80 73 74 227 T55 Ryan Keefe 76 75 77 228 T64 Greg Wells 77 77 76 230 T87 Marty Melcher 83 79 81 243 16 Pacific 303 307 300 910 T23 Chris Rosenau 75 75 71 221 The Prestige at PGA WEST 162 t T55 Thomas Petersson 75 78 75 228 T55 Adam Beckman 72 78 78 228 T77 Charles Van Sicklen 81 76 76 233 86 AT Hohn 81 79 81 241 17 Kansas, U. of 309 304 307 920 T17 Gary Woodland 78 70 71 219 T59 Pete Krsnich 77 77 75 229 T72 Luke Trammell 79 73 80 232 85 Zach Pederson 75 84 81 240 90 Tyler Docking 85 85 85 255 18 Yale University 295 319 317 931 T44 Mark Matza 68 80 78 226 779 Dan Levy 75 79 80 234 82 Taylor Hakes 76 81 79 236 84 Colby Moore 76 79 83 238 T87 Joe Hernandez 82 81 80 243 1 t)* 3 The Prestige at PGA WEST 3 - The Prestige at PGA VEST Greg Norman Course at PGA WEST La Quinta, Calif., CA Championship Tee Dates: Oct 17 - Oct 18 GOLFSTAT COLLEGIATE SCORING SYSTEM Mark Laesch COPYRIGHT © 2005, All Rights Reserved, Golfstat Par 3 Scoring Par 4 Scoring Par 5 Scoring D. Im UCLA 2.58 -5 K. Hosick Illinois 3.87 -4 M. Jensen California 4.50 -6 T. Cha UC-Irvine 2.83 -2 C. Isban Notre Dame 3.90 -3 E. Higgins N.Colorado 4.58 -5 J. Ellison BYU 2.83 -2 R. Grube Stanford 3.93 -2 L_ Lee UCLA 4.58 -5 C. Heintz UCLA 2.92 -1 B. Edick UC-Irvine 3.97 -1 F. Keenan Texas 4.58 -5 M. Baird Pepperdine 2.92 -1 C. Ogden BYU 4.00 E D. Sipe Oregon 4.67 -4 T. Verna UC-SaBarba 2.92 -1 E. Flores UCLA 4.00 E J. Ellison BYU 4.67 -4 M. Ogren Illinois 3.00 E D. Rush Ohio State 4.00 E E. McGlasson Colorado 4.67 -4 S. Gustafson Notre Dame 3.00 E C. Rosenau Pacific 4.03 +l S. Gustafson Notre Dame 4.67 --4 J. Bell Texas 3.00 E L. Lee UCLA 4.03 +1 M. Baird Pepperdine 4.67 -4 D. Zimmerman Illinois 3.00 E J. Moore Texas 4.03 +1 D. Zimmerman Illinois 4.67 -4 J. St. Clair Oregon 3.00 E D. Tolan Colorado 4.03 +1 C. Wilcox Pepperdine 4.67 --4 N. Becker BYU 3.00 E C. Wilcox Pepperdine 4.03 +l A. Coe Pepperdine 4.75 -3 O. Alvarez BYU 3.00 E D. Zimmerman Illinois 4.03 +1 T. Cha UC-Irvine 4.75 -3 E. Flores UCLA 3.00 E A. Mack Illinois 4.07 +2 L. Bishop UC Davis 4.75 -3 J. Barnsley Pepperdine 3.08 +1 T. Verna UC-SaBarba 4.07 +2 M. Savage Stanford 4.75 -3 J. Stecher N.Colorado 3.08 +1 A. Coe Pepperdine 4.07 +2 C. Heintz UCLA 4.75 -3 G. Wells UC-SaBarba 3.08 +1 J. Ryon UC-SaBarba 4.07 +2 J. Stecher N.Colorado 4.75 -3 P. Nagle Illinois 3.08 +1 T. Cha UC-Irvine 4.07 +2 D. Rush Ohio State 4.75 -3 C. Ogden _ BYU 3.08 +1 E. Hill UC Davis 4.07 +2 K. Graberman Ohio State 4.75 -3 E. Deutsch Notre Dame 3.08 +1 S. Gustafson Notre Dame 4.07 +2 M. Matza Yale 4.83 -2 R. Grube Stanford 3.17 +2 G. Woodland Kansas 4.07 +2 P. Krsnich Kansas 4.83 -2 G. Sapp UC-Irvine 3.17 +2 C. Heintz UCLA 4.07 +2 E. Flores UCLA 4.83 -2 Eagles Birdies Pars K. Coakley Colorado 1 G. LaVoie Oregon 16 C. Biles Ohio State. 43 C. Heintz UCLA 1 E. McGiasson Colorado 15 S. Strong UC Davis 42 J. Vegas Texas 1 E. Flores UCLA 15 J. Barnsley Pepperdine 40 C. Isban Notre Dame 1 F. Keenan Texas 13 A. Coe Pepperdine 40 M. Matza Yale 1 L. Bishop UC Davis 13 M. Ogren Illinois 40 D. Zimmerman Illinois 1 D. Im UCLA 12 T. Knight N.Colorado 40 R. Sprinkling UC Davin 1 C. Wilcox Pepperdine 12 O. Alvarez BYU 39 R. Grube Stanford 1 S. Gustafson Notre Dame 12 C. Ogden BYU 38 D. Rush Ohio State 1 J. Wood Pepperdine 12 R. Sprinkling UC Davis 38 L. Lee UCLA 1 T. Cha UC-Irvine 12 N. Becker BYU 38 L. Lee UCLA 11 J. Tyler Ohio State 37 G. Woodland Kansas 11 C. Heintz UCLA 37 J. Moore Texas 11 R. Grube Stanford 36 M. Jensen California 11 J. Ellison BYU 36 B. Edick UC-Irvine 11 R. Keefe UC-SaBarba 36 D. Zimmerman Illinois 11 J. Ryon UC-SaBarba 36 M. Savage Stanford 10 J. Stecher N.Colorado 36 M. Matza Yale 10 K. Sullivan N.Colorado 36 C. Isban Notre Dame 10 T. Verna UC-SaBarba 35 J. Grady Colorado 10 T. Cha UC-Irvine 35 D. Sipe Oregon 10 E. Hill UC Davis 35 K. Hosick Illinois 10 M. Mills Texas 35 164 The Prestige at PGA WEST October 2005 Dear Participants, On behalf of The Prestige at PGA WEST, welcomeY Much effort has been dedicated to ensure that you will be participating in one of the finest events of its type in the nation. Stanford University and UC Davis are proud:ao be the eo a�,Qsts of The Prestige at PGA WESTT, The Prestige is most appre- ciative of the wonderful support it receives each year from our host venues — The La Quinta Resort and The Greg Norman Course at PGA WEST. Please look around and see the amazing growth of the beautiful Coachella Valley, one of the fastest growing regions in the nation. We appreciate the dedication of our host facilities, The 0-reg Norman Course at PGA WEST, the PGA WEST Private Clubhouse and theLaQuinta Resort Hotel, and =KSL Resorts and their President and CEO, Mike Shannon and his fantastic staff. tier Thanks for coming and have a great tournarnentf Best regards,�� CY WILLIAMS, UC DAVIS :. CONRAD BAY, STANFORD UNIVERSITY A T Of44 MARK WEISSMANN, TOURNAMENT DIRECTQR 'P � GA T q p aft Ti_.heu 211," 01 4 Nit 9 Saturday, October 15 2pm Tt%Pre.tige�atPG°�WEST.iunif`�c . Presented by Nll golf Hormel and Farmer John Ite'�qW,fi�gunrt. '�► �T Celebration Awarc A=Car `� AwardsDin�i }� date is an alum of 0.7 aal��y#ele�an station of i Monday, October 17 ing into , � 7 nner The 2005 ftstrY 0�L, A PGA WEST T �R�s UC DAVIS STAN=FORD' OR_fGHANI YOUNG CALLFO'RN A Location: .................... Davis, Calif. Location: Stanford, Calif. Location`..................... Provo, Utah Location Berkeley, Calif. Enrollment: ........................23,171 Enrollment-.�„. ,. ........6,555 Enrollment:. 29932 Enrollment...........................2,000 ,. Nickname- .z...... Aggies Nicknam . .....Cardinal Nickname: .... . ...... ` .....Cougars Nickname. Goldenn Bears Schq Gold School al White Schoo[Colge & White School Colo = ...Blue Gold Co a ent Conferen' t ......PacIO Confereni ain West Conferee A irecto ... Gi ` ka Athletic : r Ted Leland Athletic [)t, olmoe Athletic r tbour 3. ,. .. Hea :..:........., ms Head Co Conrad Ray Head;Coa 8 bank Head. C esimone .13 Years At X 26 Years .. ` 3r�11 Years At - ...............2 Years At' �o .. ;......... ..... Current Golfweek Rank: ........... 121 Current Goliweek Rank...•.........45 Current Golfwe k Rank: ............. 14 Current Golfweek"Rank...........141 COLORADO ILLINOIS ICAN SAS N. COLRADO Location .................Boulder, Colo. Location: ................. Ghampaign,;111. Lora#ton:................ Lawrence, l(an. Location ..................Greeley, Colo. Enrollment:...... .............24,710 Enrollment:.. ...............269,294 Enrolliiient .........................26 980 Enrollment .........................11,855 NicW me:.. rx uffaloes Nickname: ° lghUnig lllini Nickname:......; yhawks Nickna � ... Bears School.;' Black School Gqr nge'.& Blue School.l Coto di' Blue �`:hool �� lue Mold Confe,;� i2 Confers g �" 8rg.10 Con f ;�: , � _ �.°: ..Big 12 Goofs ."- � independent : Athle; ` l Bohn Athletic ` = Guenther Athle I ew Perkins Athle# `. Hinrichs y' H ..... impson Head'Coa Mike Small Headh ss Randall Head C Goodwin Yea School ....... 2� Years,At S ...............6 Years'...............27 Years At ..............3 Current Goliweek- Rank: ............ 21 Current Go, k" ."AlCurrent Gotfweek Rank:............. 72 Current Golfweek lfank ...........124 W NOTRE =DAME O°Its�FGO1±1 PAC 11=1C Locatton ...._ tVortetame, ind Location ...... ;' X late r �Lt Eugene, Ore. 'Location.. .. ..Stockton, Calif.: Enrollment~ .. Y :.10126" Enrollment: ,� x fin:;t�ent~ 14,626 Enrollment.... ......4,500 ,. , , , .. ., Nickname. tittng"Irish Nickname `" - t., Bta�lcees Nidca e• Ducks Ntc .:� Tigers School $L, Blue Schpor �f° G Send d & Yelt; uu a &Black Confe ..,k. i st Corrfere tq T� fe 1 Pac :1 -Con -: �rg West Athletic White At#i16 • t ' e,.Smith 1!1th1Qi l M oss . v AEI � ; n lGng Head, : a ubinskl,. Head",C drown Head a Nosler Head Goacti oetfiaIs Yearst Years At fyr ..33 Years At .........13 Years At School .....................1 �.. -• .. Current,Golfweek;•Rank .. .........20 Current Golfweek R rfil ..........3f Current Golfweek Rank tlrrent Gotfook Rank ..........190 � i. PEE E QI E s. P ' R �+1 T,' S NS r UCLA Location: Nf ltbu, Ca�ltf } L rid Austin, Tex , • Irvine ' Calif Location .Los Angeles,'Calif. Enrollment:....................... 3,000 Enrollment:.. U00�, nr 19,17 Enrollment ..25,715 Nickname Waves Nrcknarne , ter. ims �ij' A A. tears r ... Brvins School: .. e* Orange ly&d Sch e b Gold Confe .. t roast. 1 f3tg W, y Coin Pac-10 n AM;rchesterj� uerrero Head C �Ii tger Headta �f�hn ilds, Head tolirtslci y . Vmeent Years At;Gchogl .........� :Years . 8 4 ..... ...9 Years „ ea' Current�Golfweek�Rank ........22 Current G` eiE4k�' `y, t .18 ; r Currents nk: M 77 Current Goliweek Rank................ 8 37 SJ�ITA BAA��RA•' Y�l�� Locattort , Santa Barba, Calif: LIewbHaven. Conn. � Enrollment 19,70 "• En� tit. .. Gauchos . Nickname..:.:.. Ni .. ulldo'gs scho Brue & laflrd f Conf Scho _ &`Willie West' " Corife`ren Ivy League Athietic 0 Athletic Ur r' mas $eckett pA Head; Lass : ` . Head Goa ve Paterson ; Years :........... .......13 MAT10 At Years: , 5 ............30 • tiv t U. Current Goifweek Rank: _,.......217 Current Gofteek lank:..........207 167 thedesertsun.com UCLA repeats as champ at Prestige 12/2/05 11:22 1. Y 4 M � 1 Y `;I+ .,sS !`• 1 �'.: .;. ; b..:j�Y1 � AC 9 '�,� �Y: '.: RCS• S;w ^ �', �... 'Larry Bonannan The Qesert flc#obey 1 �, 2005' :tA's, 0- sklot victory was >the larg xasMristan's 5-shot :r . i ,r. -5 ': (, r, /, . j. ..: t R '� 147 • ' Fw'r �. ] yam''"��3(I1 .(1,1. fill i5 I:1dY111 t?l:F't ('�I'; U 1 SIC../n�fCl,ule dna OVA � � aT�G �. I �e_cause.�T�ne �► ... .. .m . Y,. �5c; �.., � .t � .... fi ✓ L.,.n ..., Y � � t �ls l �7f' G QLS�'gx )i . }r�F� 1. C.�x ..:- a ..,. - e C.0 t n� PG choo1 !t keors Q to.. of - .tlates for : h+� 11 Q: r Q `L...x J..,>. + •: d S4" 1 T 49Lj � i'2�"d �� '.k� S � 1 1. 1 _ s x Team results• N P r } 1r 1 2 °870 ',BYU, 7 4 1it 875 T p4 Mr.it�e, �80 r�Da}me, `��80 --- T FSt, ar't©rd:886 9, F lorthern C©lorado - ,890 - -170 10> �o�o'rado 89 . t .5 t .1 r ? i S, yf r �� _ d ...� , �. ;;. = o o; ,ar' .. .t oatc�Llr�rsasT� Y t r tarc :.. htt./;wwwI hedesertsun.pgj X: s/ Date 2,QOSlO ,&Cats r�! S SaS&Art . g� �op _.., .... , R.. R e-P �-, , P 1pP P i at z 8 _. .bcs_dll/article. . .'P, b x. �. �<1 .. t 4 r, K _ thedesertsun.com I UCLA repeats as champ at Prestige V2 O0 1'1:22 M L T11. Ohio State, 897 . ,: T11. Ore90:n, 897 13. UC Davis, 898 R 14 .California, 905 . ., , 6 ` UC Barbara, 907 .Bari#a ,, h :Y: ._< ,.-,:::P ._ :, -..' :' :., i, 4 r:x 'Y 1 3 r ✓< ?'ix r, 7 yM� 'J .^^ A-: f 7,. . J F r'.'s Z: i , N '� F^*a \ .:<f:,>� f i :, <.! - rk 1- :�k�r'{ x i £fir 3 Y k '} i Y; :2;T< ` i {� , :Y: JT+,.'L - Y .. c' .'l .S ?:�t } � ; .A7 ::' -. .RY., t n , kf .::4� Sc ').i" bY.` �'*y Y }- - F jj{f, %W_ yl• �t Yt,�LQ��C�� „S } Y I�rrii Tlx: ..- ��..,�,.efi:i4�,a'in....,r ,."4a,,.f[ `2w.'1r... , ...r.. , ,ii. u. r r d to sex.. •',.:,K , e ..... ., , ., V ' - M x . ,. .. _ _. ,.. , . -. x_ .__ r,'in? .. >......:. . ;,:. ,,}l` ,fi. -r 9 , 3 '4 *' c%...[;;.r Y ;.'ti v ,4,,,,L.,f ., !. AM', F , t :: 4 r:},. . - 'M1'N: :'arc�11 'S4'+i EV" . T f e., y p, $h `fi`a,<,,. �i'f t 1 ..N' -� :✓ Y,2 M N.tr,. , ,�.^F. x "x^` 5`2E4' r•� '7,- .i NOTr �„ .,.c ;. fir ,.. •� '';.,,�. F " n ^'`.:. `- rftr' r zaa•• 4:(' .. i -a;: t, ,...._ .,..:..is r S°v ,.t. ,�;.y :: ,. P :r.•t�' xrr !` .eI t,�.. ll ,. r ' - � - :r- r ':;. ) . � :- „1 ,," . , ,f*• ,. ,. Y,. .f. ,+:3 J: w'. f... J' .1 ':'i e� ,: r.:.., ... . ,,:..e.: .. .. , , f r,<s.. t , b^w. rR S.. ,:.,,.... ," ,Ft. Cr,"Y .1'. y.,,, F i A ., ..,5:'.,:.. .:., ; ,. -. . . - '.'.' .. cr J -. '3' .. 1 z f s - , 'j, ,: - N' ,.>i� F J . ., ,... L. .. ., ..: .. .:.. ...k. ,,: x.., r: � <.,a. +. :..,'�. a >< `:'M:. A ..........., ... .,. ... s v F .',. .�.., . �:_ .., F _. a. !fir`,` ..u.s s.. , Y r ... ,o r.., r a .>.'n..-.. na c. +r,$ zt$ ..... �` .. 'i .1,' ,a., x rS1`` r .. .. _ .-.. a �, ..n ,.<... .r < rw. „.f>.�: -.4.. .....:v +'fir. /y +. ,.W. . .. .,_ '.ai:' 1 +V. .T. �. _.i - . .b 5 ,.,,,. .,. - «.. kw :f > 4';L ", +�u -'; .... + .. S. Fun, 'Y5 „n , £'..,S.r{. .� .Z'',_2y. , N-"-0 '::'.,, t }>t . .? °S. x '�4"a il: -., A a tv � ;5., ,, s <... 1:. , :, r» ,. ..$1`s, :.. .�7 e r :Y:. ,3A ,frr..... ,., - .. ,. ., .'� ` _.:.,... .rn ',r.,.,. ,: Y, . .,- .g \. ..F- d i 1H +.'.+#' -f J.' t J'r 3!`:ri .. , ,�-.F. ,. tr- l r av 'A:W` .« ,� , . 1 "2 4 -$ w?N. gad 4 �j� .i5 ,yam k. it. .,.:.: .. , 1. y u4, „ .Ti ,-.?I").SFA VR"�:s:: Y4,n f :..,5" . L.". "4i i 4 , Y+ i .i1V fit, -.:. r. ..._ 1'e, k... t '.' 'S .. .4„ f , K� a :, #. 1 ;,r,FA'..,c t'i`'P z ,.:,. < ,.. f R ,,.... ... .:,. -. T �, r- 4.atr 1 ) ,3y.:' . Yp Y:.., ...," %:. pp h .;5<.. ,, f : .. ..,_.._ »;:::. , u s;r y: �....s;;; _ ..,'3y'.. ,. x°w, ,T a ....- :4 -. s .,.:`:..mot ..`{`.A ` .3... ., 'Y..r. �L,. E: fi'Y':t+ 2, ,. - ... r ., 3 .,, \ .� ±.. rd Y .rc. , , o✓ r .,'Y 'f .: M1, i L F57 :�'.'. a*,� ,.t .#2�+' Ce)�rp,`!,v, ; �,.. , _ . .:_. . ,:Y.- r {" ,. ♦ J 9 �f ,,. n...... F . , :.<'x.. .. u..*:!, _,>'. p,,Z, d.. '�: �FW"'i5::,�,� { _ , , _... :3'vS :#- y'.. x +, "" f. ... f , _...: • xr i c aa.., _t. g.. `•�' 7,`m, e ._>:,. •.:u/ .:�::.. :- h 8rfi -„.... ..F... :3, i;: r<�. s' g ..'`�k'J',� b 4:c .:'i Wa"a 's'�•�.»,w+ ?.. ,r.... > c y'r,F,. ,;sR; :. St rr' �, ;.'r'� ." ' s: ...,'`, ;�,,. t yi'c..,:3... 3 e..:. 'CC,. ..a t'::':,. -pry€:. t� , Sr :.. ,,...::. „5; r., e,.u._ ,::kr. A w�:.fiif 4(. 4 r '... ($k, k ,,.; ,.+ .r: ..:.. a #rye :3 t,...lN'`i r :,.y�tgjj s a.r gj x,. .a,r'�t k ti..o- L„f .r '>,u9,s^fh',w. !9 J "q_ ,: 3v ,� n, e f. z.�" G t rh c4.: 7 ,•r5 `` '+;i 4. :7�a'TM x , r. � .xt"i 'r ' , :£�' `"a"',` -, ,x v y :.. j 'r 'i s.� ,t i r s M - Y`T x5f3 yF,,t 1 �• 3. � ,a '` r v' , r , 1 d.rfi.. m'% 1 a+ T ,," f �3 r .'" u 5. t x x� ,s p,,. rz .,{ . ri �c vn Y ti a a n ,#`^y �?; 5 4 n ,'� i n i'C :(.'. i ": .ef ,�r JV 4 A .t a r ,7 , yf c ta,,.. r W111S t. ^"z�X ;! E'& l R"s >�a r ,e ;yllfl �✓,fi ..w 9 < f.. % d "" r r.. +r �> f . rr'°. ' x to v,de 4 :. • . ' '„ .y v t.,: "' >s 'J`;a�f A .F, , i `` - 3va11.1;f ;i i 4 ';� s�Srx•r a,s rtL7:t' '+ };,xtiiY" i .pro, gJ`'. -, ,3. r, x sa' ,Gr.- Ca� r ,: �: A ..a4G da• ,�'`?'� >-3,^ '"� q ''; u }r„-�'``sfi^ t� 4: r '* .c° r`r s.. <)' ... .': .- 7_r �...,,. e* ,u-'' a... w.;�.: r„ :tia a Y I ^' t .. ;)' ; > ifi ,e`"Yt •r„ a L :, a ds :.,,, >"„ ,.:, ,,.;,:TIC'. t a '�a s s "., t ,.,k:.,, , �.'.,:>. t'.t •': % r :"5, fib' ac '' a ,r :.r ,,- AY ;.�. i ;o '+"e n::. F,rl �a :rs)44,„ft�� t.. t�.lsi''i �,+sr '��.. ca 5, r w 3v' S"3`'�t. ,.: , r:4aY x S. , ....,, ':� 7 '11. .,^}n Vj' E h, ,C ,ft*1..; F .,.;.. ,. :; .. f ::, :..M IT AlV - , ..lw , . -x,", ,t ntz. ., .. R r , - : _ 'N+ +%.�,r. 1 � .�T ' N x,�, y rr . k. gam ;, a � r, M k. i , :r w- k... n �yT•yr C ' F'°<': 'k < 'C{' i 1 , r: t� �' nr, ts> ......,, ... - ,>;. ,( :. ..., . .':,: s. f: -a . ` a u Y? �u,n�-s;:. s: y yfi, '"� r sae4 C:r.. ,� .. T4 ,:y q -r ,,; y. ',1 ...' .� yxY+s�,.�{g�,�,,.x„'Gy.at+�,`�`."p- :'.,y' ,�:�,`,"f'r�$..a�f'-�.,-2i'r '�y,' .; '{iS"• .'":K n c(, fi 4 L 1 w:. .• i -'� . �s i t ,�ti.tr xi" r c%n „a i 's� Tr t,t.,:r� it, s E y z r :. :'.dr„ r i'i,, , "a,'..M1S, u r :rri S z'•3_ .;� .+:, y 5 f,,,,sr+' a..r .s ,•,a. -t:: d /, P.--d- n, ?n'g?' .6 jP..y, a"2p, +'firi,. .t +!?'. J y[fefFi r ., �.1.t -: k2 "' r^+ r s,x ., .`„ r ;f p. c�k xF 7x .�.. � .. r a q� a T x. r c :;. a tet,t i✓ t r la !.A r a;f „ .§ ale.:. ?,1-''. . ', Y ,� '.. 3 C y/ 2�, yY &i `, t + , a•, -ry,. , ni' ws& ku '' n k t;E`.., z''h.;= nE rt , ,A, h ni r`- .4 e.. ,. .; r.. rb ,,,E 'l�a,"e:,. `%ku.`3-:x';( k` "'s ^<"'`�,,. '�r la P n;A ``7,2�f`.:_.><n .1'4a'k'g'-h'`; i'� v .:a k 2+,2 �)fd `'''r.F r., 1 �,h ° 4'n��,m, a r '* ;,i. ,• z. , - '. .. • : .: .z, ,e.::,"'k"Y4 x'+,.. '� vtxu'+''aro- 'r4 ay't A k�'vr f°'x$•j.� r-`•'siY ,� 14i'r Si.R a#..,' -a. ( c. '`s tq x °Y aP .e*:it s t j : r. , �-�,y. 7 '2' r �a .,k mix rt 5'X' r 5* r4s �t ';:a`�11 r, may: u''. s' 1 ��? P k , f i, � r _ r 1. �='i� *' ,'�11.111',ax ��N :. •,,,,�ylr, +ar�.fi '4f ta�'y tF ,vr i r '"„�.�5 `,-+,nr 3, �_t l tp� C<h 6 _ ,P '�, „e r ,. 'S,..i', 3 +'C e >nd t t r t > 3ry!..y�c 0' f c kfh?'#'g�*.{.i't7�'.:.; 1 a r , - ?•• �Y +S ; -r x v i r,�. `?t{: '�}:~ i 'k Rd 1 41' 'p`'9,'� t1, e "y e°` > 'b z x 4 :Y`,. t ,Q , ,c. 'r p ,., ri ti'.a Y..,^ti 'f"w t, is,': 1 i a ,t > ..F'� d4w2" A k' asf Fes' 3 . l fi` r r i? a, , , a..-; .1 .• "<-v-.,,, _... , � �, .R< 'a',,�. ,if 4 .. �,F w�i' yt n...r, . t "iA ..,.) z ,< ,t� t t" ;' * r )-- ..x �.0 ,x .. �% j mt ,».6 A R• 5..., +,'�' r .;yo: ,t«9. t ,t, r�.c, ;a, b ,f,:r 'Y k ,,r",ic . r:`",, x'r,'R, '4 "^e. z. . P', .f, F:�.,�} �e .eu, yt ,i �jw ,"=yy11 ,r i,y �r}.3'3 i ��fi�. iY4 rf��'y,:{�� '�2 � - E .:,,�' .� t h. ""wr ': ,yJ l , 9:, 1 { Y t } ;.}� � Y:. i (C yk '<�t'': �n h : d IN toati .+'" �' +:;, fir;## 5 = M',=k ) ; " ,r,.. ,.,,�" ,y +1' �a Y^ stt^s.' , o t #:a„�: k F y�,y o: s �yy k'. 2 h t YS �:k.+, rrJk 3hw 1, .f S i S S.' w a( .S3 , 1 , ..:,.. .. " 'in�y} �.'t ;'`�. r< { �! :. (5a Y'}h alS, ,�Y 7,� 3+ Y,. 6 i 'Z T',r Z"'�'G t T h,y a>'$�1Yy �Y€a d�t ,rA4 �;j+PJy-Yl ' f t 'n °"'ra"'` .,�v '4 ";';Ni �. t+ t a . va .u�i , piS ,r'rr.?sue s •k,, r yY?rd r:lip, #v. ��.. s'"a�.&r�.2 .fi hJ':: t t)�f �tr b tJ� tT�l F —lkc A... + ,'TCr�ER �.'Sn-r 'ti'r•y,",",`zSY ' z a ; r rzti+Y >f 5 �.r!^y�t� 4 ybyx. a i'i' h'2>�' #1 ,, C+,rx4� Q -q *.;�;x �fz{ .J•e;: ,+. .r.<K..s r, ', '�. t: , -..: - '..,� - [ � � .' '` a;'t= x � t,u^ L pr� �.s� P s � _fY 53 #,�, F X... f r .: _- ems. - .- � �' �,�-: �' .� `#e ,, .;r sn ,✓,,, ,� .< ..s ^� .9 y:. r - 1 , , _��:V; L , -, �4 . _ ,`��,,�`,�`,',,a , .. q' .. 12/1105 12:18 F MUM o t>saore Aof the Mgt! • S V a y.:S BYUCougars.com BYU Men's Golf Event Results 7 Fe-gperdxne 29 T8' Cal�.s��;�na 29 T8 Cor"to 29 F 1Q Np1re sDh,e Cbloado 2 Oil 12 x3 `;► AF , Y . t i ti. ti . � F with s its � 1 Y � y i Y r.55' . n fit: � J1 R x r S. //www fiyucougars com/Fili�g�sp►[R—C98 http 8 +d/ 4 Untitled 12/1/05 11:5:9 t z. No. 12 Pepperdine Ties for'.Fifth at u Presti " titer Frye dfu F©rmat' N .1 ler:' , � �x:��oe .•» r �P�i x� a Untitled 1211/05 11:44 A yap ,4 Y': i x Ride 2 4 4 low how. i- ffi e� �.7 T. d.T� .� * � t � . 19 go s y Pr+rte� ,ixacd! r`_ . }.. ¢" I.; -.. ... .,..:;'. -.. Y:::..,• - y ''. .'� ,. ;,,�.. :. r :-.:A. u. M,u4 .: �`5'1.#4 :b S ':;r.'f`„ .:', s� .y.i " ,. .'. .,....: .. t „:':.. tfid .. ..n „,:. •:Y.,., Sd ..� ,`ie.�...., tt 4 ,::�. w>.� J::: 9 P �:t 1: .5rtx MYWIN y ,U. f '. t' d �.. a:, .k i ..t. f, k` ry �r "t.�,.,... is , .�. ..:'<." ar , ., :.;- ,•� a . ,JAa A t .. �'^'�:. :. � . � 7tr,•. .t ,. t,... ,. , . rro .. ..{�� ,.: • •r ..: .. : �,v ,� .. .. ? ,^ ?, ys „' I+E'..1 s. v ,-r .#,>.... ,} ,mow..-.5. .... 1T.. ..... .x;.'4., .i ...4.J2rt < :Y .,. Y�v .. h . h„'�r h SJ. R .,.. .,..,. a., :w1z w,.... "dt.,,M1S 4...: .:. ,.. .. ,�.... ....:. 'n 4.,-J Y': �:' ,.r:f � ...:., f ... ..,.: t. ... z, u� .v .M'wv.,,:. d ,.. , �� b��, i114:,: _, � _ � .,.... {,n.V.., i f > ,+:a F� } -�' ,y ,.} �:� � r> •a�: �cb'r«':gym" rm 'z i-, :: a�'rx'7ca;a,; .V K - R,'%" r i iSij.,« k� ?, ,�,k'r?rT', :. cK^. '�10 a. ; ` r- i 4 t 1 6 a ';„Fy {' ) i n .y ve1 'T+ ty.cv3,.f.: r5#- ,' :tit i4 s. t r .,C"• 'y '�- * k �'!- ,'.'' 4 Y'•;.�a'' ne�Eu :7,,i�', r%Z w p T R4 t t rd' NO WHIMT, itsO a rt`��-�+bnS3r.^Ni�h�"t y�f zy 3 ,s �F ,.:' ��b��. �� 4 'k �J '�.� r it !'2a" ° Y ' 4� S '' t r� .� +`i,�5✓ *,i' h�, I f: t . �I Axis w ._.,., how; - �� A°� :�• � as. ��i�i �"�� otr�� y1�1 r �es�i�� >r t,: r � � � e rt�}}" � � +f +,,,� ��i in •,r'c.% � � �'� i1;,; # � s � t 4 � � } : t�1�0„8$�s�ke�yex�: 'bt�'�"Q,(T.J &%k'I'fy Fl tk .72 �k t y ,a"r s. y'6 YS�,.. "�t Wa$ o0O�get rat1Qt11L')tS1�C av fr,r a14' s�Y+$i}xtiFz n s tafie D p 3�+� 7-tv.t yyyy .6 mere able to le u sow ry ♦ "�"' 'R ' - cy�,pJ e loon0 r fhas�specall h5v�e'.kryRY'f'. up {)ur guys dot on a nice run andklt g77 et more from the back half, of our�r spot." Isban -�{ k r y sz c y v�d` •,� 4 �r 3+ xJ'�, {t� o. a, k"`3 •x',� :; t •,; . x t � t r ,a o ter R �� ll od:e PyIIia5'1'd J.k �v 1 se{jnir'�`� " r 3 ;p 'gye' yc� tkr, r .,.4, r+ ";';-A n�... y ��W'..V.�� i ,✓i .. rd, r._ � � F k ...`�� -....a en C�. t Notre am p a. . ,, ,.. ... _.. �- z4�- r kw in ue +da �. " r k' �v�-rr>.� t& !:.✓� cb .;`�*,- ,k."ax?:;$zR d�. .�-.��'s�- x, 0. a f eldto shoot under 70 at an . bt�t 9f111,r a�� nt es �' i --� �� r ,�' �',�, bra>' � r ,�, . � �,,,�w ,�. •'� ` o d 's.irst and bV Edward ti. , ^�r�.� `yv •'�.hiN r c 69 lores tied ustafsonfo t�rdut . a.: yFl i. .Irv,.:1ev5 4 .. .a; vrv.�r.d ��' � > " , : iy E .•�'� 'i, , ;"-dl A �, ;?i+. . r, a, Slit ;.,.: .. :i}� , .� r 'Ii WP fy,ra,rx ti w: d e f fx44� #I' 1:'7th lace and Matza eame a spar r *« zr Ni' i. 1'�y ,� �w} 4 : .'�e -{ Y"`� s a'•:4. '�.� r.�-�i,. ,,.r x.. Y A. _'a. 3 ry" .Y`:� v`�. �' �fx "S a�i ��f T, •#,�"'6:�k �. 3 k�Jy� gg �„� - �,' h J intn atzamh re ik sanslttie wco :. .,... ..,. s,.. ;.;; .,.::- �;:' ,F }y,,. � 1 n'x„m,- a +,+,.", � � a • �"erf3. r 5. xF* �.. ,a ' _ �'� F...�d:�. y 1 1a�reot�x lv'7 7 t, S,o horno#e (.., - � :,:1 '. _k r "^�v 3,1 b.��t}�N��'q�•.r�r, �e�., r m.Fx �� s'R '�.. ,�,,;,.,.,r�. f+ w. ��„�' ,x'e 31r�. .E{ -�.. a h 1 1 ■�1y .P 7 .i �✓.,. lac<e:�at `�F:::L .! V�';Vr:Y � 22�I.N ��1 �� ....- �� e mYt4e ,',,.. 3�"3 �z�Y; tti� ac :7, y .�rc, a' tY,.N. �' y1 ,,,u`�. ,y �4� ,� :<�,• :�. .;Grp. 5, ce tie at 13 over ar229 (!'YS�-�4 k =p � \ ., f �,^ � Cy4 ;4�• k �'a i�' -err,-�•u�,x ��"'+ ,A { k f l� 9thlasrx�r • �� , I�otxe;�ame wail close gout �ts�U�fa"�l�ed = Er r � k: alft tie =tdrdeV�lleollub r 5edI..andui11 sf�atre sver1Q 'r .<" f p e , .. �,..,re• '�'3 �i. : i°!f F. 'w S �` ram.. ': M1 ifl? -+5, r N y� '.!F T+R NC . � central ,Re zonal, A ,... M "X '',� r:Xy'y tM1J ,�,f ?e,Yi �: •SY.a,:t•: i:( �F s'F2A, h;, xka„,�°5 ,i;,x .,�' ,w.,.r.. %. ., �,,,s,9r"; it h.. 'e+1•:r. ..yi" a:F �k^k P� u"f,�"', i i 'i fY yl :.r' •) 'F :vF +v :. _ - { r�„ '„+ .(i �`_� � � � z,..:.�'q �' .s. � r zY'f }h'-.•' 1} �i�y;,; c •"xs3 r-r d r,c7fY'it• > ..,�.{' k air�< r .:yn, -{� ,, y1,'% k, :i`7'i'i #' �r f}L f ..ry T . t , x. t� � x 'the Prestige at PGA 'VEST ; Uc#. 17-18, 2"5 ;0. i - `: ., ,: , ,.., a .s s.. r., ... ,tQY b k 1i„ .. . , .i, .... ...«, .n. ...: i.�,.i . Ae-.+'i�f.`,incv`Y'3 hifk:6!f 3 . .?.. i,,../!iY✓AOh,' elz�tin2fm Untitled.. dreg r� 1211`10, :44 A Course'/'Al, far 7,��1ifi xrs�, w, i Untitled 12/1/05 11 4E Irish Tied For Eighih'�� ' l x 'e t'Crt' �.I'..t��'# r^ n % Y Nirim E trio of Notre DamegNO �� lxau ej andow RodeY sWE hoerii iachrrig scored �f ee `air s' ra Ind /Mishawaka< ��a}L gig ` t� r place: �t marred zoriy��e se'itj total. w E� � The 18 learn xi� eld�is,bu�,e� , , fi Colorado cf0 16 Texas and m 4` 'A G,, y ,� �i+4 h d,ti✓w.� .?Y?'Yn iFT 3 ,g. -TE eather�pmo r ; p to resume'secQdro�irid��N° irnnt�atel� "pmGssreu� }F1, 4: ©lfi`stal web rMU e=al3 conclusion Qf th'e�eyAA,"b 4y {x t 1 x { IIl�l7iFl YY}Y JtYi F,.V,IO r� y 1,21LA" '! rnament �pete atthe 200 i r S :_ Y 5 t; F ,�7 ?is�' ✓ � .,� �,�: f"�'r;fir f Rrestifi�Invit`a�tor�a�> F . ,, , ,, { ,.,.. a: Gil 1 v ; - : y r . ,. a _ „. .7 r t �t �o r : , e d.. ac < , (, ed:,.. e11 d,es .:4 r ,,..,. . ... :.:.......%. .��,�:,,. t..:.,; �..,J4 eft:: ed . o ,Jc� �t�ds 1N L .: -.. P . .... .,. .,-.r s.. ,.� "Aam ..r ...:, y ..x -.+kv� ,Lv:... , .,.a. r :t�.: v, . ::':,.: •. .,. <: ,k�'� 51 , 7 ,t ___, r . ' s was: a •touch sea 1 ,. :• >r„ � ,.. rr �'1..� tk'k u...,i ... :, ,.: „ i.. .:?.,,:J .., a'. -.�. i .., :.•c, . :.. ,.t v. '+,..� r,. �:, ,., ... � .:- ..., t . _u.. �n -. ,;::� ..,.>e. ,n:« t.. ?.:.,,.a'�3 ay-,a,.,U.,. ✓• � c.4,,, r .r� es t 50. rk arMd ern rope t : ca noe n RE ram, ,r �za >< a� ^xko'{l >'�` r+' e.,,✓ r r i 1 a 1 �` A �} s �, �r \ ,� - Y �r _ s �z r r e"' Moos r , 1x ,:. .'±q- "':`.euv'• :., �' � v -...� � r ;�', ., - r t ar Qr o .ax 21 er._ . d a c� r , ,. o- ry .... � .-,v . G,:..// :y 3 a Y.t4S .!-1',.t,.i: , .a 'i;}.. .e, SW.�Y'1...HF r. .. 7%q I G.. iP �.. , :+� '!' : .,.. �, .s.�;+r`,7r.. � .,.z ! 3 n � r r 7 .. _.v. ,. ..N / - r....::. b, ki ..5 .. S ✓'kk' ,f ,, £sr Y. y.�F, � ",4J `YF!v'}tT. x• '< %.;F f% .,;3.4-.<. [ : N �7 r� �.. S'Y4 Y ",'� sty,. ,, 't. S ✓. ' t.;'�'�� y 3 >:: P-. s,� ^�` : � •� c �, .i,�. .�. z.' ': t i. Xr e e ,c-Y� 'y5, B i d x, , sx''.✓'' . ! i' ' e x a': . t O 1! r IN, n ifl a w. eir hea�vM skt4 _� � �"€�'..,., .. , .� , � ; .,J:Jre t-ou : O� Y,.•Ntr ,.y..- �. � 1 t\,. .- ...,... ..3.., .�,.W,�. .',�" ,.. .. r-4 a; ,'^tl',. :a"1i` '.• e.�v .�,,..; �?. ;�? s r"t t z4:; r tic �... � a _ :'� >• i A.'.yX" .".p" ; r:n yam• 'a -..cr .., _ a ,+r.:r. �.cr},,.u. ,., ', c ,•', r lr.,!"...,+' .,.ra•;`.a r „iai.. , S roc `e III start+e l str, are u Ufa s�o rti t tat .:t C i'ri: }i : #:,_F C� R. €-. : ."-` .a< ,>'�.f-, ..,- -.-r ,,�' ,y■ �4t.w' F a. to ,� ,.. .?, �..; j...,.-.,.,., „ . ... :.,J. ss,, •:* §':.• ,ti k.! . ,p �r x i rr d'A'.. 7 . a...7 ..�a ' d r.7'rx ±~r:• a,-1 x ;a,i' i YT 7. r ..�, .y k!xtk.., ¢v3,t3x^wd' i ::,:/t,y�ay.y�'},^�a Xa'Fl -,r <',•^ _ c ©a`3dr1d tJe afoll.st'1 w a�a�P y 4 n r3 j ete,soaes anJ re�Jt� can +b� fund Qn7golfstat corn Q;��.ea�.<��gres 2 B CJ 2 - 291 2$4 "0 3 t7C Irvine 291 2$� 67'2 ��^i e� dingy 2 24�9© 8$ 0 , N fy s,..:Jn Fv r'si ?i.. , .�', a -M ,.,k: . ^. .W,.F >FF ..1a { },;.,'1id „ T 5 1 ✓k„r,.: , .. "a :`'. .,,. _ .• .. �. 'F ...:3. .:.. ., �.a .:,.. .e.'X .:. :siM :...+,. ..,..- ,... :,. :.:. .. .�aYa._N, v.; .,�. 4, _.. .a t,' :..k-C....y......?,. rin ,r. .�. ....n ,. _,v: < ,::>- � ;E ,.,� _ :a- � M .. d.. t i a e :,iQf 2' w.t x s rts conl::� h -a r dsl urt,s c. a ct�ata t 7,i=..- .... k -�.� - .�,.fi€.... -.: �, . t....4 .. .. ,. • .,......: .,,.,.i�,. � ..i„u'.x�.'- N..+tryyM s ...'..:, .....i,_ ,., lsT?i'. ,v ... , �r.J.. M. n .'S.%:`, ,%,:ihS:�v: ,.. �. l� .... , : .3 �. ✓ , .; .:-,. .,� i 5':='� p �' ;... ss... c ., ' - -, � g..:.Sz•_�;xN ,a•&:. 1m ..,s' h:' c .,.!• > �:� tit.. e�' .7s,rF.+ ::� r:� _, t!F ,'�,f .. -. ; �_'r 7. � 1 :' . • � . >" ,..:: , . �'; ,L �' ee��..i •4+vy , '�; sfr s . v..? i t[ ,' `"� � " , 2 * ` _ •�` " s.:,, r h ,;.. r ,dry 10-J =.- F .,,.-hj� ,e� ..�. �+: e. t"�t'f `c�;,v,°�,+v�..+'''��" "'� r ... ,,, .a ,. - .. , Untitled 12/1/05 11:17 Untitled 12/l/05 11:18 Al • t5. Notre Dame. 296 298 286 -880 - t'?. TEXAS 297 290 299 886 t7. Stanford' 291 296 299 886 9. Northern Colorado 296 299 295;890 ' 10. Colorado 29fl 308 294 892 Top 5 Individuals t 1. Tim .Cha, UC'-Irvine 213 t 1• Danny ;Zimmerman, Illinois 213 t 3• Erzk .Fiorss:; UCLA - 21-4 t 3• Scott G..&st4t8, in, Notre Dame 214 t 3. Chris: 'Hein, ".UCLA 214 Texas Results T7 TEXAS .: 297 290 299 886 T13 Farren eeran 73 72_ 7 T23 7ace'Mo4 7474 221' T32 Matthew Mills 78 '71`. 74 223 .. ;T49ef �e1i 7 73' 79, 226.-, .. T72.Jhonatton Yer3as. 77 7.7 .' 78 ,232 .: 4?�f v i , K b i i.i 134 http://www.texassports.cbm/inoex.php?s=&url_channel id=19&url'.subchannel_id=Furl7article_id z2573&changeTwell_id:=7 Page 2 of,2 IZdb Grube and Zack}tier pace the Cardinal><�li'a par 72 alter orie r4u�a l Hurd `round w�li :fallow. nd txf r° . r pNS Bor.coniplete results; pleaseislt gol�statreults cony. _ ,' _ Team Results f after one Y .n t , ,-IUCLA 280 0 280 -8 2 ,Colorado 290 0 290 +2 T3 UC <Irvine 291 0 291 +3 T3 Stanford_ University 291 0 291 +3 S Illuiois 2.93 0 �293 +5 6 Brigham oung Univ 195 0 295'+7 u: T6 Ya le University 295 0 295 +7 T8 Notre .Dame, U. of 296 0 296 +8 T8 Northern Colorado 296 0 296 +8 T-10 California, U,., of 297 0 297 +9 TJ0 Peppeidine 297 0 20749 T 10 Texas 297 0 297 +9 13 Oregon, U. of 298 0 298 +10 14 Ohio State Univ. 3010302 +14 6 J 1 5 Pacific 3.03.0 303 +15 16 UC==Davis 306 0 3.06 +18 17 Kansas, U. of 309' 0 309 +21 r 18 UC Santa Barbara 3 13'0 313 +25 1$S http //.vvww.cstv.com/printable/schools/stan/sports/m-golf/recaps/I0l705aab-htmI?frame-bottom University of Colorado, Official Athletic Site - Article 12/1 /05 11:44 Universitv of Oregon, Official Athletic Site - Home - Home E 12/1/05 11 UO DUCK AKHOP ONLINE University of Oregon, Official Athletic Site - Home - Home Izivos ll:la Bruins Go To Wire -To -Wire For Title At The Prestige At PGA West:: UC Davis finishes -in 13th while co -hosting annual tournament in Southern California 11/30/05 1 1:16 AN Alumni Association frrd 141Q11 U11J QIUWC Athleke,Servce ls - Bookstore fmai Team end Player Results �n 1''DF fdrmat' Calendar, + .Dowrrlad Free Acrobat*.Reaer w, ' Capital "Campaigns x 3 Compliance LA}U1NTA, Calif -M Eighth ranked UCLA .Cap#uretl its third s#ratght . i....7_.;t ,l. C `F L1nk`s la ers each shoot?1, LiveAudio �er.ri �:�in � Ti,e'%[�ih un�. ia�hn lnr#;r�ffeSM ..id��h °rnr.lPlri x r n'Cfcri-fiaj�lY1 _Cf`f1tAC-Rtif:'i-Y7VPf 7Q 1 An[ . 5' School Spirit .. 1-ovar 289 oye'thezfinal finio,rotrnds io goo with the �'u'i�der:they tallie4d`'in" Site Map - Mondays first round. UGLA finished at 4- over 860 while the Cougars finished :at 6-over'870. The,,18 teams" were only. able to finish the first round ---=-- orrrMonday .after.play "was uspended ,due to darkness. The remaining holes of thesecond round,; along with,r6maining 18 holes, were completed on Bernie Sprinkling had'a.73 irl- Tuesday. Tuesday's final round. (Todd "Hammond } Lightning delayed the tournament brl"NOnday afternoon and more rain saturated the course overnight, creating "tough playing conditions: However, nine ,players.fini.shed .below par :in. -the 547 hole tournament, including Tim Cha of UC trvine "and Danny Zimmerman of Illinois, who each finished at 3- under, 21;3. to tie for medalist:honors,;Erik Flores and .Chris Heintz of UCLA., were on6� of off the paw along -with' Scott Gustafson of Notre Dame. BYU, which was 15 shots behind UCLA after the first round, had rounds of 291 and 4-under 284 in the last';two -to finish at 6-over for the tournament. UC :.: Irvine was 8-over to place,thtrd, illtrto�s was;fourth at 11-over and 'Pepperdine " and Notre Dame tied' for..fifth at 16-over. Co -host Stanford f ntshed tied for seventh with Texas at 22=over while co- host' UC Davis was .13fh at, 34-elver. , Rob Grube led the .Cardinal with -a sixth- place showing, -tallying a 1'-under 216 while Ramie Sbrinkling was tied for 32nd 7-over 223 to the Aggies. at pace , The day featured ahole-in-one by Notre Dame's Cole Isban, last year's Wanner -up, who.aced the par-3, 216-yard 13th hole. He finished he day with a 4-under 68, the second -lowest score of the third round. n h ttp: //ucdavisaggies':col legespoits.com/sports/m-golf/recaps/ 101805aaa:html Page 1. of 2 Q Bruins Go To Wire -To -Wire For Title At The Prestige At PGA West :: UC. Davis finishes in 13th while co -hosting annual tournament in Southern California Cfioose a Sport T ,� 11/30/05 11:16 AN UCLA Takes Big Lead Early At The Prestige At PGA WEST :: Bruins take 10-stroke lead after one round with round two suspended by darkness 11/30/05 11:18 M Untitled 12/1/05 11:30 G Stecher Finishes I0th, Bears Ninth at The Prestige Junior finishes ,at even par at one of the most.diffi6 t tournaments in the country. . oct.' 18, 20-0 �I ' f fihe Prestige at 'PGA West Fi»taIesu1#s .n.'PDF Format D►o unload h'ree Acrobat Reader LA QIJINTA, Calif. -Sparked by an '1 Oth place finish by junior Jon Stecher, .the University of Northern Colorado men'solfteam finished ninth.overall at -The _ Prestige, one of -the' nation's toughest eolleg,tate tourna eats held Monday and , Tuesday at the Greg Norman Course: � P Wiest Steelier vuas shad the "entire tournamen slootrn 73 + in the first roan 71 - Y in the secood round and finishing with a'7 `" j dui ng uesday's final round. u>uor Jontecer - He`was 'ust'three .strokes behind the n��vidu,l chain ions UC ir�ule's ''tin Cha. aid J . p placed�ghth at Illinois Dann Zinimerrnan Stecher finished ahead of several offers` who were 3' . 'restage which finished ranked in the top-30 :nationally. ' a s �a on Tuesda � y afternoon. Senior Tina. Kight who was foutti,after aroundfinished 23rd overall.fter scores . of 78 and`73 over.the final two "rounds Junior r� I>aam. Finished 59th.(+13j, junior Kyle. Sullivan was 72nd (+16j andreshn�ari' Jordannsrud was 83rd.:(+21 j. As a te`ain the $ears finished nuith, 30 strokesk'behnd now three-tune`efending - champion UCLA, 'the nation's No. 1o=ranked team. The dears were just four strokes out of seventh place, shared by - No. 12 Texas and co -host Stanford and 10 strokes out of fifth, which"was hared by No. 16 Pepperdrne and No. 22 Notre Dame. Northern Colorado did top in -state rival arid.No.1-8 ranked Colorado �by' two strokes. In total, :there were five top-2,5 an,d i 1 top-70 teams. in the field of 18. `Fhe Bears who entered the event ranked No. 1Q9 nationally, also topped Ohio State (No. 55)and Kansas (No. 70j. Northern Colorado wraps -up the fall season on 0.ct. 31 and Nov.. 1 when they compete at the Herb Wimberly -Intercollegiate, hosted by New Mexico State. Northern` Colorado Finishes 10. Jon Stecher 73-71-72 216 (E) 23. Tim Kni:ah.t 70-78-73 221 (+5) 59. Eric Higains 79-7.5-75 229 (+13) 72. Kyle Sullivan 82-75-75 232 (+16) 83. Jordan Ensrud 74-84-79 23.7 (+21) 200 htt :Hwww.cstv.com/ rintable/schools/ncol/s orts/rn golf/reca s/l01$OSaab htm P P A P. 1?frame=bottom Page 1 of2 Untitled 12/1/05 11:30; Final Team Standings . 1. UCLA 280-291-289 860 (-4) ; 2. Brigham Young 295-29-1-284 870 (+6) 3. UC Irvine 291-292-289 672 (+8;; 4. Illinois 293-291-291 875 (+11) 5 epperdne 297-29-290 880' ;'(+16) Notre ,"Dame 296-Z98-286 -$80 (+16) 7..Texa 297-29:0-299 886'(+22) - -Stanford 291-296-299 $86 (+22) 9 Norther-n Colorado 296 299-295 890. (+26) 10 Colorado 290308-294 f392 " (+28} 11. Ohio< State 302-298-297 $97 (+33) Qregon 298 30'6 293 897 (+33) 13 WC" b'avis 3.0.6 291 301 898 (+34) " 14 California 297 306 302 905 (+41) - 15 I1C `5arita Barbara 313 296 29$7 (+'43;) _ _ - 16 Pacific' 303 307 30'0 910 ( 1'7 Kani3,as 309 304,=307. '52.0 (+56) r 13 le: 295 319 317 931 {+6 uy x 1 _#.t v,. .n t S 1 r , !3 ,r rEX{ +t iF s r 3 4 3 1 ' �t http://www.cstv.com/printable/schools/ncol/sports/m-golf/recaps/101805aab.html?frame=bottom l? 2'at Untitled Qtlier"Ca f nshers were freshman +George C�a>idrana teed for44th (72 76, -78 12/ 1 /05 11:27 - 226, +10); freshman Carty Wong; who t><ed for 59th ('77, `'7$, ?4 - 229, +13: junior l�Iichael VYilson wo tied for 64th(74,:.:9, 77.- 230; +.14); and sophomore Jeff c"whotUetier?9t40 So�o>�npr'e a�chael this fall` :the Bears have. laced f Ala at . e Falcon ,Invtational.at Air Forcee So far , p. `f ne lei fears ., 13, e .rn C - ca `o first Academy 1n Colorado :Spings, 1. teai theg .I Oac �0 Caleng . g , y way a2 at die the A1>ister 1VIacKenzle In�ltatle iorial it Fairfax,`Calif And now 14th at The Prestige. prestige. Cal will conclude its fall schedule Oct. 3 -Nov. 1 at the Cordevalle Classic hosted `by - ;.TCLA ;in San Martin, Calif. 1 UCLA =4 F +1 280 291 289 860 2 Brigham Young Univ. +6 F -4 295 291 284 870 3 UC-Irvine +8 F - +1 291 292, 289 872 4 Illinois +11_ F +3 293 291 291 875 T5 Pepperdine +16- F +2 97 293 290 880- T5 Notre Dame, U. of +16 F=2 296 298 286 880 T7 Texas +22 F +:11 297 290 29.9 886 T7 Stanford University +22 F +11 291 296 299 886 9 Northern'Colorado +26 F +7 29.6 299 295 890 - 10 Colorado +28 F +6 290 308 294 892 T11 Ohio State Unv. +33 F +9 302, 298 297 897 T11 Oregon, U. of 0 r +33 F +5 298 306 293 897 13 UC Davis http://www.cstv.com/printable/schools/cal/sports/m-golf/recaps/101805aaa.html?frame=bottom ;Page 1 of 2 Untitled 1211/05 1 1:27 . +34 F +13 306 291 301 898 - 14 California, U. of +41 F +14 297 306 302 905 15 UC-:Santa Barbara +43 F +10 313 296 298 907 16 Pa. ci>fic , +46 F +12 303 307 300 910 17 Kansas, U. of: +1.9 309 304 307 920 18 Yale ,.Un-xv ksity +67 F +29 295 319 317 931 ;. !': S r { •^tl f^ • Fob "%'''t `T'',"�'�Pi 'y Y t'M di ,Y F, i � F { � r; http,//www.cstv.6om/pririfable/schools/cal/sports/m-golf/recapsll0 $OSa a hf,,nr trame-bottom. Page 2 of 2 Untitled 12/1/05 11:24 A fig '1l"lLillldJ �.Y,Y-V li,aa�.L'; LaIaVV a.v luaaViw4-� Rounding outJCB's f riishers _ for 55th-place, senior Greg Well sophomore 1V shot a� to iie 'e .arid of read, aed -the r0, :l shots http://www.cstv.com/printable/schools/ucsb/sports/m-golf/fecap$/l02I OSaaa htmj7frame ,bottom Page 1 of 1 Untitled 12/1/05 11:33 Untitled 12/1105 11:35 AI Rosenau Paces Tigers At The Prestige - >�b "Printer -Friendly format The Tigers'`Iinished the Prestige `in i6th place as a learn "�E may! #nls article Oct. I8, -2Q05 L Quinta Cal><f. Sophomore Chris Ro;aenau finished tied for 23rd at The Prestige, Tuesda Oct leadin' Pac> f c en's olf :to a 16th lace team finish at the PGA Yg g P z eat course Zsenau Tired twodunds of 75 before coming back strong in his final l�:holes and. • F� Y ¢ nntcu71 Amrnd 'hot hultivf F 07 307- z Ptr`veos77, 300 910 at the6,y7.6 yard Oreg Iartnan course c "ASS xtE ! Yam` i . FY P#fnCiu A Ys _ { 1 ng_ - e l e , earl . xlh- s 10 as" Alex a >ghtnin � ortened round o yest xday, p ay ws d y m k r4 , sl'e�rs frrush%ieir second r0und.and t" la edhe final8`;of the 5 `hole : x #ornanientisfternoon Wtl1 �senau lcadulg the; team, �un> orsThoriaas'eter:ssan d hornored Beckman each finished in a t>te f©r:55th with a snore of 228 as sipj ern P terson,sh t , 75 while B.ecknian shot an o en .round 72' befo>ze shootn r(tX 9 Rosenau :wed off a . S b e to"hack That finis eta' =25 for. `Rt �.'' 1 ,:; :S M1 3 '�'`2"ems. dfs.r-tip : . ' , e GofCI,Acok horn �te :team charn; ronshr . f nislun as the lone team under ` ar for the l P g. P the Tigers at the Yz tQurnarMnt wrtl four under; 860 bv�er the three rounds. Individually, Tim Cha of Prestige fT Irvine tooome ;ihe tournament "title as he came in with back-o-back 70's in the final two �roundstoshoot is :three under, 2 13 . F The PreAtae. at EGA' WEST Oct. 17-18, 2005 Greg Norman Course% -GA WEST t ?27; l56 yards) FINAL TES ESULTS (54hole: totals) .1. UCLA 860 (280 2 1 *289), 2 BYU 870'{295 291 284); 3. UC :Irvine 872 {291-292-289); 4. I1=lino s 87 (293-291-291); 5. tie NOIRE DAME 880 296-298-286 and Pe erdine 880 297-291-290 ; 7. �.. { ) pp ) - Texas ,886 .(297 4290-299), and; Stanford 886 (29 1-296=299); 9. Tor here Colorado 890 {296=299 295); .10: Colorado $92 (290=308-294),; Ohio State 8 7 {302 298- 297) and Oregon 897 (298 3Q6 293),3, [IC "Davis.898 (3Q�=291=3©1:), 14; California 905 297-306-302 15.>UC'Santa Barbara 907 313-296 298 ; 16. Pacific (: 910 (303=307-300); 17. Kansas 9210 {309-304-307); 18. Yale �931.(29.5-3 l 9=317). The Tigers wi°ll next be in action at the -Santa Clara Invitational hosted by Santa Clara University: The opening rounds will be played on October 24 followed by the third and final round on October 25.. http://www.cstv.com/printabie/schools/paci/sports/m-golf/recaps/101805aab.himl?frame ,bottom, Page 1 of 1 Untitled 12/1/05 11:06 . Kansas Men Finish In 17th At The Prestige �:IdiIlIllCLi LiGU ll)i /LiIU }YYk L1l cl GJ1, a T G'J111riGU1 4GLVll I C'sUGl�l 11 �JLQIr;VU, 111 p ul W lltl' Cl 240 Junior placed'90t after a hreefrountotal of 255, ; r The Jayhawks will be back;in action at the Del Walker Classic inLong Beach, -Calif on Nov 34_ - Team Results { Place School Score 1 UCLA 2 BYU 870 f 3 UC-Irvine 872 Jnniar Gary iioodland 4 Illinois -875 T5 Pepperdine 880 T5 Notre Darne 880 T7 Texas 886 T7 Stanford 886 9 Northern Colorado 890 10 Colorado 892 T11 Ohio State 897 -- T11 Oregon 897 13 UC Davis 898 14 California 905 15 LAC Santa Barbara 907 16 Pacific 910 --- 17 Kansas 920 18 Yale 931 Individual Results• 207 http://www.cstv.com/printable/schools/kan/.sports/m-golf/recaps/161905aaa.html?frame=bottom Page I of 2 Untitled 12/1/05 11:35 Al Rosenau Paces Tigers At The Prestige sWh ">Pnnter-Friendly Format The Tigers finished the Prestige. in 16th�place as a team "�E mai! this article Oct. �'8, 2U05 . a Uintaa><f.o homore Chris Rosenau finished tied for 23rd at The Prestige P. g . esday, Oct I, leading Pacific men s golf to a 16th place team finis77, h at the FGA West course osenau fred o rounds of 75 before coming back strong in oles and in. aneven round 71 As` a team the Tigers shot cumulative scores of07 307- w 3Q0 9j10 ate ,7yard;+Greg ©rrrzan cous.e. rs . . . . . . . . . . -w rx7�,?X,, - F#�'i'g`in i`tendQurad #woest_7d, erd, play resumed early -is �rnornXng as Al slayrs,inssh ,xtieirsecnd roundand la ed the f nal 18of:ihe 54 hole P y� �urnannenthl eroo 1th,oseriau leadenteam,un><or� <llfl.as'eterssan 28.. �' d ori�o e arri B eckrnati each finishedn a .tie far SSth with a scor+� of as an sph '.yrpC: . ;-� kN ... � it �;. _�. �= tin Pteronh0t� 75, while Beckman shot an open><ng�round 72 before shoo.; g Rosy' u.: d.off�a entire..:. . back to�back��s' fnal.�rau��1,�to LL fin><s tho tap 2771 5Qr ULAookoe the team chain ionshi finishing as the lone team under par for the the Tigers `at :the tournamentcnth $ four under; 86Q, over the three rounds: Individually, Tim Cha of Prestige /■i r iorne,the:.toumament.title as he cam, wiih back-to=back Vs,. the _ yU}Virv�ne,took L L final two rounris toshoot a =three tinder, 213. y The prestige at 'CAA WEST Oct. 17-18, 2005 Greg Norman Course%PGA WEST {par 72/,7;156 yards) FINAL TES IVI ISI�LTS . (54dole totals): l . UCLA 860 {2:80 291 2/89);. 2 BYI7 8'70 (295-291-284); 3. UC Irvine 872 (291-292-289); 4. Illinois 875 {293-291-291) 5. (tie) NOIRE DAME 880 {296-298-286) and Pepperdine 8880 (297-293-290); 7. Textis 886 .(297=290=299) and.�Stali ord 886 (291-296 299); 9 Northern Colo 890 {296-299 295); 10: Colorado 892;290-308-294); 1 Ohio' Slate 87 (30�=298 297) and Oregon 897 (298 306 "2 3),13. UC Davis 898 ( .0.6-29 -301 California 905 (2977 306-302); 15. UC 'Santa Barbara 907 (313-296-298); 16. Pacific 910 (303' 307 '300); -17. Kansas 920 (309-304-3'1 18. Yale 931(29.5-319-317). "lie Tigers w><ll next be in action at the Santa Clara lnvitational hosted, by Santa Clara University The opening :rounds will be played on October 24 followed by the third and final round -on October 25. 208 http://www.cstv.comlprintable/schoolslpaci/sports/m-golf/recaps/101$05aab.html7frarue=bottom Page 1 of 1 Untitled Individual Results http://www.cstv.com/printable/schools/kan/sports/m-golf/recaps/101805aaa.htm'l?frame=bottom. , 12/1/05 11:06 . Untitled 12/1/05 11:06 AM http://www.cstv.com/printable/schools/kan/sports/m-golf/recapslL01805aaa.htmhframe bottom Page 2 of 2 Untitled 12/1/05 11.06 Jayhawks In 17th At The Prestige c OCt. 17, 2UU5 ` Printer -Friendly.. Farmar E-rhail.th s'article La Quint. , Calif. - The University of Kansas men's golf-tearn is in l7th . lace .in an 18 team I"ield after one rounds of The Presti eat PGA "'Vest in La �� ; round 309 ast nee boles in its second round when play was stopped due to rain. "We were playing much better iri the second xouncl"head coach: Ross Randall said `'We need`to come out and perform thttet tQrnorrovo moue dui the leaderboard:" UCLA is in first after a 280; while Colorado is �n s,econd wi#h a 290. - _ Freshman Zach Freshman Zach Pederson is;n a tie for 39th after a5 the;t round Senior Pete r Peelers°n; Krsnich . is in a ;tie for for 61 st after a 77 jnnior�odland is Fin a ire for 70th. . . . .:; after shooting a 78. Senior Line'ratnmell shot a'7 oriels,n ateor 77th. 'Junior Tyler Dockrng,-, in'900 after'an=8,5: The players w l finish the secondonnd aid play the :third round tom°orrvw. Live SO can be,:,found.at. N�7w aalfstatcoril Team Results Place. School Score l UCLA 280 2 Colorado, 290 T3 Stanford 294 T3 UC-Irvine 291. 5 Illinois 293 T6 BYU 295 T6 Yale '295 T8 Notre -Dame 296 �- T8 NorthernColorado 296 T10 Texas 297 T10 Pepperdirie 297 T 10 California 297 133 :Oregon 298 14 Ohio State 302 15 Pacific 303 16 UC Davis 306 http-//www.cstv.corn/printable/schools/kari/sports/M-golf/recaps/101705,aaa.html?frame=bottom Page l of Untitled 12/2/05 11:26 Bulldogs in 16th Place at The Prestige at PGA West Andrew Vitt shoots hole -in -one Nov.1, 2004 Mark. Matza tmished the day 1 L-o His two -round total ties him for "2 far, rounds out' Yale's toP :thre-11 tournament's : nal l holes. The >Printer. Friendly Format — :'ad C LCL G� OF 'T'9 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 18, 2006 ITEM TITLE: Discussion and Update on the City's Telecommunications Issues RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Discuss current telecommunications issues and their impacts on the City of La Quinta. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None for this action; however, the outcome of Federal and State legislation could affect City revenues in the future. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Due to rapidly -evolving advances in telecommunications technology, the Federal government is working to re -write the 1996 Telecommunications Act. The telecommunications industry is lobbying the Federal government to include provisions that eliminate local franchising, remove "barriers to entry" for new technologies, remove build -out requirements, etc. As a result, the Federal government has crafted the "Communications, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006" (also known as the "Barton Bill"). However, the Barton Bill has serious implications for local governments, including the establishment of a national franchise issued by the Federal Communications Commission, which would negate local franchise agreements and remove local control of: franchise fees, rights -of -way, local customer service standards, local anti -discrimination requirements, etc. In addition, California is also negotiating an Assembly Bill (AB 2987) which would establish a statewide telecommunications franchise. This bill would also eliminate local franchise authority. With this bill, local franchise fees are significantly reduced, emergency communication requirements are eliminated, public programming is reduced, local government's ability to protect its rights -of -way is limited, and requirements for the provision of free services to public schools and libraries are eliminated. The City of La Quinta has written opposition letters for both of the above - listed bills. Bill Marticorena of Rutan & Tucker is the City's special counsel for telecommunications. Mr. Marticorena will present an update and more detailed information about current telecommunications issues. Respectfully submitted, Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager w15 L0- , • a- `O�,/ O OF T9 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 18, 2006 ITEM TITLE: Discussion of the Draft 2006-2007 Economic Development Plan RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION:...•• PUBLIC HEARING: Review the 2006-2007 Draft Economic Development Plan and provide staff with direction on the policies, recommended implementation activities, and overall direction of the City's economic development efforts. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None for this action. The 2006-2007 implementation activities will be included within the fiscal year 2006-2007 budget. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: The City Charter and its principles of "home rule" allow the City sufficient flexibility to undertake economic development activities. The Charter allows the City "to utilize revenues from the General Fund to encourage, support, and promote economic development." BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: The City of La Quinta is in the eleventh year of a proactive economic development implementation effort. In June 1995, the City Council directed staff to initiate an economic development strategic planning process that concluded in May 1996 with the adoption of the first Economic Development Plan. Thereafter, the plan has been reviewed and updated on an annual basis. 0 0 Included as Attachment 1 is the redline Draft 2006-2007 Economic Development Plan for City Council review. Once adopted, this plan will be one of five components that comprise the City 's overall strategic planning effort: the other components include the Capital Improvement Program, Resource Allocation Plan, Annual Financial Management Review, and the 2006-2007 Annual Operating Budget. The past year has seen tremendous retail growth in the Highway 1 1 1 Corridor, most notably, securing two major anchor retailers for the corridor's eastern end. The Draft 2006-2007 Economic Development Plan initiatives include continued marketing of SilverRock Resort golf; entering into a disposition and development agreement for hospitality and retail components of SilverRock Resort; ensuring timely development of the Miles/Washington property; pursuing resort/hospitality opportunities throughout the City; housing activities; and City marketing. The City has commissioned a new Market Study, which is being prepared by Economics Research Associates. This Market Study is more focused than previous studies, taking a closer look at the markets for the City's three major commercial districts (the Village, Highway 1 1 1, and SilverRock Resort), as well as projected retail demand in the sphere of influence area. The Market Study Overview Analysis is attached to the draft 2006-2007 Economic Development Plan as Exhibit B. After today's study session, staff will incorporate the Council's changes and suggestions. A final version will be brought back for Council adoption on May 16, 2006. Respectfully submitted, Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachment: 1. Draft 2006-2007 Economic Development Plan `17 City of La Quinta April 18, 2006 City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, Califomia 92253 ,Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. 309 West 4 Street Santa Ana, California 92701 P: 714.541.4585 F: 714.541.1175 E-Mail: info@webrsg.com ATTACHMENT 1 Deleted: .......................................................................................................... Contents of This Document This document is organized as follows: i) Introduction ■ Rationale for this Economic Development Plan • Participants in Formulating and Implementing this Plan s) Resources, Opportunities, Liabilities and Needs ■ Community Profile ■ Key Assets ■ Liabilities ■ Projected Market Demand ■ Projected City/Redevelopment Agency Financial Resources for Economic Development ■ City/Agency Real Estate Assets ■ Infrastructure Needs/City Capital Improvement Program 3) Business Plan ■ Mission Statement ■ Implementation Policies ■ Fiscal Year 2005-06 Accomplishments a) Highway 111 Corridor b) The Village c) Annexation Feasibility d) Resort/Hospitality Opportunities e) Recreation Opportunities f) Housing g) Marketing ■ 2006-07 Implementation Activities and Target Areas h) Highway 111 Corridor i) The Village j) Annexation Feasibility k) Resort/Hospitality Opportunities 1) Housing m) Marketing n) Recreation Opportunities Formatted: Indent: Left: 1" .................................... .......... ..........:7........ _ Formatted: Bullets and Numbering ......................................................................................................................... Deleted: 06 .............................................................................................................. APPENDIX Formatted: Bullets and Numbering Exhibit A: City/Agency Real Estate Assets Map,..... Deleted: ¶ ................................................................................................................... Exhibit B: ril 2006 OverviewAnal sis of lvlarket a oriunities re ared { _ Deleted: March by Economic Research Associates ERA for the City of La Quinta �1.9 INTRODUCTION PAGE 2 ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA March 5, 2004 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN 4.* The City of La Quinta is embarking on the lellyear of implemen mg the City's efforts have yielded major t Deleted tenth _. economic development initiatives. To date restaurants, a Homewood Suites Hate_l and thepew resort and ;Deleted: creation of ; :.: retailers, upscale venues at SilverRock Resort. The focus for the coming fiscal year is 11ree 1 Deleted: two golf fold. The first involves SilverRock Resort The Redevelopnent Agen--`cy !�� developer ne gtiations involvingthe SilverRock resort orti concludingthe in order to facilitate the development of the bouti ue hotel and feature hotel. The to buildigg'®tli� p._FM %nt A enc WDII Isc lrtltlate d sl n c Ctiy les. fClcit ;i and second olf tours The second entails urthe. def ning the Deleted: continuing the initiatives that generated new "big box" clubhouse , markets he pit s three commercial, districts . (the High ay....... corridor ...the Resort) to ensure that the City's economic h commercial users in e Highway 111 corridor, and interest by resort : developers/operators in SilverRock Village and SilverRock _serve development initiatives will maximize the benefits to each district. The j Resort entails lanr�inq for future retail uses that will serve the antici ated 9Palation j Deleted: will entail growth in the unincor crated area within the City's sphere of influence, `.Deleted: oft .....::::::.::::.:::...:::.:..::::::::::_, ....... City's development efforts will continue to maintain a balance _ .. � Deleted: Finally, t The economic between securing quality revenue -generating development while preserving La to insure that the short-term gain realized Deleted with Deleted: overall ................... Quinta's natural features. The,goal is from achieving revenue -generating uses does not compromise the l n g -ter __. necessity for quality development that withstands the test of time. , the in this Economic Development Plan economic development initiatives presented on attracting and enhancing revenue -generating enterprises, protecting center open space and environmental attributes, and expanding recreation opportunities for La Quinta's residents. This Plan outlines a vision and direction for the City's economic development jected activities. It presents the mission statement, Implementation policies, pro the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency resources, and business plan the City and economic development effort. will follow to sustain a comprehensive Rationale for this Economic Development Plan The economic development process is the deliberate, judicious intervention in the local economy to foster a business climate that facilitates private investment. CITY OF LA QUINTA ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN April 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION PAGE 2 This process is neither exact nor fully predictable, and is more of an art than a science. Economic development is a dynamic, ever changing endeavor because it must constantly accommodate the evolving characteristics of the market place. Thus, the City annually reviews and updates this Plan to ensure that it reflects and responds to current market conditions, and equally as important, the community's collective vision as to how to accommodate these conditions. Finally, this enterprise parallels the activities associated with building a city; thus this Plan embraces a long-term vision rather than a short-term perspective. In 1996, the City of La Quinta adopted the first economic development plan that defined the community's desires for future development, and presented a business plan to guide the City's economic development initiatives. The City then embarked on a planned, pro -active economic development effort for the following reasons: Capture Forecasted Growth for the Coachella Valley A variety of market studies forecast continued growth for the Coachella Valley during the next decade. This is demonstrated by the new major retailers that have located in thepighway 111 corridor during the past year. Due to its prime location and the expanding population of the Eastern Central Coachella Valley the City is positioned to capture a sizable portion of the projected commercial, resort, and residential development through the business expansion and recruitment efforts delineated in this Economic Development Plan. Balance Municipal Revenue and Expenditure Needs The City's primary revenue resources are transient occupancy and sales taxes. During fiscal year 205-06-these revenues comprised 35% of the City's total General Fund revenue; sales tax revenue income generated approximately,,22% of total General Fund revenue and transient occupancy tax revenue will generate approximately 3%o of total GI.eneral Fund revenue. Secondary resources are license/permit fees and property tax revenue. A majority of the City's property tax revenue, however, is allocated to the Redevelopment Agency. Approximately 80% of the land area within the City's corporate boundaries is in one of two redevelopment project areas. Combined, these resources maintain existing, and provide new, services to La Quinta's residential and business communities. Resort and commercial development generates a majority of the municipal revenues received by the City. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUIN IA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN ......................................................... . Deleted: City's ................................................ ..................................................... . Deleted: 2004 Deleted: 05 Deleted: 20 Deleted: 15 222 INTRODUCTION PAGE 3 The City and Redevelopment Agency must continue to enlarge the City's revenue base in order to enhance and expand the quality of municipal services La Quinta residents expect. Enlarging the City's revenue base is particularly important given that the State continues to reallocate local revenue to fund State obligations in order to address its budget deficits. Judiciously Allocate Municipal Resources Like, any business, the City continually balances the allocation of financial resources between service costs and infrastructure investment. To prudently accomplish this task, the City annually implements a comprehensive strategic planning effort that meshes this Economic Development Plan with a Five Year Municipal Service Resource Allocation Plan, a Five Year Capital Improvement Program, Annual City/Agency Financial Management Strategies, and Annual City/Agency Operating Budgets. Since 1994, the City has achieved many short - and long-term financial goals identified through the strategic planning effort. This Economic Development Plan identifies economic development investment strategies and initiatives that are subsequently funded through the annual City/Redevelopment Agency Capital and Operations budgets. Participants in Formulating and Implementing this Plan This Economic Development Plan delineates initiatives that implement the community's vision of its desired destiny. It outlines policies, activities, and resources the City will pledge to guide and/or influence future development decisions. Thus, the primary participants in formulating and implementing this Plan are the residential and business communities that define La Quinta. When first developed, the City sponsored a series of community forums to solicit community input. The City continues to consult with these communities during the Plan's implementation phases. The City Council governs the formulation and implementation of this Plan. Council Members bring forth constituent ideas and needs, and assist with defining the issues, mission, strategy, and overall policies that guide implementation efforts. Finally, City staff plays a strategic role in this endeavor. Staff is charged with the responsibility to monitor market conditions, solicit community input, interface with existing and new users, implement programs and initiatives, and monitor achieved results. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN Section ? Economic Development Plan Strategies and Tasks to Stimulate Private Investment in La Quinta This section presents the background data that was used in developing the Business Plan presented in Section 3; it includes a summary of key assets, presents an overview of projected market demand, delineates projected City/Agency resources, and outlines infrastructure needs. Community Profile i Deleted: 2005 r' Deleted: 06 The City of La Quinta is located in the Eastern Central Coachella Valley; Indian Wells borders the City to the west, Indio to the east, and unincorporated communities to the north and south. Located approximately 2 miles south of Interstate 10, primary access is via State Highway 111 and Washington Street. Per the Wheeler Desert Letter, the City's 2004 population was 6 50Rwith a _m_edian.household _income of "$61_,480. _0nly Indian Wells Deleted. 32,522 and Rancho Mirage had higher median household incomes. In the context of the Coachella Valley, La Quinta also enjoys an emerging population of new families with an average household size of 2.85 persons; 64% of La Quinta's population is under 44 years of age (the median age is 36.4), and persons over the age of 65, historically the most recognized age group in the Valley, comprise only 13.4% of La Quinta's population. Claritas Incorporated, a demographic research firm, estimates that 15.705..persons live within a five Deleted: 132,944 W. mile radius of La Quinta, ;,�43 7 live within a 10 mile radius, and 2 Deleted: 220,389 live within a 15 mile radius. Within the same geographical areas, the Deleted:294,014 estimated average household income was 74 3Ei7, $3 511, and 70,407, i Deleted 72,646 respectively. During 2004,_ total _retail -sales- within_ the- City_of_La Quinta-were 1 Deleted 71306 $og million. The Clty s assessed valuation for- was . 7.9 billion. ....._ Deleted: 68,171^ rDeleted: Key Assets Deleted: 377 Review of the City's physical characteristics and discussions with the residential Deletea: 2004 W and business communities identify the following key community assets: i Deleted: s.27 C. Deleted: 8 ........... T:. ( Inserted: 8 ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN RESOURCES, OPPORTUNITES AND MARKET PROFILE PAGE 5 • an educated, dedicated, and highly motivated residential and business community that share a long history of working in concert to provide a stable environment that supports economic development efforts; • an international reputation for resort and golf amenities resulting from the La Quinta Resort & Club, PGA West, Rancho La Quinta, The Tradition, The Quarry, La Quinta Country Club and SilverRock Resort; • the City hosts renowned golf tournaments such as the Bob Hope Chrysler Classic and The Skins Game, which have helped earn it the title of "America's Ultimate Golfing Destination" by the acclaimed Robb Report; • the Highway 111 commercial corridor that features prime, vacant property of sufficient size to accommodate development that will serve the Eastern Coachella Valley and will generate significant financial returns for both the City and Agency; • a market area with the highest per capita income in the Coachella Valley; • the Village of La Quinta, a pommercial center nestled in the Santa Rosa-------(Deletea:Iowdensity ___� Mountains, that offers a setting that is unparalleled in the Coachella Valley; • La Quinta's commerce, art and cultural heritage as represented by the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce, La Quinta Arts Foundation and La Quinta Historical Society, that supports art and cultural activities attracting patrons from California and the greater southwest; • the 525 acre Agency -owned SilverRock Resort golf and resort property,_hamg _..- to the Arnold Palmer Classic Course which Golf Ma azine selected as one of ".,.. ; Deleted: that .......... the "top ten,new alf COUrses that you can pla Deleted: in the nation Inserted: in the nation • the Lake Cahuilla Recreation Area which provides water sport and other j Deleted: is being developed with a outdoor recreation opportunities; Palmer Design tournament golf course, an ultra luxury resort hotel, • continued strong residential development and sales activity w6 ch enerates a 1 boutique hotel, casitas/residence club l units, a 25,000 square foot significant number of households to support retail, recreation, and service permanent clubhouse, a future second golf course, and related retail, commercial users; recreation and community uses Deleted: that • a highly motivated City workforce that understands the needs of the business ------..-...................__............................................................................" community and the need to process required City approvals within a short time frame; • resources that the City/Agency can dedicate to economic development investment; and • availability of professional office space. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN RESOURCES, OPPORTUNITES AND MARKET PROFILE PAGE 6 Uabilities Though the assets far outweigh the liabilities, there are limitations that the City must account for when implementing its economic development initiatives; these include the following: •competition between Coachella Valley communities_ to provide financial .. . . .. . incentives to major developers and users, which significantly influence their location decisions; • ,ppmpetition. for. golf and resort atroon with other Coachella Valley cities who arUmprov%..,,their public golf amenities in carder Jo attract new, and expand existing, resort and hotel uses; and • eve olvincq retailing trends that render existin retail centers obsolete while potentially decreasing1he need for new e.tail centers. Projected Market Demand The Agency commissioned a new market study to assess market treads that will influence economic development efforts. Economic Research Associates ERA prepared the A ril 2006 Overview Anal sis of Market Opportunities which is included as Exhibit B to this Plan. The Overview Analysis is currentiv under final review: when completed, a synopsis will be woven into this Section. Projected City/Redevelopment Agency Financial Resources for Economic Development As part of its ongoing resource management effort, the City annually evaluates City/Redevelopment Agency financial resources and identifies those resources that can be pledged to economic development initiative develo ment of the 2006 07 Fiscal Year Budget, staff will specifically identify funds available for p;;. economic development initiatives. These funds are basically one-time resources;.; . that will most likely not be renewed when expended. +f, { Deleted: increasing I Deleted: increasing Deleted: users ............................... Deleted: planning to Deleted: and working Deleted: changing ............................................................. Deleted: may decrease ................................................................... . Deleted: traditional Deleted: One of the implementation activities scheduled for 2005-06 is to commission a focused market study to update the following data. Until that study is completed, the following narrative presents the significant findings, quoted directly from the March 2003 market study prepared by Design Workshop Deleted: Community Profile¶ The City of La Quinta is located in Southern California and is an integral part of the Greater Coachella Valley market area, which also includes the cities of Cathedral City, Indio, Palm Desert, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Rancho Mirage, Palm Springs and Indian Wells. La Quinta's location in the east -central Valley places it in the center of the highest -growth area of the Valley, and the City's borders with parts of unincorporated Riverside County offer room for physical expansion.¶ Since the late 1920's, the La Quinta Hotel has inspired wealthy and often famous individuals to escape, relax, play golf and partake in the serenity of the place. Today, the desert resort city which bears the historic resort's name is still a special place to visit; but it also has emerged as one of the finest cities in the Coachella Valley to shop, conduct business and call home for all or part of the year. Deleted:. During the Deleted: 2005 Deleted: 2006-0 City/Agency Real Estate Assets { Inserted: 2006 Deleted: 6 Since 1983, the City and Redevelopment Agency have accumulated real estate Deleted: 7 fiscal year, the City assets as a result of major Infrastructure projects or as part of the Agency's anticipates having $1. ��..... affordable housing efforts. Exhibit A, in the Appendix of this Plan, presents a map l'.. .—.. Inserted: 7 of the real estate assets owned by the City or Redevelopment Agency. Deleted: 41 City/Redevelopment Agency real estate assets currently available for economic Deleted: 00 million to invest in non - development include SilverRock Resort, owned by the Redevelopment Agency, infrastructure and SilverRock -,--:.--.-.... ---..................... and the Cit s holdings located at the to of the Cove. y' g p :i Inserted: 00 Inserted: and SilverRock Resort ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN RESOURCES, OPPORTUNITES AND MARKET PROFILE PAGE 7 Infrastructure Needs/City Capital Improvement Program As part of the annual strategic planning effort the City conducts a comprehensive review of the community's infrastructure needs. The City then addresses these ,needs. through the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program. This Program identifies both current year and projected five-year capital improvement needs and resources, and delineates an annual funding schedule for specific infrastructure projects. This Economic Development Plan is integrated with the Capital Improvement Program to ensure that the infrastructure impediments to specific economic development projects are addressed, or where possible, economic development project implementation activities mitigate site -specific capital improvement needs. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA (.tUIN IA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN i Deleted: is working to address the community's infrastructure 22 7 Section 3- 2C*&07 Economic Development Plan Strategies and Tasks to Stimulate Private Investment in La Quinta In order to proceed with implementation activities, a business plan is required that presents a mission statement describing the intended outcome the community wishes to achieve, and the overall policies that will guide implementation activities. Finally, specific target areas and implementation efforts are detailed. Mission Statement The mission statement the community formulated for this economic development effort is as follows: The mission of the Economic Development effort is to actively support the development and expansion of existing businesses, and to proactively recruit quality revenue - generating uses that diversify and expand the City's economic base, offer a variety of products and services, increase employment opportunities, enhance City/Agency fiscal resources, preserve and enhance La Quinta's unique environment, and contribute to the quality of life for La Quinta residents. Implementation Policies The following policies guide the City's Economic Development implementation efforts. They address resource and staffing commitments, annexation strategies, use of City assets, and refinement of City processes. These policies guide City staff as they pursue implementation initiatives. Active Participation in Economic Development The City will actively implement economic development initiatives by committing resources to market development opportunities through direct contact with property owners, commercial and industrial enterprises, resort and lodging operators, and developers. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1 Deleted:2005 ,i 1 Deleted:06 40 4W 8 IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND NEW INITIATIVES PAGE 9 Financial Resources Commitment The City and Redevelopment Agency will annually dedicate funds to support economic development and infrastructure improvement activities. Business Retention/Expansion ....................................... ................... .......................... ................. I.......... The Citywell work with the La Quints Chamber of Commerce to.acilitate business {Deletes: Strike Team development and expansion opportunities involving existing La Qulnta Deleted identity and businesses. Economic Base Diversification Emphasis will be placed on pursuing opportunities that will dynamically enhance and diversify La Quinta's economic base to include a balance of retail, recreation, and resort uses. City/Agency Private Project Investment City/Redevelopment Agency financial investment will be primarily limited to _ __- ............ underwriting infrastructure and unicipal fee costs, obtaining operating and use .. ,Deleted: coscs .............e.......d.....c.............................. . covenants, and rehabilitating/refurbishing older commercial structures and ................................................................... ..... centers for projects that enhance overall City development and growth ,6ssisted _ j Deleted when considered projects must feature enhanced design and landscaping amenities, d l appropriate building and site maintenance requirements to insure that these ......... .............................. Deleted: Further, a ....... , ,enhanced amenities are maintained for the life of the development. Deleted:. In formulating project specific investment parameters, the City will incorporate ..... ....... . City/Agency Return on Investment When considering City/Redevelopment Ageing investment in commercial resort --_ ---------- ---_--____-----_--- .--.---_.__._._.....__., or office development ro'ects +he Cit /Redevelo ment A enc must achieve P P 1 �# g Y. ��, ; Deleted: that require ............Y................P............... 15% to 18% return on the City/Agency investment by the third year of o eration. \ City/Redevelopment Agency investment to insure their economic ............. The developm rltpriect revenue included in this anal-�is is sales tax. transient 1 viability, occupancy tax and rc ert tax revenue' Clt develo ment nermit and Irrl aCt fee ;Deleted: must by the t revenue may not be includeddevelo ment ro ect revenue. Further Cit as _ .� Deleted: hird year of operation, - service costs must first be deducted from development project revenue The , achieve a ....................................................... City/Redevelopment Agency investment should be fully repaid within a 10-year ;Deleted: in the form of Agency period, with eve attempt to achieve re a ent within a 5- to 8-year period. p every p p yrr1 Y P 1 City/Redevelopment non - � � development fee revenue generated (after City service costs are Private Project Investment - Financial Need j accounted for) on the total dollar 1 amount of City/Redevelopment Agency investment. For commercial, industrial, office or resort 1request ro development projects that P P i Deleted: Further, t City/Redevelopment Agency financial investment, the City/Redevelopment Agency shall find that off -site infrastructure improvement costs, municipal fee costs, and/or property and building refurbishment and rehabilitation costs are so excessive that the project warrants public investment to underwrite some of these costs in order to generate sufficient returns to attract private investment. Further, ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINT A April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN � 49 IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND NEW INITIATIVES PAGE 10 if City/Redevelopment Agency financial investment is targeted towards obtaining operating and use covenants, the City/Redevelopment Agency shall find that the desired user achieves the City/Agency Return on Investment parameters described above and generates additional employment, retail and/or recreation opportunities for La Quinta residents. Reuse of Vacant Commercial Facilities The City/Redevelopment Agency will pro actively work to ensure the reuse of commercial facilities that remain vacant for 6 months or more. These activities will include working with property owners and tenants to identify reuse opportunities, identify site and building improvement needs, and facilitate user/developer recruitment efforts. Highway I I I Corridor Anchor Tenants In order to enhance commercial opportunities the City/Redevelopment Agency as secured wo major retail anchors for the east en_ d of this corridor. In doing so this corridor will have major demand generating anchors located in corridor's west, middle and eastern sectors. The City/Redevelopment Agency will work on filling remaining vacant parcels. The City/Redevelopment Agency will then be in a position to reduce, if not cease, its involvement in facilitating vacant land development and instead focus exclusively on facilitating the reuse of obsolete commercial facilities. Environmental Compatibility In order to maintain, protect and enhance La Quinta's unique physical environment, all new development projects will be reviewed with added emphasis on their compatibility with their environmental setting to insure preservation of La Quinta's unique natural desert and mountain landscape. Regional Transportation Opportunities The City will pursue joint efforts with regional agencies that facilitate the expansion of' rail and air transportation services, including the Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport, to support the transportation needs of La Quinta's resort, commercial, and other uses. Annexation Opportunities The City may pursue annexation opportunities, as requested, that are economically sustainable, enhance the Cit economic futurex and protect environmentally sensitive areas that are crucial to the La Quinta experience. These will include properties that ex and resort..and golf course development opportunities, accommodate commercial, industrial, and transportation uses, protect environmentally sensitive areas and scenic vistas, and enhance ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN _.---(Deleted: will work to Deleted: a ...................................................................................................... i Deleted: it Deleted: enhance IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND NEW INITIATIVES PAGE 11 ............................................................. equestrian opportunities. The City will also review potential impacts on current Deleted: look at __--- residents and seek ays to mitigate impacts, if they exist. ................ Municipal Properties The City will pursue the timely sale and/or development of all City/Agency owned surplus property with uses that maintain, protect and enhance the environment while achieving a return on the initial City/Agency investment. Recreation Opportunities The City will develop a second municipal golf course or other recreational uses that are compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. Further, efforts will be made to develop a comprehensive trail system that links the recreation amenities at Lake Cahuilla and in the Santa Rosa Mountains with the City's residential and resort communities. The City will continue its participation in regional planning efforts to complete a trail system between La Quinta and Palm Desert, inform citizens and residents of the project's progress, and publicize this recreation opportunity once the trail is complete. Streetscape Improvements Future major arterial streetscape and median improvements will be designed to impart a sense of place and a feeling unique only to La Quinta so that residents, visitors and other travelers will experience a sense of arriving at a special destination when traveling to or through La Quinta. Highway 111 Corridor Land Use Diversification The City will encourage the development of commercial, service commercial, office, lodging, theater, and light industrial uses within the Highway 111 corridor to diversify the community's economic base. Education The City recognizes the value of enhancing educational opportunities in the Coachella Valley, and therefore, bgs supported efforts to expand. -the_ ,Californ_ia. Deleted: Will State University, San Bernardino — Palm DesertCampus via a total contribution of $1 000 000 with $250,000 paid this past fiscal year, for the future Health Sciences building._.._._.. __ ......................_..__..... _-_.......... Staff Development City staff will continually work to refine and improve their skills as they relate to fulfilling the mission of the economic development plan and program while reinforcing the perspective that the City's economic survival depends on City ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN 23I IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES, ACCOMPLISNMENTs AND NEW INITIATIVES PAGE 12 staffs ability to serve the public in a courteous, efficient and knowledgeable - Deleel*ete, e d: 20-:- --- 04 _ ------ _._.-. i manner. Deleted: 05 Prepare New and Update Existing Information Documents Deleted: 2004 Deleted: 05 On an ongoing basis, City staff will prepare new, and update existing, promotional 3 Deletes 2005 and community information documents for circulation to potential users and j Deleted:-Miles/Washington developers. i Property. The Agency implemented the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) and transferred Fiscal Year g Accomplishments .:....:...........:.....,:,.:.......,..... ............. .................. .... .. .. .... ............................. ;" { property to CP Development woofor ?development of a Homewood Suites .............. by Hilton hotel, a boutique hotel, The Business Plan presented in the,?005.-06 Economic Development Plan identified restaurant, and related hospitality uses on this property. The DDA also specific target areas and activities to accomplish during the fiscal year. The following facilitates development of a medical summarizes the accomplishments by target area, as of March 2006. ;office center that will be designed to i generate additional demand for the hotel and boutique hotel rooms. The DDA also funds the development of I Highway 111 Corridor market and affordable single-family dwellings to buffer the hospitality and )Marketing Highway 111 Properties. City staff continued to work with Highway medical uses from the adjoining single-family residential 111 property owners to jointly pursue marketing opportunities. This included 1 neighborhoods.¶ ........................,...._. ....:::.:—_ promoting development opportunities at the International Council of Shopping I Deleted: One Eleven La Quinta Centers' Palm Springs Conference, working with property owners to address j centre. Completed activities to I implement the reuse agreement with impediments to development, and facilitating development proposal entitlement Wal-Mart that facilitated the reuse of needs. their retail building with a new retail user, which led to the opening of a Kohl's ... ,�1 nchor Tenant Recruitment. grin thjs eriod the Cit Concluded a land sale ,.Department.Store .................. . ; :Deleted: Continued activities to transaction with Sam's Club who will be constructing a warehouse center, and secure major anchor tenants for the eastern segment of the Highway also entered into a 10- ear operating Covenant with COStco. These actions { 's corridor; this effort resulted in Sam's secured two anchor tenants for the eastern se meta of the Hi hwa 11Corridor. Club locating at the Centre at La Quinta The ViIlage Deleted: Washington Park. The City approved and processed jdevelopment proposals for an Office Parking Facilities. Constructed public parking .facilities at the northwest corner. 1 Depot, Trader Joe's, and other 1 retailers. f of Avenida Bermudas and Avenida Montezuma. The City also commissioned a ; Centre at La Quinta. The City comprehensiveparking study to identify Current rand future parking demand,...and I approved and processed I development proposals for Sam's (} and off -site arkin facilities that will be needed to accommodate this Club, Marshall's, a Goodyear Tire deman Center and various specialty shops.q j Point Happy. The City approved and processed development F r-4 Annexation Feasibility j Deleted: Completed design Deleted: ; the project will begin Annexation. Continued to work with Interested property owners on 1 construction this spring evaluating the costs and benefits of annexations. Deleted: Completed construction I and i Resort/Hospitality Opportunities -J Deleted: nitiated operations of the �� Deteted: n SilverRock Resort. The City.9pened Jhe Phase 1 tournament go course -� .......... ,�• ' Deleted: Also completed (the Arnold Palmer Classic Course at SilverRock). The A nc ©nducted a ,: construction of: a temporary clubhouse (remodel of the existing developer/operator solicitation process that resulted in an Exclusive ranch house), on -and off -site ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUIN IA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN 23240 4 IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND NEW INITIATIVES PAGE 13 Housing Negotiation Agreement withDestinationDevelopment Com,pan,_y_._faQC.),_ Lowe inter rises Com an v. The A enc then acre ted a conce tual Site Ian in June 2005 and authorized staff to negotiate a property disposition and development agreement (DDA)The current schedule anticipates presenting the DDA to the Cit Council and Agency Board for consideration in June �a Quinta Rental Housing Program.. Tl�... e A�enc�old homes to ,residents from the . Vista Dunes Mobile Home Park, who could qualify for a first trust deed mortgage and who I. saved funds for a down payment and closing costs. All thre home sales were to very low income households. ................. atercoior Site construction activities commenced with home sales underwThe Affordable Housing. Agreement will facilitate develo ment of . . 149 single-family homes affordable to moderate -income households aged 55 years and older. Vista Dunes Mobile Home Park. The Agency acquired this older mobile home park in May 2004 with all 92 households successfully relocated b January 2005 The site and building lans are under final review with site improvements and home construction activities s jartinq in July 200 Avenue 48/Dunes Palms Road (Hammer) Property. The Agency purchased this 27.75 acre property in July 2004. In Jul 2005 the A enc selected _the_ Coachella Valley_Housing-Coalition(CVH to -design an, off- rdable multi-famil develo meat, and to conduct ro`ect structuringand fundingnegotiations. These activities concluded with bath the A enc and CVH aeroving a disposition and development agreement in lYtarc t 2006. The curing tax credit and State multi-famil b usin program fundi.ng, and initiatin site and buildin construction . .......................... . Marketing Television Advertisin . F=c onomic development infomercial from pervious Year aired in Orange County. In addition, two new 30-second spots ; were produced and aired locally, as well as in Orange and Los Angeles Counties promoting La Quinta as a great place to visit for shopping, dining, and golf. Print Advertising. Launched a Stay/Play & Shop/Dine campaign via the Los Angeles Times, The Desert Sun, and Desert Entertainer. Advertised in the following program guides/publications: International Council of Shopping Centers ICSC ; Bob Hope Chrysler Classic; La Quinta Arts Festival;. Palm Springs Life,• and Official State Visitor's Guide. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN Deleted: and will potentially lead to a future disposition and development agreement. .............. Deleted: La Quinta Housing Program. The Redevelopment Agency continued to implement the La Quinta Housing Program that funds second trust deed mortgages, residential rehabilitation loans, and the purchase of dilapidated dwellings. A total of 25 second trust deed loans were funded, allocated to low and moderate -income households. ¶ Deleted: to Deleted: facilitate its redevelopment with single-family dwellings affordable to very low income residents. To date relocation settlements have been achieved with 87 of the 92 residents; 74 residents have relocated from the Park, with the remaining 13 awaiting escrows to close on their new single family or mobile home units. Site and dwelling planning has commenced for the development of 80 single-family and duplex dwellings that will be rented to family households. The rents will remain affordable to very - low income family households for 55 years. Site improvements and home construction activities should commence in the fall of 2005 Deleted: Subsequently the Agency has prepared a preliminary site plan and Request for Qualifications (RFQ) that will be circulated to developers in March 2005 to design and construct multi -family dwelling and park uses on 15.82 acres located northwest of the Dune Palms Road and Avenue 48 intersection. Deleted: Infomercial Deleted: Revamped the economic development infomercial to include special effects, updated footage, new interviews and features on the La Quinta lifestyle and the SilverRock golf course. The infomercial was aired in various markets throughout the State Formatted: Font: Arial Deleted: and IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND NEW INITIATIVES PAGE 14 Public Relations. Prepared and issued press releases ort numerous items_ of interest. Coordinated a feature article for Jetsettin the West Magazine and initiated working relationship with editor of LQ Magazine for continued City coverapq, Business Expositions/Special Event Attendance. Participated in C.� SC's Western Division Conferences ffizNet 20 Chambers of La Quinta, Indio, and Coachella), and the City's annual picnic. jCity Communication Pieces. Produced City.. Re ort newsletter on a .. -.-.......... quarterly basis for distribution to La Quinta residents. created a third annual City calendar for distribution to La Quinta residents featuring and promoting SilverRock Resort, initiated re -design of City Pages in the Chamber monthly newspaper. Deleted: the fire truck donation, mosquito abatement efforts, and grand opening of the new skate park Deleted: Desert Magazine Deleted: the International Council of l Shopping Centers's { Deleted: and B Deleted: 5 Deleted: Annual Newsletter Deleted: a third annual Deleted:. ,Marketing Recruitment Program.__ Com-pleted business recruitment program__. _.. Deleted: City Calendar. Created a _________ ----—__— °�-second City calendar for distribution via _esident_survey_,_and_ creation of collateral material_for_targeted businesses_ to La Quinta residents.¶ with goal of recruiting desired tenants into existing commercial centers and those underway. Deleted: Launched business program involving workshop for realtors/brokers/developers, Community Services. Maximized exposure for various community events and programs, e.g. City _Picnic Community Concertand classes offered.-- Deleted: such as the throughout the Year. Created and mailed spring postcard to La Quinta _ �commu _residents announcing springtime events in the City. Deleted: and othnity- oriented events. SilverRock Resort marketing additional accomplishments include: Outdoor Billboard Advertisingt Rotator (traveling) billboards were secured_1< and rotated throughout the Valley at prominent locations. Television Advertising. -second spots were broadcast locally and _during,-,,--.. various golf tournaments and major sporting events. Also, the 7 Annual Jim Murray SilverRock Alumni Challenge was played and televised in December 2005 on Fox Sports Network throughout Southern California. print Advertising. _advertised in The Desert Sun and various golf, publications such as Desert Golf Magazine Palm Springs Life, Fore `. Magazine, Golf News, Southern California Golf News, and Southland Golf. Sales Tool Kit/Media Kit Waiting on official word for the 2007 Bob Hope Chrysler Classic before collateral material is printed. ROSFNOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN Deleted: SilverRock Websit—� Deleted: Established the SilverRock Resort website (www.SilverRock.org) that presents detailed information about the project and the golf course. Took various beauty shots of golf course for website, advertising, and other promotional efforts Deleted: Public Relations Deleted: Released press releases that updated both the local and golf communities regarding progress pertaining to course construction, operations, resident card and grand opening activities. In addition, assembled and distributed comprehensive media kits, editorials and articles Formatted: Superscript Deleted: Pre -opening Deleted: Created and launched a pre -opening ad campaign that featured golf course photography, hole renderings, and Arnold Palmer characteristics. Ads were placed in numerous golf publications (e.g., Golf News, Desert Golf) and newspapers IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND NEW INITIATIVES PAGE 15 public Relations. Continued to research and implement public relations efforts Issued press releases on various SilverRock items of interest. 7 Implementation Activities and Target Areas The Citypconom_ic development initiatives have attracted ma'or nchor retailers to Jhe Highway 111 corridor, develo ect_ the Arnold Palmer Classic golf course�t SilverRock F Resort, and initiated negotiations with Destination Development Comp ny DDC s. regarding the bouti ue hotel resort hotel and resort retail villa a properties at., ilverRRtok Resort. During4. Q7, the Economic Development focus Will entail. Working with Highway 111 Corridor ro ert owners to facilitate building and site reuse opportunities, to accommodate evolving retail trends and the reuse and/or ex a nsiQn of existing, retail facilities; • Ex lorin o ortunities to develo a mixed -use '"'lifestyle'"' center that combines entertainment venues With retail and residential uses. in the Highway 111 Corridor; ,,ompletinc And implemertinc the development prn,m for the bouti lct e and resort hotels at SilverRock Resort; Revise/Update Rack Cards. Created and printed a new rack card which Deleted: Hotel Solicitation/Business Systems provides current golf rates and relevant information including directions, website address, and hone number. Deleted: Designed unique P SilverRock letterhead and business cards, and produced booklets/maps for hotel developer/operator solicitation Deleted: Resident Card and\ Brochure Deleted: Designed La Quinta resident card and corresponding informational brochure Deleted: Event Planning. Coordinated a site visit by Mr. Palmer in August 2004 and the Classic Course grand opening on March 1, 2005 which resulted in attendance of an estimated 1,000.1 Deleted: 2005 1 Deleted: 2005 j Deleted: 06 ..... ... .... .... ... .... e Desi nin theSilverRock-, ermanent clubhouse and the second golf course at Deleted city 1 Deleted is looking to continue with Resort', existing retail user and resort development efforts while initiating • Ex I®rin { oqnitieS tC) develop Urban Infill reSldentlal USeS in - or near the j planning efforts that will better __�....._.,..�........_p.p...-.-.-.._ ._......_.W........_ .--- j position the City's three commercial Villa e to increase demand for the commercial and office uses' and districts to accommodate the next cycle of development opportunities. ¶ Formatted?Bullets and Numbering Evaluatin the retail demand potential and designating additional property to i._._.._ accommodate new retail centers in PlanninQ Areas 1 and 2. The Redevelo went A enc 's rime focus will be to facilitate the development of the, Deleted:¶ w,.... boutique -and ,resort, hotels, at SilverRock Resort, and to initiate the design activities for l Deletes: A the ermanent clubhouse and second golf course. Market research indicates that there (Deleted hospitality is sufficient demand to accommodate a new bouti ue hotel in the Coachella Valle, Deleted: uses market. In order to accommodate additional golf play at the Palmer Classic course generated by the bouti ue hots( atrrans the ermanent clubhouse is needed As set I Deleted: continue marketing the Arnold Palmer Classic Course to both fOlil I in the SilverRock Master Plan and supported b ritarket research, the second golf 1 local and visiting golfers. Another course will be needed to accommodate the additional golf la enerated by the resort focus will be to further establish the I Village as a community center by hotel. In Order to insure a timely opening of the Second Course, the.Agency. will initiate 1 facilitating infill development, which course design and site _Plannin _activities as art of its 2006-07 ca [tal improvement could include live/work housing _ .: efforts 'Deleted: . ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND NEW INITIATIVES PAGE 16 Another Agen.cy focus will be to enerate o ortunities to facilitate urban infill development in and adjacent to the Villa e. Market research and discussions with the develo went community indicate that the current land values combined with current parking re uirements limit the economic feasibility of residential development. The Agency ma need to address this potential..imbalance b facilitafiin land urchase and sale Iran ctiorls, _and 2y workings with the City_to ex lore on -and off -site _periti alternatives. During the past 11 ears the Cit 's economic development efforts have generated a majority of the retail uses that populate the Highway 111 Corridor. This effort established the Corridor s_ prime regional retail center, However, La Quinta residents have voiced the desire to have new pedestrian oriented entertainment venues in La �unta.Given the reciiv al draw of the _Highway _..1_1..1....._Corridor.,. locating ammixed use fi._....__ lifestyle center in the Corridor would be appropriate, A lifestyle center typically includes movie theaters restaurants, coffeehouses,. -bookstores a health club and urban residential uses. However, the limited vacant land opportur hies ithin the Corridor may limit to City's opportunities. L?_..e•9!tail _ rpp rtartt ity._economic develoRmentirtitative involves planningfar future retail development to serve future growth in Plannin Areas 1 and 2. Initial de_velor)ment_and 000ulation oroiecti©ns indicate that these Planning Areas may accommodate from �0 DQ0 to 99 9�0 residents. Given the distant location from the existin commercial Centers within the Cit , 500 000 to 600,000 leasable s uare feet of s,.•pgge locallservinc �c©rrtmerCial develo meet could be supported in this area at buildout. As art of the Cit 's annexation strata iC lannin activities slated for 2000-07 that will focus on Planninq Areas 1 and 2 additional anal sis of the retail potentia.1 will be conducted. Further iven the residential emphasis of the current land use policies that govern development in these Planning Areas combined with the fact that a majority of thisroper is located in redevelopment Protect Area under the jurisdiction of Riverside County, the City would gain limited operations revenue from annexing this area. AS art of the Cif 's strata is lannin effort new revenue sources must be identified to insure that municipal_ service casts associated with these Plannina Areas are funcie b munlc;i al revenues cienerated within these Rannina Areas. i Deleted: Of final note, the City will j work to identify the area of Highway I I I Corridor specialization of i ity s three commercial districts to insure that its economic development efforts benefit Activities to Accomplish in *Continue to market Highway 111 corridor ; each district. The first task will entail commissioning a focused market 2906 7: development opportunities to retail, auto ;study to better identify the patrons °, j that the Village, SilverRock Resort dealers, hospitality and family and the Highway I I I corridor serve. restaurant/entertainment developers and j Using this information, the City will I then craft targeted initiatives for each operators in conjunction with property p ! of these districts aimed at facilitating owners. i the development of commercial, resort, cultural and other uses. 1 • Monitor the implementation of the Deleted:2005 I Deleted: 06 ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN fW IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND NEW INITIATIVES PAGE 17 Disposition and Development Agreement to ensure timely completion of hotel, restaurant, medical office and residential development on the Miles/Washington property. .................................... -! Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.75" • Facilitate building and site reuse ;Formatted: Indent: Left: o", Q ortunities to accommodate evolvingHanging: 0.16", Bulleted +Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0" + Tab after: 0.25" retail trends and the reuse and/or expansion i + Indent at: 0.25", Tabs: 0.16", List gtgx stln _ret@jl L ilitieS. _tab._+..Not at 0.25"..................... ........................................................... • Ex lore o ortunities to locate a mixed -use "°lifest ie" center that combines entertainment venues with retail and residential Uses in the Highway 1.11 ' Deleted: secure an anchor user for the eastern section of this corridor. Corridor. ---- ________- __.__.__ .._._.._. _..__ ___- The ViIlage Activities to Accomplish in • Conclude arkin capacity,and location Deleted: <#>Complete P _ .. .. g._ .._. I improvements to the public parking lot 200 ,-0 Studies that identlf Current and future 1 located at the northwest corner of _ a� rking_ demand, and the means and 1 Avenida Bermudas and Avenida locations to accommodate these dernand5 Montezuma.¶ Deleted: duct a review of • Ex lore opportunities to develop urban infill residential uses in or near the Villaqe to increase demand for the Commercial and office use, Continue to explore commercial retail development opportunities. Annexation Feasibility Activities to Accomplish in •-Develop a annexation strategic plan that will ,2906 7 enerate land use and fiscal recommendations that guide future Planning Area 1 and 2 annexations. • Work with the County of Riverside to identif ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN Deleted: 5 Deleted: 6 ;.-.—.... :..— ..-::::::-:. W -:. ..................... Deleted: and site development standards to determine if they limit j commercial development activity. This effort will include a parking capacity analysis. i Deleted: Identify and facilitate I live/work loft housing opportunities ....................................................................................................................... . Deleted: Continue to discuss potential annexation opportunities and review the potential impacts on current services and financial resources 7 Deleted: 2005 Deleted: 06 �37 IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND NEW INITIATIVES PAGE 18 hove the ON may assume_ some of the currents redevelopment authority and revenue as Planning Area 1 and 2 properties are annexed into the City of La Quinta. • Evaluate the use of non -property tax based revenue vehicles in order to accommodate annexation requests. _._ ....._ ..__ _____...._._.. ___...._-_-------- __. ______- _ _._... • Evaluate the retail demand pCltential and j Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", Tabs: Not at os° designate additional ro ert to ! accommodate new retail centers in Formatted: Bullets and Numbering ^ Planning Areas 1 and 2. Resort/Hospitality Opportunities Activities to Accomplish in • Enter into a Disposition and Development ' Deleted. 2005 OC : Agreement_ with a -Destination Development I Deleted 06 Company (QDQ for SilverRock Resort. 1, Deleted: hotel/hospitality developer ....................................................................................................................., • Complete. -and implement the development pro rams for the boutique and resort hotels. .............. Formatted: Bullets and Numbering • Initiate the site lannin and facilities deli n _ _ recesses for the..permanent, clubhouse and Deleted: Initiate design andT T _\ the second Golf course at SilverRock Resodevelopment activities for the rt permanent clubhouse at SilverRock Resort • Begin conceptual planning for the retail component of SilverRock Resort. ....................................................................................................................... x....................proposals...................................................................................................................D le ed: <#>Market an additio nal • Solicit from landowners and boutique and resort hotel site developers to jointly develop additional resort opportunities. ¶ and hospitality uses throughout the City....................................................................................................................... Housing Activities to Accomplish in • Initiate and gom lete site. improvement and �: pT: home construction activities at Vista .Dunes.. . • Purchase and reserve additional property for future affordable housing development. *Explore the feasibility of rehabilitating or ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN ....................................................................................................................... . Deleted: conclude 'i Deleted: T2005 _ Deleted: 06 1"!38 IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND NEW INITIATIVES PAGE 19 redeveloping the remaining mobile home Deleted: s par -within the community Identify rehabilitation and/or redevelopment opportunities involving existing residential units. ............................................................................................................... ,Monitor..the implementation of the Affordable Deleted: Conclude a disposition and development agreement for the sale Housin A reement with Coach! It Valle and development of the Dune Palms HOUSin COaIItIOn CVNC for the land Sale 1 Road/Avenue 48 multi -family �� ;development. and development of -2.1.8 affordable multi-.............................................................................-...................................; famil rental dwellings at the Dune Palms Road/Avenues 48 prppgrt . • Sell additional units in the La Quinta Housing Program to very low-income households. Marketing Activities to Accomplish in General City Marketing • Create new television spots to promote new Deleted: <#>Promote a "Shop, Dine, Play, and Stay" campaign in La shopping and dining with context of City's Quinta via television¶ 25 anniversary Formatted: Superscript • Continue o run out -of -market City 30- ' FormatteddBullets and Numbering — - second spot in Los Angeles and Ora I Deleted: advertising in local event program guides such as ICSC and Counties the Bob Hope Chrysler Classic __� • continue print "play, stay, shop, and dine" Deleted: Target key and desired businesses via a direct mail piece advertising in newspapers such as Los — - =--- Formatted: Font: Not Italic Angeles Times and The Desert Sun. . _...-_ -__.. Undertake parallel shop/dine/25 • th-______ '_:- Formatted: Bullets and Numbering anniversary campaign via radio and { Formatted: Superscript publications such as LQ Magazine and The Desert Sun • x lore new City.website promotion In - Deleted: Continue to participate in conjunction with City's 25" anniversary trade shows, e.g. ICSC and BizNet - Formatted: Superscript • Continue gdvertising in various program - Deleted: annual sponsorship of the guides and publications such as: Date Festival International Council of Shopping Centers, Bob Hope Chrysler Classic, and explore CVA co-ops ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN r)n91�4 0 IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND NEW INITIATIVES PAGE 20 • Continue to advertise in Palm Springs Life (October "Cities" Issue) • Continue to participate in trade shows and special events, e.g. ICSC, BizNet, City picnic community concert • Maintain a contingency account for unique advertising opportunities Formatted: Bullets and Numbering , • Continue public relations opportunities with Deletes: City Communication¶ issuance Of press releases' with focus on Deleted: to advertise in Palm t Springs Life (October "Cities" issue) 25 anniversa _=------=------- �Formatted: Superscript • Produce a City calendar as .gift and _ _ . Deleted: monthly communication piece • Produce a quarterly City Report or La rdirectioneleted: consistent with Council Quinta residents • Complete re -design of City Pages in the Gem (Chamber monthly publication) • Create material to promote Community Services events, such as post cards and posters ,._ ---L Formatted: Bullets and Numbering • Continue to .produce quarterly- -recreational - ----------- brochure 4o gromote special grograms and classes • Create 2_, Year Anniversary Committee • Design 25t' Year Anniversary Logo---------------- Amold Palmer Classic Course Marketing • Conti nu ....rotator billboard_ s ,and ensure readability • Explore possibilityof producing new 30- second TV spot to air locally and nationally • Print Advertising — advertise in golf publications such as pesert Golf Magazine-_---- and,�alm Springs Life, and ,The Desert Sun f- ................ . • Continue„ esearch and implement. public ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN Deleted: P Deleted: and issue press releases on classes, trips, special events, etc. Deleted: <#>Promote events aimed at drawing more people to the Village¶ Formatted: Superscript J Deleted: Explore creating a basic 1 walking map of the Village ) Formatted: Bullets and Numbering Formatted: Superscript Deleted: Outdoor advertising — one Deleted: placed as a carry-over item from McMurry contract Deleted: Air 30-second TV spots ---] locally and nationally Formatted: Font: Italic f Formatted: Font: Italic ___ 1 Formatted: Font: Italic, No lunderline Deleted: <#>Develop a sales/media tool kit for tournament solicitation¶ - Deleted: R IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND NEW INITIATIVES PAGE 21 ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. April 18, 2006 relations opportunities with positive messages, e.g., national recognition by Golf Formatted: Font: Not Italic Magazine, ............... . • Advertise in non -golf publications, e.g., in- ' Formatted: Bullets and Numbering flight magazines • Contract professional services for Deleted: <#>Update rack cards and other collateral material¶ ,,maintenance of SilverRoc website _ Deleted: M �1 { Deleted: ain I CITY OF LA QUINTA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN z4i Exhibit Economic Development Plan Strategies and Tasks to Stimulate Private Investment in La Quinta ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA April 18, 2006 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN Deleted: 2005 1 Deleted: 06 �' d EXHIBIT B Economics Research Associates OVERVIEW ANALYSIS OF MARKET OPPORTUNITIES CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR THE CITY OF LA QUINTA APRIL 2006 ERA PROJECT NO. 16469 INTRODUCTION The City of La Quinta is in the process of updating its 2006-2007 Economic Development Plan which sets forth objectives, strategies, and initiatives in order to shape future City development and ensure adequate services and facilities for City residents and visitors. The identification and analysis of market opportunities and constraints is an integral part of the Economic Development Plan. Economics Research Associates (ERA) was retained by the City to assist in evaluating a range of economic and real estate market issues which will help shape the plan in the near- and mid-term. In addition to providing an analysis of socioeconomic and demographic forces which will influence development intensity and patterns in the City and other parts of the Coachella Valley, ERA's analysis focuses on market conditions and development opportunities relative to four specific project areas: • Highway I I I Commercial Corridor • Downtown Village • SilverRock Resort • Sphere of Influence Annexation Each of these areas is addressed in the summary of findings with documentation and analysis contained in the full report. Economics Research Associates City ojLa Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Key findings and conclusions regarding market opportunities relative to the targeted project areas within the City of La Quinta are summarized below. Demographics • The Coachella Valley year-round population has expanded significantly since 1990 at a rate of about 3.6 percent compared with overall state population growth of 1.3 percent per year over the same period. Permanent population in the City of La Quinta has increased more rapidly over this period as well. Between 1990 and 2000, permanent population increased in the City by over 12,000 (7.8% annual rate); another 12,000 population has been added since 2000 (8.8% annual rate). La Quinta's share of total Coachella Valley population has increased from 4.8 percent in 1990 to 7.4 percent in 2000, and 9.2 percent presently. Coachella La Quinta East Valley Valley Population 1990 111200 114,300 230,500 2000 23,700 1645700 318,100 2005 36,100 204,300 391,600 2010 45,000 276,000 478,500 2020 54,000 403,000 645,500 Average Annual Growth 1990-2000 1,250 5,040 8,760 2000-2005 2,480 79920 14,700 2005-2010 15780 14,340 17,380 2010-2020 1,900 129700 16,500 Average Annual Growth Rate 1990-2000 7.8% 3.7% 3.3% " 2000-2005 8.8% 4.4% 4.2% 2005-2010 4.5% 6.2% 4.1% 2010-2020 3.6% 3.9% 3.0% • For purposes of this study, the "East Valley" consists of the region generally extending east of Highway 74 to Coachella, and includes all of the City of La Quinta, Indio, Coachella, Indian Wells, portions of Palm Desert, and unincorporated zones. Residential and visitor activity in this area provides market support for many businesses and services in the City of La Quinta. Substantial growth has occurred and is expected to continue in this area. Population in the Economics Research Associates City of La Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 2 �. 4 5 defined East Valley increased from 164,700 in 2000 to 204,300 presently, such that the area has accounted for approximately 55 percent of the total growth in the Coachella Valley over the past five years. • Permanent population in the Coachella Valley is projected to continue to increase at a 4.1 percent average annual rate over the next five years, slowing to about 3.0 percent between 2010 and 2020. The East Valley area population, which includes the City of La Quinta potential annexation area, is forecast to increase from 204,300 in 2005 to 276,000 in 2010, and 403,000 by 2020. The average growth of about 13,000 population per year will represent 80 percent percent of the total valley's growth over the next 15 years. • La Quinta's population growth will largely depend on annexation actions. Assuming extensive annexation of unincorporated County property lying southeast of the City would result in population increasing from 36,100 currently to 114,000 by 2020 and 160,500 at buildout. City of La Quinta Population Existing Annexation Year Boundaries Area Total 2005 36,100 2010 45,000 2020 545000 Buildout 60,600 6,000 42,100 15,000 60,000 601000 114,000 99,900 160,500 • The Coachella Valley and La Quinta also have large seasonal population. During the prime season of January -April, peak seasonal population has grown at a much more modest rate. Coachella Year La Quinta East Valley Valley 1994 89700 46,800 103,500 2000 11,300 57,200 117,200 2004 13,900 64,500 127,900 2010 17,000 77,000 145,700 2020 21,700 98,500 177,600 Growth of seasonal population is expected to increase at a more modest pace than permanent population. While the aging baby boom generation will continue to create demand for second home product, this growth in the Coachella Valley is Economics Research Associates ERA No. 16469 City of La Quinta Page 3 partially offset by conversion of pre -retirement second homes to primary residents by retiring households. • In general, the Coachella Valley and City of La Quinta resident age profile reflects a somewhat older population compared with the statewide distribution: Percentage Distribution Coachella Age Cohort La Quinta Valley California Under 19 31% 27% 30% 19-54 46% 48% 50% 55-64 10% 9% 9% Over 65 13% 16% 11 % Total 100% 100% 100% Median Age 36.4 37.3 33.8 • La Quinta permanent residents are more affluent, while east Coachella Valley residents in general are slightly less so that statewide norms: Annual Household Income Household Distribution La Quinta East Valley California Under $25,000 18% 28% 21 % $ 25,000- 49,999 27% 30% 24% $ 50,000- 99,999 34% 27% 31 % $1001,000-149,999 11 % 8% 14% $150,000-199,999 4% 3% 5% Over $200,000 6% 4% 5% Total 100% 100% 100% Median Household Income $61,480 $47,924 $54,300 • Residential units authorized by building permits in La Quinta since 1990 are as follows: Average Annual Units Permitted Period Single Multiple Total 1991-1995 395 --- 395 1990-2000 15059 78 15137 2001-2005 1,070 174 15244 The building permit activity is consistent with population growth. About 70 percent of the new units developed over the past five years serve as primary residences. Economics Research Associates City of La Quanta ERA No. 16469 Page 4 � • La Quinta retail sales activity has soared with the increase in commercial inventory within the City: La Quinta Retail Sales (millions) Current Constant Year Dollars 2005 Dollars' 2001 $297.9 $322.4 2002 327.8 355.6 2003 389.4 413.7 2004 510.9 527.1 2005 669.3 669.3 'Current dollars adjusted to 2005 dollars applying U.S. Consumer Price Index — all urban consumers. SilverRock Resort Golf Course The first 18-hole SilverRock championship golf course is now in its second year of operation. Course performance in its first year was reasonably favorable in light of some delays in opening resulting largely from unusually heavy winter rain and course drainage problems, which have since been rectified. Golf play in the first quarter of 2006 has been at or slightly above budget, with expectations that the course will generate about 35,000 rounds for the 2005-2006 fiscal year. At this level, the course will approach, although remain somewhat below the operating breakeven point by about $500,000 per year. Based on the current operating structure and policies, the course will reach operating breakeven at about 40,000 annual rounds, or about 5,000 more than 2005-2006 play. It is expected that play in fiscal 2006-2007 will total about 38,000 rounds, such that modest subsidies will continue to be required, with breakeven not reached until the initial complement of overnight accommodations at SilverRock is on-line. Annual resident play in 2005-2006 will total approximately 11,000 rounds, or about 30 percent of total play. This level of resident play is consistent with pre -development planning projections (ERA original estimates based on 12,000 resident rounds). Residents are offered discounted play at $55 per round compared with peak season rates of $145 Economics Research Associates City ojLa Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 5 /� Q 4W "'L V weekdays and $160 weekends, but residents cannot book tee times more than three days in advance. Elimination of the resident discount rate would increase the average greens fee, but the higher rate would result in reduced play such that the net financial benefits would be nominally positive. The course has been operating from the temporary Ahmanson House clubhouse. While this clubhouse clearly is suboptimal in terms of size, location, and content, it has satisfactorily accommodated golfers' needs until a permanent clubhouse is constructed. Plans for the resort element have progressed with expectations that a DDA between the City and developer, Lowe Enterprises, will be finalized by mid-2006. The plan effectively has evolved into a three-phase program: Phase I — Dog Bone • 162 condominium hotel units (210 keys) Meeting and conference facilities (10,000 square feet) • Restaurant (8,000 square feet) • Spa (8,000 square feet) Phase II — Resort/Second Hotel • 90 core hotel rooms (resort owned) • 180 condominium hotel units (200 keys) • Meeting and conference space (20,000 square feet) • Condominium hotel/fractionals — 90 units (91 keys) • Retail complex (75,000 square feet) Phase III — Resort Casitas • Overnight accommodations (150-200 keys) Phase I • The first phase of overnight accommodations will be developed and marketed as a condominium hotel. The unit design, features, and market orientation is consistent with very high participation in a rental program. Within the context of Securities and Exchanges Commission regulations regarding real estate "securities," a transient occupancy in -lieu fee should ensure City tax receipts with Economics Research Associates City of La Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 6 the condominium hotel product. Based on the present planning, first occupancy is scheduled to occur in fall of 2008. • The first phase of accommodations (162 units — 210 keys) should generate about 8,000 annual rounds of golf at SilverRock, assuming 70 percent annual occupancy and a .15 golf -to -room -night generation ratio. The existing 18-hole golf course has sufficient capacity to accommodate these additional rounds. • In addition to the golf course, a freestanding dinner house restaurant (250-300 seats), a 10,000-square-foot complement of group conference/meeting rooms, and an 8,000-square-foot spa are proposed. The mix and sizing of these facilities appears appropriate for the first phase overnight accommodations. • Depending on market conditions, sales strategies, and various other factors, it is likely that the 160 Phase I units may require a two-year absorption period. This could affect somewhat the timing of the Phase II resort hotel. • Construction of the permanent clubhouse — a 16,000-square-foot facility, excluding cart storage — is scheduled concurrently with the first phase resort element. One perspective is that this timing would signal the strong commitment of the City to prospective Phase I unit buyers. Development of the clubhouse also would benefit the golf course through enhancing the overall golf experience. • The alternative to developing the clubhouse in Phase I is to defer its construction so as to open concurrently with Phase II, at the same time the resort hotel and second golf course open. While the additional expenses related to operating a permanent clubhouse should be recovered through additional net operating revenues, delaying the clubhouse opening would postpone the need for the extensive capital commitment related to the permanent clubhouse. Moreover, the cost of operating the Ahmanson House, once the permanent clubhouse is opened, will become an added burden. • The second phase of overnight accommodations will represent the largest concentration of resort facilities at SilverRock including overnight accommodations with about 380 keys. These keys will consist of a small conventional resort -owned core of about 90 hotel rooms, 180 condominium hotel units (200 keys), and a lower density 90-unit casita product (91 keys) which could be marketed as whole ownership condominium hotel units or an interval ownership product such as fractional interests. Economics Research Associates City of La Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 7 n • Development of the second 18-hole golf course would be concurrent with Phase II overnight accommodations. This timing is appropriate as the additional capacity will be needed when the additional room inventory is available for occupancy. Depending on the final mix of product, the 380 keys should generate 10,000 to 15,000 additional rounds of golf annually at SilverRock. • At present, the SilverRock developer anticipates the start of Phase II will trail Phase I by about 6 to 12 months. The timing of Phase II will, in large part, be determined by the pace of absorption in Phase I. If absorption of Phase I occurs at 80 to 100 units per year (two-year absorption period), Phase II may be delayed by 18 to 24 months. However, the core of 90 resort -owned conventional hotel rooms in Phase II could be initiated prior to completion of Phase I, with the condominium hotel sales effort coordinated with Phase I performance. • Consideration has been given to development of a golf training center/academy on the north end of the golf practice range. The primary benefit accruing to SilverRock from the presence of a training center/academy is image enhancement and national exposure in the marketplace, both which should indirectly benefit the golf course and the resort operations. The development is not substantially dependent on the resort for market support nor will it directly generate a large number of room -nights. As such, the timing of development of a training center/academy should be influenced by available opportunities and their related economic terms, and not necessarily limited to the timing of other elements of the project. • A retail/entertainment center on a seven -acre site directly south of the resort hotel is to be developed as part of Phase II. The preliminary development program calls for about 55,000 square feet of leasable floor area on the ground floor, and 20,000 square feet on the second level. • Based on the number of keys and type and mix of product in Phases I and II, the experience at similar resort projects suggests that SilverRock onsite overnight visitor demand will support about 25,000 square feet of retail at the project (about 40 square feet per key), or about 45 percent of the ground floor retail. • The balance of support for the retail center will derive from residents and visitors in La Quinta and other East Valley communities. The overall size of the center (55,000 square feet of ground floor retail) is probably the minimum scale Economics Research Associates City ojLa Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page $ necessary to create a destination, but it is doubtful that, in this location, the center would be of much greater size. Nonetheless, flexibility to accommodate expansion by 20,000 to 25,000 square feet would appear reasonable and appropriate. • Restaurants will serve as the anchor tenants for the center, and probably should account for 50 to 60 percent of the ground floor space (4-5 restaurants). The second level would likely be occupied by office tenants or other non -retail tenants. A small number of second level rental apartments would be supportable to the extent that demand for second level space is deficient. • The success of a retail center will require relatively intense programming in order to create a destination. The ambiance created by the linear lake and boardwalk feature, architectural theming, and entertainment programming/events at the center should be sufficient to market the space to tenants. • Design and theming will be critically important. A village atmosphere with a pedestrian orientation is necessary, as is linking the development to the water. The need to anchor the center with strong food and beverage tenants cannot be overstated. • It also will be important to establish an entity which is funded from tenant sales and the onsite hotels (including condo hotels) to market the retail. An annual budget in the range of $300,000 or more should be anticipated. An ongoing financial/marketing commitment to ensure the viability of the retail complex beyond the real estate sales period is necessary as this will improve hotel rental which in turn produces transient occupancy tax revenue. In addition to tenant and transient occupancy assessments, a small real estate transfer fee (new and resale) could represent a partial funding mechanism for marketing funds. • The experience of similar resort -oriented retail suggests that it may be necessary to provide economic assistance in the early phase of tenant leasing. This assistance could be in the form of free rent for an extended period, larger than normal tenant improvement allowances, and rent relief until threshold tenant sales levels are achieved. • Restaurant construction allowances of $150 per square foot (tenant funds all improvements) with annual rents per square foot of $24 triple -net, and retail shop rents of $30 triple -net with $20 to $30 tenant improvement allowances appear Economics Research Associates City of La Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 9 4' supportable. Overall, sales volumes of $350 to $400 per square foot per year are expected. • Phase III development at SilverRock is largely and purposely undefined at present. It involves the approximate 10 acres south of the retail village, and will likely accommodate additional overnight facilities. The type of product and market orientation will be heavily influenced by the experience gained in the Phase I and II development. Highway 111 Commercial Corridor • Within the City of La Quinta, the Highway 111 corridor generally extends from Washington Street to Jefferson Street, and serves as the primary commercial retail core area serving City residents/visitors and others located in the eastern Coachella Valley. • The Highway 111 corridor, extending from just west of Washington Street on the west to Jefferson Street on the east, is about 2.0 miles in length. Property depth ranges from about 500 to 1,200 feet on the north side and from 700 to 2,500 feet on the south side of Highway 111. The corridor contains approximately 470 acres of developable property, 185 acres on the north and about 285 acres on the south side of the highway, most of which has been developed. • As of March 2006, the level of commercial development in the corridor totals about 2.7 million square feet, including about 500,000 square feet under construction. Gross Leasable Area (thousands of square feet) Office/ Institutional/ Retail Other Total Existing 1,935 265 2,200 Under Construction 475 25 500 Total 2,410 290 2,700 • Over the past three years, approximately 1.2 million square feet of commercial development has been added to the Highway 111 corridor, increasing the inventory from 1.5 million in 2003 to 2.7 million square feet of gross leasable area currently. Most of this expansion relates to the opening or under Economics Research Associates ERA No. 16469 City of La Quinta Page 10 k�3 construction big box and general merchandise tenants including Target, Wal- Mart, Sam's Club, Costco, and other sub -regional tenants. This inventory expansion, by any measure, has been extraordinary. • The rapid development of the La Quinta Highway 111 corridor is manifest in retail sales activity within the City, which has increased 72 percent over the past two years: Taxable Retail Sales Year (millions) 2003 $3 89.4 2004 510.9 2005 669.3 • In addition to the 500,000 square feet under construction, the capacity of the corridor, based on available remaining undeveloped parcels, is estimated as follows: Gross Leasable Area Land Area (thousands of (acres) square feet) Vacant Parcels 40 350 Existing Auto Dealerships 10 150 Other Vacant Auto Center 35 500 Total 85 1,000 • As noted, the capacity is indicated based on development of only vacant parcels as well as a broader scenario which would involve relocation and redevelopment of existing auto -related uses. Clearly, the FARs on undeveloped properties could be increased depending on the types of uses and, in particular, the degree of structured versus surface parking. Under the most aggressive scenario, assuming redevelopment of existing auto -related uses, the Highway 111 corridor can accommodate an additional 1.0 million square feet of development. Maintaining all of the auto -related uses would reduce this future capacity to about 350,000 square feet. • East of Jefferson Street, within the City of Indio, there are extensive opportunities to develop commercial uses. This stretch of highway has numerous large-scale vacant properties. Between Jefferson Street and Monroe Street, there are Economics Research Associates City of La Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 11 approximately 200 acres of developable vacant property and substantial under - improved properties which will ultimately be redeveloped. This Indio Highway I I I corridor can accommodate in excess of three million square feet of future development at typical commercial floor area ratios. • Retail rental rates for anchor tenants currently are in the $14 to $18 per square foot per year range, triple -net, while smaller tenant space rents range more widely from $20 to $27 per square foot per year, triple -net, averaging about $22.00 in anchored centers. These rents generally support land values of $12 to $15 per square foot based on typical retail FARs of .2 to .25. Land sales of larger sites have transacted in this range, with smaller sites commanding much higher prices depending on their locational characteristics. • In general, the commercial development market has been very efficient and fluid in initiating and completing significant levels of project development. Within the past several years, several key objectives were achieved in the corridor: — The inventory of commercial space has nearly doubled since 2003 from 1.5 million to 2.7 million square feet. — The eastern end of the corridor has been successfully anchored with the new 300,000-square-foot Costco/Komar Desert Center and other development. — The corridor has emerged as a major sub -regional center serving the east Coachella Valley. Numerous big -box and other key national retail tenants have been attracted to the corridor, fulfilling most of the retail needs of the area. • Based on projected population growth in La Quinta's East Valley Service Area, projected to average 10,000 to 12,000 per year over the next 15 years, another 4.5 million square feet of commercial retail leasable area will be required, or about 300,000 square feet per year. As noted above, La Quinta's Highway I I I corridor has the capacity to accommodate only a small fraction of this development, with much of the future development likely to be funneled to the stretch of Highway 111 between Jefferson and Monroe in Indio. • There appear to be two areas where City economic development participation may be necessary and effective — retention of existing auto uses and development of an entertainment -oriented center. • The La Quinta auto center located on the south side of Highway 111 between Adams Street and Auto Center Drive currently has two dealerships, with the Economics Research Associates City of La Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 12 «� original plans for the center to host as many as nine dealerships. The two existing dealerships occupy about 10 acres with about 1,200 feet of prime Highway 111 frontage. Remaining vacant parcels designated for auto dealerships, located south of the existing dealerships, total about 35 acres. • As the East Valley has grown, and will continue to grow, viable dealerships need to expand in order to maintain their market share and satisfy manufacturer performance mandates. Both Torre Nissan and Champion Cadillac have expansion requirements. While considering the option to relocate, the Nissan dealership, which has been successful at the existing location, has expressed a preference to remain on Highway 111. • Because of very high gross taxable sales volume, the sales tax generation of auto dealerships is extremely beneficial to the City. A typical dealership will generate three to five times as much sales tax as traditional retail uses occupying the same property. Thus, it is appropriate for the City to provide assistance in facilitating the retention and/or expansion of the existing dealerships, or in securing new dealerships. • While assistance with the retaining dealerships is warranted, the City remains vulnerable to auto dealership relocation. The City needs to be prepared to address potential relocation issues, and potential redevelopment of portions of the Auto Center property with retail/commercial office development. • The Coachella Valley currently has a total of 87 movie screens contained in nine theatres, yielding an overall ratio of about 4,600 permanent population per screen, about one-half the norm. Even considering the market support derived from seasonal residents and area visitors, the overall Coachella Valley market is significantly over -supplied. • The East Valley, however, appears to be under -served, with only the eight -screen Indio Metro 8 located east of the Century 15 at The River at Rancho Mirage in Rancho Mirage and the 10-screen Cinemas Palme d'Or in Palm Desert, both more than five miles west of Washington Street. The River at Rancho Mirage, a 12- screen state-of-the-art theatre complex, has been extremely successful with gross annual ticket sales substantially above the industry average of $260,000 per screen. All of the other theatre complexes in the Coachella Valley, however, operate at a small fraction of the industry average per screen. The Indio Metro 8, Economics Research Associates City of La Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 13 n' 436 3� for example, historically has generated just over one-half the industry average ticket sales revenue per screen. The present state of the motion picture and theatre industry is very fragile. The strong performance of motion picture exhibitors in the 1990s resulted in an extraordinary expansion of the number of movie screens. Between 1995 and 2000, when U.S. theatre admissions increased 12 percent, the number of cinema screens increased by more than 35 percent. This over -building, combined with modest increases in demand, created extreme financial hardship for the industry's exhibitors, resulting in a series of bankruptcies, theatre closings, and industry consolidation. • Exacerbating the industry's problems has been stagnant growth in theatre attendance. Between 1998 and 2005, theatre attendance has remained relatively unchanged at about 1.5 billion ticket sales. Numerous factors for this stagnant growth are cited, including claims of atypical poor feature film product, high ticket pricing and increased competition from home theatre, interactive cable networks, and access to first run movies via satellite or cable systems. • There also are issues dealing with the film distribution and revenue sharing between the distributors and exhibitors. With limited quality product, competing entertainment mediums, and sharp declines in per screen attendance, exhibitors have been attempting to restructure revenue sharing with the distributors, with uncertain results at this time. • The movie theatre industry is highly competitive, particularly in the licensing of films and selecting new theatre sites. Factors influencing film licensing include seating capacity, theatre location and quality, projection and sound equipment quality, licensing terms, and the exhibitor's willingness and ability to promote the films. • While licensing and theatre attendance is affected by numerous variables, probably the most misunderstood, yet most important, factor is "film zones." A film zone is simply a geographic area determined by both the various film distribution companies and theatre operators (exhibition companies). Generally, studios only release copies of a film to a single exhibitor within a zone. Depending on demographic characteristics of a given area and the locations of all exhibitors in the area, theatres will either have a captive zone or a split zone. In Economics Research Associates City of La Quint4 ERA No. 16469 Page 14 2'7 captive, or free, zones, the studio and the exhibitor are free to negotiate the terms of exhibit each film and, if terms are agreed upon, the exhibitor will rent the film. In a split zone, the studio will alternate between the exhibitors within the zone. Although this system is designed to give each exhibitor an equal share of revenues from any given studio, the success of each film and the capacity of the exhibitors within the market often leads to a less than even split in annual revenues when two exhibitors share a zone. • The cost of development, given the new stadium seating design and digital production technology also has increased markedly, such that state-of-the-art theatres turnkey costs, excluding land, total about $1.2 to $1.4 million per screen ($300 to $400 per square foot). The rate of development of new movie theatres has declined sharply in the past five years. Nonetheless, some new development is occurring, although exhibitors are being very cautious and selective. • Despite the overall over -supply and industry difficulties, one new multi-plex movie theatre complex (16 screens) is supportable in the east Coachella Valley at this time, with a second not supportable for at least five and perhaps 10 years. The La Quinta Highway III corridor is an extremely attractive location. A proposed 18-screen theatre was announced at Monroe and 42" d Street in Indio as part of a proposed 97-acre large-scale regional commercial center in mid-2005. It is unclear whether this project will move forward in the near term. • Assuming the theatre complex in Indio does not proceed in a timely manner, an opportunity would be available in La Quinta. Such a project would most likely require substantial financial assistance. Theatres have very high parking ratios which often undermine the economics of movie theatre development. Thus, economic assistance most often occurs in the form of parking development. In cases where parking can be shared with other users, like office development, the cost is reduced. • The Highway I I I corridor would be more conducive to a mixed -use "lifestyle" movie theatre environment, with restaurants, coffee houses, bookstore, athletic club, health food store, wellness/spa center, and other entertainment -oriented tenants. Developers of movie -anchored complexes generally desire 15 to 20 acres or more, for such development, depending on the size of the project and the parking configuration. A 16-screen theatre would require at least 750 parking spaces. Economics Research Associates City of La Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 15 j j) La Ouinta Commercial Village • The La Quinta Commercial Village (the Village) is a designated commercial zone with gross land area of about 120 acres. Within this area, there are 45 individual legal parcels with a combined 55 to 60 acres of undeveloped, vacant land. • The original platting of the property comprising the Village is very problematic as most of the individual parcels are very small making it difficult to develop projects of any scale. Moreover, ownership is very fragmented with about 40 individual owners controlling the 45 vacant parcels. • The most significant commercial project developed in the last several years is Old Town. The first phase 55,000-square-foot two -level retail complex opened in 2003 and is fully leased. A 65,000-square-foot second phase is under construction. The performance of the center, anchored by three restaurants, reportedly is mixed. • The downtown area historically has provided convenience shopping and services for local residents. Old Town has attempted to create a more destination -oriented retail experience with mixed success. • Asking rents in the Village for well -located retail space reportedly are in the $20 per square foot (NNN) range for restaurants and $24 for smaller tenant shop space, and office space leases for $20 to $22 per square foot per year on a gross basis. Rents at this level, given typical .2 to .25 retail FARs, support $12 to $15 per square foot land values. At higher FARs (.4-.5), land values in the $20 range are supportable. • The limited land transactions involving sizable parcels suitable for commercial development have occurred at $10 to $12 per square foot, with current transactions being negotiated at $15 to $20 per square foot. The smaller .5- to 1.0-acre sites in downtown La Quinta have sold at significantly higher values of $40 per square foot or more, and asking prices of more than double this are being quoted in the marketplace. • The Village commercial area faces numerous challenges including, although not limited to, the following: — Downtown La Quinta has a relatively small market area with only 8,800 population within a one- and 26,000 within a five -mile radius, or about 1,000 Economics Research Associates City of La Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 16 population per square mile. This population density compares with typical suburban densities of 3,000 to 4,000 population per square mile. Access is not particularly convenient. Vehicle traffic counts are very low and Washington Street serves to some degree as a barrier. The land ownership patterns make land assemblage an expensive and difficult process. The land cost "basis" for many property owners is relatively high at $40+ per square foot, and asking prices for various parcels have been quoted in the $100 per square foot range. While these prices may be justifiable to some investors under atypical circumstances, they are far above levels necessary to support traditional commercial development in this area. Convenient parking is somewhat limited. Structured parking would mitigate the problem, but land values are well below the level needed to justify the cost of such parking, typically considered in the $30 per square foot range. — For the most part, national retailers have rejected downtown La Quinta as a location for new sites in favor of the Highway 111 corridor. • Given the challenges to creating the scale, synergies, and diversification necessary to establish a viable retail or commercial destination, it may be appropriate to radically shift the planning strategy for the Village commercial area. A development program which allows for and encourages residential development at moderate density, say up to 16 to 20 units per acre, while consolidating the commercial core area, appears much more desirable from a market perspective. Two-story wood frame construction over sub -grade parking would be consistent with these residential densities. • A strategy which intensifies residential development opportunities would be beneficial in terms of creating a viable, although much smaller, commercial core, motivating development of vacant parcels in the area without as much public intervention, creating higher land values, and enhancing the overall quality and sustainability of development in the area. • A successful pedestrian -oriented village environment seemingly can only be achieved through inclusion of this moderate -density residential product. Not only do densities at 16 to 20 units per acre provide the scale necessary in producing meaningful commercial support levels, the limited land availability and high cost of remaining undeveloped sites requires increased densities to achieve reasonable economics. Economics Research Associates City of La Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 17 Annexation • The City of La Quinta's General Plan planning area includes existing areas within the City as well as a substantial area east of the City's current boundaries in unincorporated Riverside County. Specifically, this unincorporated area totals about 9,500 acres generally lying between Monroe Street and Harrison Street, south of Avenue 52. This 9,500-acre unincorporated area is under consideration of annexation into the City of La Quinta. • Most of the proposed annexation area, which currently has minimal development, is designated in the General Plan as low density residential yielding approximately four units per acre. At this density, buildout population in the annexation area would likely total nearly 100,000, mostly representing incremental population. Buildout of undeveloped areas remaining within the existing City boundaries would total less than 25,000. • Development dominated by low -density residential uses in the area under consideration for annexation would create a challenging fiscal situation for the City. The ability to balance City revenues with service costs would be exacerbated by the property tax revenue distribution dictated by the designation of most of this are as a Riverside County Redevelopment Zone. • The two most prominent sources of revenue for the City currently are sales tax and transient occupancy tax. The land use plan should incorporate the potential to accommodate these uses within the annexation area, to the extent that there are market opportunities upon which to capitalize. • The potential to capture sales tax and transient occupancy tax are linked to the demand for retail goods and visitor accommodations, respectively. • East Valley permanent population growth is projected to increase from 204,300 presently to 403,000 by 2020. Most of this growth, estimated at about 175,000, will occur east of Washington Street, including the proposed La Quinta annexation area (annexation area population projected to reach 60,000 by 2020, and nearly 100,000 at buildout). • Based on the anticipated growth, demographic considerations, and other factors such as second home and visitor activity, incremental demand for approximately Economics Research Associates City of La Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 18 5.1 to 6.6 million square feet of commercial development will be generated by development in this area over the next 15-year period: Gross Leasable Area (thousands of sq.ft.) Local Serving Supermarket/Grocery 600- 800 Convenience Goods 350- 450 Other Retail/Services 400- 500 Subtotal 1,350-15750 Sub -Regional General Merchandise/Discount Stores/Jr. Dept. Stores 600- 750 Super Drug 200- 250 Home Furnishings, Building, Materials 600- 800 Eating and Drinking 450- 550 Other Retail/Services 350- 450 Subtotal 2,200-2,800 Regional Super Discount/Department Stores 600- 800 Ancillary Apparel/Specialty 300- 400 Automotive/Boats, Other Transportation 550- 650 Tourist Specialty 150- 200 Subtotal 1,600-2,050 Total 5,150-6,600 • Support for local -serving commercial development generated by annexation area population over the next 15 years will total about 500,000 to 600,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area by full buildout. All of the commercial space should be located within the annexation area, requiring about 55 to 65 acres of commercial land area. • There is little likelihood that a site within the annexation area would satisfy the location criteria for development of regional -serving commercial uses. Insufficient population in the typical catchment areas, access, and development densities will preclude any center in the annexation area from attracting the needed anchors for regional commercial development. These uses logically will be located along Interstate 10 and California Highway 86, south of I-10. • Many of the same factors will constrain sub -regional commercial development in the annexation area. Most of the sub -regional demand will be satisfied initially by centers along Indio's Highway III corridor and the I-10 corridor, between Jefferson and Jackson streets. As the area develops, sites within the Highway 86 Economics Research Associates ERA No. 16469 City ojLa Quinta Page 19 4.. .4 corridor south of Avenue 48 in Coachella and other areas south will be well positioned to attract sub -regional commercial development. • Depending on development patterns, the highway network, and real estate economics, there appears to be an opportunity to create a sub -regional center of 400,000 to 500,000 leasable square feet in the vicinity of Airport Boulevard and Harrison Street. • The fiscal benefits of visitor accommodations are unmatched by retail or any other land use. A simple rule -of -thumb is one hotel room generates the equivalent of 1,500 square feet of retail development in local tax revenue. The locational criteria for destination hotel development — specifically resorts — does not include the need for excellent regional access or to be within dense population areas. Rather, destinations require attractive sites where natural or man-made features are located. Emphasis on creating a resort environment within the annexation area as a vehicle for fiscal revenue generation appears to have greater merit than attracting major commercial concentrations. Economics Research Associates City ojLa Quinta ERA No. 16469 Page 20 REPORT/INFORMATIONAL ITEM: - Iq - SILVERROCK RESORT CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MINUTES MARCH 29, 2006 CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the SilverRock Resort City Council Committee was called to order at the hour of 2:06 p.m. by Mayor Adolph. PRESENT: Council Member Osborne, Mayor Adolph II PUBLIC COMMENT — None. III CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV CONSENT CALENDAR A. None V REVIEW OF MONTHLY DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Marketing Tee Time Plus — Joe Gill of Landmark explained this new marketing program, which entails a payment to concierges who refer guests to SilverRock Resort; Randy Duncan of Landmark added the fee is only paid on full -rate rounds. Community Services Director Edie Hylton has a list of participating hotels. Mr. Gill noted that the program will cover most of the Valley. Mr. Duncan noted that Tee Times Plus brings in more revenue than Stand -By Golf. Judy Vossler of Landmark added that they've hired a salesperson two months ago to make these arrangements with hotels, rental car companies, golf car providers, service providers, etc. The referral fee is $14.00, of which $10.00 goes to the referrer, and $4.00 to offset costs. Randy Duncan, SilverRock Resort General Manager, verifies and tracks the referrals. Ms. Vossler reported that she met with Kiner Communications, Maria Casillas, and Edie Hylton to review the City's marketing plan. Landmark will incorporate golf course marketing into draft SilverRock budget. She also noted that print ads have been running in Sunday Desert Sun sports section, alternating golf and food/beverage themes. B. Facilities Ahmanson Gate — the former Ranch entry gate has been installed in the east end of the parking lot. 2W 6 Bollards/Reflectors — Public Works Director Tim Jonasson reported street reflectors and reflector panels at the entry feature have been installed. Raised pavement markers have also been installed along the median to improve visibility. Landmark staff is researching new bollards, as there have been problems with people backing into the existing parking lot bollards. In the future, installation of bollards and lighting down the entry road will be coordinated with site development/design. In response to Mayor Adolph, Mr. Duncan replied three uplights on a timer have been installed at the putting green. Fire Pit Improvements — Golf & Parks Landscape Manager Steve Howlett reported that he's waiting on a second bid to remove and re -design the large chimney on the patio. Building Address — City Manager Tom Genovese reported that new, backlit address numbers have been installed at the Ahmanson Retreat & Clubhouse. Perimeter Security — Mr. Jonasson stated that gates were included with the perimeter landscape/wall project; however, the contractor (Park West) has not yet installed the gates and has been unable to meet schedules; therefore, liquidated damages are being assessed. In response to Mayor Adolph, Mr. Jonasson replied that we are withholding retention and have not paid for unfinished work. In response to Council Member Osborne, Mr. Jonasson stated the contractor has been in liquidated damage status since November 2005. The City does have a performance bond from the contractor. Mayor Adolph questioned the inconsistent wrought iron; Mr. Jonasson replied there were two types of fencing used: an insert into the veneered walls, and a typical fence. To stay within budget, the project used both types of fencing. Mayor Adolph said the wrought iron looks unfinished; Mr. Jonasson said the landscape designer anticipated landscaping in those areas rather than pilasters, and suggested shifting the existing landscaping to improve appearance. Mayor Adolph suggested having further work done in the future. L4 Wall — Mr. Jonasson reported that we are soliciting two quotes for a wall around the L4 pump station near hole 10. Mr. Howlett added the block is on -site, but Park West's quote was too high. He added that it's difficult to get contractors to bid on smaller jobs. Dishwasher — Mr. Duncan has been working with Building & Safety Director Tom Hartung and the contractor, Davis Reed, to obtain Health Department approval of a new dishwasher. The existing dishwasher is too small. The new dishwasher must be placed in the new kitchen, which involves accommodating more dry storage, and requires Health Department approval. Sink Hole @ No. 4 - Mr. Jonasson reported that there's a sink hole in the greenside bunker at hole 4. Staff met with LandMark GeoTech, who determined it's an isolated incident caused by hydro -consolidation. Mr. Duncan added that Landmark Golf has compacted the sink hole and is waiting for the geologist to test the site. Work will be completed before the PGA visits the course. Landscape @ Range/#1 Tee — Mr. Howlett reported the landscape architect (Pinnacle) was waiting for the new golf course superintendent before proceeding with landscape enhancements. Now that the superintendent is on board, Pinnacle will develop a plant list. He also noted that construction debris has been cleaned up. C. Capital Projects Avenue 52 Storm Drain Project — Mr. Jonasson reported CVWD is completing the waterline bypass, which has not affected golf operations. There was also a conflict with a Verizon fiber line; Verizon is relocating the line. All work should be done in mid -April, including paving. Johnny Pott of Landmark Golf added that they will begin work on entry landscaping once Avenue 52 work is complete. Council Member Osborne asked about the entry monument; Mr. Jonasson replied that GMA did a preliminary design, but we're waiting until Avenue 52 work is complete. Mayor Adolph suggested adding color to the landscaping; Mr. Pott stated that color will be added in the future. Council Member Osborne noted the water looks better; Mayor Adolph said there was concern about the water pumps. Mr. Pott noted the golf course crew now maintains the entry and lakes. PM-10 Improvements — Mr. Howlett reported that during yesterday's wind event, a driver and foreman were on -site to water, and that most of the dust came from CVWD's canal access roads. 70 acres have been stabilized; in addition, the contractor will remove tumbleweeds, plant barley, install irrigation, and have four water trucks available. Mayor Adolph noted there has been improvement over last year, and tumbleweeds have been a recent problem. D. Project Development Update on discussions with DDC — Mr. Genovese noted there is a closed session scheduled for the RDA Board meeting of April 4, 2006, beginning at 1:00 p.m. Update on discussions with Bob Hope Classic ("BHCC") — Mr. Pott has talked with Erik Larsen, who will visit on April 10, 2006. City staff is coordinating a tour that day with PGA and BHCC officials. Mr. Pott has recently updated the PGA and BHCC on golf course improvements. Council Member Osborne recalled the BHCC having concerns with space for stadium seating on the golf course. Mr. Pott said there are many open areas on the course, including space around the 18th hole. In response to Council Member Osborne, Mr. Pott replied that areas for bleachers and skyboxes were included in the golf course design. Mayor Adolph asked if there's been any word from Arnold Palmer regarding increasing fairway width. Mr. Pott replied no, that he believes there is adequate fairway width, but the concern may be for amateurs. Also, the course had to comply with CVWD water conservation requirements. Council Member Osborne inquired about contract provisions regarding home course designation; Mr. Genovese replied the contract says that SilverRock will alternate as the home course. Ms. Vossler added that the BHCC is a strong marketing tool for SilverRock, and Landmark is focusing on being prepared should the BHCC decide to play SilverRock. VI REVIEW OF MONTHLY FINANCIAL STATEMENT A. Monthly Financial Statements — July 2005 to February 2006 - Doug Van Bank, Controller for Landmark Golf, summarized the financial statements. He noted that expenses were over -budget in February due to a worker's comp issue. In response to Council Member Osborne, Mr. Duncan stated cost of goods sold correlates to revenue, and is on -budget. He added that course maintenance costs increased due to flooding (pump rental, labor, and overtime). To compensate, costs were reduced in other areas. Mr. Duncan stated play is approximately 200 rounds per day for February and March, and the course was close to capacity the previous weekend. Council Member Osborne recently spoke with a golf pro, who said SilverRock is one of the best courses in the United States. Council Member Osborne asked about the marketing budget; Mr. Duncan replied that it's close to budget, and they're waiting on word from the BHCC before producing collateral material. Council Member Osborne inquired about tournament play; Mr. Duncan replied that there are several tournaments scheduled in May/June. In response to Mayor Adolph, Mr. Duncan said they're trying to get the Steppenwolf tournament to come back next year. Council Member Osborne asked if residents have any difficulty obtaining tee times; Mr. Duncan replied no, and that 27 % is resident play. Ms. Hylton noted over 5,000 resident cards have been issued. B. Complimentary Golf Report — no comments. VII COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS Council Member Osborne asked if there will be gates at the Avenue 52 entry; Mr. Jonasson replied there will be wrought iron gates. Mr. Howlett reported that people do come in to walk their dogs on the undeveloped property. Mayor Adolph asked about the areas between the sidewalk and curb where there's only dirt; he stated it looks unfinished. Mr. Jonasson replied he's 2. G 7 walked the perimeter with the landscape architect (Pinnacle) to review plantings — there's no decomposed granite, only landscape or turf. Mayor Adolph would like to see more landscaping and suggested sod at the corners, or perhaps using synthetic grass. Mayor Adolph asked if there's a marker on Ahmanson Lane pointing to the clubhouse. Mr. Pott replied there is a stone marker. Mr. Jonasson added there's also a street sign. Mayor Adolph noted the transformers near the entry should be screened with landscaping. Council Member Osborne asked if the perimeter landscaping is complete; Mr. Jonasson replied that it's substantially complete, but there are some punch list items left. Mr. Howlett added the Avenue 52 storm drain contractor will repair damage. Council Member Osborne asked if the Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street monuments are on hold; Mr. Jonasson replied they're part of GMA's contract, and that once Avenue 52 is complete, we can look at the monuments again. Council Member Osborne asked Mr. Pott if he's meeting with the PGA and BHCC when they visit; Mr. Pott replied yes. Mr. Genovese said staff will report back to the City Council with the results of the meeting. VIII ADJOURNMENT There being no other business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:10 p.m. IX NEXT MEETING The next SilverRock Resort City Council Committee will meet on Wednesday, April 26, 2006 at 2:00 p.m. in the Session Room at City Hall. Submitted by, PC LJ Debbie Powell, Management Analyst "18 REPORT/INFORMATIONAL ITEM: �� MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A Regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA March 1, 2006 10:00 a.m. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee was called to order at 10:00 a.m. by Planning Manager Les Johnson. B. Committee Members present: Bill Bobbitt, Frank Christopher, and Tracy Smith. C. Staff present: Planning Manager Les Johnson, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planners Wallace Nesbit and Andrew Mogensen, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. There being no changes to the minutes of February 1, 2006, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Bobbitt as corrected. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Village Use Permit 2005-030; a request of Borrego Resort Holdings, Inc., for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for four prototypical residential plans for a 20-unit, two and one-half story residential condominium building in the Village, located on the south side of Calle Tampico, bounded by Avenida Villa and Avenida Navarro. 1. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced Mr. Del Oakes of Knitter & Associates, Sergio Sendowsky, architect, and Rich Wilde of Leyva & Wilde Landscape Architects, who gave a, presentation on the project. Staff noted the setback requirements that were implemented on the project. G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\3-1-06.DOC Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee March 1, 2006 2. Committee Member Tracy asked the distance from the gate to the street; how much vehicle stacking is allowed. Mr. Sendowsky stated one car stacking with a key card entrance. Mr. Oakes stated the roof equipment will be in a well and cannot be seen from the street. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the windows would be recessed. Mr. Oakes stated yes. It will be approximately two feet. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what type of tile would be used. Mr. Sendwsky stated it will be two-piece clay but, they do not know if it will be a two-piece mudded tile. 4. Committee Member Christopher asked that the tile match what is next door. He asked that as staff is looking at these projects, keep in consideration the massing of the buildings to keep heights staggered and retain the view corridor for the pedestrian. Staff stated this was a large issue with this project to take into consideration for future buildings. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what the material of the wood trellis would be. Mr. Sendowsky stated it would be wood. Committee Member Bobbitt asked that it not be wood, but an alternative material. He also asked what material would be used on the railings. Mr. Sendowsky stated it was a treated material. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the Queen Palms has become short term in its usefulness. They tend to last about ten years. It has become a replaceable tree and they have pulled them off their plant list. He noted the size of the plants as stated on the plans as being large and wanted to know if they would be that size when planted. Mr. Wilde stated yes. Committee Member Bobbitt recommended using a small shrub instead of, or in addition to the ground cover. Maybe a less broad plant pallet with a more denseness of species. 6. Committee Member Smith asked that the pots be hooked up to a drainage and watering system. 7. Committee Member Christopher asked if the adjoining building had a larger setback and if so why. Staff stated because they have a courtyard area in the front. Committee Member Christopher asked the width of the sidewalk. Staff stated five feet adjacent to the curb. G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\3-1-06.DOC 2 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee March 1, 2006 8. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if there will be available street parking. Staff stated it will be available. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he too is concerned with the number of taller massing buildings and hoped staff would take this into consideration when reviewing the projects as they come in. 9. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2006-005 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2005-030, as recommended and as follows: a. Roof tile shall be mudded if the adjoining property is. b. Railings shall be decorative and not standard vertical railing. C. Exposed wood trellis shall be pressure treated or glulam construction Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2006-853; a request of Trans West Housing for consideration of architectural plans ,for 11 prototypical residential floor plans for Tract 32879 (Griffin Ranch) located on the south side of Avenue 54, east side of Madison Street, north side of Greg Norman Course and '/4 mile wets of Monroe Street. 1. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced Mr. Jerry Herman and Marty Butler of Trans West Housing, and Kirk McKinley, AIA, who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Christopher asked the location of the equestrian site. Ms. Butler explained the horses would be located on a 15 acre parcel that was purchased adjacent to the project site. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked the location of the trails. Ms. Butler stated the trails will run throughout the project on a trail system that will join up with the City's multi -purpose trail system. 4. Committee Member Christopher asked the size of the units. Ms. Butler went over the project layout of the units. r) r I i. t G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\3-1-06.DOC 3 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee March 1, 2006 5. Mr. Jerry Herman, of Trans West Housing, asked that they be given discretion as to which roof tile is used. The tile they use will depend on the marketing of the units. They are requesting it be an "S" system with the option of mudding. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he would agree with a variation of roof tiles. Ms. Butler stated that when they purchased the property, Mr. Griffin asked that the roof tiles be varied and not all red clay tiles. 7. Committee Member Christopher asked what - color they proposed using for the roof tile. He agrees with allowing them the flexibility, but the dimensional quality needs to be the "S" tile with a three color mix. 8. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Smith to adopt Minute Motion 2006-006 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2005-853, as recommended and as follows: a. With the modification to the staff report that we allow the builders to have flexibility in both using "S" the and clay tile and that all "S" the used on the project will be of a tri-color mix. Unanimously approved. C. Site Development Permit 2006-845; a request of KB Homes Coastal, Inc. for consideration of landscaping, wall, gate and revised clubhouse plans for Tract 31733 (Prado Del Sol) located at the northeast corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 61 ; and D. Site Development Permit 2006-842; a request of KB Homes Coastal, Inc. for consideration of landscaping, wall, gate and revised clubhouse plans for Tract 31732 (Prado Del Sol) located at the southeast corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 60. 1. Associate Planner Andrew Mogensen and Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced Mr. Ty Mangrum of KB Homes �w1 G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\3-1-06.DOC 4 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee March 1, 2006 and, Ron Gregory and Luke Taylor of RGA Landscape Architects, who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Smith asked if the perimeter wall would be three different colors. Staff explained where the three colors were used. Mr. Gregory explained the multi -colors proposed were to give an aged look only at the entry. 3. Committee Member Christopher asked where the brick cap detail on the perimeter wall would end. Mr. Gregory stated at the entry and will transition to a Terra Cotta cap on the remainder of the wall. 4. Committee Member Smith asked if the tower was cone or pyramid shape. Mr. Gregory stated it is a four-sided structure. Discussion followed regarding the construction of the tower. 5. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Smith to adopt Minute Motion 2006-007 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2005-845, as recommended and as follows: a. Compliance with height limit on the tower of the clubhouse. b. Main perimeter walls will be brick capped. C. Additional architectural detailing can be provided near the bottom of the entry towers. Unanimously approved. 6. It was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Smith to adopt Minute Motion 2006-008 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2005-842, as recommended and as follows: a. Compliance with height limit on the tower of the clubhouse. b. Main perimeter walls will be brick capped. C. Additional architectural detailing can be provided near the bottom of the entry towers. Unanimously approved. 2073 G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\3-1-06.DOC 5 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee March 1, 2006 E. Site Development Permit 2006-855; a request of Desert Elite, Inc., for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for two prototypical residential plans for use in Tract 31202 (Rancho Santana), located at the southwest corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 52. 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. Staff introduced Mr. John Pedalino of Desert Elite, and Ron Gregory of Ron Gregory & Associates, who gave a presentation on the project. The applicant requested the flexibility with the roof tile. 2. Committee Member Christopher asked for an explanation of the equestrian trails. Discussion followed regarding the location of the trail adjacent to the houses. 3. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Christopher to adopt Minute Motion 2006-009 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2005-855, as recommended and as follows: d. Flexibility will be allowed in the type roof tile used. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None VIII. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Bobbitt to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee to a special meeting to be held on March 20, 2006. This meeting was adjourned at 1 1:44 a.m. on March 1, 2006. Respectfully submitted, (:�2 dr BE Y AW ER 74 Executive Secretary G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\3-1-06.DOC 6 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 March 14, 2006 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:08 p.m. by Acting Chairman Daniels who asked Commissioner Alderson to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Ed Alderson, Kay Ladner and Acting Chairman Rick Daniels. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to excuse Commissioner Quill. Unanimously approved. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Doug Evans, Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston, Planning Manager Les Johnson, Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer II. PUBLIC COMMENT: A. Mr. Myron Mintz, 80-355 Weiskopf asked that the Shaffer item be continued to April 11, 2006. Acting Chairman Daniels thanked Mr. Mintz for his request. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Acting Chairman Daniels asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of the March 14, 2006 regular meeting. There being no changes to the minutes, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Alderson/Ladner to approve the minutes as submitted. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None. A. Continued — Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002, Amendment #5, and Tentative Parcel Map 32752; a request of Ray Shaffer for consideration of: 1) a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; 2) a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from Golf Course to Low Density Residential; 3) a Specific Plan to allow the conversion of 2.3 + acres of existing golf course/common area tor) ►- tY Z 5 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2006\3-14-06PC.doc Planning Commission Minutes March 14, 2006 residential use; and 4) review of a Parcel Map to subdivide 2.3 + aces into three single-family lots for the property located between Weiskopf and Jack Nicklaus Golf Courses, immediately south of PGA Boulevard, within PGA West. 1. Commissioner Ladner recluse herself due to a potential conflict of interest and withdrew from the dais. 2. There being no quorum to discuss the item, it was continued to March 28, 2006. B. Site Development Permit 2006-853; a request of Trans West Housing, Inc. for consideration of architectural plans for 11 prototype production units for Griffin Ranch for the property located within Tract 328789, on the south side of Avenue 54, east side of Madison Street, north side of Greg Norman course project and A mile west of Monroe Street. 1. Acting Chairman Daniels asked for the staff report. Associate Wallace Nesbit presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which was on file in the Community Development Department. Staff explained proposed changes to Condition No. 11 in regard to compatibility. 2. There being no questions of staff, Commissioner Daniels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Marty Butler, representing Trans West Housing gave a presentation on the project and explained that in regard to Condition No. 11 they are concerned that the 20 one acre lots being custom homes will be more than 10% larger than the production lots. This is a conflict with the Zoning Code and they are asking for relief. Mr. Jerry Herman, Trans West Housing, asked that Condition No. 14 be amended to allow them the flexibility to use either concrete or clay "S" the with a tri-color mix. 3. Commissioner Alderson asked for an explanation of the garage doors that appear to be hinged. Mr. Kirk McKinley, architect, explained they are fiberglass doors with detailing, they do not swing open, but roll -up. 4. Commissioner Daniels asked if there were any limitations on the height and how will the Commission regulate custom lots being located next to a two-story house. Staff stated there are no restrictions along the property boundaries. Commissioner Daniels asked staff's recommendation in regard to the mix of concrete ands; P''j G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2006\3-14-06PC.doc 2 Planning Commission Minutes March 14, 2006 clay roof tile. Staff stated they were in agreement with allowing the applicant latitude to use either the concrete or clay tile. Acting Chairman Daniels asked if staff had any objection to the applicant's request in regard to Condition No. 1 1. Staff stated they would reword the condition to reflect their concerns. Mr. Herman asked that the Commission adopt the language of the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for Condition #14. 5. Commissioner Alderson asked if the custom lots could become an issue in regard to two-story units being slotted on these lots. Staff stated yes, and in addition the Code prohibits any two-story units being sited within -in 50 feet of a single story in any adjacent tract. Discussion followed regarding height limitations. Staff recommended Condition #11 be amended to delete the final sentence and replace it with "if the 20 one -acre lots are developed as a custom phase, the Griffin Ranch Specific Plan provisions shall apply as custom home design guidelines for the purpose of regulating custom home development." Mr. Herman stated they had no objection to staff's revision to Condition #1 1. 6. Commissioner Daniels asked if anyone else wanted to speak on this project. Mr. Pete Morrissey, 81-815 Mt View Lane, stated his property borders the east end of this project and he is concerned about the heights. They have built this end of the project up to be higher than it should be and in addition the amount of fugitive dust problems they have had since construction began. They are requesting height limitations on the eastern boundary. In addition, they have had problems with Trans West keeping the dust under control and crews working late and on weekends. Ms. Butler stated the maximum height for the eastern portion is 18 feet. Mr. McKinley, architect for the project, stated the maximum height is 22 feet. Ms. Butler explained there is a City restriction of no more than a three foot differential between pad heights of adjoining property. 7. Commissioner Ladner asked about the dust problems. Ms. Butler stated they have water trucks on site and they are doing their best to control the dust. They did have a problem with CVWD shutting off the water while they made changes to their water lines. They have not had any fines or complaints from AQMD. In addition, they are using soil stabilizers. 277 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2006\3-14-06PC.doc 3 Planning Commission Minutes March 14, 2006 8. Mr. Morrissey stated there was only one water truck for the entire site. Acting Chairman Daniels asked if the grading plan was consistent with the site grading. Staff stated to their knowledge they are. The plan is in compliance with the conditions. Commissioner Daniels asked if the Commission could condition the project to not allow any two story units on the east boundary. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated they could do that. The applicant has stipulated the Madera units will be in this location and the plan states they are 17.5 feet in height. Mr. McKinley has stated they could go up to 22 feet which is a different unit. The Commission could condition the project to require a certain plan on certain lots. 9. Commissioner Alderson asked that Code Compliance be on duty to assure they are only working on site during the allowable hours. He asked the applicant what height limitation they were going to have for the eastern boundary. Mr. Herman stated the height limits along Avenue 54 would be within the allowable height of 22 feet and with the height differential the limit would be 24 feet. Mr. Rod Grienberg, Trans West Housing, stated they would have no objection to a restriction to 22 feet adjacent to the existing residential lots. Ms. Butler explained they are currently doing the phasing of house plans to the lots. They do not want to be tied to a certain plan in case they come in with a new unit design. 10. Commissioner Ladner clarified there appears to be a street between and a wall between these units and the adjoining project. Ms. Butler stated that was true. 11. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and the matter was opened to Commission discussion. 12. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Alderson/Ladner to adopt Minute Motion 2006-002 approving Site Development Permit 2006-853, as recommended and as amended: a. Condition 14: delete the word random. b. Condition #1 1 amended to read: If the 20 one -acre lots are developed as a custom phase, the Griffin Ranch Specific Plan provisions shall apply as custom home design guidelines for the purpose of regulating custom home y, development. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2006\3-14-06PC.doc 4 Planning Commission Minutes March 14, 2006 C. Applicant* shall be limited to a single story and a height limitation of 20 feet for all lots adjacent to the Estates Project lots. Unanimously approved. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Community Development Director Doug Evans informed the Commission that two letters had been received in regard to parking in the Village and drainage at the Griffin Ranch project. Staff will address the questions and respond to the letters. B. Planning Manager Les Johnson asked the Commission to consider whether or not they would want staff to begin the process of a Text Amendment to the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District in order to allow retail stores between 10,000 and 50,000 square feet in size. Commissioners directed staff to prepare a text amendment. C. Commissioners reviewed the City Council meeting of March 7, 2006. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Alderson/Ladner to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on March 28, 2006. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:09 p.m. on March 14, 2006. Respectfully submitted, C;:�Be y . S wyer, Executive Secretary City o a Quinta, California 4. 79 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2006\3-14-06PC.doc 5 Department Report: — 1q G� OF 9 TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager DATE: April 18, 2006 SUBJECT: Department Report - Response to Public Comment There were no public comments made at the April 4, 2006 City Council and Redevelopment Agency Board meetings. � 40 DEPARTMENT REPORT: 3-A E �k f CITY COUNCIUS rt " Wyye� Y.. :F UPCOMING EVENTS APRIL 18 MAY 2 MAY 16 JUNE 6 JUNE 20 JULY 4 JULY 18 AUGUST 1 AUGUST 15 CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY COUNCIL MEETING LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL MONTHLY CALENDAR April 2006 Printed by Calendar Creator Plus on 4/13/2006 LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL MONTHLY CALENDAR May 2006 LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL MONTHLY CALENDAR June 2006 Printed by Calendar Creator Plus on 4/13/2006 �a�'•c DEPARTMENT REPORT: V rJ IYGOVOMTM �4 l9R OF 19 TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Tom Hartung, Director of Building & Safety 1--r- 14' DATE: April 18, 2006 RE: Monthly Department Report - March 2006 Attached please find the statistical summaries for building permits, Animal Control, Code Compliance, and garage sale permits for the month of March. Also included are Monthly Executive Status Reports for Vista Dunes Courtyard Homes and City Hall Expansion. The reports depict the following highlights: • Year to date building permit valuation is $1 19,978,265 which represents an issuance of 1,309 building permits through March; • 648 animal control cases have been handled through March; • 743 code compliance cases have been initiated through March; • $950.00 - garage sale permit income in March City of La Quinta Building Permit Statistics 2006 IF 2005 IF 2004. 2003 Permits Total Issued Permits Total Issued Permits Total Issued Permits Total Issued Valuation Month SFD Total (dollars) Valuation SFD Total (dollars) 113 392 26,716,905 Valuation SFD Total (dollars) 81 328 23,948,027 Valuation SFD Total (dollars) 123 479 38,107,215 January 145 468 37,258,834 February 154 387 445508,667 90 393 303,700,080 76 376 20,388,137 38 216 13,932,242 March:1 38 454 38,210,764 231 696 49,942,562 116 436 3150155789 29 264 10,299,587 April - 81 443 255677,361 117 423 30,103,487 77 3311 19,668,827 May - 77 472 211071,875 135 493 33,473,306 89 295 31,436,144 June a� - 110 527 39,826,912 203 599 39,828,443 167 473 395001, 334 July - 110 425 35,497,988 125 488 36,631,969 88 389 371,198,111 August - 126 588 43,698,268 161 445 46,3795232 76 301 22,405,929 September a� - 76 489 37,852,849 26 344 133521,914 83 313 33,074,243 �� October ` 22,907,261 91 430 24,304,258 97 380 22,375,223 November - 59 323 17,375,634 192 490 335826,763 65 265 16,655,074 December - 82 348 25,091,757 103 373 26,026,142 100 345 245475,714 Total-]DE 1,309 119,978,265 1,241 5,587 37693599452 1,426 5,225 359,4479466 1,032 4,051 308,630,243 N PERMIT STATISTICS BY APPLICATION TYPE FOR THE PERIOD 3/01/06 THRU 3/31/06 FOR ISSUED PERMITS OF ALL PERMIT TYPES DEPARTMENT - BUILDING & SAFETY ------------------------------------------------- ----------- APP -- -LIGATION TYPE ------------- THIS PERIOD --=--------- -------.SAME PERIOD PREV YEAR -------- APPLS PERMITS APPL VALUATN FEES APPLS PERMITS APPL VALUATN FEES ---------------------------------------------------------------------- AR BLCK ADDITION - RESIDENTIAL WALL/FENCE 8 34 282675 5567.77 5 19 227668 3344.53 CONR NEW COMML - OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL 167 2 167 503831 8586.50 210 210 939163 13723.00 CP POOL - COMMERCIAL 10 368477 3846.07 2 10 131970 1871.74 DEMO DEMO - COMML/OTHER 1 5 80000 1111.80 2 6 40000 855.60 -DSF DEMO - SINGLE-FAMILY 1 2 1 2 0 45.00 5 5 0 225.00 ELEC ELECTRICAL 21 24 0 90.00 9 9 0 405.00 GRES GARAGE - RESIDENTIAL 0 48425 868.13 15 15 26034 609.75 MECH MECHANICAL 6 0 0 .00 18 54 227916 3892.69 MFD5 DWELLING - 5 OR MORE FAMILY 28 6 140 30000 23261878 284.63 153356.10 1 3 32000 135.01 PAT PATIO COVER - RESIDENTIAL 14 15 62444 1654.13 0 10 0 10 0 44049 .00 1148.40 PLBG RC PLUMBING REMODEL - COMMERCIAL 9 9 14180 247.69 13 13 19200 363.00 RER REMODEL - RESIDENTIAL 8 27 385000 6958.68 13 41 273081 5583.82 RPL POOL - RESIDENTIAL 4 70 7 7513 335.55 9 23 86825 2007.34 RR RE -ROOF 304 1597552 35553.23 91 381 1868500 42907.08 SATT DWELLING - SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED 9 16 9 80 60214 1148032 270.00 14487.80 12 12 55572 360.00 SFD DWELLING - SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 38 191 10025793 93563.12 40 231 200 4063234 48747.81 SIGN SIGN 1155 41689350 387415.85 SOL SOLAR 4 5 24250 427.05 3 5 29000 372.70 SOTB STRUCTURES OTHER THAN BUILDINGS 1 41 2 107 23000 285700 84.38 1 1 5000 19.50 SPIN SPECIAL INSPECTION 2 2 7585.61 2 2 6000 178.20 TT TEMPORARY TRAILER 2 0 200.00 3, 3 170000 300.00 2 1800 400.00 1 1 8000 200.00 TOTALS: 454 1149 38210764 335523.24 696 2178 49942562 514666.02 rl) Go w ANIMAL CONTROL STAT REPORT Animal Pick -Ups rr re Mll incidents Handled !Bite Reports 'Animal Trap Set Ups Cruelty to Animals ,Vicious Animal Restraining Ron YFM- Me, �Outside Agency a R Violations- �Dogs Disturbance -Noise ,Animal Welfare License Violation r� U0 00 ra 00 co Ul CODE COMPLIANCE STAT REPORT CONSTRUGION, INC Glendora Beverly Hills San Clemente La Quinta Las Vegas Monthly Executive Status Report City of La Quinta Vista Dunes Courtyard Homes Presented To The City of La Quinta: April 5, 2006 For the Month of March, 2006 • Sewer and Water plans submitted to CDWD. Final corrections 4-7-06. CVWD approval 4-14-06. • Electrical engineer submitted demo plan and completed application. Waiting for IID to schedule their removal crew. Removal completed 3-24-06. • Street utilities located by appropriate agencies. Completed. • Asbestos survey completed —planned abatement being scheduled. Abatement completed. Awaiting AQMD clearances. Clearances completed 3-20-06. • PWCI commenced creating master project schedule (from now through construction completion) Submitted to City 3-21-06. • PWCI commenced site and building cost estimating. • No negative community related problems/issues reported. • Removal of all Trailer units except park administration doublewide. Still ongoing. Schedule Performance Project to Date • Not applicable —will begin tracking next month Budget Performance Pro ect to Date • Original Estimate: $12,500,000 • Plus Contingency (10%) 1,250,000 • Total Budget: original bid, contingency, plus approved C/Os 13,750,000 • Change Orders (0): 0 • Current cost commitments (original bid + change orders): 0 • Contingency usage to date: 0 • Contingency budget remaining: .1,250,000 • Current commitments as % of Total Budget ($13,750,000) 0% safety Performance Project To Date • No Lost Time or Claims due to injuries or safety violations. • No on -site accidents to date. • upcoming Month Priorities/Key Activities (March, 2006) • Monitor progress on approvals from CVWD on water/sewer plans. • 100% - Complete site demolition of old utilities, Concrete and Asphalt. • 100% - Finalize all civil plans including utilities and street plans submitted by MDS 3/6/2006. • 100% - Tree and foliage removal • Continue cost estimating on buildings • 100% - Completion of bid documents including Civil plans. • 100% - Complete bid package information for Phase 1 grading, infrastructure and site construction activities. • 100% - Removal and closure of the existing water well. 90 • Inclusion of Garland Industries for roofing and Solar package. • Reviewing magnitude costs of all phases of construction. • Send out Prequalification packages to prospective General Contractors • Ground breaking ceremonies on April 19, 2006 @ 9.00 am. g 0 Complete project signage by April 14tn. LZM(ONSTRUMON, INC Glendora Beverly Hills San Clemente La Quinta Las Vegas Monthly Executive Status Report City of La Quinta City Hall Expansion Presented To The City of La Quinta: April 5, 2006 For the Month of March, 2006 • Met with Garland Industries for roofing 3-24-06 design and savings. • Continued reviewing all major phases of design and engineering. • Code compliance check by City Building and Safety - Ongoing. • Review of existing utilities - Completed + PWCI to continue their range of magnitude costs. • No negative community related problems/issues reported. Master Project Schedule/Key Milestones • Master schedule to be completed and submitted under separate cover - Submitted to the City 3-21-06. Schedule Performance Project to Date • Design tracking is in progress. Budget Performance Project to Date • Original Estimate: $9,500,000 • Plus Contingency (10%) 950,000 • Total Budget: original bid, contingency, plus approved C/Os 10,450,000 • Change Orders (0): 0 • Current cost commitments (original bid + change orders): 0 • Contingency usage to date: 0 • Contingency budget remaining: 950,000 • Current commitments as % of Total Budget ($10,450,000) 0% Safety Performance Project To Date • No Lost Time or Claims due to injuries or safety violations. • No on -site accidents to date. Upcoming Month Priorities/Key Activities (March, 2006) • Design review meeting set for April 12, 2006. • Monitor progress of Design and Engineering team - Ongoing. • Architectural/Civil plans to be reviewed for code and ADA compliance. • Submit all civil plans including utilities and street plans • PWCI to continue range of magnitude costs. • Submit water and sewer to CVWD. • Submit electrical to IID. • Coordinate communication requirements for the emergency agencies. • Finalize roofing specifications by Garland Industries to Pearson Architects. • Finalize utility locations within the existing and new City Hall. 291 7 Department Report: 5 TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Douglas R. Evans, Community Development Director DATE: April 18, 2006 SUBJECT: Department Report for the Month of March 2006 Attached please find a copy of the Community Development Department Report which outlines the current cases processed by staff for the month of March. n92 P:\Monthly Report Folder\MARCH 2O06.doc 1 r%3 W COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT REPORT MARCH 2O06 PROJECT TYPE DESCRIPTION Conditional Use Permits 0 submitted Development Agreements 0 submitted Environmental Assessments 0 submitted General Plan Amendment 0 submitted Lot Line Adjustments 2 submitted Minor Adjustments 4 submitted Minor Use Permits 17 submitted Parcel Maps 1 submitted Parcel Mergers 0 submitted Sign Permits 9 submitted Site Development Permits 3 submitted S ecific Plans 1 submitted Tentative Tract Maps 0 submitted Temporary Use Permits 8 submitted Village Use Permits 1 submitted Zone Change 0 submitted Zoning Code Amendments 0 submitted TOTAL 46 NEW CASES SUBMITTED INSPECTIONS AND PLAN CHECKS Cove Checks 2 Inspections completed Subdivision/SDP, etc. Plan checks 50 performed P:\Monthly Report Folder\MARCH 2O06.doc PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIVITY JULY 1, 2005 TO MARCH 31, 2006 PROJECT TYPE DESCRIPTION Conditional Use Permits 3 submitted Development Agreements 2 submitted General Plan Amendment 5 submitted Sin Permits 45 submitted Site Development Permits 32 submitted Specific Plans 8 submitted Tentative Tract Maps 8 submitted Village Use Permits 0 submitted Zone Change 4 submitted Zoning Code Amendments 0 submitted TOTAL NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS APPROVED 981 TOTAL COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE APPROVED 306,462 iJ CO PAMonthly Report Folder\MARCH 2O06.doc 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ACTION City of La Quinta - Zoning Text Amend various sections of the City Municipal Code. On -going Corrections & Noise Ordinance City of La Quinta Draft Ordinance and CIP being prepared. CC — 4/4/06 — Being redrafted as Golf Cart Plan directed by Council RFP — Historic Survey Consideration of a Request For Proposal to update the Two proposals received — under City's Historic Survey. Previous Survey was review by staff. completed in the Fall of 1997. Village Parking Study The goal is to provide short-term and long-term Workshops held March 27, 2006 at recommendations to improve parking in the Village the La Quinta Public Library. Report Commercial District. and input is currently being drafted. Ivanhoe La Quinta Cove LLC Request for approval of 10 single-family residences on Not scheduled. Application (James Foxx) 34.17 acres located west of proposed TT 32397 (the incomplete, awaiting special studies EA 2004-530, TT 32979 former La Quinta Arts Foundation property). and re -design. Open Space Covenant. Costco — and Komar Investments 149,850 square foot Costco Warehouse and 4-island Rough Grading Underway EA 2005-539, SP 2005-075, SDP gas station located on the south side of Highway 111, 2005-833, CUP 2005-092, TPM west of Jefferson 33960 Blake Jumper Consideration of 8 single-family residential lots to be HPC — 10/20/05 — Approved EA 2005-546, TT 33801 located 555 feet north of Avenue 60 & E. of Madison PC — 3/28/06 — Approved CC — 4/18/06 Blake Jumper Consideration of 8 single-family residential lots to be HPC — 10/20/05 — Approved EA 2005-547-TT 33802 located 1,020 feet north of Avenue 60, on corner of Application incomplete Madison & Calle Conchita TJ CD cri P:\Monthly Report Folder\MARCH 2O06.doc PROJECT DESCRIPTION ACTION Nextel Request for approval of unmanned wireless facility Application incomplete. Applicant CUP 2005-095 inside tower feature, located at 47875 Caleo Bay investigating Monopalm antenna & other sites. Verizon Wireless Request for approval of unmanned wireless facility Application incomplete. No CUP 2005-096 camouflaged as flagpole, located at LQ Resort, 49499 response from applicant Eisenhower Desert Elite Request architectural plan approval for 130 SFD's PC — 3/28/06 - Approved SDP 2005-851 located on the west side of Monroe Street, '/4 mile north of Avenue 58 (TT 31910). Sienna Corp. Consideration of 1 1-lot single-family residential PC — 2/14/06 - Approved EA 2005-554, TTM 34185 development located on the west side of Jefferson CC — 4/18/06 - Continued and north of CVWD Stormwater Channel. Prest Vuksic Request for approval of 30,787 square foot retail Placed on hold at applicant's VUP 2005-029 center, consisting of two one-story buildings on the request. 3/15/06 — New prelim under northeast corner of Calle Tampico and Desert Club Bob Akman — ACI Properties called "The Islands". New Submittal includes Rite -Aid. VUP 2005-029 - REVISION K. Hovnanian Request for approval of redesigned architecture and Waiting for additional plans. SDP 2005-841 landscaping plans for residences in Tract 32398 on Project taken over by Toll Bros. No northeast corner of Avenue 60 and Monroe Street submittals by Toll Bros. KB Home Coastal Consideration of single-family residences in TT 31732 ALRC — 3/1 /06 - Approved SDP 2005-842 located on Monroe Street and Avenue 60. PC — 3/28/06 — Approved CP Development, La Quinta, LLC Request to merge Parcels 2 and 3 of PM 31116 Waiting for additional information. Lennar Communities Application incomplete. TT 33407 rl) Cz o) PAMonthly Report Folder\MARCH 2O06.doc PROJECT DESCRIPTION ACTION Monroe Dates Consideration of 118 single-family lots located at 60- Lennar has purchased land and will EA 2005-536, TTM 31434, ZC 995 Monroe Street, surrounded on the north, south re -submit. Others may develop 2005-123 and west by the Trilogy development. Tract. Ray Shaffer Request to change zoning from Golf Course to Low PC - 3/28/06 - Recommended EA 2005-550, SP 83-002, Density Residential and approval of Parcel Map to denial Amendment #5, TPM 32752 create three single-family lots in PGA West. CC - 4/18/06 KB Home Coastal Consideration of three plan types of single-family ALRC - 3/1 /06 - Approved SDP 2005-845 residences in TT 31733 located on Monroe Street PC - 3/28/06 - Approved between Avenues 60 and 61. Cameo Homes/Quail Ridge Consideration of a 46 lot subdivision on 9 ± acres Pending - application incomplete. EA 2005-559, TTM 33819, SP located south of Centex Homes, north of La Quinta Waiting for additional items and re- 2005-077, SDP 2005-847 Resort on the northwest corner of Eisenhower and design. Avenida Fernando. Casa La Quinta - BRH, Inc. Consideration of a two-story, multi -family "for sale" ALRC - 3/1 /06 - Approved EA 2005-552, SP 2005-076, condominium development on 1.23 acres, bounded by PC - 4/1 1 /06 VUP 2005-030, TT 34038 Avenida Villa, Calle Tampico and Avenida Navarro CC- 5/2/06 Masque Development Consideration of a 70 unit single-family residential PC - 3/28/06 - Approved EA 2005-557, TT 34243 development on 20.09 acres located on the north side CC - 4/18/06 of Avenue 58, approximately 1200 feet west of Madison. Standard Pacific Request for approval of single-family development ALRC - 4/5/06 SDP 2006-858 located on Avenue 58, '/4 miles west of Madison. PC - 5/9/06 Formerly known under TT 32279 and TT 33336. Cigar Lounge Use Determination Retail sales in commercial zones - City-wide PC - 4/1 1 /06 - Approved MDS Consulting for SilverRock Consideration of plans for a golf course, open space, Director's Hearing - Pending Resort - Golf Course/Clubhouse clubhouse, driving range, hotel/retail/lake, and TPM 33367 maintenance building. Vista De Montana Sign Program Sign program for two commercial buildings in the PC - 5/09/06 SA 2005-932 Village at the corner of Desert Club and Calle Amigo. C7 P:\Monthly Report Folder\MARCH 2006.doc PROJECT DESCRIPTION, ACTION Eden Rock at PGA West Consideration of 83 single family (cluster), 81 tri-plex, HPC - 4/27/06 EA 2006-562, SDP 2006-852, and 128 multi -family (16-plex) homes on 41.95 acres, ALRC - Not scheduled TT 33226, GPA 2006-107, ZC in the PGA West resort core area. Fiscal analysis being prepared. 2006-127, SP 83-002, Amd #6 Application incomplete. Transwest Housing/Griffin Ranch Consideration of architectural plans for 11 unit plans ALRC - 3/1 /06 - Approved SDP 2006-853 with 4-3 elevations per unit, to be located at the PC - 3/14/06 - Approved southeast corner of Avenue 54 and Madison Street. East Of Madison Consideration of plans for a reception center (sales ALRC - 3/20/06 - Approved SDP 2006-854 office) within The Madison Club project on Meriwether PC - 4/1 1 /06 Way and Avenue 52. Desert Elite Consideration of new production models for The ALRC - 3/1 /06 - Approved SDP 2006-855 "Estates at Rancho Santana" - Plan 5, Plan 7, and PC - 3/28/06 - Approved optional detached casita on minimum Y2 acres lots. Development is located at Avenue 52 and Monroe Street. John Hansen Consideration of a 25 lot single-family residential HPC - 3/16/06 - Archaeo/Paleo - EA 2006-563, TT 34495 subdivision on 13.74 acres located north of Avenue denied 60, east- of Jefferson Street, south of Avenue 58, HPC - 4/27/06 - for re -submittal west of Madison Street on Calle Conchita. Application incomplete David Maman Designs Consideration of a 17 lot, single-family, gated HPC - 4/27/06 EA 2005-560, TT 33848 community on 4.84 acres located 513' west of Application incomplete Monroe Street, on the south side of Avenue 58. David Chapman Investments Consideration of an office building located at the ALRC - 3/20/06 - Approved VUP 2006-033, TPM 34416 northeast corner of Avenue 52 and Avenida Bermudas PC - 4/1 1 /06 (west of Arnold Palmer's Restaurant). La Quinta Developers, LLC Request extension of time for project located at 80- PC - 2/ 14/06 - Approved SDP2003-795, Ext. #1 600 Avenue 52 (Avenue 52 between Monroe and Jefferson on the north side of the street). Permit due to expire 2/24/06. rJ CD luo P:\Monthly Report Folder\MARCH 2O06.doc PROJECT DESCRIPTION ACTION Quadrant Consideration of 3 models and landscaping for a ALRC - 3/20/06 - Approved EA 2005-545, TT 33717, SDP single-family residential development to be located PC - 4/11 /06 2006-856 south of Avenue 58, 800 feet west of Monroe Street. Dune Palms Affordable Housing Consideration of 225 apartment units in a variety of ALRC - 3/20/06 - Approved Project (Coachella Valley Housing building sizes and configurations from one to three PC - 3/28/06 - Approved Coalition) stories. Located at the northwest corner of Avenue CC - 4/4/06 - Approved SDP 2006-857, SP 2006-078 48 and Dune Palms Road. Laurich Properties Consideration of site design and access for a 10-acre Pending - applicant revisions to PRP 2005-005 neighborhood center located at Washington and Fred original proposal to be submitted Waring soon. Lots 16/17, Block 122 Consideration of a small mixed use concept adjacent Review letter sent 1 /11 /06 PRP 2005-009 - Harris to new City parking lot. Ron Salute Consideration of a small office project, ± 4,000 s.f. Hold - applicant revising location PRP 2005-010 A&M Construction Proposal for ± 6,000 s.f. office building on .5 acre lot, In review PRP 2006-01 1 N side of Calle Cadiz, east of Bremudas City of La Quinta Consideration of an amendment to the Municipal Code In process ZOA 2006-084 Section 9.80.040, Table 9-5, to allow stores 10,000 + in NC District. Lennar Homes Request to subdivide lot 82 of TT 33076 into 1 In process TPM 34653 residential lot and 1 access lot in Rancho Santana PAMonthly Report Folder\MARCH 2O06.doc Department Report: 6_'A �Y / I!I(fMP71tATFP wow G� OF TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Douglas R. Evans, Community Development Director DATE: April 18, 2006 91 SUBJECT: Department Report Regarding a Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission The City Council has directed joint meetings to be scheduled, semi-annually with the Planning Commission. These meetings have typically been held on one of the Tuesdays the Planning Commission meets. The Planning Commission meeting dates for May are the 9th and 23`d. Staff is requesting the Council select a date and time and provide staff direction regarding agenda topics. The following is a list of items staff has compiled for discussion between the City Council and Planning Commission: 1. Sphere of Influence — Vista Santa Rosa 2. Village Parking Study 3. Village Development 4. Commercial Development — Highway 1 1 1 Guidelines 5. Infill development 6. Golf Carts DEPARTMENT REPORT: 6_ aJ ' 8� of9 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITYNCIL FROM: EDIE HYLTON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOAIP(� DATE: APRIL 18, 2006 SUBJECT: TRANSMITTAL COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH 2O06 UPCOMING EVENTS OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT FOR THE MONTH OF MAY 2006: May 1 *Morning Workout (Exercise Class) May 1 *Family Tree Maker (2 classes) May 1 *Introduction to the Internet May 1 *Digital Photography May 1 Ballroom Dance, Senior Center May 2 Pony Club, Rancho Polo May 2 *Intermediate Tap Dance May 3 *Introduction to the Computer May 3 *Scanning May 4 *Ballroom Dance May 4 *Beginning Tap Dance May 4 Watercolor Painting for Teens & Adults, Senior Center May 5 *Mat Pilates May 5 La Quinta Park Water Feature Grand Opening, La Quinta Park May 6 Catalina Island Excurison May 8 *Introduction to E-Mail (AOL) May 8 *Photo Editing 1 May 8 *Quicken Investment Module (2 classes) May 9 Feldenkrais Way Yoga, Senior Center May 9 *Basic Dog Training May 10 *Photo Editing 2 May 10 *Introduction to Word Processing May 10 *Feldenkrais Yoga May 11 Feldenkrais Yoga, Senior Center May 14 Adult Soccer League, La Quinta Park May 15 *E-Mail — Level 2 (AOL) May 15 *PrintShop Publishing 1 May 15 *Photo Editing 3 May 17 *Word Processing — Level 2 May 17 *PrintShop Publishing 2 May 17 *Photo Editing 4 May 18 *Dessert Competition Luncheon May 18 Dance, Play & Pretend, La Quinta High School May 18 Beginning Ballet, La Quinta High School May 20 3-on-3 Basketball Tournament, La Quinta Boys & Girls Club Gym May 25 *Mature Driver Training *Daytime Senior Center class or activity S0 Monthly Revenue Report for March 2006 Monthly Revenue - Facility Renta .2006 2005 Variance Senior Center $ 21,540.00 $ 26,250.00 $ 4,710.00 Library $ 1,073.00 $ - $ 1,073.00 Parks $ 300.00 $ 400.00 $ 100.00 Sports Field $ 68.00 $ - $ 68.00 Monthly Facility Revenue $ 22,981.00 $ 26,650.00 $ 3,669.00 Year to Date Facility Revenue $ 54,819.00 $ 52,356.00 $ 2,463.00 Monthly Revenue Senior Center $ 7,504.00 $ 7,941.00 $ 437.00 Community Services $ 5,216.00 $ 7,087.00 $ 1,871.00 La Quinta Resident Cards $ 9,045.00 $ 12,345.00 $ 3,300.00 Total Revenue $ 21,765.00 1 $ 27,373.00 $ 5,608.00 Revenue Year to Date Senior Center $ 88,562.00 $ 87,535.00 $ 1,027.00 Community Services $ 103,394.00 $ 107,445.00 $ 4,051.00 La Quinta Resident Cards $ 38,610.00 $ 38,565.00 $ 45.00 Total Revenue to Date $ 230,566.00 $ 233,545.00 1 $ 2,979.00 Community Services Department Attendance Report for the Month of March 2006 Summary Sheet Program 2006 2005 Variance Sessions Per Month 2006 2005 Leisure Classes 104 139 -35 48 73 Special Events 80 178 -98 1 6 Adult Sports 373 449 -76 22 23 Senior Center 1369 913 456 109 91 Total 19926 1,679 247 180 193 Senior Services Senior Center 385 292 96 23 17 Total 385 292 96 23 17 Sports User Groups La Quinta Park Use AYSO 350 340 10 16 22 LQ Sports & Youth 120 100 20 30 21 Sports Complex LQ Sports & Youth 1500 1200 -300 30 20 Facility/ Park Rentals Senior Center Church 240 400 -160 3 8 Private Party 250 400 -150 1 3 La Quinta Arts Foundation 550 7 Park Rentals La Quinta Park 120 240 -120 3 6 Civic Center Campus Private Party 50 0 50 1 0 La Quinta Arts Foundation 18751 16000 2751 7 7 Library Multi Purpose Room 475 0 475 7 0 Classroom 25 0 25 1 0 Total 21,881 195230 2576 99 94 Total Programs 1 24,1921 21,201 2,9191 3021 304 Volunteer Hours Senior Center 3341 422 -88 Total Volunteer Hours 3341 422 -88 3 0- 4 Community Services Program Report for March 2006 2006 2005 2006 2005 Participants Participants Variance Meetings Meetings Leisure Classes Mosaic Tiling 3 0 3 4 0 Tai Chi Chuan 2 3 -1 2 5 Yoga Feldenkrais 6 8 -2 3 2 Feldenkrais Awareness Yoga 6 7 -1 4 4 Advanced Beli dance 12 1 11 3 4 Ballroon Dance 4 5 -1 2 4 Lince Dance 12 0 12 4 0 Beginning Ballet 9 11 -2 3 3 Dance, Play, & Pretend 13 12 1 3 3 Intermediate Guitar 2 0 2 4 0 Beginning Drumming 1 0 1 3 0 Italian for Everyone 9 8 1 3 5 Adobe Photoshop Advanced 2 0 2 3 0 Adobe Photoshop Introductory 9 0 9 2 0 Intermediate Computers 9 0 91 1 0 Microsoft Excel 5 0 5 4 0 Totals 1 104 55 49 48 30 2006 2005 2006 2005 Participants Participants Variance Meetings Meetings Special Events Middle School Teen Dance 80 0 80 1 0 Totals 1 80 01 80 11 0 Participants Participants Variance Meetings Meetings Adult Sports Open Gym Basketball 193 229 -36 18 19 Adult Soccer League 1 180 220 -40 41 4 Totals 1 3731 449 -761 22 23 Recreation Totals 5571 5041 53 71 1 53 305 Senior Center Attendance Senior Center Program Report for March 2006 Participation Participation Variance Meetings Meetings 2006 2005 2006 2005 Senior Activities ACBL Bride 364 212 152 4 5 Bridge, Duplicate/Social/Party 297 223 74 10 5 Monthly Birthday Party 28 24 4 1 1 Putting Contest 4 0 4 0 0 Talent Show 93 0 93 0 0 Movie Time 59 60 -1 3 4 Senior Activity/ Total 845 519 326 18 15 Senior Leisure Classes Arts & Crafts 11 28 -17 3 5 Ballroom/Swing 25 35 -10 4 4 Bridge Lessons 84 79 5 9 12 Computer Classes 19 0 19 5 0 Computer Tutor 3 3 0 2 3 Current/Political Events 30 0 30 2 0 Dog Training 4 14 -10 2 4 Exercise 62 53 9 10 13 Golden Tones 62 18 44 3 4 Italian 10 0 10 4 0 Latin Dance 3 0 3 2 0 Piano 2 0 2 2 0 Pilates 5 15 -10 4 4 Quilting 39 22 17 4 3 Rug Hooking 4 7 -3 5 3 Sketch/Draw 22 8 14 4 3 Spanish 22 17 5 4 4 Tai Chi / Tai Chi Arthritis 17 32 -15 4 4 Tap Dance 29 15 14 7 4 Watercolor 36 20 16 7 3 Woodcarvers 35 28 7 4 3 Senior Leisure Classes Total 524 394 130 91 76 TOTAL SENIOR PROGRAMS 1369 913 456 109 91 Senior Services AARP Tax Assistance 97 48 49 7 4 FIND Food Distribution 193 159 34 3 4 Headng Consultation 3 2 1 1 1 I.I.D. Energy Assistance/No fee 23 32 -9 3 4 Legal Consultation 3 7 -4 1 1 Mature Driver Training 11 18 -7 1 2 Medical Insurance/HICAP 6 3 3 3 1 Seminars for March/Mobile Office 28 0 28 4 0 Volunteers 24 23 1 n/a n/a TOTAL SENIOR SERVICES 385 292 96 23 17 SENIOR CENTER TOTAL 1754 1205 552 132 108 6 3 . DEPARTMENT REPORT: a�w L•+co � .��a 4'� OF Ti9 TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Timothy R. Jonasson, Public Works Director/City Engineer DATE: April 18, 2006 RE: Public Works/Engineering Department Report for March 2006 Attached please find the following: 1 . Citizen Service Request Summary; 2. Encroachment Permit and Plan Check Services Summary; 3. Capital Improvement Plan Status Update; 4. Monthly Summary of Public Works Tasks. jTothy R. J ass Public Works irec r/City Engineer . m4r 4 CITY OF LA QUINTA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITIZEN SERVICE REQUEST MONTHLY SUMMARY (MARCH 2O06) , ais Kt 6 f' .. 4 Graffiti 19 19 13 6 19 Street 1 1 0 1 1 Sweeping Drainage Landscape 6 6 0 3 2 1 6 Irrigation 5 5 2 1 1 1 5 Street 3 3 0 1 1 1 3 Maintenance Traffic Control 3 3 0 1 2 3 Park Maintenance Trash 2 2 1 1 2 Collection Misc 12 12 0 1 2 1 1 2 5 12 Sign 5 5 1 3 1 5 Maintenance PM 10 1 1 1 1 Complaint Sidewalk 1 1 0 1 1 Repair Construction a o C <o� ;, ,eC �'i •.�� k:. ':h.. �, x ' � ', ,n,�.,.<,b<�6' :.?a:"> ,�„' `i o: Y $A' � <S�" bkR� M` f^ r milRF , 1� N MONTHLY REPORTS MONTHLY SUMMARY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS PERMIT CATEGORY AMOUNT ISSUED FEE AMOUNT TOTAL FEES COLLECTED UTILITIES 6 $0.00 $0.00 MISCELLANEOUS 7 $40,092.00 $40,092.00 ON SITE IMPROVEMENTS 5 $110,630.00 $110,630.00 OFF SITE IMPROVEMENTS 3 $6,320.00 $6,320.00 TOTAL 21 $157,042.00 $1579042.00__.. MARCH 2O06 L MONTHLY SUMMARY PLAN CHECK SERVICES MARCH 2O06 DATE SUBMITTED PLAN CHECK ITEM PROJECT NAME PLAN CHECK FEE AMOUNT 03/07/06 WELL SITE 76A MADISON CLUB $1,500.00 03/07/06 WELL SITE 73A MADISON CLUB $1,500.00 03/13/06 ROUGH GRADING (REVISION) GRIFFIN RANCH $100.00 03/13/06 ROUGH GRADING (REVISION) TRILOGY @ LA QUINTA $100.00 03/13/06 STORM DRAIN (OFFSITE) (REVISION) RANCHO CAPISTRANO $200.00 03/13/06 STORM DRAIN (PHASE1)(SEELEY DRIVE) (REVISION) CENTRE POINTE $100.00 03/14/06 STORM DRAIN (REVISION) GRIFFIN RANCH $100.00 03/20/06 TEMPORARY SALES TRAILER (PRECISE GRADING/ST IMP) PALIZADA $2,250.00 03/20/06 PRECISE GRADING/SIDEWALK (AVE 60/MONROE) SCHUMACHER $500.00 03/20/06 PRECISE GRADING (REVISION) SCHUMACHER $600.00 03/20/06 PRECISE GRADING (ENTRY POND) MADISON CLUB $1,500.00 03/20/06 STREET IMPROVEMENT (ONSITE) SCHUMACHER $200.00 03/20/06 STORM DRAIN (ONSITE) SCHUMACHER $200.00 03/21/06 STREET IMPROVEMENT /STRIPING/STORM DRAIN SCHUMACHER $9,000.00 03/20/06 TRAFFIC SIGNAL STONEFIELD 100 $3,000.00 03/24/06 PRECISE GRADING (GATEHOUSE) GRIFFIN RANCH $1,500.00 03/27/06 FINAL MAP (TRACT) MIRAGE @ LA QUINTA $2,830.00 03/28/06 RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT DEDICATION ESPLANADE $0.00 03/28/06 LANDSCAPE PLAN TRILOGY @ LA QUINTA $800.00 03/28/06 SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE CITRUS ELDORADO LLC $100.00 03/28/06 PRECISE GRADING WELLS FARGO BANK $3,000.00 03/31/06 FINAL MAP (PARCEL) CLUBHOUSE APARTMENTS $2,120.00 TOTAL FEES COLLECTED $31,200.00 City of La Quinta CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT STATUS UPDATE FISCAL YEAR 2005/2006 Project Status through March 31, 2006 Most recent entries indicated in bold.... PROJECT BUDGET DESIGN CONSTRUCTION REMARKS start - end start - end Design Consultant/Contractor 2000-10 Museum $ 199,000 03/01- 06/06 TBD Design: M.W. Steele. Contractor: TBD. Expansion 2000-1 1 A LQ Park $ 167,764 1 1 /03-08/04 1 1 /05 - 03/06 JProject completed. Water Feature 2000-19 Phase II $31 M Total 01 /02-12/04 05/05-01 /07 Lead Agency: County of Riverside. Design: RBF Consulting. Jefferson Street $3.8 M City Contractor: Yeager/Skanska. Construction underway. Improvements Share Northbound bridge to be open in July 2006. Southbound bridge to be completed mid December 2006. 2001-06 Eisenhower $ 3,597,773 07/03 - 1 1 /04 02/05 - 04/06 Design: Moffatt & Nichol. Construction Mgmt: Berg & Drive Bridge Associates. Contractor: Granite Construction. Eastside of bridge complete. Work continuing on westerly half of roadway, retaining wall and easterly slough wall. Final AC Pavement placement end of April 2006. 2001-07 Hwy 1 1 1 $ 516,064 Phase 1 05/05 - 03/06 Ph 1 Design: PCA Developer's Engineer. Contractor: Yeager Corridor Improvements Complete Skanska. Construction complete as of December 2005. (Simon to Adams) Processing final contract documents for notice of completion. 2001-07A Hwy 1 1 1 $ 1,860,635 01 /05-04-06 TBD Ph 2 Design: RBF Consulting. Contractor: TBD. Corridor Improvements Environmental review by Caltrans underway. ROW (Adams to Jefferson) negotiations with affected property owners underway. FISCAL YEAS; 2Q�312004 .--. PROJECT Washington Median & $ 1,414,168 01 /04-1 1 /04 09/05-03/06 Design: David Evans & Associates. Contractor: Dateland Landscape Construction. All improvements and landscaping installed. Improvements Processing final contract documents for notice of completion. 2003-07C Madison $ 953,902 COMPLETE 05/06 — 07/06 Design: RKA Engineering, Inc. Contractor: Matich Rehab (Ave 54-Airport) Corporation. Project awarded, on hold due to conflict with developer's waterline project. Work to begin in May 2006. 2003-15 FY 2003/2004 $ 492,768 COMPLETE 03/06 — 07/06 Design: David Evans & Associates. Contractor: DBX, Inc. faffic Signal JT Construction to begin March 2006. provements (SR2S) FACapital Improvement Division\CIP Updates\March 06 Status Report.doc 1 of 3 PROJECT BUDGET DESIGN CONSTRUCTION REMARKS start - end start - end Design Consultant/Contractor Sports Complex $ 95,000 1 1 /05 - 02/06 TBD Design/Build: Davis Reed Construction. In design/build phase. Improvements Boys and Girls Club $ 355,000 1 1 /05 - 02/06 TBD Addition of a small office and a new community weight room. Addition Design/Build: Davis Reed Construction. FISCAL YEAR 2004/20#,5 CtR PROJECTS Red Light Camera $ TBD TBD RFP issued 03/27/06; proposals due 4127/06. Enforcement Program 2004-07A Traffic Signal $ 174,010 10/04 - 03/06 TBD Design: Katz, Okitsu & Associates. Contractor TBD Westward Ho/Dune Palms 2004-07B Traffic Signal $ 174,010 10/04 - 01 /06 TBD Design: Katz, Okitsu & Associates. Contractor TBD Westward Ho/Dune Palms New Traffic Signal $ 174,010 10/04 - 01 /06 TBD Design: Katz, Okitsu & Associates. Contractor TBD Jefferson Street/Ave 53 This project has been placed on hold pending SilverRock Resort Phase II. Village Round -A -Bout $ 25,000 10/04 - 07/06 TBD Design: Katz, Okitsu & Associates, David Volz, NAI Consulting. Contractor TBD. The construction phase of this project recently obtained CDBG funding. The construction phase will be listed in the FY 06/07 CIP. 2005-01 Calle Tampico $ 183,761 07/05 — 06/06 06/06 — 12/06 Design: Dudek. Contractor: TBD. CDBG Funding Approved Sidewalk and Drainage December 05. Design underway. Improvements 2005-02 Ave 52 Bridge $ 250,000 07/05 — 06/06 TBD Design: Lan Engineering. Design Underway. Improvements (Coachella Canal) 2005-03 Jefferson $ 643,610 01 /06 — 06/06 TBD Notified by RCTC that Federal TEA Grant Funds were approved Median Island Landscape with funding expected to be available after July 2006. Project Improvements development activities have resumed. 1st submittal to Caltrans is expected to be complete by May 2006. 2005-04 New Traffic $ 175,000 07/05 — 03/06 01/06 — 06/06 Design: Katz Okitsu - $12,500. Contractor: TBD Signal (Adams/Ave 47) Page 2 of 3 v PROJECT BUDGET DESIGN CONSTRUCTION REMARKS start -end start -end Design Consultant/Contractor 2005-05 New Traffic $ 175,000 TBD TBD Traffic Signal did not meet warrants during the summer or Signal (Orchard/Ave 50) winter months. Project on hold until warrants are met. 2005-10 Ave 52 Storm $ 1,063,510 Complete 09/05 - 04/06 Design: TKC - $52,300. Contractor: Mocon. Construction Drain Improvements 95% complete. Contractor to modify existing water main conflict and install remainder of pipe. Verizon fiber optic relocated. AC Paving and road restoration remaining work. 2005-1 1 Ave 54 $ 324,881 1 1 /05 - 03/06 04/06 - 08/06 Design: RKA Engineers - $24,365. Contractor: TBD Pavement Rehab Improvements MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PUBLIC WORK TASKS MONTH OF: March, 2006 Employee's Hourly Labor Breakdown Crew#1 Crew #2 Crew #3 Maint. Mg. Code Activity 5 Men 3 Men 2 Men 1 Man Total 1000 Policing/Inspection 58 63 0 27 148 1001 Pot Hole -Repair/Patching 19 14 0 0. 33 1002 Crack/Joint Repair 0 0 0 0 0 1003 Pavement Marking/Legends 0 0 0 0 0 1004 Pavement Marking/Striping 0 0 0 0 0 1005 Curb Painting 2 0 0 0 2 1006 Other Traffic Controls 30 0 0 0 30 1007 Curb & Gutter Re air/Const. 0 0 0 0 0 1008 Other Concrete Repairs/Const. 6 0 0 0 6 1009 Street Sign Install (New) 10 21 0 0 31 1010 Street Sign Repair/Maint 20 4 0 1 25 1011 J.Debris Removal 16 19 0 18 53 1012 1 Right of Way Maint. 37 1 16 0 54 1021 CLEAN Catch Basin Inlet/Outlet 4 31 0 0 35 1022 Rondo Channel Outlet/Vault 19 0 0 0 19 1022A Desert Club Outlet/Vault 0 0 0 0 0 1023 S.D./ D.W./C.B. Repair/Maint. 0 19 0 3 22 1024 1 Gutter/Median Sand Removal 0 4 0 0 4 1025 Street Sweeping (Machine) 161 0 0 0 161 1026 Street Sweeping (Hand) 3 0 0 0 3 1027 Sidewalk/Bike Path Cleaning 0 5 8 0 13 1028 Dust Control 0 0 0 0 0 1029 Flood Control 0 6 12 0 18 1031 Parks/Retention Basins Inspection/Clean-4 0 26 49 1 76 1041 Mowing/ Weeding, Shrubs & Tree Trimmin 101 .59 42 0 202 1051 Landsca e/lrri ation Contract Mana eme 0 61 188 20 269 1052 Lightin lectrical Contract Mana ement 0 0 0 22 22 1061 Small Tools Repair/Maint. 2 0 0 0 2 1062 Equipment Repair/Maint. 1 6 0 0 7 1063 Vehicle Repair Maint. 35 17 0 0 52 1081 Trash/Litter/Rec cable Removal 0 22 0 0 22 1082 Vandalism Repairs 0 7 0 0 7 1083 Graffiti Removal 155 45 21 1 222 1084 Maint. Yard Building Maint. 17 32 7 4 60 1085 Semi nars/Training 37 45 8 6 96 1086 Special Eents 2 0 6 61 14 1087 Citizen Complaints/Requests 160 6 0 0 166 1088 Meeting ' 17 27 24 38 106 1089 Office` phone, paper work, reports, Misc.) 8 41 11 471 107 SUBTOTAL 920 581 392 194 2087 1091 Over Time 15 24 4 0 43 1094 Ju D O 0 0 0 0 0 1095 Sick Leave 24 3 8 0 35 1096 Vacation 32 16 0 6 54 1097 Holiday 0 01 0 0 0 1098 Workman Comp. 0 0 0 0 0 1099 Bereavement 24 0 0 -.0 24 SUBTOTAL 95 43 12 6 156 TOTAL HOURS 1016 624 404 200 2243 TOTAL MILES 4369 1875 16541,525 8323 Department Report: 9 LA U f.1 TA I*LICE Served by the Rverside Courny Sherifs Departmer7t Police Department Monthly Report March -- 2006 Prepared for I City of La Quinta La Quinta Police Department Captain Walter Meyer, Commander March, 2006 Highlights (Numbers in parenthesis denotes the number of calls for service that day) Wednesday, 03-01-06 (97): No significant activity to report. Thursday, 03-02-06 (81): No significant activity reported Friday, 03-03-06 (139): 1600 hours - Deputies from the La Quinta Special Enforcement Team, Traffic Team and the Coachella Valley Violent Crime Gang Task Force conducted a Crime Suppression Program in the City of La Quinta. The special enforcement included serving outstanding felony / misdemeanor warrants, traffic enforcement, and probation / parole compliance checks. Deputies arrested 6 persons for possession of narcotics, 23 misdemeanor crimes, issued 32 citations, towed 9 vehicles, conducted 87 traffic enforcement stops, 19 pedestrian checks, and conducted a total of 6 probation / parole compliance checks. 2053 hours - Deputy Reynaga responded to the 77000 block of Calle Flora, reference a ringing alarm. As he walked into the front courtyard he heard the sound of breaking glass. Deputy Reynaga requested additional units for assistance. While awaiting the units, he checked the west side of the residence and found a fire in the heater room. He requested the fire department to respond to the location. Fire department personnel concluded that a cut gas line, which was considered to be intentional, was the cause of the fire. Deputies located a broken window in the courtyard. Saturday, 03-04-06 (74): 0905 hours - Deputy Olsen arrested James Smith for a violation of a restraining order at the 77000 block of Calle Yucatan. He was booked at the Indio jail. Sunday, 03-05-06 (49): 1400 hours- Deputies assisted Palm Desert Station with a grand theft that had just occurred at the Tennis Gardens. The suspect, James Smith, attempted to trade in the stolen golf cart at Larsen's, located at Washington and SR 111. The golf cart was recovered. The suspect is also wanted by the Riverside County Fire Department for an arson investigation. 2309 hours - Corporal Northrup and Deputy Taylor went to the Santa Rosa Cove Country Club in La Quinta to investigate a report, from security personnel, of a truck that rammed the entrance gate. They located the truck on Avenue Fernando and detained the driver, Juan Munoz. Deputies determined that Munoz was driving under the influence of alcohol. Munoz was arrested and booked at the Indio Jail. 411 111AG Monday, 03-06-06 (58): 0209 hours - Corporal Northrup and Deputy Taylor went to a residence at the 51000 block of Avenida Diaz to investigate an alarm activation. A security guard was first on scene and saw lights going off and on inside the residence. Deputies found James Smith lying on a bed in the guestroom. Smith initially refused to comply with orders to surrender. Deputies then prepared to use the non -lethal Pepper -ball Launcher and Smith complied and was safely taken into custody. Smith was taken to John F. Kennedy Hospital before being booked into Indio Jail. Smith was charged with trespassing in a residential structure, possession of burglary tools, and committing a crime while out on bail. Palm Desert Station was notified of Smith's arrest, as he is wanted for a golf cart theft in that jurisdiction. Smith is also a suspect in an arson incident late last week in La Quinta. 2106 hours - Deputy Reynaga went to the 53000 block of Avenida Juarez to investigate a report of loud music coming from a parked truck. When he arrived, Deputy Reynaga found Jared Brand, passed out in the vehicle. A records check showed Brand was the subject of a restraining order forbidding him from being near the residence at which he was parked. Brand was arrested for public intoxication and violating the restraining order. He was booked at the Indio Jail. Tuesdav, 03-07-06 (79): 0304 hours - Deputy Reynaga responded to a residence at the 78000 block of Wakefield Drive to investigate a report of a domestic dispute. He contacted Tanya April Vasquez (I 9-years-old), who claimed that she had just been in a physical altercation with her 16- year -old boyfriend. Vasquez claimed that during the altercation her boyfriend cut himself with a kitchen knife. He was located at a nearby gas station with superficial cuts on his chest and hand. He claimed Vasquez cut him with the knife. There was also damage to a cell phone and a dent in Vasquez's car that were made during the altercation. Both parties were arrested for domestic violence. Vasquez faces additional charges for sexual intercourse with a minor. Wednesday, 03-08-06 (86): 1440 hours -Deputy Moore responded to a report of a fight at La Quinta Middle School. When he arrived, he contacted a 14-year-old male that had instigated the fight. The victim complained of pain behind his left ear and a headache. The victim did not require any medical attention. The suspect was arrested for battery on school grounds and was booked into Indio Juvenile Hall. Juvenile Hall held the suspect due to prior criminal behavior. 1600 hours -Deputy Ortega responded to Home Depot reference a shoplifter in custody by loss prevention. Deputy Ortega contacted Manuel Espinoza. Espinoza was arrested for commercial burglary. Espinoza attempted to steal $600.00 worth of merchandise. Espinoza was booked into the Indio Jail. Thursday, 03-09-06 (67): 1113 hours - Deputy Alexander responded to the 52600 block of Avenida Herrera regarding a felony warrant service. Deputy Alexander contacted Saul Rood, who was arrested for a felony warrant for possession of illegal drugs. 1920 hours - Deputy Ervin responded to the Circle K convenience store located on Calle Tampico reference a robbery. The victim, a 24- year -old Hispanic male, said he was using the pay phone outside the store when a Hispanic male pushed him down and took $50.00 and a $5.00 phone card out of his hands. The suspect was described as being 5'-06" tall, 160 lbs, brown eyes, thick black mustache and wearing a :117 black leather jacket and brown pants. The suspect was last seen running south on Avenida Bermudas from Calle Tampico. The victim did not sustain any injuries from the assault. Friday, 03-10-06 (85): 1015 hours- Deputy Wedertz responded to the 51000 block of Avenida Alvarado regarding a possible suicide threat. A female had text messaged her sister that she wanted to kill herself because she felt guilty about her daughter being sexually molested by a friend. When Deputy Wedertz arrived he had to physically restrain the female as she attempted to swallow pills in his presence. She was transported to JFK for medical and mental evaluation. 1530 hours - Deputy Olsen responded to the Main St. Bar and Grill in La Quinta regarding a fight. Deputy Olson contacted Hector Mendoza, and found him to be extremely intoxicated. Mendoza was arrested for being under the influence of alcohol. 1800 hours - Deputy Ervin responded to the 53000 block of Avenida Martinez reference a report of domestic violence. The victim was assaulted by her husband, Brian Scott. During the altercation, she had attempted to get away and hide in the bedroom Scott kicked in the door and choked her. This happened in front of their child. The suspect left prior to Deputy Ervin's arrival. Brian Scott was located and arrested in Palm Desert about 2000 hours. Scot was booked at the Indio Jail for domestic assault, criminal threats and child endangerment. 2110 hours - Deputies responded the intersection of Washington St. and Eisenhower Dr., reference a two vehicle collision with ejection. Joe Castro, 63 years of La Quinta, had caused the collision by running the red light. He impacted a stopped vehicle driven by David Trimble, 60 years of La Quinta. Castro was intoxicated at the time of the collision. Trimble complained of pain to the back and sought his own treatment. Castro's 10 year -old -daughter was in the vehicle but she was not injured. Castro was transported to JFK Hospital in Indio with complaint of pain. He was arrested and advised of the Admin Per Se, he refused to submit to a blood test. He was released per 825 at the hospital. Charges to be filed against Castro for driving under the influence and felony child endangerment. Saturdav, 03-11-06 (67): 1230 hours - Deputy Alvarado responded to Home Depot regarding a shoplifter in custody by Loss Prevention. Deputy Alvarado contacted Eduardo Ramirez. Ramirez was arrested for taking a $319.00 nail gun. After being advised of his rights under the Miranda ruling, Ramirez admitted he went to the store to steal the nail gun. He was booked into jail for commercial burglary. 1845 hours - Deputy Ervin responded to Wal-Mart regarding a shoplifter in custody by store security. Deputy Ervin contacted Leonardo Patino. Deputy Ervin learned that Patino had attempted to take items from the store without paying. Patin was issued a citation and released. 2113 hours - Deputy Ervin responded to the area of Washington Street and Hwy 111 to investigate a motorist's report of a possible drunk driver. He located the suspect vehicle near Washington Street and Calle Tampico. Deputy Ervin conducted a traffic enforcement stop and contacted the driver, Chantelle Chou. Chou was arrested DUI and booked at the Indio Jail. Sunday, 03-12-06 (56): 1500 hours - Deputy Bonaddio responded to a report of a shoplifter in custody at Wal-Mart. Deputy Banaddio arrested Oscar Nafate for commercial burglary. Nafate was booked into the Indio Jail. 1803 hours - Corporal Northrup and Deputy Taylor responded to Wal-Mart on Hwy 111 to investigate a report of a shoplifter. They contacted Gustavo Nunez and learned he had been caught by security stealing store merchandise. During the course of the investigation, Nunez emptied his pockets and was in possession of suspected methamphetamines. The deputies also contacted Nunez's girlfriend, Christina Zapata, and determined she was under the influence of a controlled substance. Nunez and Zapata were arrested and booked at the Indio Jail. Nunez's 8-year-old daughter was transported to the station and release to a member of the family.. Monday, 03-13-06 (73): 0132 hours - Deputy Post conducted a Pedestrian Check on a man found behind The Falls Steak House on Hwy 111 and Washington Street. Deputy Post contacted Francisco Leija and determined Leija had consumed alcohol past the point of being able to care for himself. Leija was arrested for public intoxication and booked at the Indio Jail. Tuesday, 03-14-06 (47): 2317 hours - Deputy Martinez went to a residence at the 54000 block of Avenida Velasco to investigate a report that the residents' ex -boyfriend was at the location uninvited and was refusing to leave. He contacted Roderick Deas. A records check revealed Deas had an active felony no -bail warrant for spousal battery. He was arrested and booked at the Indio Jail. Wednesday, 03-15-06 (131): 2221 hours - Deputy Ervin responded Wal-Mart reference a robbery that had just occurred. The victim said a Hispanic male approached her in the parking lot, brandished a semi auto handgun at her, and stole her purse. The suspect fled the scene in a newer model Chevrolet Silverado pick-up, black in color, unknown plate, last seen towards Highway 111. The suspect is described as a Hispanic male, 23-25 years wearing a black hooded sweatshirt, and baggy blue denim pants, possible mustache. No description on the driver of the truck. APR and notifications made to surrounding agencies. Thursday, 03-16-06 (67): 1800 hours - Deputy Irvin responded to Video Depot where an act of indecent exposure had occurred on 03/14/06. The victim delayed reporting the incident because she was too embarrassed at the time. The suspect, Thomas Gallatin, was identified via the store surveillance cameras. Charges will be filed out of custody. Friday, 03-17-06 (81): 1515 hours - Deputy Olsen responded to the 51000 block of Avenida Velasco reference a request for medical aid. Jonathan Sanchez had been drinking Tequila with friends who had dropped him off at the location. Residents at the Velasco address called 911 due to the fact that Sanchez was unresponsive. Paramedics responded to the location and transported Sanchez to JFK Hospital. Deputy Olsen went to Sanchez's address in an attempt to contact family members, but received no answer. Sanchez regained consciousness and was released from JFK at 1945 hours. 1745 hours -Investigator Baur arrested a 15 —year old female for vehicle theft. The juvenile's stepfather arrived home at 1530 hours and noticed that his '94 Chevy Suburban was missing. The juvenile took the vehicle without permission, drove to a friend's house, and returned home at 1730 hours. Per the stepfather, the juvenile has a history of being defiant. Stepfather requested prosecution and the juvenile was booked at juvenile hall. J19 2040 hours - Deputy Ervin responded to the Red Robin following a report of an intoxicated subject walking in and out of traffic. Glen McAnespie was extremely intoxicated and unable to care for his own safety. He was arrested and booked at the jail for public intoxication. During the booking process, he was found in possession of heroin and additional charges for possession of a controlled substance and possession of drugs in a jail facility were added. Saturday, 03-18-06 (60): 1856 hours - Deputy Taylor and Corporal Northrup responded to Avenue 52 west of Washington Street to investigate a report of a traffic collision involving a black Honda Civic and the center median. The accident left the vehicle flipped on its side. They discovered that Sovannarith Lay was ejected from the car. He was transported to Desert Hospital to be treated for cuts and bruises, and released. The accident caused damage to the median and the one-way sign in front of Arnold Palmer's Restaurant. 2320 hours - Deputy Taylor and Corporal Northrup were flagged down at the Circle K on Calle Tampico in La Quinta. Christopher Ruiz, reported that a Hispanic male had approached him and demanded a ride. Ruiz refused to give the suspect a ride and the suspect grabbed the keys from the victim's hand. The victim noticed that the suspect had something heavy concealed under his sweater, which the victim thought might be a gun. Fearing for his safety, the victim did not attempted to stop the suspect. The investigation revealed that the suspect is possibly Ramiro Franz of Cathedral City. The vehicle was recovered by Cathedral City Police in the Dream Homes area. Sunday, 03-19-06 (57): 0953 hours- Deputy Burgie responded to the54000 block of Avenida Vallejo regarding an assault. Deputy Burgie arrested a seventeen -year -old for battery on his mother, Grace Vonseggen. The suspect was booked at juvenile hall. 1342 hours- Deputies responded to Trader Joes regarding a subject walking through the parking lot trying to open car doors. The first units to arrive could not find the subject, but were later called back as employees saw the subject again in their parking lot. They followed the subject to the rear of Lowe's. Deputy Bawdon arrived and attempted to make contact with the subject. The subject ran from him and was caught after a short foot pursuit. Deputy Munoz and Sgt. Hignight arrived to assist. The suspect was later removed from the police vehicle to be searched and the suspect attempted to run again. The suspect was tripped and he fell to the ground. The suspect was cleared for booking through JFK Urgent Care. Leif William Bjelde was booked for delaying a peace officer in the performance of his duties. The suspect possessed a Nevada Driver's License, but gave nine different names along with different date of births. 2039 hours - Deputy Lingle responded to the 79000 block of Paseo Del Rey to investigate a report that a vehicle was driving into a garage wall and activating its horn. Deputy Lingle found Ambrosia Garcia Lopez inside the car. Lopez appeared to be intoxicated, but had not been seen actually driving. A records check revealed Lopez had outstanding misdemeanor warrants for traffic violations. Lopez was arrested and booked at the Indio Jail. 2127 hours - Deputy Donowho was assigned to investigate an incident that occurred at the 51000 block of Avenida Mendoza. She learned that Emilio Angulo had come to the residence to pick-up his young child from his estranged wife, Christina Angulo. After arriving, Angulo became enraged and broke into the residence. There was an altercation involving Emilio, Christina and her new boyfriend, Andy Ford Jr. Their 15-year-old child also became involved and helped Emilio assault both Christina and Ford. Ford sustained major injuries and was taken by ambulance to a local hospital. Emilio left the scene with the children but later turned himself in at the Indio Station. He was arrested and booked at the Indio Jail for assault with great bodily injury, spousal battery; and violation of a restraining order, child endangerment, and terrorist threats. Mondav, 03-20-06 (63); 1220 hours - Deputy Harter arrested Ismeal Martinez, a transient, for public intoxication. The suspect was arrested on Avenida La Fonda at Avenida Bermudas. Martinez was booked into the Indio Jail. 1430 hours - Deputy Bolton received a report of a past rape in the City of La Quinta . The suspects had assaulted two juveniles in the early morning hours of 3/20/06. Both victims are runaways from Desert Hot Springs. Investigator Nagels was notified and will handle the follow-up investigation. 1521 hours - Deputy Burgie responded to Target reference a shoplifter in custody. He cited and released Maria Garcia for shoplifting. Garcia had no criminal history. Tuesday, 03-21-06 (73): 1733 hours - Deputy Alfaro responded to Kohl's Department Store on Hwy 111 to investigate a report of a shoplifter in custody. He contacted Rhonda Doyle and learned that she had entered the store to steal merchandise. Doyle was arrested for burglary and booked at the Indio Jail. 2306 hours - Deputy Taylor and Corporal Northrup conducted a pedestrian check near the intersection of Avenida Velasco and Calle Hildalgo. They contacted Andres Montemayor. A records check revealed Montemayor had two active warrants for driving on a suspended license and driving under the influence. He was arrested and booked at the Indio Jail Wednesdav, 03-22-06 (69): 1348 hours - Deputy Castellanos and Corporal Black responded to a man down in front of the Ross clothing store. CDF personnel were on scene and contacted German Acosta, a transient, who was sleeping on the sidewalk. Acosta appeared to be intoxicated and disoriented. He was taken into custody for Public Intoxication and a search incident to arrest revealed a metal Marijuana smoking pipe. He was booked into Indio Jail for Public Intoxication and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia. 1401 hours - Deputy Ortega responded to the 79000 block of Ladera reference an unattended death. CDF personnel were already on scene and pronounced Eddy Obrien dead at 1359 hours. Obrien had an extensive history of medical concern and no indication of trauma or injuries were found. Thursday, 03-23-06 (62): 1230 Deputy Reynolds arrested Jesus Adrian Patino for possession of marijuana after a traffic stop at Highway 111 and Simon Dr. 2120 hours - Deputy Drafton responded to the Lamp Post Pizza reference a subject causing a disturbance. He contacted Jorge Rivera, local transient, who was arrested for being under the influence of methamphetamine. He was transported to the Indio Jail. Rivera was detained for being mentally disturbed and transported to mental health. Fridav, 03-24-06 (96): 1115 hours - Deputy Reynolds conducted a vehicle stop at Washington and Hwy 111. The driver, Todd Hodlik, was found to have a felony warrant for possession of illegal drugs out of San Diego. He was booked into Indio jail. 1805 hours - Deputy Reynolds conducted a vehicle stop at Sagebrush and Washington St. The vehicle was a Toyota Tercel, but a DMV check on the plate came back to a Dodge truck. Further investigation revealed ^�el J,4, the driver/owner intentionally switched the plates to avoid registration fees. The expired plates that belonged to the Toyota were located in the trunk. Michael Whitney was arrested for false evidence of registration. Whitney was booked at the jail. 2145 hours - Deputy Ervin responded to the 80000 block of Via Talevera reference a domestic dispute. Michael Fogarty was arrested for habitual drunkenness in the presence of children and booked at the jail. Forgery was very intoxicated as he broke several items inside the house in an uncontrollable and violent manner. He did this in the presence of his 12-year-old daughter who hid in a closet out of fear. The daughter was afraid she'd get hurt. Per the wife and daughter, this is a common occurrence. They advised he is out of control Saturdav, 03-25-06(58): 0950 hours - Investigator Baur and Deputy Bawdon responded to the 57000 block of Seminole regarding a disturbance. When they arrived, John Mahoney stated that Arley Lewis, had assaulted him when he tried to move out. Lewis was extremely agitated and refused to.let Mahoney take his property. When deputies contacted Lewis, he ran into the house and fought with deputies. Lewis kicked one of the deputies in the groin area. Lewis also had a misdemeanor warrant for driving under the influence. He was booked into the jail for forcefully resisting arrest, assault, assault on a peace officer, robbery, criminal threats and the warrant. Bail increased by the judge to one-half million dollars. 1217 hours - Deputy Alvarado responded to a single vehicle rollover traffic collision at Washington Street at Simon Drive. Further investigation revealed that the juvenile driver was traveling northbound on Washington Street at about 40 mph when he lost control of his vehicle and hit the center median. The juvenile was transported by private vehicle for minor scratches on both arms. The City of La Quinta was notified reference damage. 1315 hours - Deputy Reynolds arrested Jorge Felix Rivera for trespassing at La Quinta High School. Rivera has been seen at several schools in the area and has been previously warned by school administration reference trespassing. The citizen's arrest form was signed by DSUSD security. 1500 hours - Investigator Baur arrested Jose Alejandro Valencia for theft with priors at Home Depot. Valencia attempted to steal a $ 25.00 blowtorch and had no identification. Valencia claimed to have stomach pains while enroute to the jail; an OK to book at JFK was obtained prior to booking. Sunday, 03-26-06 (52): 1350 hours - Deputy Burgie responded to Avenue 48 at Washington Street regarding a subject walking into traffic. Abdul Abdelghani, was booked into the Indio Jail for public intoxication. 2038 hours - Deputy T. White responded to Stater Brothers grocery store to investigate a report of an adult male being detained for shoplifting. He contacted Victor Salazar. Salazar had entered the store with the intention of committing theft. Salazar was arrested for burglary and booked at the Indio Jail. Monday, 03-27-06 (71): 0009 hours - Deputy Post responded to the AM/PM gas station to investigate reports of a woman going in and out of the store all night. He contacted Royal Fahmer and determined she had consumed alcohol past the point of being unable to care for herself. Fahmer was arrested and booked at the Indio Jail for public intoxication. 0418 hours - Deputy Lingle responded to the AM/PM to investigate a report of a man refusing to leave. He contacted Jorge Rivera, a transient. Rivera had the odor of an alcoholic beverage on his person and admitted to consuming alcohol earlier in the evening. Rivera was arrested for public intoxication and booked at the Indio Jail. 1522 hours - Deputy Trower and Deputy Alexander responded to Kohl's reference a shoplifter being detained. Jesus Hernandez was booked into the jail for shoplifting. Tuesday, 03-28-06 (77): 1820 hours - Corporal Northrup and Deputy Taylor responded to Jefferson Street and Westward Ho to assist the Indio Police Department with a hit & run traffic collision that had occurred. Brian Hancock was arrested for public intoxication and booked in jail Wednesday, 03-29-06 (99): No significant activity Thursdav, 03-30-06 (91): 0200 hours - Deputy Lugo conducted a traffic enforcement stop at Calle Colima and Avenida Bermudas for a stop sign violation. The driver, Janelle Pickard, was arrested for possessing several grams of marijuana in an assortment of plastic canisters marked "cannabis for medical use only." Pickard does not have a legal prescription to possess and/or use the marijuana, but said she buys it from a friend who does. Pickard was also in possession of an assortment of glass marijuana pipes. Pickard was arrested for possession of an open container containing alcohol. 0400 hours - Deputy White responded to an alarm at U.S. Geological Survey office. Joe Carrera, transient, was located walking outside the premises and found to have an active warrant for battery. The business was secure and there were no signs of entry. Carrera only had contacts for the warrant and being mentally disturbed. He was arrested and booked at the jail for the warrant. 1300 hours - Deputy Moore arrested a La Quinta High School student for possession of ammunition and a knife on school grounds. The minor was booked into Indio Juvenile Hall. 1815 hours - Deputy Alvarado conducted a traffic enforcement stop at Avenue 48 and Adams Street. The driver, Leobardo Bravo, was arrested for driving under the influence and booked at the jail. 2000 hours - Deputy Drafton conducted a warrant service at the 52000 block of Avenida Martinez. Aaron Rivera was arrested for a felony warrant for possession for sales. Rivera was booked at the jail. 2320 hours - Deputy Drafton conducted a warrant service at the 53000 block of Eisenhower Drive. Joe Maddox was arrested for a felony warrant for possession of a controlled substance. Maddox was booked into the jail. Fridav, 03-31-06 (53): 0945 hours - Deputy Butvidas contacted Eduarde Tanabe at the Dune Palms Trailer Park in the 46000 block of Dune Palms. Tanabe had a felony warrant for drug possession and two misdemeanor warrants for shoplifting and traffic violations. Tanabe was arrested and booked into the Indio Jail. Total calls for service: 2318 3 A2 Deputy Robert Brooker Deputy Chris Orr Sgt. John Shields CITY OF LA QUINTA Traffic Enforcement Team Report March 2006 Deputy Michael Gaunt Deputy Dave Adams Deputy Manny Alvarado Summary of activity for the month of March Type of Activity Number of Incidents Speed Violations 80 Fail to Yield 6 Turning Violations 10 Calls for Service & B/U's 45 Red light/Stoplight/Stop sin 78 Child Seat Violations 2 Lane Change Violation 2 Seat Belt Violations 33 DU I Arrests 3 Misdemeanor Arrest 7 Felony Arrest 0 Warnings 35 Tows 26 Injury T/C 11 Non -Injury T/C 18 Suspended DL 30 Non -Moving 176 H&S 0 Deputy Ismael Celaya Deputy Jason McFadden Deputy Paul Harter Deputy Randy Wedertz CITY OF LA QUINTA Special Enforcement Team March 2006 Summary of Activitv Sergeant Matt Jimenez Type of Activity IF# of Incidents F Type of Activity # of Incidents Ongoing Investigations 1 Probation Searches 3 Parole Searches 14 Arrests/Filings 66 Vehicle Checks 104 Arrest Warrants Served 4 Investigation Assists 5 Programs 1 Arrest Warrants Attempted 5 Crime Prevention Hours 10 Pedestrian Checks 36 Back-ups 15 Bar Checks 0 Search Warrants 0 Follow-ups 2 Recovered Stolen Property 1 Meetings/Civil Commitments 0 Surveillance 0 Citations Issued 28 Business Contacts 4 Bicycle Time 10 hrs. Training Hours 10 Illegal Drugs Seized 5 gms Meth TOTAL MILEAGE 1565 Miles SIGNIFICANT ACTIVITY 1. Conducted a "Crime Suppression Program" resulting in the arrest of 6 for possession of narcotics and 23 for misdemeanor crimes. Officers conducted 87 traffic stops, issued 32 citations and towed 9 vehicles as well as conducting 19 pedestrian checks and 6 parole or probation compliance checks. 2. Arrested Kenneth Touw, (La Quinta) for a felony warrant, Juan Gonzales (Indio) for burglary and Thai Mc Williams (La Quinta) for possession of marijuana. CITY OF LA QUINTA IWI%R" hly School Resource Officer Report March 2006 Deputy Kevin Moore La Quinta Middle School summaty or ACUVIry Type of Activity Number of Incidents Reports 11 Arrests 3 District Attorney Filings 1 Traffic Stops 2 Business Checks 5 Y.A.T. Referral 11 Vehicle Checks 9 Calls for Service 43 Pedestrian Checks 5 Follow-up 9 Truancy 15 SIGNIFICANT ACTIVITY 1. Arrested one student for assault and one for possession of ammunition and a knife on School grounds at LQHS. 2. Security detained an adult male for trespassing at LQHS. The subject was found to be an active parollee and a registered sex -offender. The subject was arrested. 3. Counseled a 3rd grade student who threatened a student with a "soft air" gun he brought to class. 4. Investigated six fights and four thefts at LAMS. All participants were referred to YAT. 5. Assisted the crossing guard at Eisenhower Dr. X CalleTampico after numerous vehicles failed to obey the directions of the traffic crossing guard. 6. Provided patrol of the businesses located at Washington St. X Calle Tampico and met with business owners regarding student activity in the area. 04.6 Deputy Eric Speir La Quinta High School CITY OF LA QUINTA School Resource Officer Report March 2006 Summary of Activity Ty2e of Activity umber of Incidents Criminal Reports 6 Non -Criminal Incidents 2 Arrests 1 District Attorney Filings 3 Traffic Stops 0 YAT Referral 6 Vehicle Checks 0 Pedestrian Checks 3 Follow-up 0 Truancy 12 SIGNIFICANT ACTIVITY 1. Investigated one fight with no significant injuries to either participant. 2. "Knox Box" locks have been installed and locking the campus gates was very effective during the recent student protests and walk -outs. 3. Criminal charges were filed with the District Attorney's Office on two students for vandalism of a classroom, on another student who was found in possession of stolen property from the girls locker room and one was arrested for tresspassing on school grounds. 4. One student was found to be in possession of what was suspected to be marjivana and was referred to YAT. J4.7 C.S.O. Steve Grissom C.S.O. Monica Santillanes C.S.O.Thomas Fowler CITY OF LA QUINTA Community Service Officer Report March 2006 Summar of Activity Type of Activity Number of Incidents Burglary Investigations 10 Grand Theft Reports 6 PettyTheft Reports 21 Vandalism/Malicious Mischief Reports 8 Traffic Collision Response 13 Vehicle Code or Parking Citations 30 Abandoned Vehicles Tagged/WarningTagged/Warning 3 Towed Vehicles 3 Lost or Found Property Reports 13 Area Checks/LQ Skate Park/Day Laborers 0 Public Assistance 3 Custodial/Non-Custodial Transports 18 Miscellaneous Calls 27 SIGNIFICANT ACTIVITY 1. Presented "Crime Prevention" programs at three Home Owner's Association meetings. 2. Conducted three community Neighborhood Watch meetings. 3. Represented the La Quinta Police Department at the Special Olympics and at the elementary school reading program. CITY OF LA QUINTA Post 503 Explorer Report March 2006 Corporal Andy Gerard SIGNIFICANT ACTIVITY 1. Post 503 members trained in the following areas: burglary in progress, alarm and building search scenarios, bicycle patrol, physical conditioning and drill / marching practice. Deputy M. Alvarado conducted the drill / marching training. 2. Post 503 members volunteered their service by assisting the La Quinta Police Department personnel at the Desert Special Olympics at La Quinta High School. 3. Post 503 members assisted the Desert Search and Rescue members with traffic and crowd control during their annual fund raising Rodeo. 4. Post 503 members have a busy schedule ahead as they look forward to attending the Explorers Competiton in Las Vegas Nevada in June, the National Explorer Conference in Flagstaff, Arizona in in July and the annual Explorer Academy in Riverside in August. CITY OF LA QUINTA Monthly CPO Volunteer Report March, 2006 Volunteer Coordinator: Danese Maldonado Summary of Activitv Type of Activity Number Monthly Volunteer Hours 312.5 Hours YTD 614 Hours 4/03 to Present 8378 CPO Monthly Visits 147 CPO YTD Visits 393 CPO 4/03 to Present 6161 Training Hours 0 i - HIGHLIGHTS 1. Currently the volunteer program is averaging 19 active volunteer participants. 2. The Citizens on Patrol (COP) program is steadily moving forward. A COP training program has been developed and will be implemented as soon as the COP vehicle is ready for use. The COP vehicle is in the process of being fully equipped for volunteer use. Communication equipment, light bars, graphics, first aid equipment and traffic safety equipment will be carried in the COP vehicle at all times. Department Report: LA Ufl TA ICE Served by the Pi erside Count "herffs Departnent Crime Statistics Summary February -- 2006 Prepared for 331 **PART 1 NARCOTICS TRAFFIC CITY OF LA QUINTA Crime Comparison -- February CRIME* FEBRUARY FEBRUARY YTD 2006 YTD 2005 2006 2005 HOMICIDE 0 0 0 0 RAPE 0 0 0 0 ROBBERY 3 1 6 2 ASSAULT, FELONY 12 10 19 17 BURGLARY 41 55 99 ill VEHICLE THEFT 24 15 50 29 LARCENY/THEFT 62 75 135 157 ARSON 1 0 1 1 NARCOTICS 0 11 5 14 TRAFFIC CITATIONS 385 320 647 621 T/C NON -INJURY 46 48 114 90 DUI 9 11 18 22 T/C INJURY 12 9 20 33 T/C FATAL 0 1 0 1 *Attempts not included ** Only Part 1 crimes as reported to UCR are included. CITY OF LA QUINTA DISPATCH INFORMATION — JANUARY 2006 TYPE OF CALL RESPONSE TIME MINUTES NUMBER OF INCIDENTS EMERGENCY 4.03 3 ROUTINE 11.035 7173 ** Data from Riverside Co. Sheriffs Department Data Warehouse, Average Response Time Report. C; Ci CITY OF LA QUINTA February 2006 Crime Distribution LARCENY / THEFT 44% NARCOTICS 0% . VEHICLE THEFT 16% ROBBERY ASSAULT, FELONY 8% JRGLARY 29% Month to Month Crime Comparison • February c FEBRUARY 2006 a FEBRUARY 2005 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Year to Date Crime Comparison • February ®YTD2oo6 a YTD 2005 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 n j34 Year to Date Traffic Activity Comparison ®YTD 2006 0 YTD 2005 700 647 - 621 I 600 500 400 z 300 00 : 100 y ry y 20 - -33 W� }4�� s« � TRAFFIC CITATIONS TIC NON -INJURY DUI TIC INJURY TIC FATAL Year to Date Calls for Service Comparison 4500 y� IY > cM jti Y 3896 3889 4000 fgp� r 3500 n ffrs�� ry 3000 2500 r p YTD 2006 ®YTD 2005 2000 g n 1445 1413$ 1500 4 �a 1000 4 3 � 500 fi a, x c 10 WQ A 0 Total Non -Criminal Criminal Page 1 of 1 Wanda Wise -Latta From: robert roche [globetexintl@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 8:49 AM em To: Don Adolph; Terry Henderson Cc: dorisw@surf.dsusd.K12.ca.us; marytroche@aol.com LXL" Subject: LQ Resident Mitch Paige Hello Don & Terry: It has come to my attention that in the near future the Desert Sands Unified School District Board will be considering the naming of a new middle school in La Quinta. I also understand that the names of Helen Keller,Thurgood Marshall, Rosa Parks, and Colonel Mitchel Paige have been advanced forward for consideration. These are exceptional people and anyone of these would bring distinction to the City of La Quinta. There is however, an opportunity for "local pride" in naming the new school Col. Mitchel Paige. As you know Mitch was a full time resident of La Quinta for 26 years. Marilyn Paige continues to live in.La Quinta. Mitch participated in many City functions. He often spoke to schools and other civic organizations in La Quinta about our early U.S. hero's and what it meant to practice honor, courage and commitment to excellence. Colonel Paige was a member of "Americas Greatest Generation", and was a real" hero". As a receipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor and by living a life of dedication to Country Mitch exemplified the meaning of the "real thing" Please lend your support in helping to bestow this honor to Colonel Mitchel Paige. Thank you, Bob. Bob Roche Globetex International Tel-760-8629155 Fax-760-8621812 r 3 ,J Truman Elementary School Award Recipients City Council Meeting - April 18, 2006 Recipient Names 1. Shane Archer 2. Serene Austin 3. Kimberly Beltran 4. Brandon Berumen 5. Steven Carrillo 6. Stephanie Garcia 7. Kaylen Gedney 8. Ricky Leacock 9. Chase Lemmermann 10. Iriana Lopez 11. Aime Luna 12. Sammy Macias 13. Natalie Nguyen 14. Alexus Pavia 15. Kenya Perezqil 16. Alexander Romero 17. Vanessa Romero 18. Sally 5alas 19. Casandra Valeriano j 8 Truman Elementary School Award Recipients City Council Meeting - April 18, 2006 Recipient Names 20. Angel Valle 21. Destiny Vega 22. Nicolaus Yonekura ass c� OF 9 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 18, 2006 ITEM TITLE: Continuation of a Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of a Resolution Approving Tentative Tract Map 34185, the Subdivision of 3.14 Acres into Ten Single -Family Lots and Other Parcels, Located 425 ± Feet West of Jefferson Street Along the North Side of the Stormwater Channel, South of Fiesta Drive Accessed From Hummingbird Lane. Applicant: Sienna Corporation RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Tentative Tract Map 34185 to subdivide 3.14 acres into nine residential lots, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS None. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 3.14 acre site into ten single-family residential lots located southwest of Fiesta Drive and Jefferson Avenue. The applicant is proposing access to the subject property via a private road connecting with Hummingbird Lane (Attachment 1). The site is bordered by single-family homes to the north, two separate Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) well sites to the east and west and the CVWD stormwater channel to the south. The City Council considered this item as a public hearing on March 7, 2006. Following a staff report, testimony was received from the applicant and multiple neighboring property owners. Several comments received from the neighboring property owners focused upon traffic impacts to the area, especially to existing 340 homes on Hummingbird Lane, which is a short cul-de-sac currently serving four residences. Concerns with width of the proposed street and parking were also voiced. City Council discussion and deliberations included the possibility of an alternative access that would not utilize Hummingbird Lane. The alternative access would involve creating a new project entry on Fiesta Drive just west of Jefferson. This alternative would require the relocation of the existing eastern CVWD well site to City property north of Fiesta Drive immediately west of and adjacent to Jefferson Street. The well site relocation would in turn allow for access to be provided directly from Fiesta Drive. Ultimately, Council moved to continue the public hearing to the April 4 meeting, allowing time for the applicant to consider the possible access redesign and to propose the alternative to CVWD and City staff. A request was made for continuance at the April 4 meeting and granted in order to allow the applicant, CVWD and City staff additional time to consider the possible access redesign and well site relocation. Following the March 7 City Council meeting (Attachments 2 and 3), the applicant provided staff with an alternative tentative tract map and access concept drawing (Attachment 4). The redesign would result in the private cul-de-sac street connecting with Fiesta Drive east of Lot 55 and just west of Jefferson Street. The proposed redesign includes one additional lot for a total of 11. The road width on the proposed redesign is primarily at 32 feet, the exception being adjacent to Lot 55 where the road would narrow to 26 feet. The applicant is also proposing to encroach approximately five feet of the road on CVWD property, which would be five feet from the top of the existing channel lining. The applicant and City staff met with CVWD staff on two separate occasions to discuss the proposed relocation of the well site and the possibility of the road encroaching onto the CVWD property. Preliminary review of the access redesign has resulted in the following: • The access redesign will necessitate the relocation of the CVWD well site to City property north of Fiesta Drive and west of Jefferson Avenue, which is comprised of remainder lots from the Jefferson Avenue road widening project. The remainder property is narrow in width (84 feet) but several hundred feet in length. Well sites typically require a minimum size of 22,000 square feet. The applicant has proposed a relocation site to CVWD for their review. CVWD staff has yet to complete an evaluation of an exact well site layout and configuration. • The proposed Fiesta Drive access point is inconsistent with the General Plan requirement for a 250 foot separation between driveways/intersections (Program 2.8) as it is approximately 125 feet from Jefferson Street. During preliminary review Public Works staff expressed possible safety and turning movement concerns with the proposed intersection location. 341 • The shape of proposed Lot 11 is irregular, requiring a custom home design as it would be difficult to site a standard home on the property that conforms to the required yard setbacks. In addition, much of the eastern area of this lot will be too narrow for typical residential uses. • During one of the CVWD meetings the applicant was notified that encroachment of the road onto CVWD property will require design and installation of a concrete access road between the storm channel floor and the existing well site to the west of the subject property. The applicant has informed staff that this new CVWD requirement would cost in excess of $150,000. • In order to accommodate previously identified parking concerns, the applicant is proposing a 32 foot wide street. However, an exception to this width would exist between Lot 55 and the CVWD stormwater channel where the street width would be limited to 26 feet. Public Works staff has expressed concern with the turning movement at this location due to sight distance limitation for westbound trips caused by this very narrow point. • As proposed, the 32 foot wide street is relying upon using CVWD property. This will place the street approximately five feet from the stormwater channel liner edge. As of the writing of this report CVWD has yet to provide a written response to the applicants request to encroach onto CVWD property. This matter is potentially of issue for both proposed designs. • The proposed access redesign does not address the recommendation of the Planning Commission to eliminate a lot in the area of proposed Lots 1-7 in order for the proposed lot lines to line up closer with the existing adjacent lots to the north. ANALYSIS Since the March 7 meeting, staff has been working closely with the applicant in analyzing the access redesign. As previously stated, this effort included multiple meetings with CVWD as well as meetings between the applicant and staff. Though questions and/or responses to some items still remain, a comprehensive preliminary review has essentially been completed. On April 10, 2006 staff received a letter from the applicant (Attachment 5) requesting City Council consideration of the original design and to forego the access redesign. The letter makes reference to several of the aforementioned items; identifying several improvements required to relocate the existing well site combined with the cost to purchase City property necessary for the new well site. Staff concurs with the applicant's request primarily due to concern with the intersection location in proximity to Jefferson Street, proposed turning radius of the private road, configuration of Lot 1 1, and the design not taking into consideration the Planning Commission recommendation regarding the elimination of a lot in the area of proposed Lots 1-7. In addition, the area proposed for the relocated well site would place it directly abutting Jefferson Street for a minimum length of 260 feet. The minimum site dimensions would not provide for a landscape buffer between Jefferson Street and required perimeter wall. In reconsideration of the original tentative tract map design, it is suggested that traffic calming improvements be established at the intersection of the proposed private drive with Hummingbird Lane. There are improvements, such as a speed table and/or raised median, which could be incorporated into the design as an effort to reduce speeds and to minimize vehicle conflicts with the existing homes on Hummingbird Lane. A condition has been added (COA #47.B.3) directing the applicant to install a speed table into the design of the private road intersection with Hummingbird Lane (located behind the existing curb on private property). With incorporation of the Planning Commission recommendations, the tract map will provide nine infill lots consistent with the average size of most adjacent properties and single-family homes compatible in size and height with the existing residences. Planning Commission Action The Planning Commission initially heard this item during their January 10, 2006 meeting, but opted to continue the item until the neighborhood meeting could be conducted in order to resolve the presented issues. At their February 14, 2006 meeting, the Planning Commission approved the recommended Conditions of Approval, which involved a number of modifications to the applicant's original proposal. In regards to parking, the Planning Commission recommended removing the applicant's off-street parking area of five stalls proposed near the subdivision entrance. The Commission did not believe that widening the 28 foot street was necessary to accommodate on -street parking. In regard to the number of lots and lot design, the Commission recommended one lot be removed so that the project would be more consistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. In regard to landscaping and wall designs, the Commission approved the recommendation of a partial -view fence along the street portion of the stormwater channel, the completion of a wall along those Fiesta Drive properties which do not yet have a wall installed, the installation of landscaping along the stormwater channel and entrance, and the use of brick pavers to distinguish entry from Hummingbird Lane onto the private street. The Planning Commission also recommended that one residential lot be removed from the subdivision to make the lots more consistent with the lots sizes in the surrounding neighborhood, on the basis that there was testimony in the record that massing of the proposed buildings would be out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. 3 FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES Findings necessary to approve the Tentative Tract Map can be made and are contained in the attached Resolutions. The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Tentative Tract Map 34185 to subdivide 3.14 acres into nine residential lots, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval; or 2. Do not adopt the Resolutions approving the project; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, --- Jktc�e � DouglasA. Evans Community Development Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1. Tentative Tract Map 34185 Exhibit (Original) 2. City Council Staff Report — March 7, 2006 3. City Council meeting minutes — March 7, 2006 4. Tentative Tract Map 34185 Exhibit (Redesign) 5. Applicant's Letter 344 RESOLUTION NO. 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION OF 3.14 ACRES INTO NINE RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND MISCELLANEOUS LOTS CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 34185 APPLICANT: SIENNA CORPORATION WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 181h day of April, 2006, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing, continued from the 7th day of March, to consider the request of the Sienna Corporation for the subdivision of 3.14 acres into ten single-family residential lots and other miscellaneous lots, located 425 ± feet west of Jefferson Street along the north bank of the CVWD Stormwater Channel, south of Fiesta Drive accessed from Hummingbird Lane, more particularly described as: APN 649-020-072 and 649-063-009 WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map has been determined by the La Quinta Community Development Department to be exempt from the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), pursuant to Section 15332, and has thus prepared a Notice of Exemption in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. The project has been determined to be a Class 32 infill project, as it is less than five acres in size and is located within existing subdivided urban land; and, WHEREAS, the City Council at its March 7, 2006 meeting directed staff and the applicant to evaluate alternative subdivision designs; and WHEREAS, the applicant and staff have evaluated such alternative subdivision designs and it has been determined by the City Council that any alternative subdivision designs are technically infeasible; and WHEREAS, at said Public Hearings, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said City Council did make the following Mandatory Findings of Approval to justify approval of said Tentative Tract Map 34185: 1. The Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan in that the property is designated Low Density Residential (LDR), which allows single-family residential uses. 45 City Council Resolution No. 2006- Tentative Tract Map 34185 Sienna Corporation Approved: April 18`h 2006 2. The Tentative Tract Map and its improvement and design are consistent with the General Plan in that its street design and lots are in conformance with applicable goals, policies, and development standards, such as lot size, and will provide adequate infrastructure and public utilities. 3. The design of the subdivision and its proposed improvements are not likely to create environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or their habitat, as the project is located within existing subdivided land and has been determined to be an urban infill project of less than five acres. 4. The design of the subdivision and type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems in that the project will be conditioned to provide a safe environment for the public. 5. Unless the project is reduced by one residential lot from among Tract Lots 1 through 7, the project shall have an adverse impact on the public health and safety. Specifically, the project as proposed with ten residential lots would be inconsistent with the character of the surrounding community in that there would be building massing along lot boundaries that would be out of character with the massing in the surrounding community. The lots proposed for project Tract Lots 1 through 7 are significantly smaller and are not within the character of the abutting properties on Hummingbird Lane. Unless one lot is removed, the Planning Commission concluded that this disparity in the size of abutting lots conflicts with Section 9.10.010 of the Municipal Code which provides that the objectives of the Zoning Code include establishing "conditions which allow various types of land uses to exist in harmony and to promote the stability of existing land uses by protecting them" and "to prevent undue intensity of land use or development" . Furthermore, the RL zoning designation is specifically intended for the "preservation of low density neighborhoods"; permitting smaller lots along the boundary of larger existing residential lots does not preserve the low density character of the existing development. As permitted by Section 9.10.040 of the Zoning Code, the City "reserves the right to limit projects to intensities below the General Plan's upper limits." Unless one lot is removed, the lot size and massing proposed by the project may also lead to a visual incompatibility with the abutting properties. With the removal of one lot, the design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 346 City Council Resolution No. 2006- Tentative Tract Map 34185 Sienna Corporation Approved: April 18" 2006 6. There is no other feasible method to mitigate or avoid the impact identified in Finding No. 3 other than by removing one lot in Tract Lots 1 through 7 because the compatibility with the adjacent property can only be achieved by increasing the lot size among the lots abutting the Hummingbird Lane properties. Thus, in order to achieve continuity with the existing neighborhood and specifically with those existing lots on Hummingbird Lane, it is necessary to remove one lot among Tract Lots 1 through 7. 7. The design of the revised subdivision and the proposed types of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the subdivision in that none presently exist and access is provided within the project and to adjacent public streets. 8. The findings made in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including the testimony received at public hearings, the staff presentations, the staff reports, all material in the project files, and the written correspondence and telephone messages left by area residents. There is no other evidence that amounts to "substantial evidence," nor are there other facts that detract from the findings made in this Resolution and the City Council expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented to it and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Honorable 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 the City Council does hereby approve Tentative Tract Map 34185 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 18`h day of April, 2006, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: 34.7 City Council Resolution No. 2006- Tentative Tract Map 34185 Sienna Corporation Approved: April 18' 2006 ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Mayor City of La Quinta California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 3 '18 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any. claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Tentative Tract Map, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. 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. This Tentative Tract Map, and any Final Map recorded thereunder, shall comply with the requirements and standards of Government Code § § 66410 through 66499.58 (the "Subdivision Map Act"), and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code ("LQMC"). The City of La Quinta's Municipal Code can be accessed on the City's Web Site at www.la-quinta.org. 3. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain any necessary clearances and/or permits from the following 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 Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency • South Coast Air Quality Management District Coachella Valley (SCAQMDCV) The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvements plans for City approval. 3 ti g P:\Reports - CC\2006\4-18-06\Sienna TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 A project -specific NPDES construction permit must be obtained by the applicant; and who then shall submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality Control Board's ("RWQCB") acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent ("NOI"), prior to the issuance of a grading or site construction permit by the City. 4. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water), LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ. A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs one (1) acre or more of land, or that disturbs less than one (1) acre of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than one (1) acre of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). The applicant or design professional can obtain the California Stormwater Quality Association SWPPP template at www.cabmphandbooks.com for use in their SWPPP preparation. B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off -site grading being done in relation to this project. C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management Practices ("BMPs") (8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC): 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. 5) Non -Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 E. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading, pursuant to this project. F. The approved SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. 5. 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). PROPERTY RIGHTS 6. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the 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. 7. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map all public street right-of- ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 8. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Hummingbird Lane (Cul-de-sac, 50' ROW) — The applicant may be required to dedicate right of way at the private road intersection to Hummingbird Lane as required by the City Engineer. 9. The applicant shall retain for private use on the Final Map all private street right- of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 10. The private street right-of-ways to be retained for private use required for this development include: PAREPORTS - CC\20064-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.130C CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 A. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Property line shall be placed at the back of curb similar to the lay out shown on the tentative map and the typical street section shown in the tentative map. 2) Private Residential Streets measured at gutter flow line to flow line to be 28 feet of travel width as shown on the tentative tract map if on -street parking is prohibited, and provided there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors, and the applicant establishes provisions for ongoing enforcement of the parking restriction in the CC&R's. The applicant shall establish provisions identifying the parking restriction in the CC&R's. The CC&R's shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department prior to recordation and concurrent with finalizing the tract map. B. CUL DE SACS 1) The cul de sac shall conform to the shape shown on the tentative map with a 38-foot curb radius at the bulb or larger as shown on the tentative map. C. Dead End Street 1) The dead end street shall be redesigned to accommodate U-turn vehicular movement as required by the City Engineer. Curve radii for curbs at all street intersections shall not be less than 25 feet. 1 1 . Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. 12. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street right-of-ways shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map are necessary prior to approval of the Final Map dedicating such right-of-ways, the applicant shall grant the necessary right-of-ways within 60 days of a written request by the City. PAREPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 13. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map a ten -foot wide public utility easement contiguous with, and along both sides of all private streets. Such easement may be reduced with the express written approval of IID. 14. Direct vehicular access to Hummingbird Lane from lots with frontage along Hummingbird Lane is restricted, except for those access points identified on the tentative tract map, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final tract map. 15. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. 16. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Tentative Tract Map and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. FINAL MAPS 17. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a standard AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD program. Where a Final Map was not produced in an AutoCAD format, or produced in a file that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept a raster -image file of such Final Map. The Final Map shall be of a 1 " = 40' scale. .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. 18. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC. P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 19. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A. On -Site Rough Grading Plan (Revisions) 1 " = 40' Horizontal B. PM 10 Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal C. SWPPP 1 " = 40' Horizontal NOTE: A through C to be submitted concurrently. D. On -Site Street Improvements/Signing & Striping/Storm Drain Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical The following plans shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department for review and approval. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the Building and Safety Director in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. E. On -Site Residential Precise Grading Plan 1 if = 30' Horizontal All On -Site Signing & Striping Plans shall show, at a minimum; Stop Signs, Limit Lines and Legends, No Parking Signs, Raised Pavement Markers (including Blue RPMs at fire hydrants) and Street Name Signs per Public Works Standard Plans and/or as approved by the Engineering Department. "Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1- foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. "Street Parking" plan shall include appropriate signage to implement the "No Parking" �. P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.130C CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 concept, or alternatively an on -street parking policy shall be included in the CC & R's subject to City Engineer's Approval. The parking plan or CC & R's shall be submitted concurrently with the Street Improvement Plans. 20. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction which can be accessed via the Online Engineering Library at the City website (www.la-guinta.org). Navigate to the Public Works Department home page and look for the Online Engineering Library hyperlink. 21. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order to reflect the as -built conditions. Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 22. Prior to approval of any Final Map, the applicant shall construct all on and off - site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City. 23. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of guaranteeing the completion of any improvements related to this Tentative Tract Map, shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC. 24. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include the removal of any existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the proposed improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monumentation. PAREPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 25. Depending on the timing of the development of this Tentative Tract Map, and the status of the off -site improvements at the time, the applicant may be required to: A. Construct certain off -site improvements. B. Construct additional off -site improvements, subject to the reimbursement of its costs by others. C. Reimburse others for those improvements previously constructed that are considered to be an obligation of this tentative tract map. D. Secure the costs for future improvements that are to be made by others. E. To agree to any combination of these means, as the City may require. Off -Site Improvements should be completed on a first priority basis. The applicant shall complete Off -Site Improvements in the first phase of construction or by the issuance of the third Building Permit. In the event that any of the improvements required for this development are constructed by the City, the applicant shall, prior to the approval of the Final Map, or the issuance of any permit related thereto, reimburse the City for the costs of such improvements. 26. If the applicant elects to utilize the secured agreement alternative, the applicant shall submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed on -site and off -site improvements, including an estimate for the final survey monumentation, for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Such estimates shall conform to the unit cost schedule adopted by City resolution, or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs shall be approved by the City Engineer. At the time the applicant submits its detailed construction cost estimates for conditional approval of the Final Map by the City Council, the applicant shall also submit one copy each of an 8-1/2 if x 11 " reduction of each page of the Final Map, along with a copy of an 8-1/2 if x 11 " Vicinity Map. Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant's detailed cost estimates. J ;) 6 P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 Security will not be required for telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V. improvements. 27. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development, or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 28. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 29. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 30. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC, and D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES stormwater discharge permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls), LQMC. All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the Final Map that a soils report has been prepared in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit. 357 P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 31. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 32. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 33. Building pad elevations of the proposed development shall not exceed the building pad elevations of the existing adjacent lots by more than one foot. 34. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining properties and the lots within this development. Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 35. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 36. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. 37. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 (Flood Hazard Regulations), LQMC. 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 J S P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 and building pads are compacted to 95 % Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall furnish elevation certifications, as required by FEMA, that the above conditions have been met. 38. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be passed through a prefilter system comparable to the MaxWell Plus Primary Settling Chamber (or equivalent) before being disposed in the proposed drywell system or equivalent system approved by the City Engineer. A geotechnical study shall confirm the applicability of drywell use for the development based on the existing soil conditions. The drywell or equivalent system shall be designed to contain surges of up to 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. of landscape area, and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. The drywell shall be designed to contain nuisance water surges from landscape area, residential unit, and off - site street nuisance water. The drywell shall be designed to accept the abovementioned nuisance water requirements. 39. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. 40. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 41. When an applicant proposes discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into 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 the 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 tentative tract map excepting there from those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the final development CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. The applicant shall make available to all buyers in ht � P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 this tentative tract map, educational material from the Riverside County Flood Control & Water Quality District regarding stormwater discharge into the Whitewater River System. I1TH ITIFS 42. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.1 10 (Utilities), LQMC. 43. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 44. Existing overhead utility lines impacted by the proposed project which are on - site or adjacent to the site, and all proposed utilities, shall be installed underground. The existing 10-foot or 12-foot P.U.E. established on Tract Map No. 2180 and not affected by this tentative tract map shall remain in effect unless access requirements are required by the affected Utility Companies for this tentative tract map. The existing P.U.E. along the northerly boundary of Lot 62 of Tract Map No. 2180 shall remain unless utilities are relocated and said easement is not required. The easement along the southerly boundary of Lot 62 shall be removed from the tentative tract map. All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground. 45. Underground 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 all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 46. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access For Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; ' and (� P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed. 47. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan (street type noted in parentheses.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Hummingbird Lane (Cul-de-sac, 50' ROW a) No addition street widening is required. Other required improvements in the Hummingbird Lane right or way include: b) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision 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). B. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Construct 28-foot wide travel width as shown on the tentative map measured from gutter flow line to gutter flow line and provide a 2' rolled curb extension to allow for on -street parking subject to the design approval of the Public Works Director. 2) The applicant shall design the entrance off Hummingbird Lane with decorative pavement material and other, features to distinguish the private street from the public street right of way as approved by the City Engineer and the Community Development Director. 3) The applicant shall incorporate a speed table into the design of the entrance off Hummingbird Lane as approved by the City Engineer and the Community Development Director. 4) The curb return for the private street shall confirm to La Quinta Standard Plan 220 to include adjustments of the proposed private street curb returns or existing driveways to conform to said standard plan as approved by the City Engineer. C. PRIVATE CUL DE SACS 1) Shall be constructed according to the lay -out shown on the tentative map with 38-foot curb radius or greater at the bulb PAREPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 similar to the layout shown on the rough grading plan. 48. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: Residential 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 49. 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. 50. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: Primary Entry (Hummingbird Lane): Full turn movements are permitted. 51. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians and bollards if required, street name signs, and sidewalks. 52. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. CONSTRUCTION 53. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the 'buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly - maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets in residential developments are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of 36 P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 the last ten percent of homes within the development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. 54. . Any new home constructed on site shall be limited to a single -story structure as per LQMC Section 9.60.310. I Aynt JT 55. In order to achieve continuity with the existing neighborhood and abutting properties, one lot shall be removed from among lots 1 through 7. The tentative tract map shall thus be redrawn to have a total of nine numbered residential lots. LANDSCAPING 56. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC. 57. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. 58. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 59. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking has been completed by the Public Works Department, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the City Engineer. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 60. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. 61. Parking spaces identified on Lot B shall be eliminated from the tentative tract map and replaced with landscaping. P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 62. Brick pavers and Landscaping shall be installed at the entry of the project, identified as the portion of Lot A adjacent to Lots B and C. Brick pavers shall be constructed to the specifications of the City Engineer. 63. A 6' masonry wall shall be constructed adjacent to Lot 8, 9, 10 and entry lot B. prior to the issuance of building permits on the subject lots. Said wall shall be consistent with the previously installed wall adjacent to Lots 2-7. 64. Wall construction along the landscaped portion of the CVWD Stormwater Channel shall be designed as a partial -view fence, with masonry on the lower portion and painted wrought -iron or tubular steel on the upper portion. This condition does not apply to those numbered residential lots which directly abut the Stormwater Channel. QUALITY ASSURANCE 65. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 66. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate construction supervision. 67. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program, but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and other applicable regulations. 68. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions. MAINTENANCE 69. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 70. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. FEES AND DEPOSITS 71. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. 72. 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). 73. The developer shall pay school mitigation fees based on their requirements. Fees shall be paid prior to building permit issuance by the City. (If this subdivision falls within an existing assessment district or in an area that may be subject to an assessment district, add the following condition:) 74. Prior to completion of any approval process for modification of boundaries of the property or lots subject to these conditions, the applicant shall process a reapportionment of any bonded assessment(s) against the property and pay the cost of such reapportionment. 75. Tentative Tract 34185 shall provide for parks through payment of an in -lieu fee, as specified in Chapter 13.48, LQMC. The in -lieu fee shall be based on the fair market value of the land within the subdivision. Land value information shall be provided to the Community Development Director, via land sale information, a current fair market value of land appraisal, or other information on land value within the subdivision. The Community Development Director may consider any subdivider -provided or other land value information source for use in calculation of the parkland fee. FIRE DEPARTMENT 76. Blue dot retro-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. P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORPORATION APRIL 18, 2006 77. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. Two sets of water plans are to be submitted to the Fire Department for approval. 78. Final Fire Department conditions will be addressed prior to final map. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. All questions regarding Fire Marshall conditions should be directed to the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. MISCELLANEOUS 79. A permit from the Community Development Department is required for any temporary or permanent tract signs. Uplighted tract identification signs are allowed subject to the provisions of Chapter 9.160 of the Zoning Ordinance. 80. The Community Development Director shall cause to be filed with the County Clerk a "Notice of Exemption" pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15332 once reviewed and approved by the City Council. The appropriate filing fee shall be paid by the developer. 81. Should casitas be part of the home design for the production homes on the site, a master Minor Use Permit for all such casitas shall be secured in conjunction with the recordation of the Final Map. A covenant and provision in the CC&R's shall be recorded informing all property owners of the Minor Use Permit and its conditions of approval. 82. The Community Development and Public Works Directors may allow minor design changes to final map applications that include a reduction in the number of buildable lots, changes in lot sizes, relocation of common open space areas or other required public facilities (e.g., CVWD well sites, etc.) and changes in the alignment of street sections, provided the applicant submits a Substantial .Compliance Application to the Public Works Department during plan check disclosing the requested changes and how the changes occurred. These changes shall be conveyed to the City Council when the map is presented for recordation consideration. 83. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking purposes. 3 S 6 PAREPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\SIENNA TT 34185\FINAL COA TM-34185.DOC ATTACHMENT #2 • r, OF 'T9 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: March 7, 2006 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of a Resolution Approving Tentative Tract Map 34185, the Subdivision of 3.14 Acres into Nine Single - Family Lots and Other Parcels, Located 425 ± Feet West of Jefferson Street Along the North Side of the Stormwater Channel, South of Fiesta Drive Accessed From Hummingbird Lane. Applicant: Sienna Corporation RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution of • subdivide 3.14 acres Conditions of Approval. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS None. AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: the City Council approving Tentative Tract Map 34185 to into nine residential lots, subject to the Findings and CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: The applicant is proposing to subdivide the 3.14 acre site into ten single-family residential lots. In addition to the single-family lots, four miscellaneous lots would be created, three for landscaping and one for the private street. With ten lots, the proposed density of this subdivision is 3.1 dwelling units per acre, which is within the maximum density of four dwelling units per acre as allowed under the General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential. An Under the Planning Commission's recommendation of nine lots, the density would be reduced to 2.8 units per acre, which would better reflect the character of the abutting properties on Hummingbird Lane. As permitted by Section 9.10.040 of the Zoning Code, the City "reserves the right to limit projects to intensities below - the General Plan's upper limits." 3 G 7 The project site primarily consists of a remainder parcel created under Home • Depot's Parcel Map 28469, approved in August of 1998, and a vacant cul-de-sac lot from an established pre -incorporation subdivision. Following recording of the parcel map for Home Depot, which included a portion of the Stormwater Channel, two CVWD well sites were created on either side of the subject property.. The remainder of this parcel, consisting of the bulk of the proposed tentative tract map, has remained undeveloped. With a vacant lot available 'for access at the end of Hummingbird Lane, the applicants have proposed developing the project site into ten residential lots. (Attachment 1). In the early discussions with the applicant, staff recommended the project be. designed to reflect the existing, adjacent subdivision. The applicant's initial submittal called for an eleven lot design. Staff recommended to the applicant that some lots be removed and the lot widths be widened and redrawn to closer reflect the existing neighboring boundaries. The applicant's revised submittal brought before the Planning Commission called for ten lots, to which the Planning Commission recommended be further reduced to nine. The Planning Commission first heard this item during their January 10, 2006 meeting. Several residents testified, expressing concern with the proposed tract. As a result of the comments received from the neighboring residents, the item was continued with the direction from Planning Commission for City staff to facilitate a is neighborhood informational meeting to allow the applicant and neighbors to discuss the proposed development. The outcome of the neighborhood meeting is discussed in a separate section of this staff report. On February 14, 2006, the Planning Commission once again heard the item. After receiving additional testimony, discussing and deliberating, the Planning Commission unanimously moved to recommended approval of TTM 34185 with the condition that the project be reduced from ten to nine lots, among other conditions (Attachment 2) . Project Design The proposed project is accessed via Hummingbird Lane, currently a public cul-de- sac street with three residential properties. The proposed private street will not be gated, though the potential exists to install a gate in the future. The Planning Commission has recommended against the five off-street parking spaces near the project entry at Lot "B" and replacing them with landscaping. The street layout involves a "T" shape with the access coming in from Hummingbird Lane, splitting to a cul-de-sac at one end and a hammerhead turnaround at the other. Two of the proposed lots access the hammerhead turnaround. 40 Lot 'Relationships and Existing Homes The smallest lot proposed is 9,123 square feet and the largest is 10,935 square feet, averaging 9,670 square feet. With the Planning Commission's recommendation to remove one lot, these minimum lot sizes will increase. All proposed lots meet the Low Density Residential zoning (RL) development standards. With all of the adjacent homes being single story, LQMC Section 9.60.310 limits all new homes on this site to a single story. The three existing neighboring cul-de-sac lots along Hummingbird Lane are 13,503, 14,810, and 17,424 square feet in size, roughly 4,000 to 7,000 square feet larger than the proposed lots due to their triangular shape. Abutting properties along Fiesta Drive range in size from 8,712 to 10,890 square feet. In response to the recommendations of staff and the concerns of the adjacent property owners regarding continuity and compatibility of the proposed development with the existing neighborhood, the Planning Commission recommended removal of one lot from among Lots 1 through 7 and required lot lines to be redrawn to better align with the existing rear property widths. Grades and Walls • Though the project site is generally level, there is a ten foot incline beginning at the rear setbacks -of proposed Lots 2 and 3, with a lesser slope at the rear of proposed Lots 4 and 5. Abutting existing Lots 74 and 75 (on Cortez Lane) are situated about seven to ten feet above project grade. Lot 64 on Hummingbird Lane is situated about four to five feet above project grade. Lot 63 on Hummingbird Lane is situated roughly even with project grade. In response to concerns raised by residents along Hummingbird Lane regarding potential loss of mountain views, the applicants were requested by staff to provide line -of -sight exhibits (Attachment 3). All abutting properties located on Hummingbird Lane and Cortez Lane have a six foot high masonry wall, which was constructed by the applicant following the installation of the existing CVWD well sites. No new walls were constructed behind the five existing properties located on Fiesta Drive, which [lave existing four to five foot high walls or fences in varying conditions. The Conditions of Approval have been written to require the applicant to construct a wall along the abutting property line for these five lots. Landscaping and Design The applicant's conceptual landscaping plan identifies enhancements to distinguish the project from the adjacent neighborhood. At the entry, enhanced paving, Sweet • Acacias, Mexican Fan Palms, and a variety of shrubs and boulders have been proposed. Along the stormwater channel, the applicants will attempt to obtain an N9 encroachment permit from the Coachella Valley Water District in order to accommodate a 12.5 foot wide landscape strip abutting the stormwater channel and wall (Attachment 4). Neighborhood Meeting and the Concerns of Homeowners A neighborhood meeting for proposed Tentative Tract 34185 was held at the La Quinta Public Library on Tuesday, January 31, 2006. In attendance were approximately 10-12 neighbors from Hummingbird Lane and Fiesta Drive, the applicant, project engineer, and representatives from the City. Exhibits of the project site were on display and staff facilitated questions between the neighbors and project proponents. Among the concerns posed by area residents included the size and total number of lots proposed; proposed building height; proposed .off-street parking at the entrance; potential problems related to construction access and dust; potential problems with utility access in regards to existing power lines; concerns with the obstruction of mountain views; and concerns with emergency access in regards to the total length of the street from Hummingbird Lane and Fiesta Drive. Residents proposed several suggestions to improve the project. Among the suggestions made, the strongest involved a reduction in the total number of lots and limiting the homes to single story structures. One resident. requested a gate at the entrance to reduce the number of trips into the project site and eliminate unnecessary traffic. Another resident proposed dedicating Lots 4 through 7 as a park. None of the residents in attendance supported the applicant's proposed off- street parking at the project entry. Planning Commission Action The Planning .Commission initially heard this item during their January 10, 2006 meeting, but opted to continue the item until the neighborhood meeting could be conducted in order to resolve the presented issues. At their February 14, 2006 meeting, the Planning Commission approved the recommended Conditions of Approval, which involved a number of modifications to the applicant's original proposal. In regards to parking, the Planning Commission recommended removing the applicant's off-street parking area of five stalls proposed near the subdivision entrance. The Commission did not believe that widening the 28-foot street was necessary to accommodate on -street parking. In regard to the number of lots and lot design, the Commission recommended one lot is removed so that the project would be more consistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. In • regard to landscaping and wall designs, the Commission approved the recommendation of a partial -view fence along the street portion of the stormwater 370 . channel, the completion of a wall along those Fiesta Drive properties which do not yet have a wall installed, the installation of landscaping along the stormwater channel and entrance, and the use of brick pavers to distinguish entry from Hummingbird Lane onto the private street. Public Notice This map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on February 25, 2006. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the La Guinta Municipal Code. As of this writing, two letters of objection were received from neighboring property owners (Attachment 5) and three phone calls were received with verbal objections. Public Agency Review All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made part of the Conditions of Approval for this case. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES Findings necessary to approve the Tentative Tract Map can be made and are contained in the attached Resolutions. The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1 . Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Tentative Tract Map 34185 to subdivide 3.14 acres into nine residential lots, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval; or 2 Do not adopt the Resolutions approving the project; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, Douglas vans Community Development Director • 371 Approved for submission b : 0 PP Y Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1. Tentative Tract 34185 Map Exhibit (Large Format) 2. Excerpts from Planning Commission Minutes of January 10, 2006 and February 14, 2006 3. Line of Sight Exhibit (Large Format) 4. Conceptual Landscaping Exhibit 5. Letters of Objection J 7t�. • • City Council Minutes 13 ATTACHMENT #3 • Kevin Key Fahlicity Leary Sarena Lopez -Garcia Steven Lea Jr. Raymundo Lopez-Amaya Juan Loya Jr. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185, THE SUBDIVISION OF 3.14 ACRES INTO NINE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND OTHER PARCELS LOCATED 425 ± FEET WEST OF JEFFERSON STREET ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE STORMWATER CHANNEL, SOUTH OF FIESTA DRIVE ACCESSED FROM HUMINGBIRD LANE. APPLICANT: SIENNA CORPORATION. Community Development Director Evans referenced a memorandum regarding revisions to Condition No. 47(B)(1), and additional correspondence related to the project. Associate Planner Mogensen presented the. staff report. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Mogensen confirmed the storm channel is lined with concrete. • Council Member Osborne inquired about grade elevations, and Mr. Mogensen confirmed Lots 1-6 will be the same or lower than existing lots. In response, to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Mogensen stated the lot lines will be adjusted to reflect the reduction to nine lots. Council Member Henderson noted reduction in the number of lots might provide additional footage for parking. Mr. Mogensen stated the Planning Commission feels the rolled -curb will allow parking at the curb. 'Council Member Henderson noted some of the neighboring streets have 28-foot wide streets with rolled curbs, and commented on the problem of trying to infill a neighborhood with compatible street configurations. Mayor Adolph noted the Council cannot take views into consideration because the law does not entitle property owners to a view. He voiced concern about street parking, and commented on the need for each lot to provide onsite parking for at least one guest. • The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN at 7:57 p.m. 3" 7 3 City Council Minutes 14 March 7, 2006 1 Mike Rowe, representing Sienna Corporation, stated they are in agreement • with all of the conditions of approval except Condition No. 55, and requested it be eliminated to allow 10 lots. Council Member Henderson asked how they propose solving the parking problem. Mr. Rowe stated they are willing to widen the entry road to accommodate parking on both sides of the street but noted widening the other street would reduce the lot sizes. He pointed out the south side will have 14 feet to accommodate parking because it will have rolled curbs against a decomposed granite surface with low-level landscaping. If CVWD allows it, the desert landscaping can be spaced to allow parking in the decomposed granite areas. Council Member Henderson pointed out there is no way of knowing at this time if CVWD will allow it. Mr. Rowe stated he believes parking problems will be isolated incidents, and indicated they have tried to address the issue of residents parking on the street in the CC&Rs. • Council Member Henderson asked about the timeframe to begin construction if the project is approved today, and Mr. Rowe stated early fall -or winter. She voiced concern about construction beginning in relation to completion of the Roadrunner Lane and Jefferson Street projects. She commented on infill projects being. an ongoing irritation to existing neighborhoods, and asked where construction vehicles would be parked. Mr. Rowe indicated they would park onsite. In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Evans stated the Public Works Director has indicated the roadway (Jefferson Street) will be done this summer, and the other side of the bridge will be finished by the end of the year. Roberta Froemming, 79-865 (Lot 64) Hummingbird Lane, voiced concern about increased traffic, and suggested the possibility of the City providing an alternate well site so the current well site can be used for an entry road off of Fiesta Drive. Ann Hermanson, 79-855 (Lot 66) Fiesta Drive, indicated she lives at the corner of the cul-de-sac, and also has concerns about increased traffic. She commented about on -street parking already being a problem, and asked for • the City's help in resolving their concerns. #-N City Council Minutes 15 March 7, 2006 • Leo Lowrimore, 79-825 Fiesta Drive, stated the residents have always assumed the lot on Hummingbird. Lane would be used as a residential lot but the developer purchased land without an entrance and wants the City to let him use the lot for an entry road. He stated he doesn't feel the- project is in the best interest of the community. Joyce Sivley, 79-775 Westward Ho Drive, spoke about increased traffic being a concern for the entire neighborhood. Glenn Hermanson, 79-855 (Lot 66) Fiesta Drive, commented on existing traffic congestion in the area, and asked Council to consider how this project will make it worse. There being no further requests to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 8:27 p.m. Council Member Henderson stated she feels 28-foot wide streets worked when there was only one car per family. She supported the Planning Commission's recommendation to reduce the project to nine lots, and suggested trying to incorporate attractive parking accommodations in the entry road area that could be used for overflow parking for this project and • neighboring homes. Mr. Evans stated the neighbors are opposed to a parking lot because of headlights being directed toward their properties. He noted the entry road could accommodate 12-14 parallel parking spaces, and reviewed potential locations for possible parking pockets. He pointed out 28-foot wide streets are not uncommon in residential design. Council Member Henderson stated she feels the existing neighborhood may not view the parking lot so negatively if their guests are allowed to use it. Mr. Rowe stated the entry road can be widened to accommodate approximately 10 parking spaces on each side of the street, and they would not have a problem with existing properties parking there. Mr. Evans noted an easement to the neighborhood would be required to let the neighbors use the street parking. He recommended keeping the 28-foot wide streets, and placing parallel parking bays for three or four vehicles each along the entry road. He feels that will accommodate more parking than a parking lot. and be more of a traditional neighborhood street design. • City Council Minutes 16 March 7, 2006 Council Member Henderson stated it's her understanding that Roadrunner . Lane, which is a 28-foot wide street with rolled curbs, will be posted no parking, at least on one side of the street. Mr. Rowe stated he prefers widening the entry road instead of constructing parking bays. In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Evans advised a condition would need to be added for staff to work with the applicant to add parallel parking along the street. Council Member Henderson asked about the complexities of letting the existing neighborhood use the street parking. Mr. Evans stated the developer would have to grant an easement for the neighborhood, and noted it will probably result in arguments amongst property owners in the future. Council Member Kirk noted public comments at the Planning Commission meeting focused mostly on the cul-de-sac becoming an entry to the new development. He stated he would like to know how the residents on Hummingbird Lane feel about Council Member Henderson's proposal for • parking. He questioned residents in the new development using parking along the entry road because of the distance from their properties. He doesn't view parking as that big of an issue in this development because houses exist on only one side of the street, and indicated he prefers putting parking along the new street in front of the homes. He stated he generally supports the staff recommendation, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to reduce the number of lots. Council Member Osborne spoke in support of limiting the project to nine lots, allowing a 28-foot wide street in front of the new homes, and creating. extra parking on the entry road. Council Member Sniff voiced concern about Lots 1 and 10 abutting directly to the storm channel because of the potential for the concrete lining. to give way during heavy storm situations. He also feels the street along the storm channel should be widened enough to accommodate parking on the north side. Mr. Rowe noted the channel is designed to withstand a. 500-year flood. 376 f City Council Minutes 17 March 7, 2006 .• • • Mr. Evans clarified there is approximately 28 feet of CVWD property between the lot lines and the storm channel in addition to a 16-foot wide access easement to the well sites. In response to Mayor Adolph, Mr. Evans stated the well sites are not yet active. Mayor Adolph suggested exploring the possibility of exchanging the CVWD well site at the east end for a well site along Jefferson Street to allow for an entry road off of Fiesta Drive. He noted the lot off of Hummingbird Lane might be used for a, neighborhood park. Council Member Henderson noted the City is already scrambling to find well sites. Council Member Osborne stated he feels it's worth checking out the possibility with CVWD. City Attorney Jenson stated she understands CVWD has previously determined none of the area along Jefferson Street is suitable for well sites because of the close proximity to other well sites. She noted the City would also be obligated to receive fair market value for the property if it's exchanged because a portion of the funds would have to be returned to CVAG who helped fund the Jefferson Street project. Mr. Rowe stated he would not be opposed to the idea, depending on the fair market value of the property. Ms. Jenson noted the lots along Jefferson Street may not be wide enough for CVWD. Council Member Kirk commented on the possibility of the length of the cul- de-sac being a problem for the Fire Department. Council Member Henderson noted an emergency access could be made through Hummingbird Lane. Mayor Adolph noted the street wouldn't be. much farther if the entry road is as far away as possible from Jefferson Street. Mr. Rowe pointed, out the access point next to Lot 55 is only 24 feet wide. r City Council Minutes 18 March 7, 2006 In response to Mayor Adolph, Senior Engineer Goble stated the standard minimum street width is 28 feet but exceptions have been made in some specific plans. Mr. Evans stated staff can go with the developer to talk to CVWD about the well site but the tentative tract map will need to be revised, and the project may have to be referred back.to the Planning Commission. Council concurred to continue this item to April 4t', and the City Attorney advised the public hearing would need to be reopened. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING REOPENED. MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Osborne to continue the public hearing for Tentative Tract Map 34185 to April 4, 2006, to allow staff to pursue the issue with CVWD of relocating the well sites. Motion carried unanimously. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved by Council Members Sniff/Henderson to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. • Respectfully submitted, 5:6�' .JCJ • JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California �'7 8 Apr .1 1 1,06 09 : 56 a Sienna Corp (760) 776-6299 p. 2 Attachment 5 SIENNA CORPORATION City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Attn: Andrew J. Mogensen Re: Well site option. to TT 34185 Dear Andrew: 41- 866 Boardwalk • Suite 209 - Palm Desert, CA 92211. 760-776-8293 FAX: 760-776,8299 April l0, 2006 After numerous meetings with yourselves and the Coachella Valley Water District personnel, we find it difficult to continue with the option as directed by the City Council on February 14, 2006 to relocate the well site at the southwest corner of Fiesta Drive and Jefferson Street. From a marketing standpoint the relocation of this well site would create *a better access into this property and get back to our original proposal of I 1 lots but to accommodate this was coming at too great of expense. To abandon 'the improvements of the existing well site and move the access road into the right of way of the storm water channel, CVWD would require an access ramp from the top of the whitewater channel down to the flow line. There would also need to be additional walls, storm drainage, access gates and improvements for this new location in an equal fashion to the ones we would have to abandon. Access (turning) movements into and out of the project were unfortunately made difficult due to the proximity to the channel. edge and the pinching of available land directly into the properly. The location of the access point in relation to Jefferson Street was also an issue that was not resolved since it doesn't meet the Cities criteria for intersection separation. Even if these items could be solved, then the safety of having the "below standard width" access road essentially running along the channel edge would need to be addressed. We -would also need some lucrative negotiation for the final price the City would charge for this new well site location. We were told that the City would be. looking for the purchase price to be at a high -end residential price point. Since this was a suggestion from the City and the land was condemned for the needed right of way to widen Jefferson Street, we assumed there would be a nominal value placed on this land. This item alone makes the plan financially unworkable but then adding the other requirements to develop this -land in this area made it became physically impossible. Planners In Developers Contractors ' Apr 11 08 09 : 56a Sienna Corp t 7601 776-8299 p. 3 Andrew Mogenson April 103,200b Page Z Without getting this proposed land for little or no cost, successfully obtaining a variance for the access and intersection locations, creating a safe community being that close to the channel edge and overcoming the additional costs associated with constructing the requested 'improvements we cannot .move forward with this proposal. We respectively request to continue with our original application and council consideration of 10 lots for this Tract. We would like to thank.you and your staff members as well as the CVWD staff in their 6f forts to make this happen. it was a noble suggestion but would behave needed -a Herculean effort on everyone's part to solve. Of which after the past few weeks of evaluation, still do not feel would have been successful. 1 will be available at the next city council meeting to answer *any questions on this matter if necessary. Sincerely, " Mike Rowe Sienna Corporation J-30 , MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: 4f-vimothy R. Jonasson, P.E. Public Works Director/City Engineer DATE: April 17, 2006 RE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34185 SIENNA CORP. The following changes to the abovementioned conditions are recommended by the Public Works Department. The Public Works Department has determined that the standard driveway approach design is consistent with the existing cul de sac residential feel while maintaining lower speeds to and from the proposed development. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS Page 23. Amend Condition 47 B. 3) and 4) to read: 3) The applicant shall construct a standard driveway approach for entry from Hummingbird Lane into the development's private street (Lot A). 4) The driveway approach shall conform to La Quinta Standard Plan 221 to include adjustment to the proposed private street entrance or existing driveways to conform to said standard as approved by the City Engineer. T:\Project Development Division\Development Projects\COA & Correspondence\Tract Maps\34185SIENNA CORPORATIO N\Amend Condition.doc 1of1 381 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 18, 2006 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing Regarding Consideration of Adoption of Resolutions Certifying Environmental Assessment 2005-550 and Approving General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002, Amendment #5, and Tentative Parcel Map 32752, the Subdivision of 2.5 + Acres into Three Single -Family Lots, Located Between Weiskopf and Jack Nicklaus Within PGA West. Applicant: Ray Shaffer RECOMMENDATION AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council denying certification of Environmental Assessment No.2005-550 and disapproving Tentative Parcel Map 32752 a$ recommended by the Planning Commission. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS None. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses North: CT / vacant across PGA Blvd. South: GC / golf course and Lot 1 Tract 28444 East: RL / single family residences West: RL / common area landscaping and single family residences ��► P\stan\tt 29053 ext #3 cc rpt.doc Report Background As a result of the Planning Commission review of these applications, additional research into the property background and its' creation has been conducted by staff and included in this report. This will ensure the City Council decision is based on all relevant facts. Additional research included reviewing the case files for Tract 28444, Tract 28340, and Specific Plan 83-002 and its' subsequent amendments. Subject Property Description The subject property is located within PGA West south of PGA Boulevard, between Jack Nicklaus and Weiskopf Streets (Attachment 1). It consists of 2.55 acres. The site is presently fully landscaped (lawn and trees) and includes part of a golf cart path and practice green used for the Weiskopf Golf Course (Attachment 2). The northern boundary is adjacent to PGA Boulevard. Between the site and PGA Boulevard is a 6'-7" high solid masonry perimeter wall with no access or openings to PGA Boulevard. KSL Land Corporation has indicated that it is selling the property to Mr. Shaffer for the proposed development. Mr. Shaffer is the applicant. The existing site conditions presently consists of: (1) three open space/landscape parcels which originally had been described as common area non-residential parcels [Lots "H", "I" and "W" of Tract No. 284441; and (2) two 37 foot wide private road parcels [Lot "L" of Tract No. 28444 and Lot "D" of Tract No. 283401, which comprise the last leg of Weiskopf Street, providing the connection to Jack Nicklaus. This last leg of Weiskopf Street has not yet been constructed. Property History In 1997, KSL Land Corporation processed Tract Map No. 28444. On March 7, 1997, the City received the Proposed Tract Map from KSL Land Corporation. Under the "Lot and Land Use Summary," Lots "H" ("H" became "H" and "W" when the Final Map was recorded) and "I" were designated as "Open Space & Landscape Lots". Lot "L" was designated as a "Private Street Lot", specifically, part of Weiskopf Street (Attachment 3). The history of the Lot "L" parcel is important to the Council's determination of the current map application. As approved, the 69 lots created by Tract Map No. 28444 were to have access across Lot "L" as one of their primary points. During the Planning Commission proceedings for the current project, Lot "L" has mistakenly been described as merely providing an emergency access route. However, through further review of Tract Map No. 28444, staff has determined that Lot "L" is part of Weiskopf Street and provides the connection to Jack Nicklaus in addition to providing emergency access. The staff reports for the April 22, 1997 Planning Commission and the May 20, 1997 City Council meeting stated: dL ,g "All resident p residential lots will front onto Weiskopf Street, a newly created 54-foot wide 3 private street which provides access to Jack Nicklaus [Lot "L" was designated as P:\reports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 002 part of Weiskopf .Street] and Winged Foot and an emergency —only access to PGA Boulevard and Madison Street" (Attachment 4). The Final Map (Attachment 5), for Tract No. 28444, recorded on June 18, 1998, contains a specific dedication of Lot "L" to the City for ingress and egress of service and emergency vehicles, which dedication was accepted by the City on the Final Map and also reserves Lot "L" as a private street for the benefit of "ourselves, our successors, assignees, and lot owners within the tract. " (emphasis supplied) . The audio tape of the April 22, 1997 Planning Commission meeting reflects that Lot "L" was intended as one of the two primary access points to the 69 lots. Principal Planner Stan Sawa explained in his presentation during the hearing that "[T]he site has access to Jack Nicklaus, south of PGA Boulevard." At the May 20, 1997 City Council meeting, Planning Manager di. lorio made the same statement to the City Council. During that same Planning Commission hearing, in response to an inquiry from Commissioner Robert Tyler regarding whether KSL intended to convert the emergency connection at the northern terminus of Weiskopf Street into a guard gate onto PGA Boulevard, Mr. Chevis Hosea, representing KSL, explained that the connection of Weiskopf Street (including Lot "L") to Jack Nicklaus provided a more suitable and scenic access for the lots. He stated that it would be too burdensome to saddle the 69 lot owners with their own guard gate at PGA Boulevard. In his testimony before the Planning Commission, Mr. Hosea stated: If we were developing a couple, a 150 to 200 home subdivision behind this [emergency] access PGA Boulevard, we probably approach it a little differently. What we thought was probably inappropriate and would be insensitive to the Association in accepting this element [a guard gate at PGA Boulevard] is that if.we created a, that ... These are, if you will, some of the most valuable lots that, that we will have sold to date. And, so this would definitely be a high end community at PGA West. And it would feel like that in that regard, it needs to be supported with guard -gated man, guard -gate access, and that, but it would probably [be] an improper burden to those, these homeowners and for the Association to try to mitigate the expenses of just these number of people [69 lots] trying to fund, if you will, the security and the infrastructure, or the maintenance of you will of, of a full-blown PGA West entrance there in some capacity. And without that possibly then ... The alternative is to go to some type of electronic access, but that's still not in support of this level of community [69 lots], that housing it would be in this element that they really.... What would be a better connection would be to create the guard 0111 gated access through Jack Nicklaus Boulevard and we've allowed plenty of rooms in those lots there [Lots "H" & "l"J to accommodate that. And then your drive to the community brings you by the PAreports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 003 Weiskopf Golf Course and gives you a nice view of that, so.... [Emphasis supplied.] In January of 1999 the City Engineer approved Grading, Drainage and Paving Plans for Tract No. 28444. (Attachment 6) This plan shows the extension of Weiskopf continuing through to Jack Nicklaus through Lot "L". Later action by KSL establishes that the extension of Weiskopf (Lot "L") was a future plan that required the maintenance of this lot for private street uses. On June 10, 1999 KSL signed Amendment #1 of Encroachment Permit #2904 (Attachment 7) which permitted KSL to construct Weiskopf in phases. The first phase includes construction of a roundabout bulb at the north end of Weiskopf and essentially is the present day configuration of the street. The Amendment provides that "[t]he second phase [connecting Weiskopf to Jack Nicklaus Blvd. through Lot "L"], when the west leg of the roundabout is tied into the cul-de-sac, will be constructed by KSL, or its assignee, unless otherwise approved by the City Council." KSL signed a concurrence of this requirement, which stated that KSL "concurs with the implementation concept described herein. KSL understands that a City staff level approval of this construction phasing concept in no way confers future rights to eliminate the west leg of Weiskopf North. Elimination of the west leg of Weiskopf North must receive City Council approval to be officially eliminated." Amendment #1 demonstrates that both the City and KSL intended for Lot "L" to be ultimately built out, and further establishes (along with Mr. Hosea's April 22, 1997 comments) that KSL understood that Lot "L" was specifically reserved for the extension of Weiskopf, not a reservation for residential development. Consistent with KSL's designation of Lot "L" as part of Weiskopf Street, which is to provide the owners of the 69 lots with direct access to Jack Nicklaus, the Final Map for Tract No. 28444 designates Lot "L" as part of Weiskopf Street. The Owner's statement on the Final Map states that the Weiskopf Street lots (including Lot "L") "ARE RETAINED AS PRIVATE STREETS FOR OURSELVES, OUR SUCCESSORS, ASSIGNEES, AND LOT OWNERS WITHIN THIS TRACT." (emphasis supplied) (Attachment 5) As to all of the Weiskopf Street Lots, including Lot "L", KSL expressly dedicated to the City "an easement for public utilities and for right of ingress and egress of service and emergency vehicles over [Weiskopf Street, including Lot "L"]." On the Final Map, the City expressly accepted this dedication. KSL also dedicated an easement to the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), a 10 foot easement within Weiskopf Street, including Lot "L". While the last leg of Weiskopf Street, providing the connection to Jack Nicklaus, has not yet been constructed, it is nonetheless clear from the record that KSL understood that there is a continuing obligation to construct this leg (as evidenced by the 1999 Amendment #1) and that the private roadway was being retained for the benefit of the 69 lot owners, who therefore have an interest in Lot L . (as , S 5 evidenced by the final map). Neither KSL nor the Applicant has provided any evidence that the 69 lot owners have relinquished their access right to Jack Nicklaus. To the contrary, many of the lot owners have vehemently opposed the PAreports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 004 residential development on Lot "L" as exemplified by the testimonial and documentary evidence submitted at the Planning Commission hearings. (Attachment 8) Thus, City staff assumes that those rights still exist. The history of the open space and landscaped lots ("H" & "I") is discussed in detail below. Project Request The applicant is requesting approval to create three parcels to allow construction of three single-family residences on approximately 2.5 acres of land. This would require both the approval of a Tentative Parcel Map (Attachment 9) and the completion of some procedure (e.g., an amending map, and an agreement for abandonment of access rights) for the extinguishment of the rights and easements in Lot "L" held by the 69 lot owners, the City and IID. The proposal is to convert a portion of Weiskopf Street and open and landscape lots into residential lots by subdividing the project site into three single-family lots containing 33,500 square feet (Parcel 1), 25,000 square feet (Parcel 2) and 52,450 square feet (Parcel 3). Lot "L" bisects all three lots. The largest lot (Parcel 3) would be on the east side with frontage on, and access from the already constructed portion of Weiskopf Street. The middle lot (Parcel 2) would have access to Weiskopf Street via a 20 foot wide shared driveway easement across Parcel 3. This access easement will be located parallel and adjacent to PGA Blvd. Access to the westerly most lot (Parcel 1) would be from Jack Nicklaus via a 20- foot wide driveway through the common area lot between the subject property and Jack Nicklaus (Lot "D" of Tract No. 28340-1, which was depicted on the Tract Maps as the last portion of Weiskopf Street). This driveway area would be a part of Parcel 1 and not just an easement as originally proposed by the applicant in December, 2005. The applicant proposes to relocate the golf cart path that runs east -west through the subject property and provides access between the 18th and 1 st hole of the Weiskopf Golf Course. He proposes to relocate the path to the south outside of the project area. The practice green, currently located on a portion of Parcel 2, would also be relocated to the south off the project area. Whether the owner of the property upon which the relocation would occur (presumably CNL) consents to this relocation is not known by staff. There is an existing 10-foot wide storm drain easement (collecting runoff from PGA Boulevard) running north -south across the east portion of Parcel 1. If the project is approved several Conditions of Approval will be required to address these easements and ensure they are relocated or if no longer needed, eliminated. 336 P:\reports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 0 0 5 A conceptual site plan showing the intent of how the lots could be developed has been submitted by the applicant for City Council review (Attachment 10). The applicant has submitted a photo -simulation of the site as it exists and with residences similar to those that could be built on the site. Additionally, a photo collage showing views of the site with the simulated residences from various surrounding properties is included (Attachment 11). General Plan and Zoning Determination for the Subject Property When the City's updated General Plan and Zoning Map were adopted in 2002 and 2003, respectively, they designated the subject property and golf course to the south as Low Density Residential (Attachments 12 and 13). Subsequent to those adoptions, as various projects were approved, Staff maintained a revised set of General Plan and Zoning maps to reflect approved maps and projects. These revised maps have been used as working maps to reflect actual approvals. The designations for the subject property and adjacent golf course to the south were modified from Low Density Residential to Golf Course in order to be consistent with Tentative Tract 28444, which specifically identified the majority of the subject site. as "open space and landscape lots which was reserved for recreational uses.. These map modifications were completed as an administrative correction for the purpose of permitting staff to maintain a fairly current inventory of actual approved uses. In conducting the research for this request, Staff determined that these map modifications are not the official General Plan and Zoning Code designations because amendment of the official General Plan and Zoning Code maps require public notice, a public hearing and final action by City Council. Therefore, staff has concluded that the General Plan land use designation and zoning for the subject property is Low Density Residential as adopted in 2002 and 2003, respectively. Based upon this conclusion, the applications for General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are no longer necessary. The PGA West Specific Plan The current PGA West Specific Plan designation of the project site as Tourist Commercial does not prohibit residential use of the property. However, the conversion of open space and private street uses to residential development appears to be inconsistent with the open space and circulation concepts of the current Specific Plan. The Open Space Policy (Section 2.6..2) states the following with regard to the open space concept for PGA West: PGA WEST is designed in recognition of the fact that as urban and suburban development takes place, recreation and open space becomes a limited and valuable resource. In addition, it is recognized that high-, 337" planned around an open quality projects are designed and p space/recreation program. Two types of open space/recreation are planned for PGA WEST: golf courses and common open space areas. P:\reports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 006 Approximately 47% of ,the project area is dedicated to five championship golf courses designed so that adjacent residential and resort hotel development will benefit from the visual and open space value created by the golf amenity. To further maximize the effect of open space, common open space areas will be strategically located throughout the project. These common open space areas will result when dwellings are clustered or higher density residential uses are developed along golf course areas. Where appropriate to the adjacent residential development, common area pools will be provided. Higher residential pads make the best use, not only of the golf course frontage, but of the prevailing breeze and spectacular Coachella Valley mountain views. (Emphasis supplied.) The Recreation policy states that the plan area is to contain as "a major element" an "extensive passive and active recreation program of development", including a variety of recreational uses, including trail systems and golf courses. The existing open space Lots "H", "W" and "I" at issue here further these goals and objectives. The area is currently providing residents with a golf cart path and a portion of a putting green. The proposed subdivision would eliminate these uses and convert the open space to' residential use. As stated below, there are numerous additional similarly situated open space lots that may be converted to residential use if the City Council were to authorize this conversion. Such conversions, on a larger scale, would be inconsistent with the Specific Plan's requirements to maximize open space and the "ribbon-like pattern" throughout PGA West. For this reason, if the City Council is inclined to allow this project to proceed, Staff recommends that the Specific Plan be amended to expressly authorize this conversion and all other proposed conversions. Such conversions should not be allowed to proceed in a piece -meal fashion. At the Planning Commission meeting, a PGA West representative stated additional conversions are forth coming. The elimination of the last leg of Weiskopf Street (Lot "L" of Tract No. 28444) would be inconsistent with the circulation plans for PGA West. Exhibit 9 to the Specific Plan (per Amendment #4 to the Specific Plan) indicates that PGA Boulevard and Weiskopf Street are "collector" roadways to facilitate circulation on a project -wide basis. Exhibit 9 (Attachment 14) demonstrates that the Specific Plan envisions Weiskopf as a significant through -way connecting to another significant street, not as a dead end cul-de-sac. Deleting the connection of Weiskopf Street with another significant roadway would be inconsistent with the Specific Plan's requirement that this street be a collector that connects to a plan - wide circulation system. PAreports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 007 In Section III.A. of the originally approved Specific Plan in 1984, one of the goals, policies and objectives of the development was to provide for a balance between open space and other uses. The "Open Space Concept" in the Specific Plan provided that there be a "continuous ribbon-like pattern of open space throughout the project." In Section III.F., the Conservation, Recreation and Open Space Element, the Open Space Policy stated as follows: OAK TREE WEST has been conceived and is being designed with full recognition of the fact that as urban development takes place open space becomes a limited and valuable resource. In addition it is recognized that high quality projects are designed and planned around an open space program. Two types of open space are planned for OAK TREE WEST: golf course areas and common open space areas. 34% of the project will be used to develop 4 championship golf courses. These courses will be designed (laid out) and developed so that adjacent development will have the maximum visual and open space value possible. To further maximize the effect of open space, common open space areas will be strategically located throughout the project. The Recreation policy states that the plan area is to contain as "a major element" an "extensive recreation program of development", including a variety of recreational uses, including jogging and walking systems and golf courses. PGA West's Development Specific Plan 83-002 was approved in 1984 to allow the original development of PGA West. The land use map identified the subject site in an area generally shown as part of the golf course/common area improvements; however, the specific location of the project site was not readily identifiable. Amendments were subsequently approved in 1988, 1989, 1996 and 2000. The approval history of the Specific Plan and land use designations for the subject property are as follows: Specific Plan Approval Date Specific Plan Site Designation Original approval May, 1984 golf course/common area Amendment #1 September, 1988 golf course/common area Amendment #2 June, 1989 golf course/common area Amendment #3 August, 1996 "resort core" commercial Amendment #4 October, 2000 "resort core" commercial Based on research of City case files, Staff has found that until Amendment #3 of Specific Plan 83-002 in 1996, the property in question did not exist as a definable site due to a different circulation and land use configuration of the proposed PGA West. Amendment #3 of the Specific Plan appears to show the subject property as � "Resort Core" commercial, in conjunction with the proposed hotel site to the north $4' across PGA Boulevard, with Jack Nicklaus connecting to Weiskopf Street. P:\reports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 008 Amendment #4, approved in 2000, re -designated the southeast corner of Avenue 54 and PGA Boulevard from commercial to Medium Density Residential in order to allow a fractional ownership project (which is presently under construction), lower the maximum number of units in PGA West and revise several development standards. None of these changes pertained to or affected the subject property. Subsequent to the Amendment #3 approval, the Specific Plan for PGA West has and still identifies the subject property as Tourist Commercial. Under the City Zoning Code the Tourist Commercial zone does not permit residential uses, while golf courses require a Conditional Use Permit with open space and parks a permitted use. However, the current PGA West Specific Plan language for Tourist Commercial designated property allows various residential uses, including single family residences, golf courses, open space and parks as a matter of right. Tentative Tract 28444 Approval Between approval of Specific Plan Amendments #3 and #4, KSL Land Corporation received approval for Tentative Tract Map 28444 in June of 1997. This map included the subject property and land to the south and east. The tentative map expressly labeled Lots "H" ("H" later became "H" and "W") and "I", within the subject property, as open space and landscape lots. The tentative map approved by the Planning Commission and City Council did not specify that these were to be "reserved lots." Only Lots "T" and "U were identified as "reserved lots." Instead, Lots "H" and "I" were consistently referred to as "non-residential common lots." For example, the staff reports for both the Planning Commission and City Council referenced these as "various other non-residential lots (Attachment 4) . The agenda titles referred to them as "common" lots. An April 6, 1998 memorandum from the Community Development Department to thePublic Works Department requested that the final map sheet specify that Lots A, through J are common open space lots." The Planning Commission and City Council resolutions approving the tentative map also referred to them as common lots. The tentative map presented to and approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council depicted several areas as "Future Residential."Lots H and I were not so designated, and were treated as non-residential lots. Indeed, KSL's representative repeatedly referred to the density of the project as being 1.8 units to the acre. He went so far as to request that 1.8 units to the acre density be taken into account with reference to relief from conditions that KSL was requesting relating to certain off -site improvements. (e.g., Audio Tape of April 22, 1997 Planning Commission . Meeting, during which Mr. Hosea explains that the 1.8 units per acre caused KSL to incur increased expenses which should be taken into account regarding improvements on Madison Street). In order to arrive at the 1.8 units to the acre density, all of the common areas had to be counted non-residential. Thus, if it was KSL's intent all along to ultimately develop these lots a residential, then the 1 units per acres was a misrepresentation of the intended density. 3.90 P:\reports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 009 The Owner's Statement on the Final Map, executed by Larry Lichliter, expressly reserved Lots "H," "I," and "W" for "open space and recreational purposes." KSL has suggested that these lettered lots were simply a placeholder for future development. This is contrary not only to its 1997 representations before the Planning Commission and City Council, but is also contrary to the language that it inserted in the Owner's Statement on the Final Map, which designates the use of these lots as open space and recreational. Moreover, on adjoining maps, where future development rights are retained for future development, the maps have so noted. Thus, for example, on Tract No. 28340-1 (Attachment 15), Lots B, C, and D were reserved "for future development purposes" for the sole benefit of the KSL entities, their successors and assigns. Such statements were not made with regard to the open space/landscape lots here at issue. These facts (as well as the circulation requirements imposed on Lot "L", which bisects this property) demonstrate that KSL did not have a reasonable expectation to develop the property for residential purposes. Had .there been such an expectation, KSL would have reserved the property in a similar manner as Tract No. 28340-1, would not have executed the 1999 Amendment #1 to the Encroachment Permit, would not have given lots owners an interest in Lot "L" and would not have stated on the record that Weiskopf was planned to connect to Jack Nicklaus. Moreover, the use of "lettered" lots indicates the intent that these be restricted to non-residential use. Common practice indicates that these are not intended to be reserved for residential development. According to the testimony of many of the lot owners within Tract No. 28444, the residential lots in the vicinity of the subject property were sold to homeowners based upon the land use designations in Tract Map 28444, which showed the subject property designated as recreational open space bisected by Weiskopf Street which was created to benefit the 69 lot owners. (Attachment 8) Several of the homeowners stated that they were charged a premium because the area was in the vicinity of open space. Environmental Considerations Environmental Assessment 2005-550 was initially prepared for this request. However, because of information that has come to light during the public hearing process, City staff no longer believes that the Environmental Assessment is adequate. During the course of the public hearings before the Planning Commission, statements were made by the applicant and the property owner that there are other similarly situated open space lots that could be converted to residential uses if the City were to allow the conversion of open space to residential lots. During the Planning Commission's March 28th hearing on this matter, members of the Commission asked the applicant and the representative to describe the scope of the areas that may be affected by the determination on this project. The applicant did not provide the information and has not subsequently provided P:\reports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 010 the information. At the Planning Commission meeting of March 28 the representatives of the owner and KSL stated that they could not provide the information. Because it is unknown how many acres of similarly situated property exists, it is not possible, based upon the current record and the Environmental Assessment, to properly assess the scope of the open space and circulation impacts associated with this project, including the cumulative impacts resulting from the removal of this open space and street. it is important to note that the EIR prepared for the overall PGA West development based its conclusions on the fact that the development would not have an impact on the recreational amenities and resources in the City based upon the conclusion that the tracts would include significant open space components. Specifically, on page 116 of the EIR for PGA West, the report states that the development "will have little impact on the local park system. This can be attributed to the private recreational/open-space facilities that [the project] will provide for its residents." Because it is currently unknown how many acres of open space could be affected by this determination, it is no longer possible to determine that this project has no potential to cause a significant impact on the environment in terms of land use and open space/recreational resources. Further, this decision has the potential for growth inducing effects since approval of the project would establish a precedent for allowing the conversion of open space lots. CEQA Guideline 15126.2(d) discusses the need to analyze growth inducing impacts: Growth -Inducing Impact of the Proposed Project. Discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Included in this are projects which would remove obstacles to population growth ... . Also discuss the characteristic of some projects which may encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively. It must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment. (Emphasis supplied) Here, the applicant has not provided any information to the City relating to future plans for development in other open space lots. Therefore, it is not possible for the City to meaningfully assess the impacts of this project on an individual or cumulative basis. This is especially true where, as here, the action on this application could establish precedent for future applications. (See Napa Citizens for Honest Government v. Napa County Board of Supervisors (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 342, 368 [an EIR must discuss growth -inducing effects even though those effects will result only indirectly from the project].) J P:\reports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc ou Additionally, the Environmental Assessment does not address traffic and circulation aspects of removing Weiskopf as an entryway and collector for PGA West, as depicted in Exhibit 9 of the Specific Plan. Nor does the Environmental Assessment address traffic and circulation related impacts relating to not extending Weiskopf as described and depicted in the Grading, Drainage and Paving Plans for Tract No. 28444, which plans were expressly acknowledged by KSL in Amendment #1 to the Encroachment Permit. Finally, subdivision (g) of La Quinta Municipal Code Section 13.12.130 ,provides that the City must make a finding that the design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision.„Here, Lot L is approved to extend to Jack Nicklaus. The City and lot owners of Tract 28444 have rights to this lot. In order to approve this project, the applicant would have to demonstrate that this project will not conflict with those easement rights. In light of the lack of information on these issues, the Community Development Director has therefore determined that the project may have a significant adverse impact on the environment and therefore, recommends that if the City Council wishes to entertain this project, further environmental review be completed. LEGAL ISSUES On March 23, 2006, City Staff received a letter from Mr. Bob Hargreaves, an attorney representing the applicant (Attachment 16). This letter raised several legal issues. Dedication of Open Space/Routing of Lot "L": Mr. Hargreaves' letter asserts that Staff has concluded that Lots "H", "I" and "W" are permanent open space but that this conclusion is incorrect because "the parcels have never been dedicated as open space." It is Mr. Hargreaves' position that these lots were initially mapped to accommodate a "tentative entrance to the tract." This comment is not supported by the record. First, other portions of this staff report clearly demonstrate that Weiskopf (Lot "L") was not "tentatively" routed to intersect with Jack Nicklaus. Rather, comments from the applicant, the. Final Map for Tract No. 28444, the Specific Plan, the Grading, Drainage and Paving Plans for Tract No. 28444, and KSL's specific acknowledgment that Weiskopf would be completed as evidenced by the Amendment # 1 to the Encroachment Permit all demonstrate that the street was not "tentatively" routed. Exhibit 9 to Amendment 4 of the Specific Plan also demonstrates that Weiskopf and Jack Nicklaus is identified as a gated entrance and a collector. Second, the record also establishes that during the map approval process, the applicant's agents represented that the reservation of Lots H I and "W" as open space was to provide a nice view of the golf course. (Testimony of Chevis Hosea, April 22, 1997 Planning Commission.) 'This j 3 ( Y representation was later memorialized on the Final Map conditions, which limit P:\reports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 012 these parcels to open space uses. Third, as addressed above, there is no express indication on the Final Map that these lots were reserved for later residential development; comparatively, other tract maps processed by KSL have made specific reservations. Lots Status as "Private": The letter indicates that these parcelshave remained "in private hands pending ultimate decision on their use. Lot L, , as noted above, was dedicated to the City for emergency and access purposes. The City accepted that dedication on the Final Map. Likewise, as addressed above, the Final Map reserved Lot "L" not just for the benefit of the subdivider, but also for the lot owners." As a result, aside from KSL and the applicant's interest in Lot L there are both public and private property interests at stake. Lot "L" bisects the site and to the extent that Lots "H ", "I" and W"are held by a private owner, the , development of these lots will be impacted by Lot L s location. Furthermore, as demonstrated above, these lots fulfill a significant open space purpose, which the owner voluntarily chose to encumber these lots with during the subdivision process. Constitutional Right to Use Property: The letter suggests that denial of this application would constitute an unconstitutional taking because denial would deprive the owner of economically viable use of the land based on the KSL s reasonable expectation to develop the property. There are several inaccuracies in this assertion. First and foremost, the record (as summarized above) does not support the conclusion that KSL had an expectation to develop the site. Mr. Hoseaiscomments and KSL's execution of Amendment #1 to the Encroachment Permit demonstrate that KSL understood that the open space lots were an important component of Tract No. 28444 and that Weiskopf would be completed to its terminus at Jack Nicklaus. Additionally, the general density of Tract No. 28444 was based in part on the open space lots as described by Mr. Hosea. There is no reasonable expectation to develop property in these circumstances, especially since in other circumstances the same owner has expressly reserved development rights in other tracts when it intended to do so. Mr. Hargreaves cites Loveladies Harbor Inc. v. United States, 28 F.3d 1171, 1 172 (Fed. Cir. 1994) to suggest that a denial of the project will constitute an unconstitutional taking of the subject property by not permitting residential development. Loveladies does not compel that conclusion. In fact, the Court in Loveladies specifically indicated that takings claims are resolved based on the unique facts of each case. In addressing the question of whether there was sufficient denial of economic use of the land to constitute a taking the Court stated that the outcome "depends on what is the specific property that was affected by the permit denial." (ld. at 1 180 (emphasis added).) In this case it is important to note that it was the owner, KSL that reserved Lot' "L" for private street purposes (including a reservation to individual lot owners) and dedicated this parcel to the City. It is equally important to note that J the record demonstrates that KSL expected that Weiskopf would be completed by 94 extending it from its present configuration to Jack Nicklaus. With respect to the open space lots, it is important to note that Lot "L" bisects these lots and that KSL PAreports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 013 testified that their purpose was to provide a "nice view" as an entry feature. Further, it was KSL that actually reserved these lots as open space and as private road. Based on these circumstances, which indicate that the restrictions on this property were due to the developers own action, the Loveladies case is distinguishable. Public Notice This request was advertised in the Desert Sun Newspaper on April 8, 2006 and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet around the project boundaries and to those who submitted letters and addresses. To date, several letters have been received in response to the City Council notice. However, as a result of the Planning Commission hearings, a large number additional of letters were received. They are all attached for your review (Attachment 8) . Any further comments received will be handed out at the meeting. Related Information 1 . Forrest Haag, a consultant and representative of the applicant, has provided a written summary of the PGA West history of the subject property based on his research and records. Mr. Haag states why he believes the subject property was always designated to be used for residential purposes. As stated above, Staff feels that Mr. Haag's explanation is inconsistent with the City's record. (Attachment 17) 2. Mr. Ray Shaffer, the applicant in this request has submitted an e-mail letter, dated April 13, 2006 regarding this matter for your review (Attachment 18), Planning Commission Action The Planning Commission initially reviewed this request at the meeting of December 27, 2005. (Attachment 19) Commissioner Ladner abstained from all consideration on this matter because her insurance business involves insurance sales to homeowners' associations involved in the project. At that time the Planning Commission, after testimony and discussion, continued the hearing to January 10, 2006, and requested the applicant provide additional information from the two applicable PGA West homeowners associations and Fire Marshal. On January 10, 2006 the request was again continued to the meeting of January 24, 2006, in order to allow all of the previously requested information to be submitted (Attachment 20) . Prior to the January 24t" meeting, Staff was informed that the driveway access between proposed Parcel 1 (westerly most parcel) and Jack Nicklaus (street) to the J95 west, would be sold to the applicant instead of being an access easement as was originally proposed (Attachment 21). This necessitated continuing the hearing to PAreports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 014 February 14th in order to re -advertise the expanded site and for the applicant ation submit an amended Parcel Map. Staff also requested additional info covered later in report) deemed relevant for the Planning Commission's consideration. At the February 14th meeting, staff informed Planning Commissioners that the applicant had requested the hearing be continued to the April 25th meeting in order n to allow time to prepare technical exhibits and conduct a neighborhood me the (Attachment 22) The Planning Commission moved to continue the hearing to March 14 meeting. On March 14th, due to lack of a quorum (a quorum is a minimum of three of the five members present and available to deliberate) of the Planning Commission for this item, the request was continued to the meeting of March 28, 2006. On March 28th, the Planning Commission again considered this matter. Discussion included comments from a number of nearby PGA West homeowners who in general stated that they felt the project would be detrimental to their properties and that they were led to believe the subject property would remainpen space. Planning Commission discussion and deliberation focused upon severs) • Based on the 1997 action on Tract 28444 and the information provided on that map, which created the subject property, it appears that the intent of KSL a that time was to have the property be maintained as landscaped open space and an extension of Weiskopf. • Neighboring homeowners testified that when they previously inquired about the subject property, they were presented plans that showed ,the property was created and designated for "open space and recreational uses. • Although the PGA West Specific Plan designated this area as Tourist Commercial, which, among other uses, allows single-family residential, Tract 28444 approved for KSL, designated the property as landscaped open space with a road that has not been constructed. At the time of the Planning Commission review, it was believed the road was an emergency access t t t was no longer needed because alternate accesses had been provided Weiskopf. • Commissioner Alderson noted a concern that fire access to the lots was not adequ ate. Staff noted that the Fire Department had reviewed the map and indicated that the hammerhead access was acceptable. The Commission noted that action on this request would set a precedent for future similar properties in PGA West.4,196 PAreports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc Based primarily on these factors the Planning Commission voted 4-0-1 to adopt Minute Motion 2006-003 recommending denial of Environmental Assessment 2005-550 and Tentative Parcel Map 32752. Applicants Request For Continuance Mr. Forrest Haag, on behalf of the applicant has requested a continuance to the meeting of May 2, 2006 in order to allow their consulting team to "adequately prepare presentation material for the hearing" (Attachment 24). FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The Planning Commission's recommendation for denial of the proposed Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map was based on Findings discussed during the public hearing on March 28, 2006. A Resolution denying the request along with those Findings has been prepared for your adoption should you agree with the Planning Commission's recommendation. As noted, the applicant has requested a continuance of this item to the meeting of May 2, 2006. The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council denying certification of Environmental Assessment 2005-550 and disapproving Tentative Parcel Map 32752 as recommended by the Planning Commission; or 2. If the City Council wishes to consider approving of the Project, the applicant should be required to: (1) Demonstrate that interests held by the City, IID, and the 69 homeowners adjacent to Lot "L" of Tract Map 28444 have been extinguished by consent or some other legal means; (2) identify the similarly situated properties that could be effected by a favorable decision on this issues and revise Environmental Assessment 2005-550 (and if necessary prepare proper environmental documentation) to consider, at a minimum, growth inducing and traffic/circulation effects that the Council's determination could have; and (3) process an Amendment to the PGA West Specific Plan's (a) Conservation, Recreation and Open Space Element to Allow for the Conversion of open space to residential use and (b) Circulation Element, Exhibit 9, to eliminate the connection of Weiskopf Street and Jack Nicklaus; or 3. Continue consideration of this item to the meeting of May 2, 2006 as requested by the applicant; or 397 4. Provide staff with alternative direction. PAreports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 016 Respectfully submitted, Doug as Evans Community Development Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1 . Location Map 2. Aerial view of site 3. Excerpt from Tract 28444 showing site 4. City Council and Planning Commission Staff Reports for TTM No. 28444 for the meetings of April 22, 1997 and May 20, 1997, respectively 5. Final Map for Tract No. 28444, recorded June 18, 1998 6. Grading, Drainage and Parking Plans for Tract No. 28444, approved by the City Engineer on January 19, 1999 7. Amendment #1 to Encroachment Permit #2904, dated June 10, 1999 8. Letters received from PGA West property owners 9. Tentative Parcel Map exhibit 10. Conceptual Site Plan design 1 1 . Photo Simulations 12. 2002 General Plan Land Use map excerpt 13. 2003 Zoning Map excerpt 14. Exhibit 9 (Depiction of entry concepts and collectors) of Specific Plan 83- 002, Amendment #4 15. Final Map for Tract No. 28340-1 16. Letter from Mr. Robert Hargreaves, Dated March 23, 2006 17. Letter from Mr. Forrest Haag, ASLA 18. E-mail letter from Mr. Ray Shaffer, dated April 13, 2006 19. Planning Commission minutes for the meeting of December 27, 2005 20. Planning Commission minutes for the meeting of January 10, 2006 21. Planning Commission minutes for the meeting of January 24, 2006 22. Planning Commission minutes for the meeting of February 14, 2006 23. Request for Continuance Letter from Mr. Forrest Haag, dated April 11, 2006 38 PAreports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc 017 24. Letter from applicant's attorney dated April 14, 2006 P:\reports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc RESOLUTION NO. 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING CERTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO.2005-0550 AND DISAPPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 32752, FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF 2.55 ACRES INTO THREE RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND MISCELLANEOUS LOTS CASE NO.: EA 2005-550 & TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 32752 APPLICANT: RAY SHAFFER WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 181h day of April 2006, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a request by Ray Shaffer to certify Environmental Assessment No. 2005-550 and approve Tentative Parcel Map 32752 to allow for three single-family homes and other miscellaneous lots on approximately 2.55 acres located on or near Weiskopf Street and Jack Nicklaus, immediately south of PGA Boulevard within PGA West; and WHEREAS, the owner and original subdivider, KSL Land Corporation, is selling the property to Ray Shaffer, the applicant for the proposed development; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 3rd day of June 1997, approve Tentative Tract Map 28444, a single-family development of 69 residential and other miscellaneous lots (described as "non- residential common lots" and two "reserved lots") by adoption of Resolution 97-42; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 2nd day of June 1998, grant final map approval for Tract 28444 by adoption of Resolution 98-54; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 61h day of August 1996, grant final map approval for Tract 28340-1, a development of single family residential lots and other miscellaneous common lots by adoption of Minute Order 96-130; and WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision of the 2.55 acres for the project involves Lots "H," "I," "L," and "W" of Tract 28444 and Lot "D" of Tract 28340-1; and WHEREAS, Lots "H", "I" and "W" are listed on the Lot and Land Use Summary on the Tentative Tract Map 28444 as "open space and landscape lots" and were not described as "reserved lots" (only Lots "T" and "U" of the Tentative Map were described as "reserved lots") and were further described in staff reports and agenda titles for the Tentative Map as "various non-residential lots" and "common lots", respectively; and City Council Resolution No. 2006- Environmental Assessment 2005-550 and Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 2 WHEREAS, Lots "H", "I" and "W" were reserved for "open space and recreational purposes" on the final map; and WHEREAS, Lots "H", "I" and "W" were voluntarily encumbered by KSL as open space/recreation and landscape lots on Tract 28444 and these lots implement the Goals, Policies and Objectives in Sections III.A. and III.F. of the Specific Plan to provide balance between open space and other uses; and WHEREAS, the City staff members who processed Tract 28444, including Jerry Herman, who was then Community Development Director, Christine di lorio, who was then the Planning Manager, and Stan Sawa, then and now a Principal Planner, have indicated that KSL and its consultants did not, at the time they were processing Tract 28444, indicate that their intention was to ultimately develop the open space lettered lots as residential areas; and WHEREAS, deletion of these lots as open space lots would be inconsistent with these Specific Plan Goals, Policies, and Objectives for the original PGA West section because these lots constitute strategic locations for such amenities as determined by the City and as demonstrated by comments by the developer at the time of approval of Tract 28444; and WHEREAS, there is testimony in the record that adjacent homeowners relied on representations by KSL and others relating to the continued existence of these lots as open space, and indicated further that they were charged a premium for their lots based upon the proximity to open space areas; and WHEREAS, the applicant and KSL have stated on the record that there are other locations in PGA West where open space parcels exist that either they or others intend to develop with residential housing if the City permits the conversion of non- residential open space to residential uses, however, neither the applicant nor KSL have been willing or able to provide the City with information about these specific locations so that the City can truly assess the impact of its actions; and WHEREAS, as a result of not having this information, the City is unable to determine whether granting the approval for this subdivision will have a significant individual or cumulative impact on open space and recreational uses or establish a precedent for future similar projects; and WHEREAS, there is not sufficient evidence in the record that KSL intended to (or communicated to the City its intention to) develop Lots "H", "I" and "W" as residential development, particularly in light of the fact that the Tentative Map "reserved" only two lots (Lots "T" and "U") and in other residential tracts (e.g., Tract No. 28340-1), KSL has expressly identified certain other lots as being reserved for future development; and 4 019 City Council Resolution No. 2006- Environmental Assessment 2005-550 and Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 3 WHEREAS, Lot "L" is reserved on the Final Map for Tract 28444 for private street purposes for the benefit of, among others, the 69 individual lot owners of Tract 28444 to provide the owners access to Jack Nicklaus and such lot was also dedicated to and accepted by the City for ingress and egress for service and emergency vehicles and for public utilities; and WHEREAS, the record establishes that KSL intended for Lot "L" to be constructed as the final northern leg of Weiskopf Street as evidenced by testimony before the City Council in connection with approval of Tract 28444 and.as evidenced by express written concurrence with certain conditions contained in Amendment #1 to Encroachment Permit #2904; and WHEREAS, neither the applicant nor KSL have provided the City with any evidence that the 69 individual lot owners have relinquished their rights in Lot "L" of Tract 28444; and WHEREAS, neither the City nor the utility easement holders have abandon their easements in Lot "L" of Tract 28444; and WHEREAS, the Specific Plan identifies Lot "L" of Tract 28444 and Lot "D" of Tract 28340-1 as the northern leg of Weiskopf Street, allowing it to intersect with Jack Nicklaus; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Assessment did not address the growth inducing impacts of removing open space from PGA West (either on an individual or cumulative basis) nor did the Environmental Assessment address traffic or circulation impacts in the event that Weiskopf Street is not completed; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 27th day of December 2005, on the 10th and 24th day of January 2006, on the 14th day of February 2006, and on the 14th and 28th day of March 2006, hold noticed public hearings to consider certification of Environmental Assessment 2005- 550 and Tentative Parcel Map 32752, and adopted Minute Motion 2006-003 recommending denial of the Environmental Assessment and proposed subdivision to the City Council; and WHEREAS, upon hearing and consideration of all testimony, evidence, and arguments presented, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard and based upon the entire record for this application, the following facts exist which justify denial of certification of Environmental Assessment 2005-550 and disapproval of Tentative Parcel Map 32752: 020 City Council Resolution No. 2006- Environmental Assessment 2005-550 and Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 4 That approval of the proposed subdivision would result in conversion of land currently established for open space and recreational use to a residential use designation. The record does not contain substantial evidence that KSL had an intention to convert Lots "H," "I," and "W" to any other use when it created those lots. The record contains specific evidence that KSL believed that these open space and landscape lots would be of benefit to the subdivision in connection with the subdivision's density and in connection with view and other recreational goals associated with these lots. KSL voluntarily designated these lots as open space and landscape lots on the Tentative Map, reserved them for open space and recreational use on the recorded Final Map, and did not expressly reserve them for future development, as compared to other tract maps where such express reservations were made (e.g., Tract 28340-1). 2. That based on evidence in the record, including testimony of and letters from many lot owners, the elimination of the open space and recreational designation of said lots will undermine the reasonable expectation formed by persons who acquired property interests in these developments with the understanding that said lots would remain undeveloped. 3. That the proposed elimination of open space and landscaping uses on Lots "H", "I" and "W" conflicts with section 9.10.010 of the Municipal Code which provides that the objectives of the Zoning Code include establishing "conditions which allow various types of land uses to exist in harmony and to promote the stability of existing land uses protecting them" and "to prevent undue intensity of land use or development." This project would increase density (in contraction to KSL's representations during approval of Tract No. 28444) and would undermine the stability and protection of open space. This is particularly the case where, during the tentative map approval for Tract 28444 the agenda titles and staff reports referred to Lots "H", "I" and "W" as "common lots" and "non-residential lots", respectively, indicating staff and City Council intention at the time of Tract 28444's approval that these lots would not be developed for residential purposes. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City's General Plan residential policy, which is to encourage the preservation of neighborhood character, including open space. 4. That Section III.A. of the original PGA West Specific Plan provides as a Goal, Policy, and Objective that it is necessary for projects to have a balance between open space and other uses. In furtherance of this concept, the Specific Plan provides for a "continuous, ribbon-like pattern of open space throughout the project." Likewise, Section III.F. of the original Specific Plan, entitled "Conservation, Recreational and Open Space Element," recognizes the importance of maintaining open space by noting its value as a limited resource. In furtherance of these stated concepts, the Specific Plan prescribes that golf courses shall be "designed (laid out) and developed so that adjacent development will have the maximum visual and open space value possible." 021 City Council Resolution No. 2006- Environmental Assessment 2005-550 and Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 5 The removal of Lots "H", "I" and "W" from open space uses will contradict established Goals, Policies and Objectives in the Specific Plan that emphasize the importance of maintaining open space in PGA West and seeks to prevent the removal of this limited and valuable resource. Lots "H", "1" and "W" were voluntarily included by KSL in Tract No. 28444 as non-residential lots and that these lots are strategically located to maximize open space in an area that is compatible with its present use. As a result, this application is inconsistent with the PGA West Specific Plan. 5. That KSL made statements during public hearings before the Planning Commission that it (KSL) and CNL currently own similarly situated property within the PGA West Specific Plan and PGA West that are presently designated as open space and landscape lots. Statements were made to the Planning Commission to the effect that a favorable outcome of this application may result in further requests to subdivide these similarly situated lots by KSL, CNL, or others, in a manner similar to this project. Although requested by the Planning Commission to identify the scope of the similarly situated parcels, neither KSL nor the applicant was able and/or willing to provide the Planning Commission additional information regarding the location of or its plans to process these additional lots. 6. That, as a result of the KSL's failure to provide the City with information relating to KSL's intention to further subdivide similarly situated subdivisions within the area covered by the PGA West Specific Plan, the City does not have the necessary information to properly assess the individual or cumulative environmental impacts that could result to the physical environment from the removal of the open space, landscape and recreational uses designated for Lots "H," "I," and "W" and the private street required on for Lot "L". Environmental Assessment 2005-550 is therefore deficient because it does not constitute an adequate informational document to permit the City Council to approve the project. 7. That approving the deletion of the open space, landscape and recreational lots may result in growth inducing effects on the physical environment because the decision to allow elimination of open space, landscape and recreational lots could establish a precedent with respect to conversion of other open space and recreational uses in the area (based on KSL's testimony before the Planning Commission). These growth inducing impacts were not analyzed in the Environmental Assessment. For this reason, and as required by CEQA Guideline 15126.2(d), the potential cumulative effect of a decision to approve this project must be analyzed as part of the project's environmental review documentation. The current environmental review for the project also lacks sufficient analysis on the traffic and circulation impacts that could result from the decision to remove Weiskopf Street as a collector for PGA West and as an entrance to Tract 28444 404 as evidenced on Exhibit 9 to Specific Plan Amendment #4. The project's traffic 022 City Council Resolution No. 2006- Environmental Assessment 2005-550 and Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 6 and circulation impacts are not sufficiently analyzed. Environmental Assessment 2005-550 is therefore deficient because it does not constitute an adequate informational document to permit the City Council to approve the project. 8. That, as part of recorded Final Map 28444, KSL made an offer to dedicate an easement to the City over certain lots including Lot "L." This dedication was expressly granted to the City for public utilities and for ingress and egress of service and emergency vehicles. The Final Map indicates that the City accepted this dedication, as did a public utility provider. The record reflects that Lot "L" was also expressly intended to provide an access point for the 69 lots to Jack Nicklaus through an extension of Weiskopf Street. The Final Map for Tract No. 28444 expressly reserved Lot "L" to the individual lot owners. Section 13.12.130(G). of the Municipal Code provides that the City shall only approve a tentative map unless it can make a finding that the subdivision "will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision." The proposed subdivision would eliminate the City's easement in that it would prohibit the City from ensuring that Lot "L" is used for its stated purpose and would eliminate the individual lot owner's interests in Lot "L." There is no evidence in the record that the applicant or KSL have obtained the relinquishment of these rights. The City has no authority to permanently relinquish the rights of such lot owners to property interests expressly conferred to such owners without prior consent from each such lot owner and, indeed, not over the objections of such lot owners. Substantial evidence in the record reveals that many of the affected lot owners have not provided their consent to the proposed elimination of the private street depicted as Lot "L" but have, instead, expressed their adamant objection to the proposed subdivision based on the projected negative effects on aesthetics, maintenance of open space, and access for emergency services. 9. The purpose for the individual lots owners' and City's interests in Lot "L" are directly linked to a significant public health and safety issue relating to the community, namely convenient and efficient access for emergency vehicles and as a primary access point for the subdivision. This conclusion is evidenced by the inclusion of Lot "L" as part of the Weiskopf Street connection with Jack Nicklaus in Exhibit 9 of Specific Plan Amendment #4. Notably, KSL concurred to develop Lot "L" as the second phase of Weiskopf Street's extension to Jack Nicklaus and expressly represented to the City that it understood that this obligation was not extinguished. In light of the public health and safety concerns relating to the continued maintenance of Lot "L" for its designated use, it is necessary to maintain its easement in the affected lots, including Lot "L," for the benefit of the City and its residents in the vicinity. Ova 023 City Council Resolution No. 2006- Environmental Assessment 2005-550 and Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 7 10. KSL's intend to construct Weiskopf Street over Lot "L" is depicted both on Exhibit 9 of the PGA West Specific Plan and in the Grading, Drainage and Paving Plans for Final Map 28444. KSL expressly understood that Lot "L" would be used for the final northern leg of Weiskopf Street to Jack Nicklaus as evidenced by the 1999 Amendment #1 to Encroachment Permit #2409. This demonstrates that KSL did not have an expectation to develop the subject site (which is bisected by Lot "L") as a residential use. 1 1 . That, as part of recorded Final Map 28444, KSL retained for itself, successors, assignees, and lot owners certain lots within the tract, including Lot "L," as private streets. Specifically, Lot "L" was designated by KSL on the Final Map for ingress and egress of emergency services. This designation is shown on the recorded Final Map and is directly linked to a significant public health and safety issue. relating to the community, namely the preservation of convenient and efficient emergency vehicles. The record further reflects that, in addition to its intended use for ingress and egress of emergency services, Lot "L" was intended to act as a primary access point for the 69 lots to Jack Nicklaus. In order to accomplish the connection, approval of the Final Map was conditioned on KSL extending Weiskopf Street over Lot "L" so that it would connect with Jack Nicklaus. 12. That there is no feasible method to mitigate or avoid the impacts identified in findings above other than by denying Tentative Parcel Map No. 32752 because, including without limit, (1) there has been insufficient environmental analysis relating to removing open space and the connection of Weiskopf Street with Jack Nicklaus, (2) the location of Weiskopf Street terminating at Jack Nicklaus is specified in the Specific Plan for this exact location and there are no other available locations for this intersection that would be as effective, and (3) the individual lot owners, the City and IID have not relinquished their respective property interests in Lot "L". 13. The facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at public hearings, the Staff presentations and Staff report, all materials in the project files, in the Tract No. 28444 files, and the written correspondence and telephone messages left by area residents, the applicant and KSL. There is no other substantial evidence, nor are there other facts that detract from the findings made in this Resolution and the City Council expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 024 City Council Resolution No. 2006- Environmental Assessment 2005-550 and Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 8 That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of said City Council in this case. In addition, pursuant to La Quinta Municipal Code Section 13.12.130, the City further finds as follows: A. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the PGA West Specific Plan for, among others, the reasons outlined above; B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with the PGA West Specific Plan for, among others, the reasons stated above; C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements may cause substantial environmental damage; D. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements may cause serious health problems to the extent that site access is limited by the construction of homes in the right-of-way for Weiskopf Street and due to the inadequate access to one or more of the lots created by the subdivision; E. The site is not physically suitable for the type of development for the reasons stated above; F. The site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development, given that the original approval of the subdivision was based upon the assumption that the area now at issue would remain as open space, and the prior density calculations and representations for Tract No. 28444 were based upon Lots "H ", "I", and "W" remaining open space; and G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements proposed will conflict with easements and access rights held by the City and by the 69 lot owners within Tract No. 28444 in Lot "L" of Tract No. 28444. 2. That the Environmental Assessment and subdivision application are incompatible with significant and objective standards and policies existing on the date the Environmental Assessment and subdivision application were deemed complete. 3. That the subdivision application would create conditions and impacts which cannot be avoided. 4. The City Council denies certification of Environmental Assessment No. 2005- 550 as submitted based on the findings stated herein. Based upon the whole record, the City is unable to find that there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the proposed subdivision will have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Assessment No. 2005-550 does not reflect the independent judgment of the City Council. 407 025 City Council Resolution No. 2006- Environmental Assessment 2005-550 and Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 9 5. The City Council disapproves of Tentative Parcel Map No. 32752 based upon these findings. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California held on the 18th of April, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California f1 9 02 � @ e l K W `r Y h 4,10 r � � Via•' # u d �r ti n z AT 7 iv- y4,C�,•� L r � � � .,yY •` � a � � d fs �* y n 3 . � k '"� P �� '� k�m • rz �` a r � Y 4� a { k � �fY ki �•.F �jx' � -a � rr� `h a> ,��'' )IL p M • '�, ^fir t r� �" ,� s'-i,�,� � � , �° ,. -- �^ - � '.� r �. tx. err fr,t ..� �l'h..'. •r � � � i� x 'e, ax Xy .� �. f i � YJ � 4y .► 1, 4� a ., A'4' _ w�. Grp, w ■. ° '""',,> �.w v7 �� a z .�d z�� •� ,' � q�� i.~(f �k� ,'� � � � �,yj . �.� �r � p� P „"-_ � �.y i. A S� `.,�`.�r •r.�. ra�r',�,r,�� tf ��47��rv� fY a a�� Z�!R�:' '�►��,. � � �y :...� rt ,. A �y ;k v Y •'�� . ILI 5s. ,+� �,�'.: �, f+�"�y E1 w��C �f.R � �, �, t � ! ,� `J G," �., �, �' Y }� y � +{, }. '• Y ( -' "'►M z � � _ Iij > }d,",, ';� t•ryrx r" s >w 4'rvya ' .^' 4 i A. , .. f... .fit {, r" , ',�y,. +•h ,�.i i +. .T:�„� '`.... _. ,l M 351, r .p" ... `-•. t `"'� r � .vim .F w , r � .�R ea F s ,ice `"& �� ,r��A��;��'t^• '+w `""`�'� z" '�►` . , i •� w;�,r wy tt e Ld9 - _ . ,...';. .air: �v�.4�..,�-.--p�k �,,�,�� awr..,.`_.- f��a"-'-- "t` � • tiA«. 1 +' _r..: v `afir" .� �'`r �.'. ' T,P tpl tx'f,. # / - a r � � � a 4�t$ � -d � ��J.,%�.� i� Y•y,.,lL. ,¢ � 9t ± ^?i "f » x � _ ,��jx�i1t ;''' , - �-•^" wo.� �7 rli ,Y. . �'�'� x �i � -tle' , W+�►�k' �,.. .flag: w• i rr. �9" y i,hi '� �•� (.� ,..'�. -✓ w� � ..� {�ii+� rri WN k"�t4n u�dta tj ' " 4R rIT r (`,y c �.' , u�, ♦may «' ,} � �� f �¢�X'�'F Y 'I d * 1i,Y J'#�. I ss "�. t^ , •,�'h` a' , ' • � ":tea .ow •yi; y��' y��K�� y„ tt .- wR Y•Cw fr, .eira� u�.,�Gp T}y. �-0rg'f.'� iyyM1�t :�.,+w+"•"•...".^r•�"if'w"�t. "` AP-M , SP " r .. ol _ irrvid "a a» ' ��'_` r. ,I`.. � � � '�• -... ,fir !'A'. Y, ;..4;.# ny "Ytgz e�q`. .;� vk-•.b, i yew... *+ �'`-`±�:'' . 1 ~(,f `A "�' ! I.t owl a 1 ail .h &�,. �,n'rk��rt '• "�' ,� }" � !3, .,.'i - �, „{. „ `�' ..+4 4X . NAT C J, .'v' {' t.:Y ay..r JV 9 �az\ ATTAC H M E tp ! N. 'b' ELI k" "� Iq• � N Vf L_• ag RA r EdU CO ' LO w z l d d0 -..�. � 6�`nc^�./�// .oa0� dy\ ,l.js� S�1• �3 �[" 0.pZ\RAJ ^ •�'i�o n r• ' �rbbq '�'// rW H 00 t0 y 3a " �,p 2� to /,on co .-1 d O < o m N � r ems✓ I O �§� �p,00' �O �� '°�,�\°•�'o \ �'i O z O < U - p c1l�i U 1.a yO QwQ cJ w J co Oto } ` I t-i N N f- 3 �1 b s\rn a V z Z U ti a r� r I oq yd N F < cn N o a. z Z O ,�� CL`� F's NNQ�� -I J jam_ i e ^� �\ o W LL O U O -J LudO 0 to o <w' U N7, 0 rn r: tt P2�� • �� O c� z Z Z O 3 � F• J � } D m J ,S9 '� � 5h�q �• �' a Z v �aUOU N< li' cn ^o < cii w � LL � h�% �' ✓ O J qO ^�saD i`uN� ati�cd .N• ui J `'� }. Z� iil < at0 3,15t.01 N Q w � I h _; Lti iw o�a�, .< a L� Z` r^ . wz PalVA7`�i t m D_- N�$'74N ,nz m o j W Z I ::)0 <OUS J� zv) '�`r I C.7Sm Wpl OVI C[1 i 'J J $ J o i J cn � N vi mrCid-~t, o•�pj��/to �n v��}5 u§iddui_ ', [��[m_yb F''f3f� 19 R' N�NNr'Nr`I�rU NN.f YI b, D cs 1� p Cam. m T N N nINNRINNN�t'1 �/ • �f��h N > i\ �zp60� f Y _jCR ur L,l 'yl ��?D22y ~ y\•./ \�� r� I fZt L/ �^��vd� svm� o �n �S65 f Ig 3.tb, �5�$��Ft��r,IFe��Si$� u N12 Y3� Y3 m^ a?• � N Z�pOb� Me C� N8N: Z. cUi� /.d o 1 .SS avb o r t, mm 'b .clbir SoY�:an nin y ti �yp�p3V ryg ^ �� 3.ZOSO._F �1 �r _•S£•CS.B poi ' N t%IS i N •l9•a� QRC, 3.8L£S.01 J 1� . y�� RaD DVNN L00'02q 3.ft, iy lhP&�a04 6i.0[ N ..J._�._.—� .Ji I� - ;��;.n 7'f`o 3yd-OtlN MOO,OO.Y N ?8d-p78, l d yy" 7S�\\ras 9 A Ng� b,'P, NOVA J :NT 3 91' 030 13 3 U J. S: 00'sc A,60,9S.a N 62'912 AAC,01.0 N I Q N 1 6 1 !l O d tl 1 �d— 61SSY921 A,OE,01.0 N _.._ ...._ i,69'WO :A,OS,ol.O N k- --- — - --- - - t- r 1C8'S "WS ''S9'1 'LUE8/891 '81A (00'981)A,'YE.01.0 N u=i '.60e1 '3j's `d'i it .I 03 i'r Cl �M_ : s 12 NMI03S WO A$ _ _ Q N I W Ld IZ W �• N J muc wmw W M I / N M I t\l \ 5I> M 1~ w _ _ mu M Q 11 � q En A Iw.X CL PO i N w mrn MJ I Q is 1r•Nw MoS M I I O w- w 4 vi U pys° q` u M 1y �o � � x� xewanr I N 04 w a' v 3 I I N W p z0w Q of - - - ,Na ' j N f� � NN� ® J •. W Cj � J � �' I . r '_' � •. � II p O Hz rn o o��, C 1 ,D N ck ( S �z_j qq cr I_ Y— Y'�NP�� zwo U j`N o _ q to iL N d/ -1/ o Y //OA. AX lNC 1n L1, ll \ wz 2En ` N Zoe y� Z $ ."' zc� �ti� n In �. �•. � � Ln (� (� M a Lt) E 7LL- m N y0 < -Lbul /\ l hyi eP� 0J N" tD i 1 Oto " o A t0 g 8< W ' ' co O < Olt o aJ > o u ca / t~ i g • lfl 0 � � _ ` I1,IlEY.S N HW r yJ � g F O tf� _--. 1 > ELl VVVIII ttl:ti J bR �.. � ;� M � � d•��.� •• �� ♦ n� � � ��t�o075� q1 u� M N p2�^ L . rW vi cad N N �o Z5 a � 3 f ' I ' El 90 • ■ O u � t ; CC) b 031 t Y to v < 'Y� - HA W v 7 a Ci< Z n �zw� P-w a moo J zo �Xa umU. o _o p� Cj N �Wj Y se0�� 3 `3Ez oxp o ai F �yy U < ~O Y ZO_Wm y7y�'U gOWJ� O�a l(}Clp W�yNJ/f XS p. �Q/pg1. F U m W< V I> X= � 4 ME 0 U W J �� X< W� J N a � m O i � W Z � Wom<W 2 FF- eo`Q„a WwaVVV2---a wQ~ :9 N Rh- g' +Q�+�" r3�<�''�OCT3z z>w��-' 1 z N1v� -'5 mom _ ? a a�_VOma 4.46 V 2 W V m m �UW < Z O W NU �2W p gC O 4yg d 4 w o�iQ w� eau m aW�� rz v_ g gg o >w 3 _$ r-o w 3 M z m o Y$ v a z�z o$oap0a d `oWCNw m �� z i W I N y Z V m W OC W O - to a o F Wm =aX vow�vo �== s� '80 �aNk o 2N a C�Wa` �wN"m 5 v =�z wW Z p. N wO�' O X Q z O 2' Z~ VI O r U y�1X St O K w O O V O =� r fy o a�� bzs � o� a ;5 W�Qa c�� g a$ � rn go r (� J J 0' = W <rWx-iyci� Q asyy<.. Woaa Q• 4 UaFa4� U a�-1- V O U 4 p� W r \ O C.i ¢C.�O �9i+•�.o <N a i�.lrw� 2� �z4z. �' �ozVoeo wa < ��aW ni S. Un J J lrr p j ZZO (� a Z p- t� 4 J m JO �-C' 0K W Jm ' F<mO O q Y q� N � a Z .$N OHO pa 'KG'oa K'Om `dwov, ;n JJ<O pF mwzy�y Q UU^ }�Z V W Z g 4 4 H m W ~ 0 4- x 0 awlF 2` .� ."b Za ~ 2 g 8 O .cc�2� 3 O- lN�l�{S1S w wG �z x� N p �W f W i a' �:• U' uW,k w a0i°J W .�cz (il 000 Fa- a °il+w a�v aum o c4'i cQ m a j J Yt-- le 111 J < ? W W H K V M J 4 �YLn ZF r-SWm. Z Z 3 X� W m w� � wa 111 = <WYw6 ? v�W WJ Ja'nwZ �< �tg� `g�ww VOp 0 �a mQ • w$ao�a w3 Z 7 (. # F Ow OG 4 �d a g �� S�Ry \CH b� �F VO } NaN J �zN�w z J0 tt1 �a�.- o p�� & aw c`iz w = R£ S <a '�CEr \¢ �mF`� p��wm, �m M Obi pocWi� �; �� Z4 N a 1 ¢��u J �� wa„poo b o Qter/ N tiZ �?Q�o ��ONawZu0 N z oo 11 mV- fmwlwZ.•1yy w�0amw QZ='o w �raZa� w¢w y J4-O zFw 'z w o va 0�a�$a o9N • L Ld fn h: St�azmzo �� XOYOU W«opt J o w Offi w x �4µ.._Qo �a zd�aaw c.��Z<zG p z ozz On oN� Obi ��z z� z�ZpZpm oa '�rlQ $ 3a5o S< a `s>� F 0'J $i 'n imaL-4 lO O4 - WvW Z Z F Z a W q O W N m Q x JK N W N p a' W 0= Y ��apnw \ �� O �W as 0 wr ?w x� W 0: Ow�F�z X mw �o o a d b� m vW+w'c'� ¢� Q ¢•gyp LL W z mV�"� H min d r �¢Z�F < X=pVa'W X �w wW 17Zray.D�Juy O' Ii^�'w�� \ a Z XF x X�1-"ins ,�w rp G w Z� Na o�� X' wcai� ^ W W�wo rn <o Z c�aoYaa Q QQ o3 `i <w�m °' a L'i �O mW o _o d zp ,n W u Z min= << <wZZinw cis ��<w 0 taJ o�w . �-� V= 4 w g a W W N xQ O =N Is - Z < 2 J w O V Qpaa ' O W<Z rozvZ'w< Vf a< �_j y a °lo''o W� Fa- bU�z� <x < •x 3j z< =Fzo� J rx-I C a1i -ya, �xW�a d y x�za OWZ 1 Now,.. yn:-<ae (� w ¢ 'Tin. > �. 0 y �,�o,r x� y) xD Z �0cm, o- ` �W z� W < azo �-� Jon n:oo ?,a Fa ^ 2J2. /= ) <�pazm <x .�i z <`$<pn_ �'$w OJ IS'�.'< $ Q cWi Wo W 0�1 O J r �'^ Jr �-'ina Z )w agW°N°O z -+Xa <r`-• a)U * Z Z O '^o�U� o ^ wr T3 0- a z Jx a KJ U r �- N-�17.� y Ya(7wO� Y� zu Z YZIn0y 69'0NUy aw� m W� 7 L�i�VFzz $ W ��Y ymjX <U lJ.l W NQn=o `W } OOZZJwF OU W V '�— H1 le,W U l�K W'n �"- i wf7' V wNzaw N� i- `"�w¢x�� < z�.Y- W i c`'>z ` awaC zZ W V) =rvoi��voi o Z5 0 o Wa C-5 �0Uv`i¢ o �� U _c��5"ao o u u U _ c�< <J < Zz S w � Zp J q f' ZZ 4 W � Q a' S O W W W W Oy W�j NjU aNn= W O K x� UZ '�� S` zi7S z iwwUg _ �CL ti �'Y VI H W O n' X q sav' S <pw zWyy-3,,��O�zZ Z yZl �.F?o Jz�n-'tzyz �r N> vi J'"< 3W .3� W N W [A�'w4 W YZp<OyU'pj[ W WZ�Z ~ W C V 1 J W[ H< a' Z e� Q Z U U V 1 O W a V� fZ W O O NU U W v1� M< W aZp W InYI}1 m < =n.O W Z m ?UC] Utwn �a W�'�¢� <ZNZONz VW�j a $ Z� j��N.. DOygj yyGzp w 0omm` K U X V1 y{�J1 V W Q IN/1 Vj < W d_ W W w O-� H WWVI<N �0aU WyVf� W w r O s O Z W Z w V' O p d V 0 5 J O �Z F w0 <k K� �. O 'nZS J� �O� V q, N 'J O J /-N Z '„S- V �F IY- ZZ y`.ppw W ZU � Z U W�< w W= XM E , O a <'S Z y F� O Z OU Y W �U : J�1r'� W j <> ZIn �' U VWI Q4' ¢N f7 n: JOf J d aW$ 'O��Za V �OZZ O w� �a �Z /{may" ZU '�Y,NW YZ fY p w w ��U_'z m � aJ�Q. �� ci � w Wsg=a �N Z Y g�a wo w a �O o oo w o < azw TOiYa a a^ <W� O� c� w wzm� p U -- a 'waca� - Wa��pZw n..� :E =ZJ NKZ� z UOtn�p ? WZavWiuz s $W ^ wSp0w $ WZ<Wu z0 $� 3a vJiia apt <¢p 3 p J pzz Z p a W J XZ: 'n'�UF V Q XXJ TOWwH<O o � N y, 4 Q��'GG Z a W < W �'4J� l!' L�.0 �OFZ � <� � 0�? Q 2w � J NH= - W NZ W < ~ 3 N C F`.-W73 Fa000� u F�Vw�jW �p w tp7'inX ZI o nqm v` UNON 2V' W V OOQ: a 2 w K4. W ! J�Z q Zp pV-Z .S• a~(�/f Y`Z Y 0 - aa0 1/i gQZUn. r 1 Z o O w OZ a Z4 O z7dapk' < d 1 1 0 zmi0y0 W Z <p�ooco�zz C� o$Wr'-W'�-. z �qp f-"' k'�>z_QUZ rW-p,,�nz qi YdZ�w�z q < V 1 fjr- 7c xn yU'' (`.) QWQ�jj W J Qp Z a y BUJ lW� Q i W F �j N a< J Z O I O 4O � W Z ~ N�Oz< W mVJC61w f/1 UJ V _ICJ N>'ON� y y mF'z Y m'no m3o m m ozWa ¢�'Cio r� ��o �pg�Z� lz W W F W I C u _ N$WvFii`a�' W Wzi��z.X '_ �a kzLn Q< gaE y' WwciaX�y'� �� > JJ O �$ zoomaW o O Wa; R W w3 1p Wo;nxM, W W 'W&of'-i W 8 XY m Zi LA Oe-7�ia � 414 032 ATTACHMENT #4 FILE COPY DATE: CASE NO.: REQUEST: STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 22, 1997 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28444 APPROVAL OF THE SUBDIVISION OF 38.36-ACRES INTO 69 SINGLE FAMILY AND OTHER COMMON OR STREET LOTS LOCATION: ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF PGA BOULEVARD AND WEST OF MADISON STREET ABUTTING THE TOM WEISKOPF AND JACK NICKLAUS TOURNAMENT GOLF COURSES APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: KSL LAND CORPORATION REP: MR. S. CHEVIS HOSEA, VICE PRESIDENT OF LAND AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERS: M.D.S. CONSULTING (MR. STANLEY C. MORSE, P.E.) ENVIRONMENTAL . CONSIDERATION: THIS TRACT MAP APPLICATION IS PART OF PGA WEST, AND HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PER SECTION 65457(A) OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING LAW BECAUSE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT WAS PREPARED FOR THE "PGA WEST SPECIFIC PLAN" AND CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON MAY 11 1984. A SUBSEQUENT EIR WAS PREPARED AND ADOPTED AS PART OF AMENDMENT #1 IN 1988 (SEPTEMBER 20, 1988). THEREFORE, NO ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS DEEMED NECESSARY. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) STRPTPC28444-14, 4 15 RES028444-14, COND28444-14 1 033 ZONING/ SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATIONS: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) AND RESIDENTIAL PER SP 83-022, AMENDMENT #3 BACKGROUND: Site Background/Tract History The PGA West Resort is made up of numerous tentative tract maps which have been approved since 1984. Some of the tracts have been completely built out while others have not: Prior to KSL Recreation Corporation building within PGA West, eight different unit serigs had been approved varying in size from 1,290 to 4,165 square feet excluding the custom lots on Cherry Hill. The housing units vary from single family detached to single family attached and two story six and eight unit buildings. In 1995, KSL Recreation Corporation received approval to build single family detached housing within PGA West that ranged in size from 2,065 to 4,542 square feet (Plot Plan 95-552). This was the first compatibility review application within PGA West. Additional houses were added by KSL under Plot Plan 95-565 in 1995 but the unit range remained unchanged. The proposed parcels shown on the map exhibit are vacant, and surrounded by the existing Jack Nicklaus Tournament and Tom Weiskopf golf courses to the northeast and southwest, respectively. The site has access to Jack Nicklaus Boulevard, a gated private street south of PGA Boulevard, built under Tract Map 25499 in the early 1990's (previously a portion of Tract Map 21642). In 1996, KSL remapped the residential lots along Jack Nicklaus, and to the south, under Tentative Tract Map 28340. Phase #1 of the map was recorded on August 1996. The properties, around this area, are designated for residential development by the PGA West Specific Plan (Land Use Plan). A third amendment to Specific Plan 83-002 was approved by the City Council in 1996 (Attachment 1). To the east, across Madison Street, is a future master planned community of 880 residential houses on 220-acres (Specific Plan 90-017). The future houses will be placed around the existing Tom Weiskopf golf course. Project Request This map proposes to create 69 single family and various other non-residential lots on +38-acres in the southeast section of the PGA West development (Attachment 2). The project density is approximately 1.8 dwellings per acre. All residential lots will front onto Weiskopf Street, a newly created 54 foot wide private street which provides access to Jack Nicklaus Boulevard and Winged Foot and emergency -only access to PGA Boulevard and STRPTPC28444-14, RES028444-14, COND28444-14 2 4 034 Madison Street. Enhanced paving areas with raised landscape medians are proposed on this new street. The lots vary in size but are generally from 86-feet in width by 165-feet in depth (0.3-acres) to approximately 105-feet in width by 172-feet in depth (0.4-acres). The smallest residential lot is 12,750 square feet. The developer anticipates building Masters and' Heritage Collection housing units on these lots pursuant to Plot Plans 95-552 and 95-562 (Compatibility Review) which were approved by the Planning Commission and City Council in 1995. The single family lots on the south side of Weiskopf Street back onto the existing Tom Weiskopf golf course whereas the lots on the north back onto the existing Jack Nicklaus Tournament golf course. The applicant is proposing access to the north of the site from proposed Weiskopf Street via reserved Lots "T" and "U". Public Notice This map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on April 3, 1997. All property owners within 500-feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by Title 13 (Subdivision Ordinance) of the La Quinta Municipal Code. Additionally, the applicant requested that public hearing notices be mailed to all property owners within PGA West (and within 500-feet of the development's boundaries) to insure that all property owners in the area are made aware of their development application. This expanded noticing request exceeds the City's requirements under the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. Public Agency Review Staff sent a copy of the applicant's request to all public agencies and City Departments on March 21, 1997. All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. All agency comments received have been made Conditions of Approval for this case. Environmental Assessment An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the PGA West Specific Plan in 1984 (SP 83-002). The City Council certified this document on May 1, 1984. Subsequent amendments have been permitted and certified by the Commission and Council. Therefore, this site has received prior environmental consideration and no further considerations are deemed warranted. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES: Based on the provisions of the General Plan, SP 83-002, Zoning Code and the Subdivision Ordinance (Title 13) the following overview of the project is provided: STRPTPC28444-14, RES028444-14, COND28444-14 3 4 7 035 1 � i • Issue 1 - General Plan Consistency/PGA West Specific Plan (SP 83-002) The City's General Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential (2-4 dwellings per acre) which allows single family housing (e.g., attached or detached housing units). The PGA West Specific Plan is consistent with the existing General Plan and its internal elements because only 5,000 homes (1.8 dwellings per acre) are allowed in the PGA West development along with other commercial resort amenities. The proposed single family development is consistent with the City's General Plan and PGA West Specific Plan as designed because detached single family houses are permitted in the SPR District of SP 83-002 (Chapter 3). The adopted Specific Plan for this community outlines its long term development pattern for this mixed -use project. Its text includes a land use map and narrative describing all land uses in the area. The proposed parcel map is in a residential district area of the Plan (i.e.. SPR District) which permits lots of not less than 6,500 square feet for detached residential housing projects. This map proposes lots of greater than 12,850 square feet which is almost twice the size required under PGA West Specific Plan. The proposed single family development is consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Code as designed. The adopted Specific Plan for this community outlines its long term development pattern for this mixed -use project. Its text includes a land use map and narrative describing all land uses in the area. The proposed tract map is in a residential district area of the Plan. Specific Plan 83-002 does not require common recreational facilities when detached housing units are proposed because it has been shown that private pools will be built instead. Therefore, no common pools/spas or restroom buildings are proposed. Issue 2 - Tract Design/Improvements Private streets are proposed for this subdivision map as required by Specific Plan 83-002. Access to the site will be from existing (or future) streets within PGA West. All proposed streets will be a minimum width of 36 feet as established by the General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance and SP 83-002. Street and other infrastructure improvements are required for this project. The minimum lot sizes allowed for this area are 6,500 square feet with lot frontage of at least 50-feet. This map complies with these minimum standards. The recommended Conditions will ensure that all on -site work is consistent with City standards. Issue 3 - Environmental Consideration An EIR was prepared for the PGA West Resort in the early 1980's. The City Council certified the EIR and approved this master planned development request in May of 1984. The project is exempt from further environmental consideration because no changes are proposed greater than that which was planned or approved between 1984 and 1988. STRPTPC28444-14, 4 RES028444-14, COND28444-14 418 036 Issue 4 - Health and Safety All necessary infrastructure improvements for this project are either installed or will be constructed as required by the attached Conditions. This includes water, sewer, streets, and other necessary improvements. All electric services will be installed in under ground piping and will meet all requirements of the service agencies (gas, electric, water, etc.). CONCLUSION: The property owner's request conforms with the Land Use and Circulation Maps of Specific Plan 83-002 (Amendment #3) and City Codes. The tentative map, as Conditioned, is consistent with the existing' golf courses in the immediate area. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97 =, recommending to City Council conditional approval of Tentative Tract. Map 28444, subject to the recommended Conditions. Attachments: 1. PGA West Land Use Map 2. TTM 28444 - Reduced 3. TTM 28444 (Large Exhibit - Commission Only) ell, Associate Planner Submitted by: hristine di lorio, PI nning Manager STRPTPC28444-141 RES028444-14, COND28444-14 5 037 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28444 TO SUBDIVIDE 38.36-ACRES INTO 69 SINGLE FAMILY AND OTHER COMMON LOTS IN PGA WEST RESORT (SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002, AMENDMENT #3) SOUTH OF THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF PGA BOULEVARD ABUTTING THE JACK NICKLAUS TOURNAMENT AND TOM WEISKOPF GOLF COURSES AND WEST OF MADISON STREET CASE NO.: TTM 28444 APPLICANT: KSL LAND CORPORATION WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 22"d day of April, 1997, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing and consider the request of KSL Land Corporation to approve a 69-single family and other common lots on a 38.36-acre site in the PGA West Resort at the southern terminus of PGA Boulevard abutting the Jack Nicklaus Tournament and Tom Weiskopf golf courses, more particularly described as: Portions of Section 21, Township 6S, Range 7E, S.B.B.M. (APN: 769-730- 003, 769-520-001 and 002, 769-530-001, 769-720-003, 761-080-073 and 074, and 761-090-050) in the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, State of California WHEREAS, said Tentative Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 197011as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development Director has determined that the original Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan 83-002 (PGA West Specific Plan) approved by the City Council in 1984, and as amended in 1988, is still valid and binding on this development request. Therefore, no additional environmental review is warranted; 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 Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify to the City Council a recommendation for approval of Tentative Tract Map 28444: A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans. The project is in a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions of the General Plan. Therefore, the density requirement of the Land Use Element RESOPC28444-14/COND28444-14/STRPTPC28444-14 038 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 (Chapter 2) shall be met. The Tract, , as designed, is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of Specific Plan 83-002 (Amendment #3) which permits 5,000 residential units in PGA West, a master planned golf resort. The site is zoned Low Density Residential (RL District) and designated Specific Plan Residential (SPR) under SP 83-002 (Amendment #3) which permit single family developments (i.e., attached or detached housing units). All plans for future single family homes shall be consistent with the provisions of the Specific Plan and Zoning Code in effect at the time building permits are acquired. The development of the project, as conditioned, will be compatible with the surrounding area. B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans. The density and design standards for the Tract will comply with the Specific Plan 83-002 and the Land Use Element of the General Plan (Chapter 2). All streets and improvements in' the project conform to City standards of the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as designed. All -on-site streets are private and will be maintained by a Homeowner's Association. The new extension of Weiskopf Street between PGA Boulevard and Madison Street will enhance the circulation system within the southeastern section of PGA West. C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed land division and is part of other previously approved subdivision maps by The Sunrise Company approved by the City but not fully completed. The original development plan will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were required during the grading of the site by the Sunrise Company and KSL during construction of the existing golf courses. D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. Health and safety concerns were addressed in 1984 and 1988, during consideration and approval of the master planned PGA West Resort. Mitigation measures were imposed to reduce noise, traffic and other environmental concerns under Specific Plan 83-002 (Amendment #3). The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on City, State, and Federal requirements. Dust control measures shall be required during any further on -site construction work as required by Chapter 6.16 of the Municipal Code. 421 RESOPC28444-14/COND28444-14/STRPTPC28444-14 .039 0 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 E. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. The proposed private streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support necessary infrastructure improvements. The project as designed and conditioned complies with all City requirements and Specific Plan 83-002 (Amendment #3). WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map, the Planning Commission has considered, the effect of the contemplated action on housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of La Quinta and its environs with available fiscal and environmental resources; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby reconfirm the conclusions of the Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan 83-002 (as amended) since its original approval in 1984; 3. That it does hereby recommended to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 28444 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 22"d day of April, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California 4 .' 2 RESOPC28444-14/COND28444-14/STRPTPC28444-14 040 • • Planning Commission Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 ATTEST: 'JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California 42.3 RESOPC28444-14/COND28444-14/STRPTPC28444-14 oai PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28444 KSL LAND CORPORATION APRIL 22, 1997 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply (APN: 769-730-003, 769-520-001 and 002, 769- 530-001, 769-720-003, 761-080-073 and 074, and 761-090-050). 1 2. Tentative Tract Map No. 28444 shall comply with the requirements and standards of §§ 66410-66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Title 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. This map approval shall expire and become void within two years unless extended based on the provisions of Section 13.12.150 of the Subdivision Ordinance. 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, 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 - Coachella Valley Unified School District - Coachella Valley Water District - Imperial Irrigation District - California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) 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 subdivisions requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy of the application for the Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of the 4 2. 4 COND2844414/RES028444-14 1 042 planning Commission Resolution 97-_ Tentative Tract Map 28444 April 22, 1997 proposed Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan for review by the Public Works Department. 4. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. All easements, rights of way and other property rights required of the tentative map or otherwise necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the development and functioning of improvements shall be dedicated, granted- or otherwise conferred, or the process of said dedication, granting, or conferral shall be ensured, prior to approval of a final map or filing of a certificate of compliance for waiver of a final map. The conferral shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant easements to the City for access to and maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of all essential improvements which are located on privately -held lots or parcels. 6. 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. 7. The applicant - shall dedicate 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. S. The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. 9. The applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, and common areas. 10. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval by the City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the property unless such easements are approved by the City Engineer. COND28444-14/RES028444-14 2 5 043 Planning Commission Resolution 97-_ Tentative Tract Map 28444 April 22, 1997 FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAPS 11. 'As part of the filing package for final map approval, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, on storage media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu choices so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. If the map was not produced in AutoCad or another program which is convertible to AutoCad, the applicant may substitute a scanned raster image file of the map. IMPF�OVEMENT PLANS 12. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of Rough Grading, Precise Grading and, if necessary, "Drainage" and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Street and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, gates and entryways, and parking lots. If water and sewer plans are included on the street and drainage plans, the plans shall have an additional signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation, lighting, and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 13. 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. 14. When final plans are approved by the City, and prior to approval of the final map, 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 choices 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 including approved revisions to the plans. 44106 CONb28444-14/RES028444-14 3 -j 044 Planning Commission Resolution 97-_ Tentative Tract Map 28444 April 22, 1997 IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 15. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to agendization of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Title 13, LQMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 16. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of improvement costs. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, tract improvements shall not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service to lots within the development. 17. If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the conditions of approval and secure those phases separately, a phasing plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. - The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations as set forth in the approved phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a construction sequencing plan for that phase is approved by the City Engineer. 18. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (site development permits, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site improvements and development -wide improvements (ie: retention basins, perimeter walls & landscaping, gates, etc.) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final map unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 19. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for applicant's required share of improvements which have been or will be constructed 2 7 by others (participatory improvements). COND2844414/RES02844414 4 1 045 • • Planning Commission Resolution 97-_ Tentative Tract Map 28444 April 22, 1997 Participatory improvements for this development include: A. Fifty percent of the cost to design and construct improvements to Madison Street from the currently -improved section at Airport Boulevard to the most easterly southeast corner of the revised PGA West Specific Plan (Specific Plan). When construction is warranted, the improvements may be constructed by the applicant, by the City or by others. B. Design and construction of perimeter landscaping form the north boundary of this Tract to the most easterly southeast corner of the Specific Plan. The applicant's obligations for all or a portion of the participatory improvements may, at the City's option, be satisfied by participation in a major thoroughfare improvement program if this development becomes subject to such a program. GRADING 20. Graded, undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 21. 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. In accordance with said Chapter, the Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 22. The applicant shall comply with the City's flood protection ordinance. 23. The applicant shall furnish a copy of the soils report with the grading plan. 24. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the final map(s), if any are required of this development, that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 25. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at the interface of this development with abutting properties and of separate tracts within this development, if any. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by 441.8 COND28"4-14/RESO28444-14 5 J 046 Planning Commission Resolution 97-_ Tentative Tract Map 28444 April 22, 1997 more than three feet except for lots within a tract, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not in five feet. If the applicant is unable -to comply with the pad elevation differential requirement, the City will consider and may approve alternatives that preserve community acceptance with the proposed development. - 26. Prior to issuance of - building permits, the applicant shall provide a separate document, bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer or surveyor, that lists actual building pad elevations for the building lots. The document shall list the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and the difference between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. UTILITIES 27. All existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. High -voltage power lines which the power authority will not accept underground are exempt,from this requirement. 28. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to construction of surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 29. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. If the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation of any final map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for any waived final map, the development or portions thereof may be subject to the provisions of the Ordinance. If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the applicant shall be responsible for all street and traffic improvements required herein. 30. The following minimum street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS COND28444-14/US028444-14 6 4 2) 9 047 Planning Commission Resolution 97-_ Tentative Tract Map 28444 April 22, 1997 1) Madison Street (Primary Arterial) - 86 feet curb to curb plus sidewalks and median. The applicant shall secure 50% of the cost to design and construct the west half of the street from the currently -improved section at Airport Boulevard to the most easterly southeast corner of the Specific Plan. B. PRIVATE STREETS AND CULS DE SAC 1) Residential - 36 feet wide if double loaded (builds on both sides), 32 feet if single loaded 2) Collector (z 300 homes or 3,000 vpd) - 40 feet wide 3) Cul de sac curb radius - 45' Main entry streets and interior circulation routes, bus turnouts, acceleration/deceleration lanes, and/or other features contained in the approved construction plans may warrant additional street widths or other measures as determined by the City Engineer. 31. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings and devices, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and mailbox clusters approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 32. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond development boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street width transitions, or other incidental work which will ensure that newly constructed improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and conform with the city's standards and practices. 33. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be prepared by registered professional engineer(s) authorized to practice in the State o California. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted Standard and Supplemental Drawings and Specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. Plans for Madison Street shall be prepared by the applicant or others when the improvements are warranted as determined by the City. 34. Street right-of-way geometry for culs de sac, knuckle turns and comer cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 430 COND28"444RES028444-14 7 048 0. 0 Planning Commission Resolution 97 Tentative Tract Map 28444 April 22, 1997 35. All streets proposed to serve residential or other access driveways shall be designed and constructed with vertical curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods to convey nuisance water without ponding in yard or drive areas and to facilitate street sweeping. 36. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design for a 20-year life and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including site and building construction traffic). The minimum pavement sections shall be as follows: Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. Collector 4.0"/5.00" Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00" Primary Arterial .4.5"/6.00" Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50" The listed structural sections are minimums, not defaults. Street pavement sections shall be designed using Caltrans design procedures with site -specific data for soil strength and traffic volumes. The applicant shall submit current (no more than two years old) mix designs for base materials, Portland cement concrete and asphalt concrete, including complete mix design lab results, for review and approval by the City. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (no more than six months old at the time proposed for construction) aggregate gradation test results to confirm that the mix design gradations can be reproduced in production of the base or paving material. Construction operations shall not be scheduled until mix designs are approved. 37. Prior to occupancy of homes or other permanent buildings within the development, the applicant shall install all street and sidewalk improvements, traffic control devices and street name signs along access routes to those buildings. If on -site streets are initially constructed with only a portion of the full thickness of pavement, the applicant shall complete the pavement when directed by the City but in any case prior to final inspections of any of the final ten percent of homes within the tract. LANDSCAPING 38. Perimeter walls and required landscaping for the entire perimeter to be enclosed shall be constructed prior to final inspection and occupancy of any homes within the COND28"4-14/USO28444-14 8 431 Planning Commission Resolution 97-_ Tentative Tract Map 28444 April 22, 1997 tract unless a phasing plan or construction schedule is approved by the City Engineer. 39., The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the perimeter setback areas or lots along the following streets: A. Madison Street from the north boundary of this tract to the most easterly southeast corner of the Specific Plan. The improvements may be secured for installation when street improvements are constructed. 40. I, Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and landscape setback areas shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Landscape and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The plans are not approved for construction until they have been approved and signed by the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. 41. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way. 42. 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 five -feet of curbs along public streets. 43. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, common basins and park areas shall be designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor -mounted equipment. 44. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans .are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. PUBLIC SERVICES 45. The applicant shall provide transit amenities as required by Sunline Transit and or the City Engineer. COND28444-14/RESO28444-14 9 4J21 -1 050 Planning Commission Resolution 97-_ Tentative Tract Map 28444 April 22, 1997 QUALITY ASSURANCE 46. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 47. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing not included in the City's permit inspection program but which are required by the City to provide evidence that materials and their placement comply with plans and specifications. 48. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have their agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 49. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings, .As -Built or As -Constructed clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the plan computer files previously submitted to the City to reflect the as -constructed condition. MAINTENANCE 50. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of drainage, landscaping and on -site street improvements. The applicant shall maintain off -site public improvements until final acceptance of improvements by the City Council. 51. The applicant shall provide an executive summary maintenance booklet for streets, landscaping and related improvements, perimeter walls, drainage facilities, or any other improvements to be maintained by an HOA. The booklet should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist the HOA in planning for routine and long term maintenance. COND28444-14/US028444-14 10 "3t 051 • • ATTACHMENTS 4�4 052 Planning Commission Resolution 97-_ Tentative Tract Map 28444 April 22, 1997 FEES AND DEPOSITS 52. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. FIRE DEPARTMENT 53. Schedule A fire protection approved Super fire hydrants (6" X 4" X 2.5" X 2.5") will be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330-feet apart in any direction with any portion of any frontage more than 165-feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow will be 1,000 G.P.M. for a two-hour duration at 20 PSI. 54. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant/developer will furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review and approval. Plans will conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system will meet the fire flow requirements. Plans will be'signed and approved by the registered civil engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "/ certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 55. The required water system including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. MISCELLANEOUS 56. The provisions of Specific Plan 83-002 (PGA West Specific Plan), including sideyard setbacks, shall be met prior to issuance of building permits. 57. All agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking purposes. 58. 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. COND28444-14/RES028444-14 11 435 053 j Ji :1 ov It an •q� i r �, �� lg �� ,,: ��' ATTACHMENT 2 me^ , _ � � 1 1 1 o i � R i b, ! ( M � " �,:' f(}I ' it , .' • Q';, � ' , ■ •� � 1ti♦ ••� �{O�■.. 1 1 I,S I � ' 11.¢ ' 11 t ' • I 'GI �� • , � ,/%� r SI �:\ It `' , co ;t G� �! 30 i`lam ,. Ldl . : I" j• 1 ! • • AilLLJ sit . � � �' 1 ` � � � � •��i ',t 4 , ' ,�i� 3 ' •'n. ®• I . J �r t , ^ YR"`.Z. _ . i' • I � r', If rn z -m , ;',:. ; ,;:,, 8! fit,• ,+.::,�\,. Uj c } Z U __i �1 �,; ;� '•�, •/ , . It ' t ; ' } r I i ° 3 •:. _• �� ! ! I„ A � 'yam �, t ♦ L l I. 1t,�/��f �tr t N.1 J'((�.�i i,t'� • • �1.1 . • (per •'f f\ • •r 1 ' I /� 1 •` r n , ty 'r l a • ,C� , r of �• ti , � , ' ! .�II, .. ':�) � �, 1. Y p ., .' E . is tell 14, lb . t • � �' �1. � t to t� .. � I ! i � I l 4 11 4.1 fira is •' �1� a �fII�- :i r �s- ! Ija T•• 1-9 1,04 Jul till 05 6115! is i / Af I FILE COPY F ofti° AGENDA CATEGORY: COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: May 20, 1997 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing on Tentative Tract Map 28444, a request to subdivide 38.36-acres into 69 single family and other common lots located on the south side of the southern terminus of PGA Boulevard and west of Madison Street abutting the Tom Weiskopf and Jack Nicklaus Tournament golf courses. Applicant: KSL Land Corporation RECOMMENDATIONS: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Adopt City Council Resolution, approving Tentative Tract Map 28444, subject to Findings and Conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Planning Commission Action On April 22, . 1997, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the applicant's request to subdivide property for the development of 69 single family houses on private streets. After discussion, the Commission, on a 5-0 vote (Commissioners Seaton and Gardner were absent), adopted Resolution. 97-028 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 28444. A copy of the Commission Minutes are attached (Attachment 1). Site Background/Tract History The PGA West Resort is made up of numerous tentative tract maps which have been approved since 1984. Some of the tracts have been completely built out while others have not. Prior to KSL Recreation Corporation building within PGA West, eight different unit series had been approved varying in size from 1,290 to 4,165 square feet excluding the custom lots on Cherry Hill. The housing units vary from single family detached to single family attached and two story six and eight unit buildings. In 1995, KSL received approval 056 J to build single family detached housing within PGA West that ranged in size from 2,065 to 4,542 square feet (Plot Plan 95-552). This was the first compatibility review application within PGA West. Additional houses were added by KSL under Plot Plan 95-565 in 1995 with the unit range remaining unchanged. The proposed site shown on the map exhibit is vacant, and surrounded by the existing Jack Nicklaus Tournament and Tom Weiskopf golf courses to the northeast and southwest, respectively. The site has access to Jack Nicklaus Boulevard, a gated private street south of PGA Boulevard, built under Tract Map 25499 in the early 1990's (previously a portion of Tract Map 21642). In 1996, KSL remapped the residential lots along Jack Nicklaus, and to the south, under Tentative Tract Map 28340. Phase 1 of the map was recorded on August 14, 1996. The site and surrounding area are designated for residential development by the PGA West Specific Plan (Land Use Plan). A third amendment to Specific Plan 83-002 was approved by the City Council in 1996 (Attachment 2). To the east, across Madison Street, is a future master planned community of 880 residential houses on 220-acres.(Specific Plan 90-017). The future houses will be placed around the existing Tom Weiskopf golf course. Application Information This map proposes to create 69 single family and various other non-residential lots on +38- acres in the southeast section of PGA West (Attachments 3 and 4). The project density is approximately 1.8 dwellings per acre. All residential lots will front onto Weiskopf Street, a newly created 54-foot wide private street which provides access to Jack Nicklaus Boulevard and Winged Foot and emergency -only access to PGA Boulevard and Madison Street. Enhanced paving areas with raised landscape medians are proposed on this new street. The lots vary in size but are generally from 86-feet in width by 165-feet in depth (0.3-acres) to approximately 105-feet in width by 172-feet in depth (0.4-acres). The smallest residential lot is 12,750 square feet. The developer anticipates building Masters and Heritage Collection housing units on these lots pursuant to Plot Plans 95-552 and 95-562 (Compatibility Review) which were approved by the Planning CO—mmission and City Council in 1995. The single family lots on the south side of Weiskopf Street back onto the existing Tom Weiskopf golf course whereas the lots on the north back onto the existing Jack Nicklaus Tournament golf course. The. applicant is proposing access to the north of the site from proposed Weiskopf Street via reserved Lots "T" and "U". CCSR28444-P,CCRES028444-14 CCCOND28444-14 4�9 057 w � • Public Agency Review Staff sent a copy of the applicant's request to all public agencies and City Departments on March 7, 1997. All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. All agency comments received have been made a part of the Conditions of Approval for this case. This map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 6, 1997. All property owners within 500-feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by Title 13 (Subdivision Ordinance) of the La Quinta Municipal Code. Additionally, the applicant requested that public hearing notices be mailed to all property owners within PGA West (and within 500-feet of the development's boundaries) to ensure that all property owners in the area are made aware of their development application. This expanded noticing request exceeds the City's requirements under the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. 1=6 III 171 - An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the PGA West Specific Plan in 1984 (SP 83-002). The City Council certified this document on May 1, 1984. Subsequent amendments have been permitted and certified by the Commission and Council. No significant environmental changes have been made therefore the original findings remain adequate. TATEMENT OF TH Based on the provisions of the General Plan, SP 83-002, Zoning Code and the Subdivision Ordinance (Title 13) the following overview of the project is provided: Issue 1 - General Plan Consistency/PGA West Specific Plan (SP 83-002) The City's General Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential (2 dwellings per acre) which allows single family housing (e.g., attached or detached housing units). The PGA West Specific Plan is consistent with the existing General Plan and its internal Elements because only 5,000 homes (1.8 dwellings per acre) are allowed in the PGA West development along with other commercial resort amenities. The proposed single family development is consistent with the City's General Plan and PGA West Specific Plan as designed because detached single family houses are permitted in the SPR District of SP 83-002 (Chapter 3). CCSR28444-P,CCRES028444-14 CCCOND28444-14 440 • 0 . A The adopted Specific Plan for this community outlines its long term development pattern for this mixed -use project. Its text includes a land use map and narrative describing all land uses in the area. The proposed map is in a residential district area of the Plan (i.e., SPR District) which permits lots of not less than 6,500 square feet for detached residential housing projects. This map proposes lots of greater than 12,750 square feet which is almost twice the size required under PGA West Specific Plan. The proposed single family development is consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Code as designed. Issue 2 - Tract Design/Improvements Private streets are proposed for this subdivision map as required by Specific Plan 83-002. Access to the site will be from existing (or future) streets within PGA West. All proposed streets will be a minimum width of 36-feet as established by the General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, and SP 83-002. Street and other infrastructure improvements are required for this project. The minimum lot sizes allowed for this area are 6,500 square feet with lot frontage of at least 50-feet. This map complies with these minimum standards. Specific Plan 83-002 does not require common recreational facilities when detached housing units are proposed because it has been shown that private pools will be built instead. Therefore, no common pools/spas or restroom buildings are proposed. The Conditions of Approval require improvements for this project that include streets and other infrastructure improvements necessary for development pursuant to Federal, State, County, and City provisions. The recommended Conditions guarantee that all on- and off - site work is consistent with City and other public agency standards. Issue 3 - Health and Safety Concerns The proposed Conditions of Approval require installation of all necessary infrastructure improvements. These include water, sewer, streets, and other necessary improvements. New electric services for each lot will be undergrounded and meet all requirements of the local service agencies (gas, electric, water, etc.). Plans and fees shall be submitted and paid to the respective serving agency. Issue 4 - Environmental Consideration An EIR was prepared for the PGA West Resort in the early 1980's. The City Council certified the EIR and approved this master planned development request in May of 1984. The project is exempt from further environmental consideration because no changes are proposed greater than that which was planned or approved between 1984 and 1988. CCSR28444-P,CCRES028444-14 CCCOND28444-14 059 416 Issue 5 - School Mitigation Fees Developers are required by State law and SP 83-002 (Amendment 3) to pay school mitigation fees to the appropriate school district prior to obtaining building permits. Currently, the Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD) charges developers $1.84 per square foot of living area based on their passage of Resolution 96-37 in 1996, unless the developer has entered into other contractual arrangements with the District for fee payment. Mr. Arto J. Nuutinen, attorney for the CVUSD, has submitted two letters requesting that the City impose a prior school fee mitigation condition which was deleted by the City Council in 1996, under Amendment 3 to SP 83-002 (Attachments 5 and 6). Based on this deletion, the City Council has no discretion to consider adding a requirement other than the State mandated mitigation fee. A letter from Mr. Larry E. Lichliter, Executive Vice President for KSL Recreation Corporation, has been received responding to the District's request (Attachment 7). CONCLUSION: The property owner's request conforms with the Land Use and Circulation Maps of Specific Plan 83-002 (Amendment,3) and City Codes. Findings for approval are included in the attached Resolution along with recommended Conditions. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: Alternatives available to the City Council are: 1. Approve the project as recommended by the Planning Commission; 2. Continue the project to June 3, 1997; or, 3. Deny the project. e Herm n'75ommunity Development Director CCSR28444-14/CCRES028444-14 CCOND28444-14 4Al62. Attachments: 1. Planning Commission Minutes of April 22, 1997 (Excerpt) 2. PGA West Map 3. Location Map 4. Map Exhibit 5. Letter from the law offices of Bowie, Arneson, Kadi, Wiles and Giannone 6. Letter from the law offices of Bowie, Arneson, Kadi, Wiles and Giannone 7. Letter from Mr. Larry Lichliter, Executive Vice President for KSL Recreation Corp. 8. Large Map Exhibit (Council Only) CCSR28444-14/CCRES028444-14 CCOND28444-14 4 it 3 061 RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28444, A REQUEST T0. SUBDIVIDE 38.36-ACRES INTO 69 SINGLE FAMILY AND OTHER COMMON LOTS IN PGA WEST RESORT (SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002, AMENDMENT #3) SOUTH OF THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF PGA BOULEVARD ABUTTING THE JACK NICKLAUS TOURNAMENT AND TOM WEISKOPF GOLF COURSES AND WEST OF MADISON STREET CASE NO.: TTM 28444 APPLICANT: KSL LAND CORPORATION WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 20' day of May, 1997, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of KSL Land Corporation to approve a 69-single family and other common lots on a 38.36-acre site in the PGA West Resort at the southern terminus of PGA Boulevard abutting the Jack Nicklaus Tournament and Tom Weiskopf golf courses; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 22' day of April, 1997, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by KSL Land Corporation to develop 69 houses on 38.36-acres in PGA West and recommended approval to the City Council, more particularly described as: Portions of Section 21, Township 6S, Range 7E, S.B.B.M. (APN: 769- 730-003, 769-520-001 and 002, 769-530-001, 769-720-003, 761-080- 073 and 074, and 761-090-050) in the City of La Quinta, County. of Riverside, State of California WHEREAS, said Tentative Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development Director has determined that the original Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan 83-002 (PGA West Specific Plan) approved by the City Council in 1984, and as amended in 1988, and 1996, is still valid and binding. Therefore, no additional environmental review is warranted because no significant changes have been made and the findings remain adequate; 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 of approval for Tentative Tract Map 28444: 4 062 Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 A. The proposed map -is consistent with the City of La. Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans. The project is in a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions of the General Plan. Therefore, the density requirement of the Land Use Element (Chapter 2) shall be met. The Tract, as designed, is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of Specific Plan 83-002 (Amendment #3) which permits 5,000 residential units in PGA West, a master planned golf resort. The site is zoned Low Density Residential (RL District) and designated Specific Plan Residential under SP 83-002 (Amendment #3) which permit single family developments (i.e., attached or detached housing units). All plans for future single family homes shall be consistent with the provisions of the Specific Plan and Zoning Code in effect at the time building permits are acquired. The development of the project, as conditioned, will be compatible with the surrounding area. B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans. The density and design standards for the Tract will comply with the Specific Plan 83-002 and the Land Use Element of the General Plan (Chapter 2). All streets and improvements in the project conform to City standards of the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as designed. All on -site streets are private and will be maintained by a Homeowner's Association. The new extension of Weiskopf Street will enhance the circulation system within the southeastern section of PGA West. C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely'to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The subject site is physically suitable for the .proposed land division and is part of other previously approved subdivision maps by The Sunrise Company approved by the City but not fully completed. The original development plan will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were required during the grading. of the site by the Sunrise Company and KSL during construction of the existing golf courses. D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 063- RESOCC28444-14/CCCOND28444-14/CCSR28444-14 Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 Health and safety` concerns were addressed in 1984 and 1988, during consideration and approval of the master planned PGA West Resort. Mitigation measures were imposed to reduce noise, traffic and other environmental concerns under Specific Plan 83-002 (Amendment #3). The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on City, State, and Federal requirements. Dust control measures shall be required during any further on -site construction work as required by Chapter 6.16 of the Municipal Code. E. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. The proposed private streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family lot. All required public easements will provide access to the ite or support necessary infrastructure improvements. The project as designed and conditioned complies with all City requirements and Specific Plan 83 -002 (Amendment #3). WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map, the City Council has considered, the effect of the contemplated action on housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of La Quinta and its environs with available fiscal and environmental resources; 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 reconfirm the conclusions of the Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan 83-002 (as amended) since its original approval in 1984; 3. That it does hereby approve Tentative Tract Map 28444 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 20`h day of May, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: 4 064 RESOCC28444-14/CCCOND28444-14/CCSR28444-14 Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: GLENDA L. HOLT, Mayor City of La Quinta, California A*EST: SAUNDRA L. JUHOLA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: DAWN C. HONEYWELL, City Attorney 447 " '5 R£SOCC28444-14/CCCOND28444-14/CCSR28444-14 RESOLUTION 97- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28444 - KSL LAND CORPORATION MAY 20, 1997 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply (APN: 769-730-003, 769-520-001 and 002, 769- 530-0011 769-720-003, 761-080-073 and 074, and 761-090-050). 2. Tentative Tract Map No. 28444 shall comply with the requirements and standards of §§ 66410-66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Title 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. This map approval shall expire and become void within two years of City Council approval unless extended based on the provisions of Section 13.12.150 of the Subdivision Ordinance. 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, 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 - Coachella Valley Unified School District - Coachella Valley Water District - Imperial Irrigation District - California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) 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 subdivisions requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy of the application for the Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CCC0ND28444-14/US0CC28444-14 i 448 Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 May 20, 1997 proposed Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan for review by the Public Works Department. 4. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. All easements, rights 'of way and other property rights required of the tentative map or otherwise necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the development and functioning of improvements shall be dedicated, granted or otherwise conferred, or the process of said dedication, granting, or conferral shall be ensured, prior to approval of a final map or filing of a certificate of compliance for waiver of a final map. The conferral shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant easements to the City for access to and maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of all essential improvements which are located on privately -held lots or parcels. 6PP 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. 7. The applicant shall dedicate 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. 8. The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. pp 9. The applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, and common areas. 10. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any of portion of this property between the date of approval by the City Council and the date recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the property unless such easements are approved by the City Engineer. FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAP(S) 11. As part of the filing package for final map approval, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, CCCOND2844,-14/RESOCC28444-14 2 4 Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 May 20, 1997 on storage media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu choices so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. If the map .was not produced in AutoCad or another program which is convertible to AutoCad, the applicant may substitute a scanned raster image file of the map. IMPROVEMENT PLANS 12. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checkingshall be submitted on 24" x 36 media in the categories of Rough Grading, , Precise Grading and, if necessary, "Drainage" and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Street and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, gates and entryways, and parking lots. If water and sewer plans are included on the street and drainage plans, the plans shall have an additional signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation, lighting, and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 13. 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. 14. When final plans are approved by the City, and prior to approval of the final map, 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 choices 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 including approved revisions to the plans. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 15. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to agendization of a final map or parcel map or issuance CCCOND28444-14/RESOCC28444-14 3 06 Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 May 20,1997 of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Title 13, LQMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 16. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of improvement costs. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, tract improvements shall not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service to lots within the development. 17. If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the conditions of approval and secure those phases separately, a phasing plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations as set forth in the approved phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a construction sequencing plan for that phase is approved by the City Engineer. 18. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (site development permits, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site improvements and development -wide improvements (ie: retention basins, perimeter walls & landscaping, gates, etc.) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final map unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 19. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for applicant's required share of improvements which have been or will be constructed by others (participatory improvements). Participatory improvements for this development include: A. Fifty percent of the cost to design and construct improvements to Madison Street from the currently -improved section at Airport Boulevard to the most easterly southeast corner of the revised PGA West Specific Plan (Specific t :t CCCOND28444-14/RESOCC28444-14 4 V69 Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 May 20, 1997 Plan). When construction is warranted, the improvements may be constructed by the applicant, by the City or by others. B. Design and construction of perimeter landscaping form the north boundary of this Tract to the most easterly southeast corner of the Specific Plan. The applicant's obligations for all or a portion of the participatory improvements may, at the City's option, be satisfied by participation in a major thoroughfare improvement program if this development becomes subject to such a program. GRADING 20. ' Graded, undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 21. 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. In accordance with said Chapter, the Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 22. The applicant shall comply with the City's flood protection ordinance. 23. The applicant shall furnish a copy of the soils report with the grading plan. 24. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the final map(s), if any are required of this development, that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 25. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at the interface of this development with abutting properties and of separate tracts' within this development, if any. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within a tract, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. If the applicant is unable to comply with the pad elevation differential requirement, the City will consider and may approve alternatives that preserve community acceptance with the proposed development. ) CCCOND28444-14/R£SOCC28444-14 5 Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 May 20, 1997 26. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide a separate document, bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer or surveyor, that lists actual building pad elevations for the building lots. The document shall list the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and the difference between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. UTILITIES 27. All existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. High -voltage power lines which the power authority will not accept underground are exempt from this requirement. 28. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to construction of surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 29. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. If the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation of any final map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for any waived final map, the development or portions thereof may be subject to the provisions of. the Ordinance. If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the applicant shall be responsible for all street and traffic improvements required herein. 30. The following minimum street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Madison Street (Primary Arterial) - 86 feet curb to curb plus sidewalks and median.. The applicant shall secure 50% of the cost to design and construct the west half of the street from the currently -improved section at Airport Boulevard to the most easterly southeast corner of the Specific Plan. B. PRIVATE STREETS AND CUL DE SACS CCCOND28444-14/RESOCC284" 14 6 4' 071 Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 May 20, 1997 1) Residential - 36 feet wide if double loaded (builds on both sides), 32 feet if single loaded 2) Collector (>_300 homes or 3,000 vpd) - 40 feet wide 3) Cul de sac curb radius - 45' Main entry streets and interior circulation routes, bus turnouts, acceleration/deceleration lanes, and/or other features contained in the approved construction plans may warrant additional street widths or other measures as determined by the City Engineer. 31. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings and devices, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and mailbox clusters approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 32. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond development boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street width transitions, or other incidental work which will ensure that newly constructed improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and conform with the city's standards and practices. 33. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be prepared by registered professional engineer(s) authorized to practice in the State of California. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted Standard and Supplemental Drawings and Specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. Plans for Madison Street shall be prepared by the applicant or others when the improvements are warranted as determined by the City. 34. Street right-of-way geometry for cul de sacs, knuckle turns and comer cut -backs shall conform with Riverside* County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 35. All streets proposed to serve residential or other access driveways shall be designed and constructed with vertical curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods to convey nuisance water without ponding in yard or drive areas and to facilitate street sweeping. 36. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design for a 20-year life and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including site and building construction traffic). The minimum pavement sections shall be as follows: Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. CCCOND28444-14/RESOCC28444-14 7 4 4 072 • Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 May 20, 1997 Collector 4.0"/5.00" Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00" Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00" Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50" The listed structural sections are minimums, not defaults. Street pavement sections shall be designed using Caltrans design procedures with site -specific data for soil strength and traffic volumes. The applicant shall submit current (no more than two years old) mix designs for base materials, Portland cement concrete and asphalt concrete, including complete mix design lab results, for review and approval by the City. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (no more than six months old at the time proposed for construction) aggregate gradation test results to confirm that the mix design gradations can be reproduced in production of the base or paving material. Construction operations shall not be scheduled until mix designs are approved. 37. Prior to occupancy of homes or other permanent buildings within the development, the applicant shall install all street and sidewalk improvements, traffic control devices and street name signs along access routes to those buildings. If on -site streets are initially constructed with only a portion of the full thickness of pavement, the applicant shall complete the pavement when directed by the City but in any case prior to final inspections of any of the final ten percent of homes within the tract. LANDSCAPING 38. Perimeter walls and required landscaping for the entire perimeter to be enclosed shall be constructed prior to final inspection and occupancy of any homes within the tract unless a phasing plan or construction schedule is approved by the City Engineer. 39. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the perimeter setback areas or lots along the following streets: A. Madison Street from the north boundary of this tract to the most easterly southeast corner of the Specific Plan. The improvements may be secured for installation when street improvements are constructed. CCCOND28444-14/RESOCC28444-14 8 4 5r v1 ®73 Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 May 20, 1997 40. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and landscape setback areas shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Landscape and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The plans are not approved for construction until they have been approved and signed by the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. 41. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way. 42. 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 five -feet of curbs along public streets. 43. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, common basins and park areas shall be designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor -mounted equipment. 44. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. PUBLIC SERVICES 45. The applicant shall provide transit amenities as required by Sunline Transit and or the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 46. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 47. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing not included in the City's permit inspection program but which are required by the City to provide evidence that materials and their placement comply with plans and specifications. CCCOND28444-14/RESOCC28444-14 9 V 4JU 074 Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 May 20, 1997 48. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have their agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 49. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of , the drawings shall have the words Record Drawings, ,As -Built or As -Constructed clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the plan computer files previously submitted to the City to reflect the as -constructed condition. MAINTENANCE 50. The applicant shall make- provisions for continuous maintenance of drainage, landscaping and on -site street improvements. The applicant shall maintain off -site public improvements until final acceptance of improvements by the City Council. 51. The applicant shall provide an executive summary maintenance booklet for streets, landscaping and related improvements, perimeter walls, drainage facilities, or any other improvements to be maintained by an HOA. The booklet should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist the HOA in planning for routine and long term maintenance. FEES AND DEPOSITS 52. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. FIRE DEPARTMENT 53. Schedule A fire protection approved Super fire hydrants (T X 4" X 2.5" X 2.5") will be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330-feet apart in any direction with any portion of any frontage more than 165-feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow will be 1,000 G.P.M. for a two-hour duration at 20 PSI. 54. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant/developer will furnish one blueline copy of the water system. plans to the Fire Department for review and approval. Plans will conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system will CCCOND28"4-14/Usocc28"4-14 10 t �{ L♦L 1 075 Resolution 97- Tentative Tract Map 28444 May 20, 1997 meet the fire flow requirements. Plans will be signed and approved by the registered civil engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "1 certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 55. The required water system including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. MISCELLANEOUS 56. The provisions of Specific Plan 83-002 (PGA West Specific Plan), including sideyard setbacks, shall be met prior to issuance of building permits. 57. All agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking purposes. 58. 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. CCCOND28444-14/RESOCC284" 14 11 A .. q J ATTACHMENTS 4 .; 077 ATTACH �1T 1 Planning Commission Meeting April 22. 1997 44. Commissioner Seaton stated that in her opinion the d oper had addressed the issue of security for the model homes; the C ission needs to have additional information regarding the pools; t wo proposed lots on the island is an issue and perhaps the Commissi hould listen to the HOA; and there still needs to be information provi on the golf cart access. 45. ' Commissioner Newkirk stated h o believed most of the issues had been addressed. His greatest conc was. the cul-de-sac. He too believes the construction of the two ho on the island is a big mistake and it should be a park that would enhanc a entire area Commissioner Woodard suggested 1 the island become a p with a pool and the pool to be constructed at the end of the tract becom ouse. Commissioner Newkirk agreed. jam dgmliwwl 46. Commission yler stated it would be impossible for the Commission to impose th onditions of the original Specific Plan on this developer. He concu with the concerns raised about the two houses on the island. How r, he too would not want a home with a community pool next to it. A erous issues still remained to be resolved, he would move to continue project. 47 There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Woodard to continue Tentative Tract 28410 to May 13, 1997. -Unanimously approved. Chairman Abels recessed the meeting at 9:00 p.m.. and reconvened at 9:08 p.m. Co 'oner Seaton informed the Chairman that she was ill and left the meeting during the recess. B. TATIVE TRACT 28444; a request of KSL Land Corporation for approval to subdivide 3 8.3 6 acres into 69 single family and other common or street lots on the south side of the southern terminus of PGA Boulevard and west of Madison Street 40 abutting the Tom Weiskopf and Jack Nicklaus Tournament Golf Courses. 1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department: PC4-22-97 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. 3. There being no questions of staff, Mr. Chevis Hosea, representing KSL Land Corporation, reviewed the conditions. He stated they were unclear regarding Condition #30, but after discussions with Senior Engineer Steve Speer, they 4.G0 07 Planning Commission Meeting April 22. 1997 understood they are only required to construct the west side of Airport Boulevard. He then questioned their participation in a Thoroughfare Improvement Program to be implemented by the City, but as there are now other development to share in the costs, they have no objections. Regarding the issue of school fees, he stated they had inherited the agreement that was negotiated between DSUSD and CVUSD from Landmark Land Company and it is their position that they are participating on based on those agreements. 4. Commissioner Tyler asked for clarification as to the main and emergency entrances into the tract. Mr. Hosea explained the entrances and stated the design is tentative until they decide whether or not there would be another entrance into the project. 5. Commissioner Butler asked about their fees for the construction of the Madison Street Primary Arterial. Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained that the reason for the requirement is that the Specific Plan requires the development of the off -site streets. As they are in the final stages of development for the specific plan area, that is why this is being required. This condition is only identifying the ultimate width of the street. The second half of the condition requires the applicant to secure 50% of the cost to construct the west side. of the street. 6. Commissioner Woodard asked if someone is entering the Nicklaus gate was there a traffic issue. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated there is a possibility for a fender bender. Mr. Hosea stated that from a traffic engineering point, the safest point to make the entrance is at the slowest point. Additional measures such as speed bumps can be used. This is consistent with every gate entrance at PGA West and it has not been an issue to date. Staff stated that in the tight situations at slow speed there are conflicting problems that will occur. 7. Mr. Arto Nuutinen, attorney for CVUSD, stated his concern was to obtain what the City's policy is regarding these conditions. At some point a determination will need to be made. 8. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the public hearing. PC4-22-97 12 4� 0 Planning Commission Meeting April 22. 1997 9. Commissioner Tyler reviewed the Conditions of Approval for each of the tracts and asked staff to clarify why they were not the same. It was his opinion that the language should be consistent for each tract. Condition 42, should have a sentence regarding when the tract would expire and an additional condition added regarding drainage requirements. 10. Commissioner Newkirk stated he believed the issues raised in a letter by Mr. D. R. Lutz should be addressed. Staff stated they were reviewing the issue. 5. There being no further comment or questions, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97- 028 approving Tentative Tract 28444, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as amended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Newkirk, Tyler, Woodard, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Gardner and Seaton. ABSTAIN: None. Commissioner Gardner rejoined the Commission. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. HIGHWAY I I I GUIDELINES; a request of the City for review and approval of landscaping, entry signs, bus stops, and building design guidelines. 1. Chairman Abels asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Mr. Ray Lopez, consultant for the project, gave a presentation on the proposed guidelines. He stated the guidelines would go to the City Council for final approval. 3. Commissioner Woodard asked if the landscaping plans were designed to blend with each of the adjoining cities. Mr. Lopez stated that there had been no conscious effort to do this. Council direction was to give La Quinta its own identity through signs, landscaping, bus stops, etc., to create a theme. Commissioner Woodard questioned why the bicycle path along Highway I I I PC4-22-97 13 46 .ow t .� -w ZZ , L "War m - ATTACHME1-0 N�3'" 0 TRACT NO. 284 4 4 sem AVENUE VK24TY MAP NOT TO SCALE 464 082 41 ------------- eas Hill ! �• Go CM a I ' CO 2 M r �� .. ! • Ww ----------------- QQ •'''(:' '' 1 _ ��.• �+� Jill. - w Sir !• •�. �� ► •'1.i. fib Il n V �1 '� L� 1 ' �;, • •' • I II [ . �� c all ui 1 L ��yy • got 4 omi 1 1 r • N 11 11 i �. 3NNN� 1[�■`[ 9 ••,,! ; i!� •alb i • ;• i �Ell•logo ii It , n ALEXANDER BOWIE* JOAN C. ARNESON WILLIAM J. KADI WENDY H. WILES* PATRICIA B. GIANNONE ROBERT E. ANSLOW ARTO J. NUUTINEN DANIEL J. PAYNE rr MARLON SIMON ISABELLA ALASTI DEBORAH R. G. CESARIO LYSA M. SALTZMAN IRW , ATTACHMENT -"" BOWIE, ARNESON, KADI, WILES & GUNNONE A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAV -A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 4920 CAMPUS DRIVE NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 (714)851.1300 3403 TENTH STREET, SUITE 715 RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (909) 222.2750 March 21, 1997 City of La Quinta Department of Community Development P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Attn: Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner (200) 4234054 FAX (714) $51-2014 RESPOND TO NEWPORT BEACH REP. OUR ME 3033.18 ,i i r j J MAC; 2 4 1997 DU1 CITY OF C TA PLANNNIG DE?z �TMENT Re: CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28444 ("TTM 28444") AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 28489 (REVISED) ("TPM 28489") FOR THE PGA WEST PROJECT Dear Mr. Trousdell: This letter is submitted on behalf of the Coachella Valley Unified School District ("District") with regard to .TTM 28444 and TPM 28489 -as referenced above. It is our present understanding that TTM 28444 relates to development of 69 single family lots and TPM 28489 relates to the development of 4 single family lots for the PGA West project within the City of La Quinta ("City") Specific Plan 83-002 ("Specific Plan 83-002"). Presuming this understanding is accurate, the City may not grant any approvals with respect to TTM 28444 and TPM 28489 due to the fact that the owner and applicant, KSL Land Corporation ("Applicant"), has not taken the required steps toward providing full mitigation of impacts on the District's school facilities ("School Facilities"). The District requests that the City take note of the following information regarding the long-standing requirement that the impacts of residential and/or commercial and industrial development within Specific Plan 83-002 on the District's School Facilities be fully mitigated BAKW&G/DRC/36265 4�� BOWIE, ARNESON, KADI, WILES & GIANNONE Greg Trousdell March 21, 1997 Page 2 prior to City approvals. Specifically, Condition 39 of the Conditions to Approval of Specific Plan 83-002 ("Condition 39") explicitly provides that: [Applicants] shall pay a per -unit school development fee as determined by the Desert Sands and Coachella Valley Unified School Districts in accordance with the school mitigation agreements as approved by the La Quinta City Council and in effect at the time of the issuance of building permits." 1 At present, the District has not entered into any School Facilities mitigation agreement ("Mitigation Agreement") with the Applicant or any other party in connection with TTM 28444 and TPM 28489 and hence TTM 28444 and TPM 28489 cannot be approved by the City pursuant to the clear language of Condition 39 requiring a Mitigation Agreement. Accordingly, the District hereby protests any approvals in connection with TTM 28444 and TPM 28489 that are not proceeded by and/or made contingent upon the Applicant meeting its obligation to fully mitigate the impacts of its development within Specific Plan 83-002 on the School Facilities and enter into a Mitigation Agreement with the District. The District also reserves it right to augment the information and position contained herein in the future. If you have any comments or questions regarding the contents of this correspondence or the District's position, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, BOWIE, ARNESON, KADI, WILES & GIANNONE y Deborah R.G. Cesario DRC cc: Elsa F. Esqueda Alex Bowie BAKW&G/DRC/36265 4 f ' i ATTACHMENT BOWIE, ARNESON, KADI, WILES & GUNNONE A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW ALEXANDER BOWIE" JOAN C. ARNESON WILLIAM J. KADI WENDY H. WILES' PATRICIA B. GIANNONE ROBERT E. ANSLOW ARTO J. NUUTINEN DANIEL J. PAYNE MARLON SIMON ISABELLA ALASTI DEBORAH R. G. CESARIO LYSA M. SALTZMAN •A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION VIA MESSENGER 4920 CAMPUS DRIVE NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 (714)851.1300 3403 TENTH STREET, SUITE 715 RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 (909) 222.2750 April 25, 1997 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 (800) 423-6054 FAX (714) 851.2014 RESPOND TO NEVPORT BEACH REF. OUR FUE 3033 Re: Appeal of Findings or Conditions - April 17, 1997 Planning Director Approval - Tentative Parcel Map #28489 - KSL / April 22, 1997 Planning Commission Approval - Tentative Tract Map #28444 - KSL Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: This letter is forwarded on behalf of our client, the Coachella Valley Unified School District ["District"J. Pursuant to the procedure' adopted by the City of La Quinta ["City"], the District hereby appeals the decision of the City's Planning Director on April 17, 1997, by which the application of KSL Land Corporation ["KSL"] for approval of Tentative Parcel Map # 28489 ["TPM 28489"1 for the PGA West Specific Plan 83-002 [the "Project"], was approved during hearing before the Planning Director. The District further appeals the April 22, 1997 approval by the City Planning Commission of KSL's application for Tentative Tract Map # 28444 for the Project ["TTM 28444"]. The appeals of TPM 28489 and TTM 28444, respectively, are each based upon the following reasons and supporting evidence: 'Title 13, City of La Quinta Subdivision Ordinance No. 13.12.130. In this regard please find enclosed two checks, each for $175.00, according to the City of La Quinta fee schedule, which are paid under protest according to the authority of Government Code Section 6103, on the basis that the Appellant, the Coachella Valley Unified School District, is a public school district and a public agency for purposes of the exemption provided in that statute. BAKW&G/AJN/37 t 27 46S BOWIE, ARNESON, KADI, WILES & GIANNONE Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council April 25, 1997 Page 2 1. During the Planning Director hearing on April 17, 1997, the Planning Director stated that the approval of TPM 28489 was inclusive of the condition of approval originally imposed on the Project relative to mitigation of the District's school facilities ["School Facilities"] impacts from implementation of the Project, specifically, Condition 39 of the Conditions to Approval of Specific Plan 83-002 [hereinafter, Condition 39"]. Condition 39 provides that: "[Applicants] shall pay a per -unit school development fee as determined by the Desert Sands and Coachella Valley Unified School Districts in accordance with the school mitigation agreements as approved by the La Quinta City Council and in effect at the time of the issuance of building permits." Representatives of the District were present at this hearing, and relied upon the information provided by the Planning Director, Ms. Christine Di Iorio. The Planning Director's statements on April 17, 1997, however, were not consistent with statements attributed to her a letter dated March 26, 1997 from the Planning Director to our firm, in which it is state that Condition 39 "is no longer a condition as it was amended in August of 1996." Nevertheless, at the April 17, 1997 hearing, the City's Planning Director specifically stated that it was her understanding and intention that Condition 39 was not rescinded, but would be made applicable to TPM 28489 and any other map entitlement relative to the Project. By contrast, however, shortly prior to the April 22, 1997 hearing before the City's Planning Commission relative to TTM 28444, the City again took the position that Condition 39 was rescinded by way of an amendment in August of 1996 by way of a telephone conversation between City Attorney Dawn Honeywell and Alexander Bowie of this firm. Therefore, the City's positions relative to the applicability of Condition 39 to the Project are demonstrably inconsistent, and obstruct the ability of the public and other responsible public service providers to follow the planning requirements of the City relative to residential development; 2. At present, the District has not entered into any School Facilities mitigation agreement ["Mitigation Agreement"] with the Applicant or any other party in connection with TPM 28489 or TTM 28444. TPM 28489 and TTM 28444 therefore cannot legally be approved by the City, pursuant to the unequivocal language of Condition 39 requiring a Mitigation Agreement. The City has been advised of this by correspondence from our firm dated March 21, 1997, which correspondence and all other testimony and BAKW&G/AJN/37127 469 1� • BOWIE, ARNESON, KAM, WILES & GIANNONE Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council April 25, 1997 Page 3 correspondence forwarded on behalf of the District is herein incorporated by this reference; 3. The record of proceedings, including, but not limited to, City Planning Commission Resolution No. 96-025 [regarding Amendment No. 3 to the Project], City Resolution Nos. 89-70 [approving Amendment No. 2 to the Project] and 96-67 [approving Amendment No. 3 to the Project], along with the City's August 6, 1996 Staff Report for the proposed approval of Amendment No. 3 to the Project [collectively, the "KSL Resolutions", or "Record"], is silent as to any specific school mitigation discussion. By contrast, the Record contains statements in the pertinent resolutions and staff reports that carry forward all of the previous conditions of Specific Plan 83-002. By not expressly amending the applicable condition of approval for the Project dealing with School Facilities, the language of -the KSL Resolutions by their own terms carried forward all prior specific plan requirements, including Condition 39; 4. The District must make its facilities planning decisions in light of the conditions of approval imposed by the City on residential development. In this regard the District is acting in reliance upon the City's imposition of Condition No. 39, for purposes of its facilities planning to serve the students from the Project. However, the District was never given any notice of any purported proposal to amend the Project by way of deletion of Condition 39; 5. The City has not provided for any alternative School Facilities mitigation, if Condition 39 is to have been deleted. The purported general condition of approval [No. 3], providing that the "Applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions [including the District]", which the applicant shall obtain "[p]rior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit." The District has already informed the City on several occasions that it will require an executed Mitigation Agreement with the Developer, pursuant to Condition 39, and the interjection of this Condition at best lends itself to several competing interpretations [including an interpretation that an executed Mitigation Agreement is the District's requirement], and at worst merely calls on the applicant to comply with the Statutory School Fees Legislation, which is not a Project -specific mitigation measure as required by CEQA; 6. During the April 22, 1997 public testimony relative to TTM 28444, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell advanced the proposition that Condition 39 was imposed prior to the enactment of the Statutory School Fees Legislation [Gov. Code Sections 53080 et seq. BAKW&G/A!N/37127 4 `7 0 BOWIE, ARNESON, KADI, WILES & GIANNONE Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council April 25, 1997 Page 4 and 65995 et seq.], purportedly because such a condition was "meaningful at the time the Project was approved", but that superseding enactment of the Statutory School Fees Legislation eliminated the necessity for Condition 39, notwithstanding that.nothing in the Record discloses any such self-executing termination of Condition 39 on the basis of subsequently enacted legislation. In response to this statement, testimony offered on behalf of the District noted the necessity for the City's advisory and legislative bodies to offer an explanation for elimination of such a mitigation measure, especially since the staff report for TTM 28444 justified no additional environmental review on the basis that "an environmental impact report was prepared for the `PGA West Specific Plan ' and Certified by the City Council on May 1, 1984 [and a] subsequent EIR was prepared and adopted as part of Amendment No. 1 in 1988." The City Attorney then advised that the findings and text of the August 1996 amendment represented the intent of the City Council to rescind Condition 39, which is not supported by the text of the pertinent KSL Resolutions. It defies logic how the City can on one hand rely on a 1984 EIR, amended in 1988, which included Condition 39, to justify no further environmental analysis, and then suggest that an interpretation of the text of the Record in 1996 purportedly eliminated or rescinded Condition 39, for purposes of an action taken in April of 1997. It is telling that the City did not indicate in the staff report for TTM 28444 that the sequence of events in approving the environmental impact report for the PGA West Specific Plan included a deletion of a condition, which was in effect at the time the EIR certified, occurring in 1996. The City cannot claim that the conditions of approval and mitigation measures dating back to 1984 and 1988 allow it not to undertake another environmental analysis, but simultaneously argue that an action in 1996 rescinded one of the environmental mitigation measures, and not include such purported 1996 modification of the 1984 EIR in the relevant staff report. The City's actions amount to nothing more than a post hoc rationalization favoring the proposition that the City apparently desires to eliminate the developer applicants' responsibility to mitigate the adverse school facilities impacts of the Project to a level of insignificance. 8. The premise that Condition 39 was deleted because it was the intention of the City Council to do so by approval of Amendment No. 3 to the Project in August of 1996 is flawed, because City Council Resolution 96-67 [approving Amendment No. 3 to the Project] contains no language expressly supporting such proposition. The law applicable to municipal ordinances requires an ordinance of a city to be construed in accordance with legislative intention disclosed by its terms, which intention cannot be shown by any extraneous evidence, even if the testimony or opinion of an individual member or BAKW&G/&TN/37127 4 ", 1 # • • R � BOWIE, ARNESON, KADI; WILES & GIANNONE Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council 5 April 25, 1997 Page 5 members of City Council contradicts the express terms of the ordinance. [See, e.g. Re t Application of Volpi, 53 Cal.App. 229,199 P. 1090.1 Furthermore, the statements made on behalf of the City by the City Attorney at the April 22, 1997 hearing do not withstand scrutiny: For example, on one hand the City Attorney suggested that language in City Council Resolution 96-67 supports rescission of Condition 39. However, when taken to task on this statement on the basis that such resolution in actuality contains no such specific justification, the response was to the effect that the City does not have to justify its actions to the public if they are consistent with the City's own internal policies. This statement invites another level of inquiry, in that I] where is the City policy that Statutory School Fees are sufficient in the absence of a Mitigation Agreement, 21 why is such policy not consistently applied, 3] how can the City claim to have a policy regarding school mitigation limited solely to statutory school fees, if the County of Riverside's policies [e.g. County of Riverside Resolution No. 94- 183] applicable to adjacent unincorporated areas are in contravention of such policy, and 4] how is a purported policy favoring Statutory School Fees compatible with the proposition [stated by the City Attorney on April 22, 1997] claiming that the intent of the City is merely to allow the applicants to work out a solution with the District without further involvement by the City?; 9. There is nothing in the Record to support the notion that the City made any environmental analysis in compliance with CEQA to consider that the deletion of Condition 39, which was enacted to mitigate identified school facilities impacts to the School District, would result in unmitigated environmental impacts in the absence of any alternatives to mitigate such impacts. 14 Cal. Code of Regs. Section 15062 requires the City to determine whether or not a project, for which an earlier environmental analysis was performed, requires additional environmental review, and provide notice of such determination to the public. It is without question that the deletion of a previously adopted mitigation measure such as Condition 39 constitutes such a change; 10. The KSL Resolutions, to the extent they are given an application not supported by their own terms, are void or voidable as to any purported repeal of Condition 39 from their inception [i.e. "void ab initio "]. See e.g. Lesher Communications v. City of Walnut Creek (1990) 52 Ca1.3d 531, 544. We have reviewed the Record relative to the Project, including its amendments, and observe that there is nothing in the Record which unequivocally informs the public of the City's BAKW&G/AIN/37127 • BOWIE, ARNESON, KADI, WILES & GIANNONE Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council April 25, 1997 Page 6 purported action to rescind Condition 39. Accordingly, the District hereby protests and appeals any approvals in connection with TTM 28444 and TPM 28489 that are not proceeded by and/or made contingent upon the Applicant meeting its obligation to fully mitigate the impacts of its development within the Project on the School Facilities of the District and enter into a Mitigation Agreement with the District. Any statement by City staff to the contrary is not supported by law. Therefore, any approval by the City Council, City Planning Commission, or City Planl< 1 9 Director of the Project or any related map approvals, including, but not limited to TPM 28489, TTM 28444, and TTM on the basis of an undisclosed, post -hoc rationalization of an intent to repeal Condition 39 without any consideration of an alternative mitigation measure to mitigate the significant adverse School Facilities Impacts from the Project in substantial complian state law requirements including CEQA is an abuse of discretion. Please be advised that Government Code Section 6103 states in pertinent part, "Neither the state nor any county, city; district, or other political subdivision... shall pay or deposit any fee for the filing of any document or paper, for the performance of any official service... Therefore, this appeal by the District is exempt from any fee which might otherwise be applicable under the City's appeal policy and fee schedule, notwithstanding the enclosure of the fees to process the joint appeals set forth herein, which are paid under protest. Very truly yours, BOWIE, ARNESON, KADI, WILES & G ONE A _ I cc: Dr. Colleen Gaynes Ms. Elsa Esqueda Mr. Alexander Bowie Ms. Dawn Honeywell BAKW&G/AJN/37127 `2 J rw f ATTACHMEN'j� RECREATION CORPORATION April 2, 1997 Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner City of La Quinta Department of Community Development P. O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 -APR C1 i •, CITY CIF Lr� PLAN N SNIT Re: Coachella Valley Unified School District ("CVUSD") mitigation agreement regarding Specific Plan 83-002 Dear Greg: This letter is in response to the letter you received from the CVUSD dated March 21, 1997, a copy of which was forwarded to me. KSL is the successor in interest to certain real property which lies within the CVUSD, and is ,the beneficiary of certain entitlements and agreements related to the PGA West development, including, but not limited to, Specific Plan 83-002 and the Agreement for Financing Public School Facilities within the CVUSD dated December 29, 1986 (the "CVUSD Agreement," a copy of which is enclosed for your reference). It is our understanding that Tentative Tract Map 28444 and Tentative Parcel Map 28429 (the "Maps") are located within the boundaries defined in Specific .Plan 83-002 and are therefore, mitigated by the CVUSD Agreement. It is also our understanding that the CVUSD Agreement was entered into to satisfy Condition 39 (as referenced in the CVUSD's March 21 letter) . The CVUSD Agreement specifically provides for a per -unit fee (as opposed to the "per square foot" fee the CVUSD is attempting to charge); the fee was determined and set by the CVUSD; the fee is reflected in a school mitigation agreement, i.e. the CVUSD Agreement; and the CVUSD Agreement is still in full force and effect. Therefore, the CVUSD is only permitted to charge school fees of $628.00 per residential unit. Further, KSL believes that the CVUSD Agreement clearly defines the residential lots impacted by mitigation as being within Specific Plan 83-002. It our contention the CVUSD has erred in its determination that the above referenced Maps have not been mitigated through an agreement and we respectfully submit that the City of La Quints must proceed with the review and approvals of the pending Maps. Sincerely, Larry ichliter Executive Vice President LEL/bl 474 prop.pgaw.cvusd.112 America's Leader In Distinctive Lifestyle and Recreation c 092 56-140 PGA Boulevard • La Quinta, California 92253 - (619) 564-1088 - Fax (619) 564-4880 •rrw/%LILIC\IT G PA� < OOK Q 4Wipa W pm �� < O(AY�Di pN to O K �r 3 «pt O ~ �'� m �oWaj VUptJ cad ShS' m �alrv=a zaa m� W w �a y1 Irn < F 4 r Q^ W w U < z w 7Gp1 W) ZCi F� G a ZZ< tip< bIo57 1^ A 2' ¢ yr Uj ,"' V!' 086 n' ('� } T�- �1 a4.oz a V 4 g <O m 44770� of w 5 r{{ Oc�o w r2 O o a< $ ;o _ ma 44J1z w oo WW � O w t �� <6 � y 4—�O W N U W4 <I U z ,.. c� m �i Np TFZ< FJm"� Hu m aFm �6.< I� W =mo o b Z4�j' z �OU 'L Om W ~ OWC NyNj m� KpUw�eO 7i� �vj <x Inw +�J 60 O x iN N I aF_cri� �Zw �� a� �W ezcSYz 1'U& __....-_._.._..... UU a."_', ..,.I,eU. -.......C�.".Oiy._r_.,.'' . 1f1� VCU1-C roFW4,}Ui4_..imaa<�<WwccGJ�277ol<Z<°J•~�O<w n' OoaJ�r z��y�S�Wr<wVrNQw`lz�<3n0 d�Y IWc�<v�U) Wm4�4�Umjj_S(wO�-.Ng�moaWUUNw Mao ' N�'�mWme5"g1 i• wmw, Vmo wzE25cno aWpN'g,W .<OU ar" r8 Nrr. O <UQ ¢ WW112 t�F<Sm� 60O 10 x &F '"iW_aZ_p U mo¢2- �o ma�qWwvQp�geJiW wS my W< a < � U <cJm o VVq3�0oZ rr�ir+; `�•mo;N�_ Jt Z< 11! w r m p Zln� �t'�•Q wmNa m < W O pp }t£ 4 w w m $ }Wz w = J= O N W p Q O SdIV� zjaWw (Odl R # r,/� uN_ZZi * r pW�j� ooV r0 SJR H /yc O V O * < V) J J Z W W Z J N IY Ll w�U li Lul O M Z OS 3 U2<# a R b aq �� i rm<� _z, �wm LLJH ram/ 1$gz�o J;{8 �Y N_`I\�u ��w� V V L6 YJ�QaO (A7am ¢ 3 OW<7 o d'd�aza d �Zo wW mwrwo �- NF-• C7 k' ,n x �yVF N .r 4 z vNi o Y w N aPl Z �< wln H3011 * �...</�e' �o wUomwN mUr tal Z 1��yy `"Inpv06< az '�j�Jl °a ,, 39" + � mVaU-.1 waw NJQ►-O �w`z� o:Emj<a w0 �<mcU.�d 20}`In • WJt�� N `'�' �N=a`bJ' �oc6�Qo J EBw zo a ZZz nYy" ��mv = L) o=w <LLd 2U 2< aZQaW=r. -ZQzj ? RO22OFN-W1�-, Ny�a �Ne=F2a Z o 2¢F< \ zx=7SjulOT44W�dpQQn�a Io^O awwwNvvrQwW OY - z4p Z-aOFVo55 QpZ O U 0 =U Vol Q¢ = r 2 3< O m N m H W O F N kpU �l��►(% 1' �LLo.YGltl,�1D,,Naa<qKJ`Z. O�QC�O_7]11 mCZ9 F¢- NwUr�.W's�!-'.frn"z� Fwm(�n� W�m>,�, �(\� . \ J- xyi"w4W C Xwa�Ji dW <��4xk<<.'N�Na>JO MX4r1 rZ� H QwYJ�.�m z iF TrQzZ X Nx WVJ o-<aQOU x r � z < 2 O a v p < mW Wp.rUpm_N3JwwoIQon mWNV�0_ Ll mWQw3W�Znzom 3< <,is <<Wo / '6 _ >uj < N sF VzMW<z>J ui 2J o H N <� gZm r<-� .� Z �� wa ��w wmi�`'� -+Y< ¢ ni <� wmo �^�+�}{{Z.� O ^ W�_ V`-S<as I >z W �Q NV <JWJ� U y yJ ~ 'N iVL m<S�Y \ m� Z V W mN4�6 < y� ��ZZ-W F �_CJO ` V;/1 aDy� ¢zWm zVS 44� } w7 Wa N� r S�Fa=v F < = of T S Q Ji 4 �z7 N N Fx-�1� O V O w< V _Uln Qr O C> U_ U2wiQ O O iJU U< Qq r yyY_FAZpp Ln tDd'u�i,lf� < r 7d' z rovi Z CWK- �<-(WA =OWWW§ 7dN cr S< O z z�wv x �Sa� c� iYzpl-In = mrp4. a No No>ZcWi o ,zz,<Wloi,mN w�Z mio�"w Z=i wmo 1/1 wp>z�N G�p=J(7 OW �j�0 4m,o T ZNZ Ol�/y! �Ui ul q� ja Z ZNz�p Uw `I � = W O O W Om J V F a W <4 1- Q O 'ym�r U m yJp N vJ NO Z �FN 6mN < n 4� X d �zw a off.. Sow�Q v_ awamin < a w w��w„� w pLAK aY OOO[[[mO Z= W/n �00 V ��.� m w r 4j Z412 j o00 ;1 ��'� �wy �41 jNi1 X6VVU4NII1 Q<2'1N_2� J UZ2 ~0p0 U �y{. mOOr�4 < 6QW Or 0 �t�W a �Z NO >iaWo m�Vo O d a w wYm2 m Z .W � }2N } o o? o9 yU v+zw 2 a.y� g po �' x laryyymJJJ W L<-m <y� mo4>� Z a F ��Z W 3 W J 6 4J W r <V OK 4411 W V) �jW N OU� <pl�j OJJ Z m\ W JJJJQ m Q� ZWZ a-vZ, V wI4Q�r W aa z <wN0 3� fn Vl J m < O w 3�C?F O � � �aF-NOw J SZ�U< U 3 Yx J -x;=6 � < O aZUN w 6 pZ <OZ O J m i�Vtl} -< of J �- Wo O "aVm. ZrFU 4<1� rQ� Q2W OWg "o wcn2w< �0 m w ¢ zOf� i-� I<�ol6m 4 a <� C�4Jw aZp�o� U <JZ)W � O W !nY Z }V/zaaz N w14�1 o UyOVf V W VpZ w w IJ�-VO y rWW'�N;,qaa0 W�# O OW <�o 0 "V - Zlr Z < O"�CC2� 2 < O m 4 k'Q�> wz m z r 'ppc�W nz i < O !Jk i }a z M� ��v� U <wp wJ 'ZaN U wQiy�1F wN 3(C Z O Or�W O z 4 a" O Vf 4OJ {W Z4 1w �Kp �8' W m r 4C11 l� < J�J NO~WWJJ Q fj O a O Q"O� aw �J O J J WW K 4J Q W . YFO Y yN }i �g a41 4 ¢iV Z Wa V I ymW/ W W O W V O r Z W mW 3'` OF K V 1 1 n W V• 1 Q �1 (&J 2_ Zp V I Y a'z wy ZF<..� W WZ>�z wX J= Q F �Z 1x-N `j f/1wN W << 1y.11Ow� 4y11 ww�W�2 x z� 4Wx1 yxWvCL X Wyx1 Ir m �� JJ O <8 Z�oaw o O w3;dR 3 3Q�, pN �� 3 34 W K �' 3-i� Y Y m Z of U Ot�ri7i Jna NZ 4 J 093 13 3 Id 18 00's, moxm AAC,01.0 N NOS i aym 0AI8 IWOdW I V US'SW) AX,01.0 N 1,b9•W2) A,09,01.0 N t WTS "3L'8 `STI 'L8-C8/8Sl v, ('00-sel)A, K,01.0 N o 11-18C12 'ON '81 83d HSM3 12 N91103S d3M300 A -4 �qWl 178 "JI I dj LLI 04 a re ts,4 �k A LIJ to W, > LIM -0� N L\l C) w I Lo a. pn u 0 C� 0 L4 CL, cw a) CL CY) 1 !6 - . i� g 00FAiff A-4 z tn co Q c 0 ag so I i C14 10 0 0 LJ C14 I CO A,�� 04 C-4 K) I C, 04 Cl X7 W W PI) V) V) ;t N CL 0 LAJ 0) pe) z C', C) C114 dz s ;5 04 ru V, .4 It N LL) n- w En co to \ V )-lb du ro, t 4tL1 4(-0 w -- /o/0 UC 04 < VIM c) > cF D, Z a) D - - - CY) o L u z d) Q!s M (n w u. z o In 7 a CO aj tf) < 0 Lurn) In NVa C;) L(n) W 17) to 04 LL, P9 u -Lo < "-N Ln EN 1:\l —1 0 0 Z- C) C� < ct, o I - ---- Psi CC A WE 8 1!3 (D oo CD I Lr) In fu-5 Wo Rl p n- U Cl c-, k LL -to ICA Cn M-c - E- Ca to o o up U-1 CD -jig U ,, hR C) e X. 1. < M CL CaL. SN" JO SISVse.O, Pr 9 3, t-5 A —y re Q Cd cci ('90 (n 3i sue_ w A f A E'll -)w -61, V a 0 m 0 r' M r C 094 aP 6 Lp \ 7:1 0 R \ L I Ln SQ W V) �)�� O O a IV 3 CD r _ LAJ W J p G1 �mm I I I 60 . T (��s �/� v�A y\ f Y <4SS7• 9 ►G, 2oa t� / �� rr a� .91 X 3•lS:nS Sl ,y� K 01 a aG �o (D a �� J N 2. pp / Jp. p' / !n y A (O �y // j\.�2 N 'a 02 V) • rn �� \\ ., �o Ld nd N \ V°-3I O M Z v-'G I F— I GG' Z m = w fX p O Z O a- W Y p Y I Z 3 Q `b✓ o y s y j� M <01:ocm0 (�jY "✓=I y a j at\ i N , 4 Lnz In d�Zzo N _ h• V) W O a N a o Z o-ju O Z 0 Z O� 7 j\,9E,zY.6 N ? J c� 3 m 4 m -1 ,SS '�\ h�4l F' V) a P Oli 7 Q n�� N Ivr g M Q N V O O r s _ � J A 1 � �Yc1 .b^�dr �. ,� ,,, 8 .ov r 5 0 3 1, e pva �� LN aOwO T3�,bL0[nNl1 < j i Q-� J!S Ll 1,5?is3mii�jp U LyZJU W J `.� L OaC NNNNI�(•I fV NI '~ ly O�DaM z aJ L 5 O JI m2� Vl _ w�� Fu ZFZmzZ� r� J POJ� -�� J ti �,�x _ mid V7 c;,n _� �- c x' zz• a Vim' Q J s�' mN�. `•'4 �NN�o {� P .G l'S .GYP Nm..N+'II'1 SR av'n+iu°�Kir� - at GIR N �f' o �wSrim�ma�ni .r�M� SSSIN $\ o ptiDp W O ��6y .r Gl u - r- ,rzls-- 3.rb,CQ. N d8'2L o mod- "t5i$RS'fvi �� o,/ I$ .�x�SN •l<pp bd' ' y Ln c_`�"�N~n: �� \ !•-e mod. y `"i�'`i / d °ady j— - �^�r'�re' i Qb �u8° 'gig vm �' c hoQ I� 1 SS �in :D— n; D,. / z a 3.20.�C.zN � � � ! �sQs -0 yy 0• N i :n:ln.•v+.°Imo•o-�� \9 p%vim � }a4 ioi D, �'iz� N1 '2K 38GCSn('N �\ r.nnozn 3,rr,►r.Cr tad-ava M11Jp,Colt lad QtlE Jr CHby �\' - dv y O MtZ,S4.9 N \ ` D ( ` en 1 mil I ; y� o G t � � � � � L_I ` 4e1 G O 1 IA, -1 LV 5 \1 1 �39 06.9bp cLi Snd1ND1N day i; 41 095 N 0 o C) cQ C) 0 � r,,l CO 11 Lai LAJ V) Ci: 0 LO -ee 0 f 0.0 0 3i LO CC) E X V) 11— cn z M 0 F5 0 00 U) 5 z 0 0 01 LO Is, PIZ 0 z. L) 2 cn H KZ 0 04 't co Is" cn to Atft/ co v to w Ma RI �-!; 'LO CZ LO W IAJ w > w 470 096 ri �o CID T J W a GsC v Z � J oaf o m F4 U �A O2Z CC) 3yi LY N N J ac • CL may, O O �ON CO W z N� o H a � C4 W O�0 J $$ O 4 Z J U hg ZO? D61Z N < Lj O m ZZ_' z Z m-A Sri W Ld � Mr Ld W a LJ LLJ n �0)a O 9 133HS�/ ,lr��.ct , 33S it a O J / N N / / v / o O / In % yL' C" o 4 It N /X? w C14 Go In w N 0 1p / -•o£ ry i u IN *7 4 q�73 097 a 06-%/ot 'S•S aid .(rz •N0 LOR91 '70.8 ''Jf .Y/E 'ai w 83NSM N01133S Y/t to _�. (,19'909z) AX,01.0 N - ,62'912 -� 6696►9Z) 11,OSALa N fr--► 64E,91.0 N --- - U*992 nAS,OI.O N 6UE24 - r SV3 ' 13381S NOSIadW 9 M OfA N 2 3dv�so, ,Yf co � I (.00'SBl) n,YE,01.0 N r j U r Z:r m'1121 1N3Y(3SY.3 3dV3SONVT AZ. .98'SS2 M,OS,O[.0 N o0'2Y 11. I N 1.9Z,669 N ' , y,�, -- 0 l=1 0 3,92 GY.681� �pp(, gJ 00.12C/� zg100 u N H '! L21 r 1 N n,YEWD N 3,92 0. .µ...•..:; 34 W� \ p\�\0 2TZ70..� _ CID ---i`' in 0 J ----------- to�^� -- — -- 1 1 &t S-Am 16f'0 -- --- — V 9! 1 1 y \ ^ 9 N �y 3,YI.OSf'9 _ 9t .tla p /r 00 Iti •aPr��g at 4r• N �` . ,YE'012 3,19,E0.0 N�Iayd�,/� x 11j1 /'N Zy _ N Oi LO pe) CL / 'f 3, ,E0.0 N I ?g/ 6, / tQ�,b,N M d6 by -NO ,Si � \ d O LJi. _3_EO� 'Al 8 d_ �, !1 •/� .v Nn O •6Y'191 N I mob! W '� < N O 3 I• >� o� M N w 3 zo.BE E IN I avn a W S YY.E N u C] J f= p)NN` _ y� ES'ISl MUM N I I YB'S9f p0,0E•9 N VS V) W Q Cj n d' OCL w N 00 I Fl. I ® V) aoNT-0 rn M I pp �00 SI 3, S, 0.0 N i0 ~w ^i ,O3xZ Z J 1 —1 gaoa LNl U 1n � % U n F- C" CA Z p E`O M i 3I y I 6S'49 3.ISE0.0 N �44 Or M NUJ g V U p O O 00'091 .fS, 0.0 N I a- I $ _ Ll o a Td � Oz _1 N A% O I^ N Imi OWN O,iN�N��O^.E Vi. U rrWT-7 7-�W � d I W I 1a1 (`i N I 3 soY 3,I.,Eo.oN Z W,2Otj tal 6S'6 �,ui� $ � W N 00%1 3,00AS.0 N V8 uv 6+1 m Q I aFl A- ' ?� = W Y z �� I� of N 1! d Ig I gel J < Nt 0M a & �r (RZR€JbICR� bib 000S1 ',OO,SE. f$' I Y'E .000E.YN Vbd1Y.YN ~ 4 NMNLc2e�1%M19Ft)KRn�'3R.^o�i�g:�`+}v sR el W 1 N In (0 U Mc�i o: ..a^^`��^, �s'iu�v^•iFi� ^ ItI� j N y t, sa¢` A nl f � � , R. d+' 1� . I U' •O y 6 N C 3zrer'crr"� a' r e� 'n li, Lq �d dOg P L2 IppD Zl'\j N - NMY 9 O -mom ^mo It in ci / N GF7 S .133HS /% a �./ 33S H H 2 f DRAWING NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER l of 11 DRAWING NUMBER rrluvJ. F31vil" DRAWING NUMBER Trwek 2AMk4+ z Q J z Q w C7 Z cc 0 CMD z r� u fix X �3 a mil Rig,�I�� it � ggy >� �0 x �� 15 � _ �� Ix, 11 �61 Itk g RN g t 6n <� a 'o fix 1�` 141 Ix w wo 1,QP� �9olo +� aaeE ; Wig lop f d Iq Is sg go I lxi a�NIX... I In R-J%wt Jilp _ AgIA 1i h 11111 1,2 P111 I 811 . I.S111 ; i I I NR x u a a s $ Nil I Ir >d >�� X $ til0t o e� gig g LL :a a�� net PV 15 Eli a� t1 � Uy . 4 0 o I neepy 9# " �RlSI A3S� -1 1 w ;. ,,III- Olki 1;1 _ if;111, , i f im, I'll, ICI a "11 if gi x1p fix <� -� .@WHIM, WE 41 gig Mee 0 a 00 0 1%5h Mb3b3M *hSS bb eshhhO OW mwix 11111 >r A 0 x lip 141 �� 1Id1111 12 < k 'rrSY ; HIM, m DRAWING �M�p FDRAWING NUMBER _ A ING NUMBER _ DRAWING NUMBER 2 �P'I Kp, P�virv� `fralat 2B4'f��ALAAo)G mx c�.aw nw wanmwamx . vxa... w"., m... «.w win m«ouriw ,«�««« mw .ea.«ww«orw Q b 1J— I 0 f.� z ('N'.IS.XP OA18 VOd z m LLJ m 5I Pit �il� E g �< swo ID AM f Ta o ^ S it b � ✓� I �:.:::. v. � •.:: ..: . ..... .... �o 1 (1 f J• v V DRAWING NUMBER 3 'P °I DR�NUMBER6.rAoJ F RAWING NUMBER nwt- 26� rit8l 'ON JOV"a NY-W ONIAYd Y YNVOU pnuvav O \ f g It 101 _ DRAWING NUMBER �DR-AMNG _ =0ZRAfNGDRAWING NUMBER V"9Z 'ON JOVHt NVIa ONWVd V rnyvw vlw.w •\ :Pk, 1 yrK�P \ .M\ ! ,' e 41 \ \\\ ' `�� v I mI S \ uu IL �qQl! DUI 00 at F i � � .l'1 '� • � 6 yWj p .* 1 Iu <° az u lolw I i, i . � � �e tcatwl i 6 �'3 � i"�.z ac•oc:ii �', �1 I � � It .�n'lol r.N'Ne I W 0; s Lj Nry 1 0 I %( W 'rc / C. S :`` r \ h B dH e'[�I' ie 0 : ; , w :u M 11.4Z eo-oi ec Iw ? l ;n .tz e0-u ec ler - . 0 a i t r o 0 •c a i )'; I ry I , f W oos>I moil A to 191 Ln if Zo k l 40 I fit 1 a a 'i �. J" 'n $�9 fpe��e I I tD MIX �1•,6br//f, I -5t '� : S Y i' IF Illy i � i ;>? f Via•/ a�, i �s ij �� ' r 0 0511 i 1 1 DRAWING NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER 2 °I DRAWING NUMBER _ DRAW NUMBER 1 DrnirwJc I I I ro'l.rro I1 I I � .selsr: I I • ( �I C / I � I `i fT(�F; '111q'U �1 LOYa LO OBI € a I , 56 ampNE. C7 ��ytl Q lul sz' > aL- rz Z < i IS I d o i 3 Oi i E if yl-7i n'�Ma ` I ;t , I f � I i % 1, N Y I 1 , e I ! II' � i WEER*� 1 ,d. M 013.M'1 rQR I 'F $. �+i1/i�'S �•�b ..W'Li 7L LO'Ya 1 ^ 1 1 \' �7L519nr4 �T i m •I � .. i� O Il, /E�,, i i E j I '6 f "'I •� I r , � "O W1 ruI 9 . [4 i 61 Y� *.j rut I �•1 �E .111 Cut r: 1 L IuD '1 F. Ifi9:I,1f.1.- '710'Ya 'o 11 ruR Eo �:b I T" ma IT&, !I I I Sg� C �� n -1 ruf B'ELI t►LM1m dY � g' jli II, � i £ EsyIt s�� W o3u'i ci I / tl 1 n I Q1 y� , 2 / vl+cz�J y�(��ax`grL�Ga� i� i /! �TND I I i l f I ) o., - as i 1 I u s,t, W 1 gas Val 10 8 DRAWING NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER -'� (�YjLi(i✓)POWL" TrlLat' 28'i'4-4 1 DrOLvt PI fri@Z 'ON 13YU NVId DNIAVd Y 3DVNvtla WxmvW n (01 rn x i 00 A s1 �Ifl is O W p - ..-.. 4-�r �/' ,C,t. �' �, e� yam`, .° 1ST •.: ♦ - ) �� ) `-f • ',//{/ %/ ti �l 'fY �-�1 1 I I Y � • � F' - - Won .S ZS-?i l r+yii t - - ml T+ 0 X a / 1 .VS OIt W-71 71 9Z'99 \ 1� / ,,�/ um1 01M \ / / u / l! i sr � VV r �) 4 Ib •I I ! r � �I � � � 1 1 I y In �\� ' 1 O"��L+�y, �i��yy^I pi5"� �_d �•r." a J�IW� \�;..-\ \\\ ua o"' 3pp� PP� $ ` f ca°•y eIn � a ° V 1 66E)96p ®060Ct99 0 I N, j.'W S W 5 IQ „ ,� ( ( .,, `,,.,f'� \S. \ \ y1`� •Ll fa \ ;,Oj,yy1� i \ b Ys blsk 1!3o y y j yyyyy y yy��yy yyn d i n } HOW, I �. I I -P I'� V ;�'� ,\ \ I `F \`•`\� )Oa ��` t\ I�',�` ,, `, ' ✓ W j � 4 pa�S c gg 1�ILL1'd WO. Lo 1 \ TM• \1'IY`+ In �'.• , 1 Gi 11, , \ 4 y0 LL I I W bg� u $y k 1 pR V 1�' L✓t\ 'll 00 L� 1M [I, u'ckL ', y II. I r ✓�0012 'Cr ' -W-71 ppqqII W-71 OZ'[Lf i KLNK l j '� Q Cp I IZ [Lr lY Pod f o N KtEn• 00'0 91W cl'V 36 104 DRAWING NUMBER ORAWINr' NUMBER _ pRNAANG NUMBER - GFiAWING NUMBER (�ilelirYg, PnvivYcj Trolr�t'`f RMiOD WI.O•,1W 11.M. GtNrN. 0.u, Hp.O Cpppq.ivlN InN[,f4 rUN�ItlarMtMld MtfYyUM. • APM 6:1 :I15[ 5 B7- 6�1BY Oil U � MKI ly� 11 97 ;1 Or :,_, rev C7 r do 2p 1� DI%AVd x dt}VnTnu unu. av �I CDI S 4 N at J C: sayk +E F rQ z b :� F O N .. $° U 3 O Y0.155 � F'r' 2� E � / `j • Vim' O _ & y t , yyyygg " `"� /: „ x �c. ,;?. a a� '., � .... ": .. % `✓tP � �� Sib r I' tb• yi 3 \ " I i / 1 � ✓ ey 11 i ' � � �/: g imp i QQS - — a r4• e � ' s g N bS• •c, 44 55 666 M I[9 � 33 a 5 819 LAm DRAWING NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER 3, HA" 6A o f 9 b AV, nnr�w°mcau�nu mxaum.. nRn �a.na.o.m.� .�.rxw»�+. _ w,. �..umnwn� wnn ten».. !rf 8 8 y 1r 8 i�-'dhf5 ppp pp©pp®®®O o ©o O o a 1 3 3 a 1 S No S I a H W 3 101 M \ram PD�PAMNG NUMBER 44y �.. R 3DVNVNO E)NWNJ � cOIWI o� CY a G .tl S U � � $ g o Q51 V ' bE �iR pp C �p O - Alli 3OSOi4G�G �a'+�.�iG�SO�GG�il ,a 1(a ts b - -- — z M o 3 z m- Ij ATTACHMENT 7 AMENDMENT #1 ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #2904 This permit amendment allows the roundabout bulb at the north end of Weiskopf Drive (centered on Station 10+30) as depicted on the "Grading, Drainage & Paving Plan for Tract 28444", to be constructed in phases. The first phase will leave the roundabout bulb as a cul-de-sac per the attached 8'/Z x 11 drawing of the Interim Improvement. The second phase, when the west leg of the roundabout is tied into the cul-de-sac, will be constructed by KSL, or its assignee, unless otherwise approved by the City Council. Prior to commencement of construction of the second phase, as a condition of permit issuance, KSL or it assignee, will revise Sheet 3 of 9 of the Grading, Drainage W Paving Plan for Tract 28444", to incorporate the curb elevation adjustments that were constructed in the interim first phase and pay $100 for the plan revision. It is further understood that no improvement bonds for Tract 28444 will be released by the City until all improvements required by the tract conditions of approval are constructed. KSL Concurrence KSL has reviewed the proposed phasing concept of the street improvements proposed by Innovative Communities as outlined in this Permit Amendment and concurs with the implementation concept described herein. KSL understands that a city staff level approval of this construction phasing concept in no way confers future rights to eiiminat7 a west leg of Weiskopt North. Elimination of the west leg of Weiskopt North must ce e e City„Council approval to be officially eliminated. KSL Concurrence Title: Amendment Requested By: I Amendm " , ). t,� 6 g 9 1��)/ Innovative Resort Communities Date of La T:\PWDEPT\STAFF\SPEER\MEMOS\990608a.wpd Date: Authorized N r p• •. 48551 �h �L _. •. .. ' 486.12 � • f �s UP � rc , � • s�. , iiiiiiiiiii,illillillIlljllllllllllllI �s.2� E 486.45 TC 4486.19 TC 85.95 E 486.54 1 Nt 10+30. �G G � `Loy \ � �"' 654 �c • � �h`°'co? [� i s 9 ZC col •�. 4�6 �� ZC �52 j9?.p9�C 6' q$6• SCALE 1" =20' G � ek�� 0 a, Aa • �. A BLVD�� • N �ITERMA PG. ENTRANCE � CO/VSUL TING O 493 M D ISMORSE scHuLTz DOKICH • 79-799 Old Avenue 52 (760) 771-4013FAX 77 � _4073 L. Ouinto. CA 92253 EMAIL mcisbquinto®mdsconsulting.net onn ow ao c®mmuniies June 811999 Steve Speer City of La Quinta Public Works Department Dear Steve; I am writing to you to request that the city allow us to bring the curb & gutter threw the intersection of Weiskopf North at Weiskopf. We own the property on Weiskopf at the turnaround, but we do not own Weiskopf North, KSL does. KSL plans on building Weiskopf North at a later date, at which time they will cut out the above -mentioned curb. By allowing us to install the extra curb we will be able to complete our turnaround and keep proper drainage as well as the fact that we will be using this area for the entrance for our models. (see attached drawing) Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, t'—:4 X. Michael D. Cusick Director of Operations Innovative Resort Communities 200 East Washington Ave. Suite 100 Escondido, CA. 92025 76on71-4252 _?C,lz, 9- �2.09 494 112 200 E. Washington Ave., Suite 100 9 Escondido, CA 92025 * Ph:(760) 839-8238 0 Fax: (760)839-82. ATTACHMENT 8 495 113 To: Mr Stan Sawa - City of La Quinta Page 1 of 1 2006-01-26 17:09:42 (GMT) 17604066156 From: Jim Betz FAX COVER SHEET TO Mr Stan Sawa - City of La Quinta COMPANY Planning commission FAXNUMBER 17607771233 FROM Jim Betz DATE 2006-01-26 17:12:47 GMT RE Zone Change to Pacel Map 32752 COVER MESSAGE Dear Mr. Sawa, This letter is in reference to Envir. Assess. Amendment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106 Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752. I have numberous objections to this application rezoning. When we purchased our home at 80520 Weiskopf, PGA West and the builder/seller of our home assured us that this land was designated as open space. I also object to this rezoning as the Weiskopf Golf Course the use of the course would severely change. I am a member of PGA West Golf Course and do not want the first tee and putting green to be relocated. It appears that there is limited Emergency Vehicle access for the three proposed homes. To solve this situation it appears that additional land would be required to solve this situation and thus alter the Weiskopf course even more. Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. The City of La Quinta has told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the golf course. The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and I am opposed to this change. Jim Betz, 80520 Weiskopf, La Quinta, CA 92253 760 777-8880 www.efax.com 496 114 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 922 Zone RE: Environmental Assessmen t 2005-550-,General Plan Amendment 2005-1061 32752 Change 2005-126, Speci fic Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel ap Dear Gentlemen: Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the It is our understanding thatP Mr. Map 32752. aforementioned Tentative We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. *The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. at part of this land is currently used as a catch basin **The City of La Quinta had told us th for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precede nt setting for other parcels of land. now considered open space and this is very alarming. homes. feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed **We question the feas tY are o osed to this *The use of the Weisp ko f Golf Course will be severely changed and we pp change. Thank you for your consideration. o. -, 6- - 4 ��' a —CD— r v+ s 03/23/2006 13:17 7607712113. J OR B DONDERO _ PAGE 02 Marcb. 21, 2006 Joseph & Barbara Dondero 56190 Jack Nicklaus Blvd. La Quanta, Ca 92253 760 771-2113 City of La Quinta, Planning Commission 79-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 FEE: flay Shaftr Proposed DevelopMent Dear Panning COMMissiOn Members: My name is Aarbara Dondero and I lave .at 56190 Jack Nicklaus Boulevard, La Quints, Caltforn, which is the #first house on the left as you enter the Nicklaus Gate at P.G.A. West. We purchased our home here in December of 2000. ,A, Compelling reasthat on n for our to usprebaeWASext Accordingly, I that tlae location of the properly was adjacentherefore, wee aid more far our home site then some believed it was a fully developed area; and, p of the other homes. It is truly a disappointment to think that the area could be rezoned after we invested so much in our home; since it was brought to our attention that we would never have to deal with further home encroachment. I am disheartened that we have been misrepresented by K.S..I.., the owner of the property n question. At no time have we or nearby homeowners been shown any kind of a � implied plied that additional homes would be located on this open area. Additionally, there exists enough traffic congestion with the cart path and the Nicklaus Gate. Adding another driveway hnmediately in front of the Nicklaus Gate exit will only further complicate the problem. Cm yi ng, this one step further the proposed development area has been enjoyed by golfers coming from the clubhouse to park and leave their carts upon joinmi g with their n could be tebeautiful kefl from us. putting green which is cun'cntiy very challenging would be downsiz o Should this proposal be approved, in just a matter of time other open area in picturesque P.G.A. West would experience problems as we are. This decision would be setting P cAcc- Accordingly we urge you to deny this request to rezone this proporty. We enjoy our neighborhood the way it exists and are happy to be living in La Quint". Barbara Dondero aas 117 Mr. Douglas R. Evans Community Development Director, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico, P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mr. Evans: LL WC 0 �v1AR 0 7 2006 CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT This letter is in support of the application of Mr. Ray Shaffer of PGA West to rezone three building lots on the Tom Weiskopf golf course to low density residential from the presently designated tourist/commercial. As a concerned resident of PGA West, I attended the February 23rd public hearing on the subject, held in the stadium clubhouse at PGA West, and heard both sides of the issue discussed. I support Mr. Shaffer's petition for the following reasons. • His plans to develop the properties represent a significant improvement, both aesthetically and physically, over their presently undeveloped and unattractive state. I often play golf on the Weiskopf course and have wondered why these lots were not built out, since their overview of the course is especially attractive. • In the interest of fairness, there would be no alteration or obstruction of the views of adjacent property owners. I confirmed this by personally visiting the site after the 23rd meeting, since some comments from attendees seemed to raise this as an objection. Looking south or west from the south property line of the closest house, the one immediately to the east, there was hardly any visibility of the lots in question. • Instead of being detrimental to their sight lines or subsequent values, neighbors property values would likely increase significantly as a result of the upscale housing Mr. Shaffer has planned for these lots. This was clearly pointed out several times during the meeting. • One property owner in attendance who is designing an estate house on the Peninsula Estates development directly to the South across the lake from Mr. Shaffer's property, strongly favored Mr. Shaffer's plan as a vast improvement over the vacant and unimproved appearance of the lots as they exist. • As was pointed out during the February 23"d presentation, Mr. Shaffer has the legal right to bring forward his development proposal. The fact that the property has not been developed before, or that adjacent owners may have incorrectly perceived the lots to be public space, should not deter fair consideration for Mr. Shaffer or any other legitimate owners of properties who wish to develop them in a manner compatible with the community. As a PGA West homeowner.since 1999, I believe that compatible low density housing on open lots will not only add value to adjacent homes, but will also lend continuity to these neighborhoods by closing conspicuous gaps which were clearly intended for development from the beginning. In this regard, I am confident that you and the commission, as city leaders, will take a balanced and objective view of this issue, looking beyond the narrow self interests of the vocal minority mischaracterizing the Shaffer proposal. On the other hand, large scale high density condominium projects such as the 2e 7 units proposed in lieu of the former hotel site, would not be compatible with h existing community, would diminish property values overall, and would be an unwanted drain on the nearby golf facilities, the surrounding infrastructure, and other club services. This project should be actively opposed by PGA West residents, while attractive projects like Mr. Shaffer's should be encouraged. Please add this letter to the public record of discussion and debate on this issue. S' rely, oe B. Garrett, 80126 Merion, PGA West, La Quinta, CA 92253, Phone 760 7718030 CC: Mr. Ray Shaffer CC: Mr. Forrest Haag 119 JOANNE & MYRON MINTZ 80-355 Weiskopf La Quinta, CA 92253 Phone: 760-771-0402 Fax: 760-771-11 . -- �-` R DesertMintz@aol.com .' �.- ;,� [E MAR 0 2 2006 0 March 1, 2006 Mr. Doug Evans Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta '78-495 Calle Tampico lea Quinta, CA 92253 CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Gentleman: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to his application for rezoning and the constant rescheduling of the hearings, some of which we know could not be avoided. We are very pleased that Mr. Tom Kirk as been appointed to the City Council and wish him well. As you know, the winter time is the time when most homeowners make reservations far in advance to various functions like the Philharmonic and the McCallum. It has been very hard on the homeowners to keep giving up their time and tickets only to be told that there is another hearing postponement. We also understand that researching the land in question is very difficult and time consuming. As we are one of the families that will be most affected by this possible rezoning, and as we have been continuously involved and responsible for keeping in touch with the other homeowners, we would be greatly appreciative if the next hearing on this matter could be rescheduled until the 11tn of April. This would give Mr. Shaffer and his staff adequate time to present their case and this would also give the Planning Commission adequate time to research the land. Hopefully, the meeting on April 11tn will finalize the matter, and no additional Planning Commission Meetings will be necessary. 100 Your consideration in the above request would certainly be appreciated by the 100 or more PGA WEST Homeowners that have sent in letters in opposition to the rezoning request. ' Having the Meeting postponed to March 28 would cause a hardship for us and many other PGA West homeowners. Thank You, J Joanne and Myron Mintz r�3 121 Mr. Tom Kirk E U Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta R 78-495 Calle Tampico FAR 2 ? 2006 La Ouinta, CA 92253 CITY OF LA QUINTA DEAmnELOPMMENT RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,6"y ndment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. inta had told us that art of this land is currently used as a catch basin **The City of La Qu p for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. �t4 i�nh � are �'l a � ►ti 12" Mr. Stan Sawa City of La Quinta Planning Commission 14 February, 2006 I wish to oppose the postponement of April 25, 2006 hearing regarding the possible building of homes on the Schaffer tract. I believe that many interested persons will not be present if the hearing is delayed until May or June. T ank you, seph . Mon n 79-730 Arnold Palmer Drive La Quinta CA 5 r� i..5 123 February 14, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 ICE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Gentleman: ft is our understanding -that Mr. flay D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous ob octions to this application for rezoning. The City of Le Quinta had told us the fund in question has always been perceived as open space. • The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. • Many existing home views will be obstructed. • Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. • We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the homes. • The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we OM Opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. 1 a 124 FEB-14-2006 10:49 AM MINTZ 7607711154 P.01 February 14, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quints 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quints, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 51 TgnWjNq FfrW 11 IR W791 Gentleman: It is our understanding that Mr. Rpy D, SfV fer 4 appf M for a MM kl to aforementigned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We Rave ttitmtow to this appbwn for rezoning. T� I.W � open space. • The City of La Quints had told us that part of this land is cun- w* used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. • Many exissbng home viewswill be obstructed. C49neiRe M192804 Will M VAUdbAl Wng 6 ocher parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. � W�qu�Ko�CI��Si�il�yofEm��V�h�saAlifd��l homes. • The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we as OprMW to this change. Thank you for your oonsiderft. b r� 125 ROBERT AND JANET HELLER 80558 HERMITAGE LA Q U I NTA, -CA 92253 FEBRUARY 14, 2006 Planning Commission City of La Quinta La Quinta, CA. B j 4 n06 ,r �Tvc�L;AQU NfPA ;OMMUN104 DEVELo PAE,N? i)FPARTMENT We have been residents of PGA West for six years and strongly recommend that the Planning Commission deny the request by Ray Shaffer to convert the open space land on the Weiskopf to single family lots. When KSL acquired this property through the Resolution Trust they have presented to the planning commission and the City Council multiple plans for the development of this property. Contained within those plans this area was deemed open space. If the planning commission approves Mr. Shaffer's request, then KSL or the current holder of open space land can request to convert open areas to additional building sites. This is not in the best interest of the residents who Live at PGA West as it increases the density of the area. Also, I am tired of going to Planning Commission meetings only to find out that Mr. Shafer continues to ask for postponement. It is obvious that his hidden agenda is to appear in front of the City Council when many of the homeowners have gone to their summer homes. R ert Heller Janet Heller 126 Pagel of 2 Subj: Re: Rezoning Date:' 2/13/2006 11:44:09 A.M. Pacific Standard Time From: Pp,, aq west To: JMMEM CC: drendinoOdc rr.com, bbfgb _ mx.net, Ppaawest Myron and Joanne, Unfortunately, I am unable to attend the meeting tomorrow night, as _ I am in New Jersey. As I have mentioned in the past, Danny and I are a. i totally opposed to any building being done on the area you mention (between the Nicklaus Gate and the Weiskopf Gate.) Barbara and Gabriel Bauer are opposed, as well. I act on their Q behalf when they are not in town, and they are in Austria now. They have asked me to voice an objection on their behalf. Please feel free to print out this email and bring it with you to town hall tomorrow. Thank, you. Priscilla and Dan Rendino 80390 VV+ iiskopf ---Original Message From: JMMEM To: bkfoord@earthlink.net; chitwood@dc.rr.com; Chsbrdly; Tsifferman; waynemoore@were-organized.net; stkcap@dc.rr.com; Deneandwillie; LQKnudsen@hotmail.com; dgbrill@earthlink.net; BrooksideSwanson; jerrymoloughney@dc.rr.com; h_harkness@hotmail.com; RGreen4680; NANCYPGAW; trbo@earthlink.net; GolfMom0011; Walt-Jan@dc.rr.com; joancheroti@hotmail.com; ad_madia@msn.com; jed@quest5.com; @ landersen@lagc.com; Anitaapshutter.com; bbfgb@gmx.net; jimbetz1 @msn.com; CLBLACK63; TBLUE1143; Bregman; budbrewer@budor.com; CONCBOB; Efinadvsr; rogeremerick@hotmail.com; emmo353; sdfitz@sympatico.ca; JohnF0213; kfoulkes@powercom.net; WPGreen@aim.com; barbarahelwig1 @msn.com; Nrherman; ixora@pacbell.net; RJat6470; Judy@cossette-investment.com; Justsadie444; kmk2650@yahoo.com; CHARKORN; Milcharlie@cs.com; jack32@ix.netcom.com; Whirlwnd; donnalefever@yahoo.com; marklefever@yahoo.com; JMuckel; Tsnovi; jamesold@sbcglobal.net; HomesBySPhillips; jlporter@adelphia.net; George. Porter@USI. Biz; drendino@dc.rr.com; Ppgawest; dggs999@msn.com; Scalpelafp; dsherva@optonline.net; UKTOLA; jimwisener@comcast.net Sent: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 2:24:43 PM Eastern Standard Time Subject: Rezoning Dear PGAWEST Home Owners, The saga goes on re the rezoning of the Property between the Nicholas Gate and Weiskopf. We spoke with Stan Sawa, Principal Planner for the City of La Quinta, this morning. Mr Ray Shaffer has hired an attorney and at tomorrow night's Planning Commission Meeting will be asking to postpone once again. In fact, he will be asking for this agenda item to be postponed until April 25. This is outrageous, as far as we are concerned. If the application for rezoning is not heard before the Planning Commission until the end of April it is more than likely it will not come before the City Council until the summer. We see this as a sneaky ploy to get this through the City when so many of us are not here. Monday, February 13, 2006 America Online: JMMEM 12� Page 2 of 2 According to Mr. Sawa, the Planning„Corrimission can deny Mr Shafer's request can modify it, or accept it. We will be there to ask that they either deny the request of at least modify it, so the issue of rezoning is heard on February 28, or no later than the March 14th Meeting. We know it's Valentine's Day, but PLEASE, if you can be at City Hall tomorrow night at 7PM to voice your oljjections to this postponement, or be there to support us when we make the request, it will send an important message. To date the City has received close to 100 letters opposing this rezoning. Its not too late to bring or fax a letter to City Hall or to us and we will take it with us tomorrow night. Please feel free to forward this a -mail to any of your friends and neighbors. Thank You, Joanne and Myron Mintz 80-355 Weiskopf 771-0402 motiday, F ebmary 13', 2006 America. Onfitie: JivitMEM j 1 128 FEB-12-2006 08:12 PM SWB ELBOW BRACE LTD. Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding tha Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative arcel Map 32752. i We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. 925 838 9266 P. 01 "The City of La Quinta ha , told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. "The City of La Quints ha told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin lbr the Golf Course. "Many existing home views will be obstructed. "Changing this zoning will The precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is ve alarming. "We question the feasibilitV of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf olf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. 2/12/2006 J�1 129 Feb-12-06 01:31P STOKE CAPITAL 7605648277 P.01 I � "7 d- Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa of La Quinta Planning Commission, City 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92203 Environmental Assessment 2005 Chan Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan Amendment 2005-1 ce,' RE: Ecific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Pa Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. he **T City Ci of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. "Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now 9 9 considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Goff Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. �4 K4�e�f ��CtYlo A6t 130 L(L J February 3, Mr. Tom Kirk FEEB 1 0 2006 Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta CITY OF LAQUINTA 7 8 -4 9 5 C all e Tampico COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment #5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D.-Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel. Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. - The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. - Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space. This is very alarming. - We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the three proposed homes. - The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the golf course. - The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. - Many existing home views will be obstructed. Thank you for your. consideration. SincerelyTW6 Charles R. Bradley Rita M. Bradley PGA West Residents and Members 81-555 Tiburon Drive La Quinta, CA 92253 513 131 MR. AND MRS. RICHARD H. FRYE 80-015 Merion La Quinta, CA, 92253 Telephone (760) 7712025 Fax (760) 7713725 February 4, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 FL.B - 9 2006 CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Re: Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment #5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Mr. Kirk and Mr. Sawa: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zoning change in the referenced Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We find the requested rezoning to be objectionable for the following reasons: 1. The parcel in question currently serves as open space and as a catch basin for the adjacent Tom Weiskopf golf course. The placement of houses on the parcel would severely damage the feeling of openness as one approaches the first tee from Jack Nicklaus Boulevard, and as one plays the Weiskopf eighteenth hole. 2. Homeowners on both Weiskopf and Nicklaus Boulevards will have their views of neighboring mountains obstructed or eliminated. 3. Building on this parcel would set a precedent that could lead to the loss of many other open spaces on and around the golf courses of our community. We oppose the rezoning and urge the Planning Commission to turn down Mr. Shaffer's application. Sincerely, 'chard H. Frye 'M m" 5,A� Marcia M. Frye 514 132 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta CG E G 1W [E D FEB - 9 2006 CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Re: Enviromental Assessment 2005-550 General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment #5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course Many existing home views will be obstructed. Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. We question feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you. William and Sandra Phillips 80495 Weiskopf La Quinta, CA 92253 W14 i 133 Feb 07 06 11:27a Larry and Carol Riggs 7605649797 p•1 LARRY MGGS 50720 WEISKOPF WAY LA QUINTA, CA. 92253 760-564-9797 February 7, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 .Amendment 45, Tentative Parcel -Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is my understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. I have numerous objections to this application for zoning. The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. The City of La Quinta. had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. Many existing home views will be obstructed. Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. Ltd 134 30 January 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta CA 92253 D FEB CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Re: Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan.Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Speck Plan 83-002 Amendment #5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application ,for rezoning. 1. The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. 2. The City of La Quinta told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Weiskopf Golf Course. 3. Many existing home views will be obstructed. 4. Changing of this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. 5. We question the feasibility of emergency vehicles being able to access the three proposed homes. 6. The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are adamantly opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, r� Walter and Marjorie Malishka 54-636 Southern Hills La Quinta CA 92253 135 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RFEG[HWE FEB - 7 2006 0 CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: k is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numIrous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. "The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Goff Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Goff Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. ✓ram % 5�7 ,� �� o� Z4 11S 136 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,Gene ral Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our. understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views'will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. �13 137 T•d OSSS-TLL-09L eOT:90 90 So qaA Thank you for your consideration. -"t •:ram .. '.. r� let bit llktsv . iv# Ui ~9� 01.0 138 z•d OSSS-ILL-09L eOT=80 90 60 qaj PEB-03-2006 10:20 AM DON.MANN 17607771116 P.01 Don Mann & Karylene Mann Fax Routing Sheet To: AM Date: - -a Number of pages including cover page,,,,, AAA'v'*inns l 4285 PEBBLE BEACH DR., STOCKTON CA 95219 (20LA 951-2009 OME QUINTA #sand PAX: 777-528 116 FAX (760) 177-4061 dew- Iba9-3 5ti1 139 Feb 03 06 10:25a Jeanie 760-564-6363 p.1 Charlie & Jeanie Reyes 54.301 Oak Hill La Quinta, CA 92253 Bus/Res: 760-564-5562 F= 760.5644363 Cell: 760-408 7721 E-mail: charIleandjeanie aWc.rr com Fax • Februay 3, 2006 • City of La Quinta Palnning Commission 760-777-1233 W-11";4a]11610 Mr. Tom Kirk and Mr. Stan Sawa Charlie Reyes Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Specific Plan 83---2, Amendment #5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 This Transmission contains 1 pages including this cover letter 2005-126, e Dear Gentlemen, It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. My wife and I would like to go on record as opposed to this application. We have numerous objections to this rezoning but uppermost is the severe change it will have on the golf course. Thank you for your consideration. *If you did not receive all pages or transmission was not legible, please call: 760-564-6562 Cell: 760-408-7721 140 Sent By: Carol Emmons Interiors; 760 564 1449; Feb-3-06 11:32; Page 1/1 f ebruary 2, 2006 Robert and Carol Emmons 80560 Weiskopf La Quinta, CA 92253 760-564-1.449 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta. 78-495Z, alle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE-: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-1 06, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning: 1. The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. 2. The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. a. Many existing home views will be obstructed. 4. Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. 5. We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. 6. The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly ypprs, Robert Emmons Carol Emmons 141 FEB-03-2006 10:20 AM DON.MANN 17607771116 P. 02 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quints 78-495 Calls Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,Generarl Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Genthmmn: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Sheffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. "The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. "The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. "Many existing home views will be obstructed. "Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the fessibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. "*The use of the Welskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change.' 'CO, - A/ ��e , k ��, �gao-�G� %yi�i.�--✓ :�-3-v6 l Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land. is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is. very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. '"The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. 0--X oz 7f ,,54/ `a 1-7 a�- �t Pae_� 9 �Z 3 143 rage 3 of 3 144 � Page 1/1 Sent By: ; r uiMfF -�pv�NSA,ca �22�3 qWA.,.d' zooI 0� Oro F,,j A It, z, 3%. S. 4.71 A I 760 771 9378; Feb-2-06 10:43PM; 1—t v ci + In r , I - 11 --,roo, col I�! s i' i�a �S�'CiS �S1S ,OAF w W 1 Sao 922 s�3 Feb 02 06 10:25p Alexander Korn MD 760 771 0275 February 3, 2006 Alexander Korn MD Charlene Korn 8o795 Weiskopf La Quinta, CA 92253 (760) 771L-0775 Mr. Tom IGrk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Via Facsimile 760-777-1233 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: 1t is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning_ **The C-Ohl of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes_ **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change_ Tha r your consideration. Alexander Kom Charlene Kom d, Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa F tB — 1 2006 Planning Commission, City of, La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico CITY OF LA QUINTA La Quinta, CA 92253 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General'Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752 and we are opposed to this change. Please note the following objections we have concerning this application for rezoning. 1) We were told by our real estate agent, upon purchasing our home, that the area mentioned would always be a green belt. The City of La Quinta had told homeowners in this area that the land in question has always been perceived as "open space". 2) The City of La Quinta had told homeowners that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. 3) Many existing home views will be obstructed and privacy will be jeopardized. The new homes will be looking directly into the backyards of some existing homes that now enjoy privacy. 4) Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. 5) We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. 6) The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. We purchased our homes "believing" we would be protected from further development at the proposed new home sight. We strongly urge you to deny the zone change that will impact existing homeowners in many negative ways. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, 147 January 26, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 FEGEOWE FEB - 1 2006 0 CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 bear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **The City of ,La .Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many- existing home views will be obstructed. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **As members of PGA West we pay high monthly dues to maintain our golf courses. This proposed change is a change for the negative with absolutely no benefit to us as, members. Thank.you for your consideration. Charles R. and Carol R. Reed 55-307 Winged Foot. ; La Quints, CA 92253 February 1, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Gentleman: it is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. • The City of La Quinta had, told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. • The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. • Many existing home views will be obstructed. • Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. • We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. • The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. V 1�t2- 149 Feb 01 06 09:30p IThe Blackburns 1-760-564-6925 p.1 January 28, 2006 Mr. 'Toni Kirk Mr -Stan Sawa Planning Commission, 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, Ca 92253 City of La Quinta Jim and Patricia Blackburn 54-652 Tanglewood La Quinta, CA 92253 760-564-7825 Fax: 760-564-6925 Re: Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005- 106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment #5, Tentative Parcell Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: We understand that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zoning change in the above mentioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We are concerned about this rezoning application. 1. According to the City of La Quinta., they have always perceived the land in question as open space. 2. The City of La Quinta has stated that a portion of this land serves as a catch basin for the golf course. 3. If this zoning is changed it will be precedent setting for other land parcels now considered open space. 4. It appears that it will be difficult for emergency vehicles to access the three proposed homes. 5. Weiskopf Golf'.Course access and use will be severely changed. We opposed this change. 6. Views of existing homes will be obstructed. Thank you for consideration of our comments. Sincerely, Jim and Patricia Blackburn pb\La Quinta\wei3kOPf rezoning 012006 342 150 FES-01-2006 12_54 PM MINTZ 7607711154 P.01 JoaKKz. awd M�rovv M%wt'z 80-355 Weiskopf La Quints, CA 92253 Phone Number 760-771-W2 Fax Number 760-771-1154 Email DesertlAintzCsoi.com FAX T"RANSMITTA4-1=0" "Ooro m 4G► Qk qW S Sam To: P10.00 gc Cp MMt 3 5 k oft -� Date Sent: Number of Pages: 4No Fax:17 7 w 12 3 S tto R� PGRwes; Oppos►niq VJ��s�v��' Zcn1e Cl'vR.��'. nnessage: 14 I�oQ� �ow►.�etx� v�c�sux� Mr. SI-r,�e�r' V�ska� ZoNe C1whT �3 August 25,2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 J,4N 3 1 2006 CITY OF LA ()UINTA COMMUpEPARTMEN PMEM RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. "The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. "The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. * * Many existing home views wi I I be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. "The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course wiI l be severely changed and ve are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. Jack and Georgia Morris 55-296 Rig Spring La Quinta CA 92253 --, J ?� Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 _6"WEE M-6UME JAN 3 1 2006 D CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUpEPAR DEVELOPMENT RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank u for your Consideration. Qi John Clay PGA Resident SS - o (0 o `+- J35 153 MARILYN & LLOYD GINSBERG . 55-142 Southern Hills. La Quints, CA 92253. Phone: 760-564-5313. Cell: 760-220-9855, FAX: 760-777-1539. E-mail* M2BR@aol.com Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 June 26, 2006 IEG' �uMC� JAN 3 1 2006 D CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Goff Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. r 7) %'; 154 JAN-31-2006 11:10 AM MINTZ 7607711154 P.02 Yahoo! Mail - bettycloisc@yahoo.com rr)A- - o&rl' 1 /tn't e- vPk - 5 � Soma- 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Pagc 2 of 3 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. "The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. "The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. "Many existing home views will be obstructed. Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. "We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. *"The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change, Thank you for your consideration. John & Betty White 54-378 Shoal Creek La Quinta,CA 92252 ItLl p.11us.190(j,171ai 1.yB11oo.Con1/ym/ShOwl.ctler?box,111box& Msgld=3043 _ 1095393_ 159_ 2... 1 /26/2006 J ?7 155 JAN-31-2006 11:09 AM MINTZ 7607711154 P.01 joawm a" Mdrow M%wtz 80-355 Welskopf La Quints, CA 92253 Phone Number 760-771-0402 Fax Number 760-771-1154 Email DesertMintz@aol.©om FAX TRANSMITTA(- FORM To: Date Sent: ^Number of Papas: �Z. 21 A %4 O ry Fax 11 rl j • l 2 33 Massage: 5 ee leAke r-fi(arn .J S., a y-1 -1 �-rE. 156 MICHAEL HERMAN @PGA West 80-690 Weiskopf Way La Quinta, CA, 92253 January 20, 20Q6 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa of La Quinta Planning Commission, City 78-495 Calle Tampico 5 �DJAN 3 0 2006 CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT La Quinta, CA 922 General Plan Amendment 2005-'106, • Environmental Assessment 2005-550 002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel RE: Specific Plan 83 Zone Change 2005-126, Sp Map �2752 Dear Gentlemen: that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in It is our understandi Tentative Parcel Map 32752. the aforementioned objections to this application for rezoning. We have numerous o � s been **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has alway perceived as open space- that art of this land is currently used as a **The City of La Quinta had told us P catch basin for the Golf Course. Many existing ** in home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other pa considered op en space and this is very alarming. Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 **We question the feasibility of Emer 9 proposed homes. Golf Course will be severely changed and we are **The use of the Weiskopf opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, 15T JAN-29-2006 20:25 THE BLACKBURN GROUP RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. "The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. "Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and, this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. 1 K, 4 . G�r e e Y.", 0" Ct 0 TOTAL P.01 FROM : SEGAL DESART PHONE NO. : 760 771 9108 Jan. 27 2006 07:30PM P1 Mr, Tam Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle 'Tampico La Quintal CA.92253 (Via Fax) Re: Environmental Assessment 2005-550. General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-12V Specific Plan 83. 002 Amendment #5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752. Dear Sirs: As residents and members of PGAWest, we are opposed to the above application for rezoning. Unfortunately, we are not able to attend the Commission meeting on February 14, 20069 so wish to express our objection to this proposal - which will negatively impact our community in many ways - via this letter, Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Marvin A Stefanie Segal 80-789 Spanish Bay La Quintal CA. 92253 marvsegalQmsn.com JAN-27-2006 10:25 AM MINTZ 7607711154 P.02 Page 2 of 2 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. "The City of La Quints had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. "The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. —Many existing home views will be obstructed. "*Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. *"We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes - "The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. o E�� JAN2 7 ZOb6 n�j �DEPA 1/23/2006 JAB 160 JAN-27-2006 10:25 AM MINTZ 7607711154 P.01 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 January 24, 2006 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-1069 Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752 and we are opposed to this change. Please note the following objections we have concerning this application foir rezoning. 1) We were told by our real estate agent, upon purchasing our home, that the area mentioned would always be a green belt. The City of La Quinta had told homeowners in this area that the land in question has always been perceived as "open space". 2) The City of La Quinta had told homeowners that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. 3) Many existing ham views will be obstructed and privacy will be jeopardized. The new homes will be looking directly into the backyards of some existing homes that now enjoy privacy. 4) Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. 5) We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. 6) The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. We purchased our homes "believing' we would be protected from further development at the proposed new home sight. We strongly urge you to deny the zone change that will impact existing homeowners in many negative ways. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Lloy nde. 80395 Weiskopf La Quinta, Ca. 92253 JAN2720 543 161 4�7 72q,4, 1-)77-12-3-3 Dr. & Mrs. Phillip J. Goldstein 80546 Hermitage La Quinta, CA 92253 760-771-3991 January 27, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission ity of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 D F C E � VEE JAN 2 7 ?off Di COMW� EPAI Y 1 pMENT Re: Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment #5, Tentative parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. After attending the Planning Commission Meeting, on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 our concerns are growing and we have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. We also think that the Fairways HOA board should have objections as well, if they are truly representing the HOME OWNERS! 1. The City of La Quinta had told us that the land in question has always been perceived as "OPEN SPACE". 2. We were also told by the City of La Quinta that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Weiskopf Golf Course. 3. Many existing home views will be obstructed. 4. This zoning change will be "PRECEDENT SETTING" for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming to all home owners and members of PGA West. 5. We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicle ability to access the 3 proposed homes, which may result in an increase in the fire insurance for the entire HOA. 44 162 6. The look and use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. As a resident of the Weiskopf Golf Course and member of PGA West, we thank you for your consideration. 4cerel',y, 4oldstein Sharon E. Gold tein 515 163 JOAN SOMPER. & SHERWYN TUR.BOW 57-161 MEDINAH • LA QUINTA, CA 92253 January 26, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk _ Mr: Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quints' 78•-495 Cal le Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 200 5-5 50, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change' .-2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 ' Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone changein the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. , **The City of La Quinta had told us that part"of this land is currently used -as.a. catch basin for the Golf Course. r "*Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. • **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be sevirely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your prompt consideration of this potentially devastating change. PHONE 760 564 0850 • FAX 760 564 0860 46 164 �'d 0990 b99 091L SJU9W}s9nu1 lE}1 e8V:60 90 9Z uef To: Mr. Tom Kirk - City of La Quinta Page 1 of 1 2006-01-26 17:06:50 (GMT) 17604066156 From: Jim Betz FAX COVER SHEET TO Mr. Tom Kirk —City of La Quinta COMPANY Planning Commission FAXNUMBER 17607771233 FROM Jim Betz DATE 2006-01-26 17:09:07 GMT RE Envior Asses. 2005-550 COVER MESSAGE Dear Mr. Kirk, This letter is in reference to Envir. Assess. Amendment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106 Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752. I have numberous objections to this application rezoning. When we purchased our home at 80520 Weiskopf, PGA West and the builder/seller of our home assured us that this land was designated as open space. I also object to this rezoning as the Weiskopf Golf Course the use of the course would severely change. I am a member of PGA West Golf Course and do not want the first tee and putting green to be relocated. It appears that there is limited Emergency Vehicle access for the three proposed homes. To solve this situation it appears that additional land would be required to solve this situation and thus alter the Weiskopf course even more. Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. The City of La Quinta has told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the golf course. The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and I am opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideraton. Jim Betz, 80520 Weiskopf, La Quina, CA 92253 760 777-8880 www.efax.com r J - s3 7 54-901 {NVERNE88 LA QUINTA, CA 9ZZ53 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr, Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Cane Tampico La Quinta, CA 922-53 January 26, 2006 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying fior a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City. of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. * City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you fior your consideration. Carol and Ron Nolte l i d1f / f PHONE AND FAX (760) 664-ZZ67 E—MAIL". COrol.ron@verizon.net r. 166 JAN 25,2006 13:35 7605645649 Page 1 3 L b 4 V/A �ep' qlT- I OV 4Y 7 5 za;(O rP Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 D) E C Ft-V E JAN 2 5 2006 COMMU ITY 6EV ENT D ARTM N _ RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,Genera I Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen; It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752, We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. "The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. 'The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming, "*The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change, Thank you for your consideration. �ogz� 49 167. Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 City of La Quinta [ECROVIE WJAN 2 5 2006 0 CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-1061 Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. 1. The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. 2. The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. 3. Many existing home views will be obstructed. 4. Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. 5. We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. 6. The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. ames C. Wisener 80-920 Weiskopf La Quinta, Ca. 92253 00 • YAN-24-2006 04:22 PM MINTZ 7607711154 P.02 Page 1 of 1 Subj: "City Hall Meetingr Date: 1/23/2006 7:14:56 P.M. Pacific Standard Time From: jt,ldtlta-rnsc.com To: dewed intzc-QUP—m To Whom It May Concern - We are totally opposed to the subject zoning change. The consequence of allowing three single family homes to be built on a portion of the Weiskopf golf course can only lead to additional zone change requests. The integrii� and prestige of the PGA West community is certainly challenged if areas previously dedicated to open space are now turned into another building area. Like most others who live in PGA West, the foci that the community does enjoy open area - areas that were presented as permanent to buyers - added to the desirability of the area. It would be a severe abuse to the land if this proposed project is allowed to go forward. Previous commitments preclude our attending the meeting. Sincerely, Wilson & Judy i=ieldhouse 50205 Jack Nick" Le Quint*, Ca. 92253 (750) 771-37e5 JUDY COSSETTE 7607711983 p.1 Yage L of L RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: it is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer 'is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be Obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. R[E Gr,%-� E d- W IE JAN 23 2006 0 1122/2006 CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT f-� . 170 Page 1 of 1 Stan Sawa From: Jim 4 Kim [kimjames.cox@verizon.net] Sent: Monday, January,23, 2006 8:41 AM To: tkirk@la-quinta.org Cc: Stan Sawa Subject: Zone Change 2005-126 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 ' Gentlemen: 1 It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. James W Cox & Kimberley L Cox James W & Kimberley L Cox 55-914 Brae Burn La Quinta, CA 171 1 /23/2006 SAN-24-2006 04:21 PM MINTZ 7607711154 P.01 f;(y4 : AM .hE STA I NLESS PGA WES" Jmiumy 2212006 pHOHE NO. : 760 771 97% rf r. & MnL Duane POulkea So-sm Welskupf LaQuinta, CA 92253 iulr. Torn Kirk Siam Sawa pisming Comnissim City of LaQuinta 78-495 Wit Tor UQWn% CA, 92253 Sari. 23 20% 09; 22M P1 • nwirot�mentd1.4s9essmc�nt 2005-5501 GCstoral Plan A,mendmelk% 2005-106) Zone R�. Chop 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment #5, Tentative Parcel Map3275 Gentlemen, i, k 1, understendiAR tbat At. 11A D. Shtx fer is app1Y ng for a zoae change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We bought our property in L,aQuinta in 2001 and it vas our understanding that the land in question has always been perceived by the Cite of L.aQuintn as open space and that it is currently used as a catch basics for the golf course. We believe that changing this zoning wiU be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered opm space and we woould definitely be opposed to that happift. We would also be opposed to the way that the use of the Welskopf Golf course would be changed. We would also pc$tlon the access of emergency vehicles to the three proposed brass on this parcel as well as the obstruction Ofviews of existing homes acar of Adiwent to this Paul, Fo r the me oned reasons, we would bops that y'ou would reject his zonlus change. thank ou for your consideration. j &"een Foulkes 172 JAN-24-2006 04:09 PM SHEAFER 760 771 4712 P.01 January 24, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 PAX: 760 777- 1233 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005- � 106, Zone Change 2005 12b, Spec ific Plan 83-002 Amendment #52 Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Schaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. • The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. • The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. • Many existing home views will be obstructed. • Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. • ,We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the three proposed homes. The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. 'hank you for your consideration. k fast5 0 Ta c JJ5 173 01/24/2006 09:43 FAX 212 683 9784 MAIL BOXES ETC1227 Q001 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, 78-495 .Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 City of La Quinta January 23, 2006 RE. Envi ronmental Assessment' 2005-550,Genergi Plan Amendment 200 five 106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-001 Amendment # 5, en Pad 6el Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The city of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. "The Cityof La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. ** for other parcels of land now Changing this zoning will be precedent setting considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be. severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. a6 174 Jan 24 06 01:04p William Madia 7607719790 FA Planning Commission, City of La Quint 78--495 Calle Tampico La Quints, CA 92253 RE: 'Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005- 06, Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel p Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone cha aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been space. ''The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used for the Golf Course. "Many existing home views will be obstructed. "Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land open space and this is very alarming. "We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 *The use of the Weiskopf Goff Course will be severely changed and we change. Thank you for your consideration. 8o5��' Al" 241�� in the a catch cons to this 51 "' th 4,12 01/24/2006 13:43 7607712113 I January 24, 2006 J OR B DONDERO PAGE 01 • - -- - ---+s�.r,� .a�a.,u�a�• . nr��_ `��aisw.�+ar-ram Mr. Tom Kirk f Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005- 106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment #5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Schaffer is applying for a zone. change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. • The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. • The City of La Quints had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch, basin for the Golf Course. • Many existing home views will be obstructed. 11 • Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. • We question the --feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the three proposed homes. • The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. JJo 1.76 p.I tabs, &%Ji.F- Jan 24 06 02:24p MSN Hotmail - Message Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr.. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. *The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. 'Many existing home views will be obstructed. "Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. 4 �` ';�� / , .►arc '1 r- + "' ��t. !.I •� C—,ti�.••r^ .. . ! � • `. ! '+-.I 911H '! D Inbox Get tiTe latest updates frown. 215'e r i iv:5m HomeI ;f t�isN 14ctmaii I search I Shopping I money ( people & Chat ��Jf •. c; 2006 Microsoft TERMS OF USE Advertise TRU5Te Approved Privacy Statement GetNeV,44ise Anti-Spa http://by 105fd.bay 105.hotmail.msn.com/egi-bin/getmsg?msg=l 3AB6965-1 ODA-4CB8-A... 1 /2i)i0Q1 177 FROM : FAX NO. : Jan. 24 2006 02:47PM P1 January 24, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sanwa .Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quints, CA 92253 FAX: - 760 777-1233 RE: Environmental Assessment~ 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005- 1 106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment #5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Schaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. • The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. • The City of La Quints had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. • Many existing home views will be obstructed. • Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. • We question -the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the three proposed homes. • The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. 178 Harlan & Kathleen Harkness 81040 Legends Way La Quinta, CA '92253 January 24, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk / Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 pQ JAN 22006 CITY OF LA OUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Harlan Harkness Kathleen Harkn i C� Date / i a C. D �O ul 179 J 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 rR EC'EIV iqN �9m Ii 24 i COMMUNITY DENTA �T DEPAR i RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quints had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changingthis zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. FROM : John&MaxineDykstra PHONE NO. : 760 771 3402 JAN. 24 2006 03:10PM P1 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr, Stan Sawa planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Cabe Tampico La Quints, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone 2 Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 3 Dear Grentlen=: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752, We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as gpen space. **Thc City of La Quints had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. * * Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. �\A As, Pa o 6:7 John M. Dykstra 55- 161 Shoal Creek r LaQui.nta, CA 92253 181 FROM John&MaxineDykstra PHONE NO. : 760 771 3402 JAN. 24 2006 03:10PM P2 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning CoMMISSion, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quints, CA, 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005- i 06, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We bave numerous objections to this application for rezoning. `*The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that 'part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Chwwiing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. * *We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. 7 / /tat/ Marne M. Dykstra 55-161 Shoal Creek. LaQuinta, CA 92253 182 Jan 24 06 03:16p Brian & Kathy Foord January 23, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 760-564-5412 p.1 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is ou' understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. i Brian & Kathy Foord 80-970 Spanish Bay LaQuinta CA 92253 183 s FROM :SA FAX M0. :7607710355 Mr, Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tam iico La Quinta, CA 92253 Jan. 24 2006 04:15PM P1 -/-60 - %%%-/,;Z 3 3 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-5509General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2006-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change -in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. "The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. "Many existing home views will be obstructed. '"Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. ""We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. "The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. d, f LG 7 71- O 184 LA t� Jan 23 OG 05:55p CARL BONGIRNO 760-564-6217 p.1 f7 1)1 "" %2 33 Page 1 of l I Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amend Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tenta Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. "The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has a space. "The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is curren for the Golf Course. "Many existing home views will be obstructed. "Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels - open space and this is very alarming. ""V1le question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to acce; it 2005-106, Zone Parcel Map 32752 change in the been perceived as open used as a catch basin of land now considered the 3 proposed homes. "The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed nd we are opposed to this change. - t I Thank you for your consideration. mailhtml :mid://0000003 8/ s 3 I. .185 1 /23/20W, 7 Jan 23 06 04:29p edwin novascone 760-771-0725 p.1 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment , Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is my understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in theaforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. The land in question has always beenGolf Course.ved as I am against en any amend entichange that wouldace and partof it is currently used as a catch basin for the Weiskopf9 change the contour of the golf course and the resulting reduction in the value of my house on Weiskopf Way. Thank you for considering myobjection to Mr. Shaffer's planned development. 6 2-3 oG Edwin H. Novascone 80-655 Weiskopf Way La Quinta, CA. 760-771-0112 186 FROM ; FAX NO. :17605646002 Jan. 23 2006 11:05PM P1 Page I of 1 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quints 78-495 Calle Tarn&O La Quints, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. The City of La Quints had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space, "The City of Ls Quints had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. "Many existing home views will be obstructed. "Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. "We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. "The use of the Welskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. r Daniel Rendino 80390 Weiskopf Le Quinta, CA 92253 JG 187 Mnttrls�c� Tannarct '>Z 7llll� • FROM FAX NO. :17605646002 Jan. 23 2006 11:03P11 P1 Page 1 of 1 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Saws Planning Commission, City of Le Quints 78-496 Calle Tampico Le Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2006-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. "The Cii ! of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. "*The City of La Quinta had told'us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. "Many existing home views will be obstructed. "Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. "The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. Barbara Sauer 80370 Weiskopf La Quinta, CA 92253 N/rnttrios� Tonnorsr '71 ")AA! .....� FRS ; FAX NO. :17605646002. Jan. 23 2006 11:01PM P1 Page 1 of 1 77 7 1;� 33 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission Clty of La Quints 78-495 Celle Tampico La Quints, CA =53 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005.550,General Plan Amendment 20W106, zone Change '2005-126, . Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. *'"The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. `The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. "Many existing home views will be obstructed. "Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. —We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. "The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. Z, zg Priscilla Rendino 80390 Weiskopf La Quinta, CA 92253 189 Mnnrlani Tanners, '12 ')AAA . Jan 23 06 0e:17p Donna 760-777-4692 p.2 January 21, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment #5, Tentative Parcel Plan Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen, We purchased our retirement home here at PGA West four years ago. We are full time residents here at PGA West. We picked this area for the Golf Courses and all the beauty and open space that surrounds us here at PGA West. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. We were told that this is an open space and changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed. Members. now have access to a beautiful Putting Green and also the space to park our private Golf Carts as we join up with other Members to play the Weiskopf Course. We are opposed to this change, we feel that this would be a huge lost to our Members. Many of the existing home views will be obstructed and the lovely open feeling that surrounds this area would be lost forever. Thank you for your consideration. Donna. and Gary Swanson 80648 Bellerive La Quinta, CA 92253 190 Jan 23 06 06:12p CRRL HONGIRNO rl `I 7- /v? .37 760-564-6217 p.1 I Page 1 of 1 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Iwo-xg /> RE: Environmental Assessment 2 005-550, General Plan Amend ent 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tenta ive Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta.had told us the land in question has a space. *"The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is curl for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. "Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parc open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to ac change in the been perceived as open used as a catch basin of land now considered the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed nd we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. mai1htm1:mid://0000003 8/ 11 JAr 191 Jan 23 06 08:17p Donna 760-777-4692 p.1 Gary and Donna Swanson 80648 Bellerive La Quinta, CA 92253 7774691 FAX TRANSMITTAL I TO: City of. La Quinta Planning Commission FAX # 760 777 1233 ATTN: Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550 General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126 Letter dated 1/21/06 attached with regards concerns of subject matter. 57" fJ 19 2 56110 Pebble Beach La Quinta, Ca 92253 January 22, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City 'of La Qinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmentalessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone -Change 2D05-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # ,5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **We understand someone from The City of La Quinta said the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **We understand someone from The City of La Quinta said that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. y ob a d Judy Albright 75 l93 & p�' � U U � `"'J v �j Z� Gl��cd N �✓d /'✓ FYI .... Weiskopf Golf Course Zoning Change and Plan to Build 3 Single Family Y On Jan 24th there will be a meeting at La Quinta City Hall, 78-495 Calle Tampico at 7:OOPM, to continue to hear a request by Ray Shaffer, a developer, to change the zoning of a portion of the Weiskopf Golf Course. The plan is to acquire'2.3 + acres from KSL and to build 3 homes on 3 single-family lots. The areas of the proposed building sites are located between Weiskopf and Jack Nicklaus streets and involves the specific area adjacent to the Weiskopf Putting Green (which will be severely altered) and Water Retention Basin or Storm Drain Site next to 80355 Weiskopf. Currently there are no view single family homes looking down into the Weiskopf Golf Course which is precisely what Mr. Shaffer wishes to accomplish with the building of his 3 single-family homes. Thus severely compromising the existing vistas. Mr. Shaffer, as of the 27th of December 2005, Planning Commission Meeting, had not made an application to the Fire Department and this is of serious concern. Mr. Shaffer's representative, Mr. Haag, claims the enormous Storm Drain Site would be slightly rerouted and is to fall between 2 lots. According to another statement of Mr. Haag, this site is to be moved east, these are two conflicting statements and thus it is very unclear where this storm drain will be and what the effects on the Golf Course and surrounding homes will be. Mr. Shaffer's representative, Mr. Haag, also stated that if the cart path were rerouted, as it must be to accommodate the 3 homes, it could be a 9 foot climb up to the first tee. Planning Commissioner Daniels stated that property owners in the area have always perceived this area as open space. KSL Corporation has other open space areas at PGA West that are currently not developed, and these too will be coming forward due to the value of the land. If we allow the rezoning of this portion of the Weiskopf Golf Course it can be precedent setting for rezoning of other areas throughout PGA West. The General Plan of the City of La Quinta controls the underlying use of land and its development. On December 27, 2005 Community Development Director, Doug Evans stated, "...that this entire area has been an open space portion of PGA West. It has not been proposed for development prior to this application. The area has always been referred to as open space. Property owners have relied upon what was shown to them. From a public purpose there is no need to develop this site. From a policy standpoint, ...it does not comply with the General Plan." We strongly believe that the _ g y e proposed development of 3 single-family homes on the � Weiskopf Golf Course will vastly disturb the serenity of those who live in the area as well as those playing the course. We ask for your support in addressing the City of La Quinta and the Planning Commission to keep the area as Open Space. If you cannot attend this W meeting in person, your concerns may be put in writing and dropped off at City Hall, or ( Z } given to us to read at the Planning Commission Meeting. J ` 194 Aax JAN 2 3 4q 5 7 j95 - JAN-22-2006 12:32A FROM:ALLAN BREGMAN 17607771644 TO:7771233 P.1/1 ALLAN B REG MAN BREGMAN@AOI.. COM VIA FAX January 2 L. 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92263 760-777-1544- FAX 760-777-1644 80860 WEISKOPF LA QUINTA, CA 92253-5689 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. "The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. "The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. "Many existing home views will be obstructed. "Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. "We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. "The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration, You truly, Ilan r gman JAN 2 3 2006 CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 5743 196 FROM : RPRCHE STRINLESS PCIA WEST PHONE NO. : 760 771 9706 Jan. 22 2006 06:40PM P1 Mr. & Mrs. Duane Foulkes 80-555 Weiskopf LaQuinta, CA 92253 Janumy 22, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa planning Commission, City of LaQuinta 78-495 Calle Tampico LaQuinta, CA 92253 Re: Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific plan 83-002 Amendment #5, Tentative parcel Map 32752 Gentlemen, It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We bought our property in LaQuinta in 2001 and it was our understanding that the land in question has always been perceived by the City of LaQuinta as open space and that it is currently used as a catch basin for the golf course. We believe that changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and we would definitely be opposed to that happening. We would also be opposed to the way that the use of the Weiskopf Golf course would be changed. We would also question the access of emergency vehicles to the three proposed homes on this parcel as well as the obstruction of views of existing homes near or adjacent to this parcel. For the aforementioned reasons, we would hope that you would reject his zoning change. Thank Jou for your consideration. Si athleen Foulkes Duane & R JAiV 2 3 2006 CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT JAN-20-2006 12:50 PM MINTZ 7607711154 P.01 Dr. and Mrs. MYRON MINTZ 80-355 Weiskopf La Quinta, CA 92253 Phone: 760-771-0402 Fax: 760-771-1 154 DesrrtlNintz@aol. coat January 20.2006 Mr. 'Conn Kirk Or. 9W 9AWA Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-496 Calle Tampico Le Quinta, CA 92253 ECEIVE 1p�JAN 2 0 2006 CI o 4CoMNEAR71WM MEKT RE; Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, II Zone Change 2005-'126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment 41., lenUlve Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen'. It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tsntative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. • The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been pgrgolvqd as open space. • The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. • Many existing home views will be obstructed. • -Chan in this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now IV .. I I s ace and this is very aarming. considered open p • We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. changed and we are • The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. You truly. r' Joanne and Myron Mintz JAN-20-2006 12:51 PM MINTZ 7607711154 P_02 56235Jack Nick laus D La Quinta, CA 92253 January 16, 2006 To Whom It May Concern: This is in regards to the scheduled meeting at our City Hall at 7:00 pm on January 24 to hear a request to change the zoning of a portion of the Weiskopf Golf Course into housing lots. Jhe proposed zoning change and housing development may be the beginning of a very troubling chain of similar requests throughout PGA West. A point of fact is that this parcel was surveyed last year as was a parcel of the Jack Nicklaus Private Course abutting the east side of the number 10 tee boxes. The surveyor informed it was to be a change to accommodate housing for KSL. As we are immediate neighbors to the number 10 tee box proposal, one would think this disclosure would have been in our purchase documentation but — NOT so! If it had of been, be assured we would not have, I considered the purchase of this home as our patio privacy will be obliterate an a major portion of the mountain view which garnered a premium price, will be lost. The same situation no doubt exists with the present residents on either side of this proposed project — those on the Weiskopf and those facing east on Jack Nicklaus Boulevard. I also question why these parcels were not part of the KSUCNL transaction. The sinister appearance is that KSL had every intention to retain "and develop these parcels when land values made it very lucrative to proceed; and, over the legitimate objections of those so negatively impacted. I feel empathy for all of you having to go through this stressful exercise and sincerely hope our City fathers reject outright this precedent setting re- zoning request. Sorry I cannot be at this important meeting but t must be out of the State for that entire week. yours truly, Gary L. Haslam `� 199 .TAN—ZO—Z000 iZs51 PM MINTZ 7SO7711154 Prof. Fritz Gabriel and Barbara Bauer 80370 Weiskopf Way Le Quints, 92253 CA To La Quinta City Hall La Quinta We want to have the Welskopf Golf Course kept open space. We are against the new buildings on the Golf Course. DECEIVE JAN 2 0 2W6 COM DNER,UY QPME14T Fri Gabriel Bauer 40arbara Bauer (IGPJ La Quinta, Jan. 14t', 2006 J 200 1. JAN-20.-2006 12:52 PM MINTZ 7607711154 D jaN 2 0 2o�os FYI,,,,Weiskopf Golf Course Zoning Change and Plan to Build 3 Single Family H On Tuesday, Jan. 24th there will be a meeting at La Quinta City Hall, 78-495 Calle Tampico at 7:00PM0 to continue to hear a request by Ray Shaffer, a developer, to change the zoning of a portion of the Weiskopf Golf Course. The plan is to acquire 2.3 + acres from KSL and to build 3 homes on 3 single-family lots. The areas of the proposed building sites are located between Weiskopf and Jack Nicklaus streets and involves the specific area adjacent to the Weiskopf Putting Green (which will be severely altered) and Water Retention Basin or Storm Drain Site ne)d to 80355 Weiskopf. We have been diligently watching the process of the rezoning application and what follows is a summary of the previous Planning Commission Meeting. We plan on being at the Meeting on January 24, 2006 to voice our coneems. If you, too have concems we urge you to beat this very important meeting. Currently there are no view single family homes looking down into the Weiskopf Golf Course, which is precisely whO Mr. Shaffer wishes to accomplish with the building of his 3 single-family homes. -Thus severely compromising the existing vistas. The property currently is owned by KSL Corporation, this area and a flew other areas were not included in the recent CNL transaction. Mr. Shaffer, as of the 27th of December 2005, Planning Commission Meeting, had not made an application to the Fire Department and this is of serious concern. , Mr. Shaffer's representative, Mr. Haag, claims the enormous Storm Drain Site would be slightly rerouted and is to fall between 2 lots. According to another statement of Mr. Haag, this site is to be shoved east, these are two conflicting statements and thus it is very unclear where this storm drain will be and what the effects on the Golf Course and surrounding homes will be. Mr. Shaffer's representative, Mr. Haag, also stated that if the cart path were rerouted, as it must be to accommodate the 3 homes, it could be a 9 foot climb up to the first tee. Planning Commissioner Daniels stated that property owners in the area have always perceived this area as open space. KSL Corporation has other open space areas at PGA West that are currently not developed, and these too will be coming forward due to the value of the land. If we allow the rezoning of this portion of the Weiskopf Golf -Course it can be precedent setting for rezoning of other areas throughout. PGA West. I Plan of the City of Le Quints controls the underlying use of land and its development. On The Genera ...thatttss enure area has been December 27, 2005 Community Development Director, Doug Evans stated, d, prior to this application. The an open space portion of PGA West. It has not been proposed for developmentP area has always been referred to as open space. Property owners have relied upos t downs t them. From a public purpose there is no need to develop this site. From a policy standpoint, comply with the General Plan." We strongly believe that the proposed development of 3 single-family homes on the Weiskopf Goff Course will vastly disturb the serenity of those who live in the area as well as those sion to tlaying ee the area as Open your support In addressing the City Of La Quints an th`e Planning Commission put in writing and dropped off at S,paoe, K you cannot attend this malou V in to , yo Z;`,N 9iverto us to reed at the Planning Commission Meeting. 01.=00 fPAi free to forwadrd this e-mail to anyone you feel might have interest. Tnurbay, dnrtwsy 12, Zo" A„6rio4 Ond"- D&6eKrA AZ row: , K , i NiT 583 201. JAN-20-2006 12:53 PM MINTZ 7607711154 P.06 N)-440 ll 't'isko ,'unwary 17, 2006 Dear Myron and Joanne, DECEIVE JAN 2 0 2006 DI COM%'U%K DF�VFLMENT Thank you for keeping the Masters Homeowners updated on the proposal to rezone the Wetskopf Golf Course and build three single family homes in the arga Awn Un 14C roulft rarof MV UTUI As 1 understand it the entire area is currently zoned as open space. When I purchased my home on Weiskopf four years ago, the plot map of the PGA development, on view in the lobby of the Stadium Club House, snows a road running between the Nicklaus Gate and Weiskopf street. I Hover was infoym4d as M why the road was wPVPr built, but may assume it was to designate the land as open space. If that was the reason the road 584 wasn't built, then 1 see no reason to approve this proposal and would east my vote against approval. 202 not I would like to see is a cart path running from the Nicklaus Gate to where it joins the cart path that leads to the Nicklaus Tournament courses' ]0'tee, Sincerely, James A. Old 585 203 Jan 20 06 06:43p Michael Herman 760-771-6014 p.l MICHAEL HERMAN @PGA West 80-690 Weiskopf Way La Quinta, CA, 92253 January 20, 2006. Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa City of La Quinta planning Commission, 78--495 Calle T92253 IcO La Quinta, CA n t 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 20e Parce RE: Environmental Assessmel Zone Change 2005 _1 26 Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: r_ Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in It is our understanding ent t e Parcel Map 32752. the aforementioned T numerous objections to this application for rezoning. We haven s been **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has alway perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **ManY existing home views will be obstructed. will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now **Changing this zoning considered open space and this is very alarming. Emer ency Vehicles able to access the 3 **We question the feasibility of 9 proposed homes. f Golf Course will be severely changed an we are **The use of the W eiskop opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, R L L E CITY.OI= LA QUINTA c COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT] 6 DEPARTMENT 204 Jan 20 06 09:02p Jody Shapiro 760 564 9075 p.l Jonathan D. & Patti S. Shapiro 55-525 Turnberry Way La Quinta, CA 92253-8720 Phone: 760.564.2555 Fax: 760.564.9075 January 20, 2006 Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaeffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. *'"The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. "The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. "*Many existing home views will be obstructed. *'"Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this .is very alarming_ "We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. "The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. Jonathane.Shapiro Patti S. hapiro R, V& � JA N 2 C CITY OF LA QUINTA 205 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 587 DEPARTMENT JUDY COSSETTE 7607711983 p.1 Yagezotz RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel leap 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Man► existing home views will be Obstructed. '*Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. �-aa-off R GDO I P,dWE 1/22/2006 CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT •� DEPARTMENT 206 01/06/2006 09:42 7607718348 A PAGE 01 Friday, 1911 uary (.)b. 2006 V Mr. Stan Sawa ,Assistant: Plwuling Director .City of La Q 'nta--CC tjfQrnia La Quint,, California 92247 P':JA. WEST Specific, Plan Amendment, S Re -quest for a con,tinuance Dear Mr. Sava. Ws l;qf:r .13. pro.vid d to, ordrir. to. docUm. nt my reyu�:St fox a contingaxice to January 2� ', 2�0� ; vE' fhe 'b�o�re nc�ied i�tc�x� eurrr.��t�y sc�beclule � before -d)e City's Manning Thank y4 It fbIr youI' •anent;-Oz, zo t.hts 1M. M.T. Sincerely,, R�( RayS V'' M: P(T -M-1 'K >EiR�g, $- t.A, %ic. a FCNVE bk P111 ). JAN06_.-M j CITY FA INTN 0"""I F. IOPMENT DEPART . 58 07 Mr. Stan Sawa City of La Quinta Planning Commission 14 February, 2006 I wish to oppose the postponement of April 25, 2006 hearing regarding the possible building of homes on the Schaffer tract. I believe that many interested persons will not be, present if the hearing is delayed until May or June. T �ou" Caroline G. Macgregor 590208 Dec 02 17 12:22p Emerick 7607714643 Mr. Torn Kirk Mr. Stan Sauna Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Via Facsimile 760-777-1233 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, ,Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002.Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying.for a zone change in the. aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Goff Course_ *-*Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. "The use of the Weiskopf Goff Courses will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. X / - 3:: �- & Date Pee )e e C L— 1.2 C Name and Addresfi Mr. Tom Kirk Mr. Stan Sawa Planning Commission, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Gentlemen: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. **The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has always been perceived as open space. **The City of La Quinta had told us that part of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course. **Many existing home views will be obstructed. **Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and this is very alarming. **We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles able to access the 3 proposed homes. **The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration, 210 4.- gt-•t //u T�q" C; -Z2'.l ATTACHMENT #10 TT A /ti ■ ■ a 1 r— lk 0 -ro 4 21�' 213 ,96 214 NwNWm" GEM OF %%kT H E DESERT ATTACHMENT #12. 2002 GENERAL PLAN MM R WR 'a" LPR t"A4, -7;i�, No- ,A, ENUL b.' D R Y) A LD it jp NC 0 Xv R PROPOSED LAND USE POLICY DIAGRAM - RESIDENTIAL LAND USES FV-L-D-R-1 VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0-2 DU/AC) FLDR] LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DU/AC) � MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (4-8 OU/AC) MEDIUM. HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (8-12 DU/AC) HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (12-16 DU/AC) RURAL RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY COMMERCIAL LAND USES MIXED/REGIONAL COMMERCIAL COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL [-NCNEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL PARK OFFICE TOURIST COMMERCIAL F—VC-VILLAGE COMMERCIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY OTHER LAND USES URBAN MIX MAJOR commuiery FACILITIES PARK FACILITIES OPEN SPACE GOLF COURSE OPEN SPACE WATERCOURSE/FLOOD CONTROL 6 OCTOBM 1992 160AC sao w. LDRI 97 it rat. �" ,i a+ N� 215 LDR 1 LDR Ire INS tirigloo. an f 'PO fiA' • • - .. '� \ 'NT � gip, ... - : ``.. _ • t w ?'I �Illlli f , t o � , . r A �oriirr�lrrrr�rrrrr rlrrrrnr��i��trr .1�� vp � �`��►r�r.__1r11rYlr!!r �_ I �'`: ��I��j `';!f•,,rr�111U1� .`. � �'�MLI<MrlrtlllriMltli�i • ra , TJ J, f, � �1111t111111/ , pIIIIv11M lit rr�� +�� rr� riirnnrtll�� I►�' PA if ON rrrinrrlr+�..� ` �IIIIItNUiltii1ll11'i1111\�► ��'1 1 1 tl►,, �y MO :ae�ttttr,,1 IIIUIUlflll ll nr t1►./ � ^R �_� r � �' ,fir x; Ay' e t� INS Ip y�rr. r R 1 ATTACHMENT #14 1 Project Entry Concepts The Resort Core is provided public access to the resort residential and golf amenities by way of Jefferson Street and PGA Boulevard from the north. The privacy and serenity of the PGA WEST residential neighborhoods is a signature of the development that is enhanced by way of a series of private, gated residential enclaves accessed from PGA Boulevard and Madison Street. It is envisioned that manned or unmanned residential entry points will provide secured access to all residential development within the plan area. These entry point locations (and potential entry points) are diagrammatically illustrated below. alcmism 2= ==mUnd e V- TUNNELACCESS TO THE GREG NORMAN COURSE PLAN AREA r - ram - KOPF LEGENDS WAY GATE GATE Exhibit 9 Access to the Resort Golf club and internal project residential areas is accomplished from the southeast via Madison and the Weiskopf Gate. Internal roadways lead to the Spanish Bay Gate and on to PGA Boulevard and the Northern portion of the plan area. 2.20 PGA WEST - Amendment IV *I 216 t4ar-23-2006 15:55 From -BEST BEST KRIEGER 7603417039 ATTACHMENT #16 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP .► CAuFORnv. uMTEP w+Au.1iY ?wR714ER4n.P ONC- L'QmG PRQFE&SrOw►L. C-0RP0A^Tl0#va RIvFR51PE VAWYI=RS SM DIEGO c9091 66& 1450 74.7aO nlGrswAY I I I. SuRe zoo to 19) 525-13oo INOIAN WFU-S, CAWFORNIA 02210 OrrrARIO t 50J 568-2451 1 ORANGE Cour('(1r t909) 989-855 4 1760) 340-GC598 FAX 19491 263.24s00 66m-^Vv COM SACRHMEPM 19 16) 325-4000 RoarRT W. HAROREAVES RosERT mARGRF-wE51Z,)pIBKL.Aw COM Fit-E No 79983 DODO I March 23, 2006 Chairman and Planning Commission Members CITY of LA QUINTA 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92270 Re: Shaffer Development, EA ZOOS-SSO, GPA 2005-106, CZ 2005-126, SP 83-002, Amendment #f5 and TPM 32752 Dear Chairman and Members: I am writing today on behalf of the commission to approve the proposed residential referenced applications. applicant, Mr. Shaffer, to urge the planning use of the property, as proposed in the above - As discussed more fully below, staff s apparent conclusion that the parcels are permanent open space is incorrect. The parcels have never been dedicated as open space. They were initially mapped to accommodate it tentative entrance to the tract. The entrance was subsequently routed elsewhere. The parcels have remained in private hands pending ultimate decision on their use. To insist tbat the property be maintained in perpetuity as open space would be in violation of the property owner's constitutional rights to make beneficial use of the property - The PGA West development plan under Landmark Land Company and KSL ownership never contemplated that the Shaffer parcels would be permanent open space or part of The golf course. The golf course specifically excluded this land area from inclusion in the golf/open space as described in Mr. Haag's letter to Mr. Sawa dated January 12, 2006: "KSL's directive to the golf course planning team was clear; based on the earlier master plan concepts for land use, route a ''championship" style course with starting and finishing holes provided with ample take -off and landing area for the golfers' slanting and finishing shots. The course (as constructed) exhibits this "template" for safe distance frorn the first tee and the eighteenth green to the [Shaffer parcelsl. Mr. Shaffer's proposed plan for three lots exhibit appropriate setbacks to regulation play - area similar or in excess of the play -area setbacks of existing lots on Nicholas Blvd. and Weiskopf'. 6 f J 0 R M L IT ADM ARTM V G 7 U51.1 217 filar-23-2006 15:55 From -BEST BEST KRIEGER 7603417039 LAW CFFICE5 OF E3EST 15EST & KRIEGER t.t_.P Chairman and Planning Commission Members CITY OF LA QUINTA March 23, 2006 Page 2 T-238 P.003/004 F-001 The Shaffer parcels were initially conceived as part of the resort core. In the PGA West Specific Plan, the parcels were designated "resort commercial", contemplated to be part of the Iarger resort commercial development across PGA Blvd. In 1997, when Traci 28444 was approved, the Shaffer parcels were mapped as a potential entrance to the tract, as a private road, with landscaped areas on either side. The minutes of the planning commission meeting regarding Tract 28444 indicate that the entrances were considered tentative. "Cornrnissioner Tyler asked for clarification as to the train and emergency entrances into the tract. Mr. Hosea explained the entrances and stated the design is tentative until they decide whether or not there would be another entrance into the project.". On the final map, the road lot (lot " ) was retained as a private street, with easements offered for dedication w the City of La Quinta for public utilities and service and emergency vehicles. Lot 6"L" was also offered for dedication to CVWD and IID. The adjoining lots on either side of the proposed road were reserved "for open space and recreational purposes for the sole benefit of ourselves, our successors and assignees". No part of the parcels was dedicated as common area or open space to any homeowners association, as would typically have been the case if KSL did not intend to reserve potential alternadve use of the property. The proposed entrances were tentative because it was not clear whether the master association would approve another entrance gate, which would be an on -going staffing liability for the association. It was ultirnamely determined to be preferable to channel the traffic through gates at the Spanish Bay project. The entrance road through the Shaffer parcels was never developed; the offered dedications were never accepted by the City, lID or CVWI). The Shaffer parcels were planted in grass on A temporary basis for aesthetic reasons and to control dust During the intervening years, KSL was fully occupied developing the remaining, much larger parcels within the specific plan. Nevertheless, KSL retained the expectation of eventually developing the site. The parcels were not sold to CNL as part of the golf course. The existing specific plan designation for the Shaffer parcels is "tourist commercial". Apparently, in the land use maps generated at the time of the comprehensive general plan update in 2002, the Shaffer parcels were designated as "low density residential". Subsequent general plan land use maps show the area in an "open Space/golf course" .designation; however, staff has been unable to confirm when, and at whose direction, those subsequent changes were made. I understand that in preliminary meetings with City staff on the Shaffer project, staff acknowledged that residential uses were permitted under the existing general plan and specific plan designations. Nevertheless, staff requested that the application be processed with a specific plan arnendmerit to facilitate public review. RMU'MMARTRQ6705 j 1 f-)1 218 Isar-23-2006 15:56 From -BEST BEST KRIEGER 7603417039 T-238 P.004/004 F-001 yaw oFFICXS of REST REST & KRIEGER LL.P Chaim= and Planning Commission Members CITY OF LA QUINTA March 23, 2006 Page 3 Nevertheless, we believe that the Shaffer parcels retain the tourist commercial designation under the approved specific plan, or at worst the low density residential designation under the 2002 general plan, both of which designations are appropriate for Shaffer's contemplated residential use. When Shaffer purchased the right to develop the Shaffer parcels, he acceded to KSL's reasonable expectation of being able to put the parcels to beneficial use_ A requirement that the parcels be maintained by the owner in perpetuity as an open space amenity for adjoining properties would not only destroy the owner's reasonable expectations for beneficial use, but also impose are uncompensated maintenance burden, both in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United Slates Constitution (see Loveludiec &rbor Inc v. United States 28 F_3d 1171 (Fed. Cir. 1994)). As you can appreciate, the land retains considerable value that any property owner would be compelled to pursue. The proposed use — high end, low density residential — is much more compatible with adjoining residential uses than the tourist commercial uses initially contemplated for the parcels. The environmental analysis concludes that the residential development will not have any significant negative impact on adjoining properties and, in all likelihood, will generate an increase in market value for the new and existing homes in the neighborhood. I urge the planning commission to approve this project. It will be much preferable to reach an agreement at this point on the proposed residential use, that will enhance the value of the neighborhuod, than to leave the ultimate disposition of the property open to continuing uneertalnty.whlle the issue is resolved in court. JER LLP Kwh4m cc: Stan Sawa, Principle Planner Kathy Jenson, Esq, City Attorney Ray Shaffer M XMLff0MAR1'1NQ2670$1.1 �t19 ATTACHMENT #15 pill '<° owl I :'4va VIA If � W � �» 9 gig G Ix 155 55 Itts ■ '� �<` m r � tat 00 Hu jib LA CQ is'U i C5 alill wo Z lid a WFc HIM E—+��~ ~ ' Will '% � <III-211m -� E-0 fibi I 11 saw . fill ILy rall4lil Y ills�t, 41, Nfil ale t: Y Y Is l O = G'),3 20 s 0 ME MY OF CMW OF NOOK SM OF CM"VM TRACT NO., 28340- 1 SMEST 2 OF 4 SNEEIS NEW A 3UADIVAM OF LOr 2 AND A PORiION OF tOf 1 OF WCT NO. 25401-k FM MW FLO NI 11M 231. PAGES 73 TI#OL)GM 79. NCWSIIIE OF WPS. OFF)CIAL RECOIIDS OF RMEME COIMiY. CM00ANK TOGETHER V M A POMM OF SEC; 21. TOMNSI! • SWK RANGE 7 EAST, SAN EIMINIDMIO IEADAN. M CONstUm an" GM W. DOKICM L S.4• 3 nun NO.2LW-y v�ciir"Y� NOT TO SCALE SURIIEI�OR"S NOTES • -- NNfAili FMW r M. TAM N.C.E. M4W FLAIII. PER 7W NO. 25i06-k N.N. 231/73-7E. MM OIFi11NNE M*OICAiM • -- NpC = R LUA TACK & TAC, IME &34K FLUSK N USI W r LF- Mom R.C.E. &%a PER iR. MM 2SMM-4. N.N. 231 7l A-- Noon M r L►., ON KA NO UM TAM U 4NTi.1, RM TO K MT m TKAOT W. nno-1. MALAW/Ar ^ WLM MONK NDI IM O -- MOXAIES SU r LP, TAM Li 4MM3, FIUNN. UMM MOM MCIMM r MKN PK UM L.S, 46N3, FUM4 OR A LIM AND TACK. TAGIO Li 403 WWK I on m of �A1p1�4f INE KARNM! Mo NEKEON AK wm ON TFt SOUiI1NESIENIr LME OF LDf 3. 3110M1 m N 34'36'241' E M 1100 MM 231N-4 MO N NOON 231, PAMS 73 TIM M 76 OF INMS. RECOIes OF Nam cup Q OM UMI AQ MIN N 3/'SO'17' L ► ; ( PAR I r , _ PM� 24006 T.M.I 28280-f1 `. `'�-------------- Me 4Vr/Jf-R r �'�' A---PWLEVARD-- - -r- I-� IIM34WW PAR. 3 I 11M + fir-_ ------ N2712'SrE- 71W 4 `_ S _ AwlI1iIE10. N OOIIC W OR i LOf CORNER FW ON FACE OF CUIK SET LE40 AND TACK. TACCDI LS. 4M3 M TOP OF CUM ON A OF WW. TO K SET AT ALL LOT --- v�I v I - - - 3 CdMEM D CW AT N.C. S. LC.'S. PAWS TPAT AN A A SWW MMCN ARE NOF LOT COMERS M MIlO SOE LOT U NM TO K SET a ALL TPVICT COWERS, AND � I N1721'i 71.06' M K SET AT ALL COQEXK UM MCTI M N.C.'S. E.C.'S AND ALL ORER CEN- LDT I/ / TIA NE MIS OF CMMoL. L1NLE33 arm= WIM i I ALL NoNU M SON *Kr SWU K SET N ACCOMW= MIN THE MMW- NDIm. M9011111 AO NDOff FOR TNI IMF. LMESS 0111E11NLM ()-MOKAID Kt N MIX PER MA 231/73-71L LOLIM MONK NOTED. i� I KA I NO. 2"9-4 / [) - MWAiM MM t MM PER N.N. >Z"AW- u, UNLESS ODERMMii Nam . MS. 23 /73-76 � / M TRACT CWM4 44 NUIMM LOTS AND M LErMn Lai TNI 71Acr COMMIG i5.0 ACRES GROii. I r as r---- 4 1 TRACT NO. I26WO-2 Ms. LOT 2 LDTI 3 iI IYIA01 7. IM N MW 130 PM R OFFICMI ISOM P-S tome-0 i I I I 1.1s ---------------- iLOT 4% LOT 22 LDT 12 I; i ►' TRACT ND. "42 M S. 2021"I Spam OMSSm anal ME SAM o I W Xt E• sLUMB OF THE FOUVM MEN or DKMM me/On A MW W UW AND EAN M MM 10 COMMIA WUV =MIY MMM N ffi= W iK "M FOR i aX MW AM M.VAS W IAVF NDEiWM OEOI M ADM MIA KSET M 04 ACCIFU FOR MW UX No ALSO ANT NO ALL PONE EASEIOM Ne MM W MMFi FOR MM NE LSE, MM NO OMMls ON. oWM MU OR AWM iNE HI MN DES01MNm PN IVII1. 06, FOR 71E 14JI M OF NOTEa AND MM RM OW LM X N NEAILL W SIIC11 ROADS NO FOR THE PUIiM W CMA Me NMMWW Ale MEST1c HATER 10 am ON10L LNON N Mon w SUCII M LM Me on cO1M xm MT 1 N TIE PAMM FROM THE MW STATES. AN F*W t SUI= TO ANT VEM me A=o mm mm RM WW^ AMLiLMIK. IMNKATACTLM1o. OR om PLMrONLS ILO ROINIS 10 mm me RESOIom LKIEO N CaMEC m MIN SUCH wm mm a NMI K IiCO0iMZM AM ADO MLEDOEN N THE LOCAL CUSUK LAM NO I r P ' Ni OF 114E COLMT131; Ale 4 0' SULW TO nE MW OF 11E FNaNIE1oN OF A VEN OR LOGE TO EXiMM AND 93" NI ORE MWFROIA 9QU THE SATE K MW TO PE1E11M1E ON NI MW THE PITEIM MW WM = M N LAN.- IECOIOm OECDMM 21. IML M NOOK 3 PAGE 34 OF FTLiDFTS. M EASEIM FOR VA M ROAD Ale NCOMAL. PLNIOKi Ii= m AIR 3% ion N NOOK 5m FWX SM OF OWL rats r-wr • 10• so• 400 NO• AN DOW FOR /ME M IUIPM NS= Of 0 11- E 01 N NOOK N1. FM N W OML yip DT39MQ f7MMgT K PLATTED I= WM m moW O14AN1m TO WUML NRIy■ON IITR1CT RM POLE U M MWWM MY 2L iSO N NOOK M& iAM 410 W WFICMI DORM. AN tAe W Me TO WE 00 MOB W AMM FOR W= PMEINE NC IN AUM A 190 M UOK 1104, FM 372 w O11NX moo= EANDAM CRM Im 10 AIM 1E3- PIOmNR 'A A CALM M LUM /MRI Mr IN MW um= Name 1o1 1 4. ININI A` ML W& 3446NNN, W OFnaM NRWDWKD mm U 000111 W Mm 10 LNOLMNL UW OO1MMMV K CJAFMIK M. FOR CMSTMXWK MIf UAMK LIE. LKNNDIMICL W" Won RPiMM9 or AND Aoas To (4) MOM, 911M No aLER MAYS NOR an NUIEN ER LMM UPON RE own P1NOio I AND (M) LNOERs> am is ZDL ELFICTOCL CIL7i, CANLl: Won Titmm SWIX maw Ale om Ump LI or M F m 12. M4113 M K 330414. NO IiCONOm oa � I M AS 14=nDff MD.1 3mN N No 3w0iA NL OF OFINlAL NECOmi IECOIMm AUDIT 31 1N & N NOOK iN& FM 3M OF OiilpAl 1601 F SAo DIID= CJWIOT FLOM FROM AN001M � 2 AN DMIEIENf MM 10 THE LWU sT O OF MOM FOR WAU PrILM NMMM NAY 24. 190 M 1 NOOK MAL MM sea OF WnCML KECOmB NO MMMED N DBIMff GEED IK9OOIMm W" 7. IOU N MOIL 134% PAGE 12 OF WnCYL IiCO1IDM Elba 0 Op CO • h o el lz N 5 H U . F E.., <_ I � M 1 1 ►. t i 1 W F, Moc < Wol C II M 1 1 I 1 1 W I n N I 1 I 9 W N n� h i N 22 SHEET 4 OF 4 SHEETS NI THE CTIY OF LA QUWA, COWM OF RIVERSIDE. STALE OF C WOMOR TRACT NO. 28340-1 OEM A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF LOT 1 AND LOT 2 OF TRACT NO. 45499-4, PER MAP FRO IN BOOK 231, PACES 73 THROUGH 16 INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, OFFICUL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY. CAUFOFW / MGETIfR WRH A PORTION OF SECTION 21, 7OWNSHIP 6 SOUTH. RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN. MDS CONSULTM GARY W. DOKICH L.SAM3 /,- MARCH. 19" TRACT NO.202M-i `,a' LOT D PC eout f BARD -A 91111! L- ou r_ow 0 30 00 In TRACT N0. 2"0-4 MQ 28VIS-70 LOT 3 240 S►l� i 3 fA9E1 m m —Nowt: A ,om Four wot pswort FOR FuRc um" F4JIrM oMTM 10 1FR WOK tMI yo uslocr. mMMMI PWM WAMot EAs M ®- 0000 A 10m Fan writ 03DOff Fat FS= uttm FSMrost: 000= TO m CR W to QWJlA SEE SLEET 2 I = SUIVEIADRS mm '23 ATTACHMENT #17 Thursday, January 12, 2006 Mr. Stan Sawa Assistant Planning Director City of La Quinta California La Quinta, California 92247 Re: PGA WEST Specific Plan Amendment Zoning / Land Use Boundary Issues Dear Mr. Sawa: This letter is to provide information clarifying issues surrounding the history of the Zoning and Land Use designations for the property under consideration for residential use adjacent to the northerly Weiskopf Course boundary at the south side of PGA Blvd. between Nicklaus Blvd. and Weiskopf (exhibits attached). The Weiskopf Course within the PGA West Master Plan / Specific Plan As a planner/landscape architect for the prior land owner (Landmark Land Company), I was directly involved in the master plan preparation for the PGA West project from its beginnings in the early 80's thru the 90's as well as for the 10+ years of KSL ownership after the disintegration of Landmark Land in the early 90's. In addition to directly participating in the preparation of the land plan and routing of the Weiskopf Course adjacent to the property in question, my private planning firm prepared detailed plans and specifications of the landscape architecture of the Weiskopf Course as well as all Specific Plan Amendments to date. Over the past couple of decades, I have seen first hand, a great deal of flexibility in the interpretation of specific boundaries for land use within the master plan for PGA West. The Pattern of land Use in the PGA West Specific Plan PGA West has always been envisioned and planned as an upscale residential community overlooking premier golf course amenities. Mr. Shaffer's three lot subdivision exhibits two lots greater than one-half acre and one lot greater than one acre in area. This is consistent with the surrounding pattern of residential land use overlooking golf and greatly exceeds the standards of the adjacent residential lot -area and their provision of landscaped area on those lots. Documenting the Pattern of land Use in the PGA West Specific Plan As exhibited on documents from the current PGA West Specific Plan submitted in conjunction with Mr. Shaffer's requested Zone Change (attached herein), the land area to the north of the golf course boundary where three residential lots are proposed is shown as golf and open space. A variety of land use depictions for this lot area from Tourist Commercial, Low Density Residential, to Golf and Open Space, has existed over several years and several u dates to the City's General Plan document. 4_ � r F ILE S C,, foKKtST K. MAAG, ASLA, INC. LANDSCAPE ARCM ITECTURt - LAND PLANNING 1251 N. COAST MIMAY LACUNA BtACM, CA 92651 F. (919) 3y6_9066 r: (9't9) 376-906y t: rORKtSTG rKMMAIL.COM MtMBtR A5LA 2 2 4 Page 2 Mr. Stan Sawa City of La Quinta, Planning Dept. Attached Exhibit 2.1 is reprinted from the City's current -day version of the General Plan booklet and shows residential land use for the Shaffer application area. The current -day Web Site rendition of the same area (reprinted and attached herein) shows a road connecting Nicklaus Blvd. and Weiskopf over open space area lotted separately from the golf /open space lot. In discussion before the Planning Commission hearing of December 27th it was stated that "this area has always been envisioned as open space" however, it should be noted that although several earlier exhibits were flawed or at lease inconsistent, current exhibits are not perfect either - possibly leading to confusion as to the "history of intended use" of the lotted area of Mr. Shaffer's application. Routing the 5th course in the PGA West Specific Plan At the inception of the golf course planning effort for the Weiskopf Course, KSL's directive to the golf course planning team was clear; based on the earlier master plan concepts for land use, route a "Championship" style course with starting and finishing holes provided with ample take -off and landing area for the golfer's starting and finishing shots. The course (as constructed) exhibits this "template" for safe distance from the 1" tee and the 18th green to the proposed residential lots. Mr. Shaffer's proposed plan for three lots exhibits appropriate setbacks to regulation play -area similar or in excess of the play -area setbacks of existing lots on Nicklaus Blvd. and Weiskopf. With a minor modification to the cart path routing and the practice green adjacent to the starting tees, the proposed lots do not require any modification the actual course area. Mr. Shaffer's proposal is consistent with the surrounding master plan intent and with the original Weiskopf Course routing. In light of the above, the applicant's proposed low density residential lots exhibits a consistent and non -obtrusive pattern of land use with surrounding and adjacent residential use and complies with the intent of the PGA West Specific Plan from its inception. Mr. Shaffer kindly appreciates Staff's time and effort in preparing it's recommendation to the City Council for approval of these three low density residential lots. t K. Haag, ASLA, Inc. W. Ray Shaffer, Mr. Larry Lichliter ry foRKEST K. MAAG, ASLA, INC. LAN DSCAPt ARCM ITtCTUKI - LAND PLANNING 115t N. COAST MIGMWAY LACUNA NAM CA 91651 F. (9t9) 376-9066 r: mg) 376-906i t: tORRtST@rKMMAIL.COM MtMUR ASLA 225 The exhibit below represents the current layout of the golf course and the adjacent residential tract boundaries or "Existing Site Use." As shown, the land area immediately south and adjacent to PGA Blvd is a remainder area "out of play" within the Tom Weiskopf Course. Within the context of the overall master plan for this area, res- idential land use has always been envisioned and is depicted on the adjacent exhibit referenced as "Proposed Site Use" EXISTING SITE USE ENLARGEMENT GOLF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TOURIST COMMERCIAL Exhibit 6 PGA WEST SPECIFIC U 2.1 22U The exhibit below represents the proposed layout of the golf course and the adjacent residential tract boundaries or "Proposed Site Use." As shown, the land area to be lotted is immediately south and adjacent to PGA Blvd and is a remainder area "out of play' within the Tom Weiskopf Course. The proposed sue for three lots with similar architecture and site design is within the context of the overall master plan for this area. PROPOSED SITE USE ENLARGEMENT GOLF Low DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TOURIST COMMERCIAL ® AREA OF CHANGE IN LAND USE 3LAN AMENDMENT V Exhibit 7 Flo 227 EXHIBIT 2.1 City of La Quinta General Plan LEGEND ' Roads TownshlpMangeSections Railroads e City Limits Planning Area a1 ■ �� e Planning Area #2 • • • City Sri of Influence Residential Land Uses VLOR Very Isar Density up to 2 dulac LDR Low Density up to 4 &dac MDR Medium Density up in a du/ac MHOR Medium -High Density up to 12 du/ac HDR High Density up to 16 dadac Hillside Overlay �] Agriculturefiquestrian Overlay Commercial Land Uses M/RC Mnaedl 4onal Commercial CC Community Commercial NC Neiglihorhood Commercial F- CP Commercial Park O Office 7C Tourist Commercial . K village Commercial Other land Uses I Industrial 0 MC Major Community Facilities P Park Facilities �1 OS Open Space G Golf Course Open Space W Watemourse/Flood Control P Floating Park Designation Scale 1J2,000 0"r; N 0 4,000 "M 12,000 Feet NORTH Riverside County Vicinity Map-` '�- L 4 .F 4 f f' (.&&- Map Prepared on: June 19, 2002 Map Prepared hy: Aerial information Systems r ► i TERRANOVA°m Map Version No.: 8 0 " 228 City f Quinta 0La Official Zoning Map 6 12 229 FAIRWAYS ASSOCIATION January l It 2006 `. Pay Shaffer affer Deve%ne a Congmny 55-77-0 -Cbwy MRI eve La Qwnu# C; iflb mi 9225.E Re: Sbaffcr Homes at FCTA. WEST, C ,sptmdcwe of J ,6, 2W Dear *W. Shaffer. - The PQA WEST Fairways Amocisfim (Assn m) ac4uwwkdges apt of the pWodevelopment (Miaffer Homes at PGA WESI) per your rot pondence and -plot plan. dated December, 2005 by Fist k. Maag, ASIA* Inc. It is acted tit the lots (&=, v &%tty resident ) are twSw in acreage ftn the lots on bath NkJdaus Blvd. wW Wept aud that the dm homes ates wdl be of sbWe Awy 04ntwe and qwjde lan cape =tntecb= that will be complimentary to the surmundbng hones} Upm resew -and a=eoe In Chy of La wit&*s P#anlimg COMMiM ., one building pla and site &Ap mud be wwnWd for ftnptft to the mate PGA Wes' Masters Associsfion and PGA, WEST Fairways Association tr to submitW to the City of La QWnta for wnst, M . permits. RUndy L. A eny For the PGA WEST F*ways Aasmiahou ftm Office Box l 690 i s Quirax Calffibmia92247v Phwe (7 ) 776-5100 * Fax (760) 776-5l 11 f ► .t. 3 230 01/12i 2005 30: e05 7605642329 1x*ST PAGE 01/01 t Jan .1.2, 2 Mir, Ray Shaffer 55-770 Chmy Hill L. Quinta, Ca_ 92243 P" WEST M"Tm OCUTWX9 INQ PO. BOX 1516, LA OUNTA, CAA 92253 f?66) 4-36W ' FAX (7-60) 4-2329 RE: Home Sites betwmn Jam Nfiddaw and Weiskopf Dear Mir_ Shaffer: 'lhak you for shanng your ho site rmWons with us. 'fie PGA WEST Mauer Association Im no judsdicfim or requnsibility ;for : egg this .a a. Frm QW was piesm to the Board we have no objection at this time,, however, we reserve the figbt to vier the firW Alas in mder to make a finA + ecis on. -Steve Hastinp Bawd Dkao*r PGA WEIST Master Association 614: 231. ATTACHMENT li18 Stan Sawa From: Ray Shaffer [shaffer1114@msn.com] Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 8:19 AM To: Cc: Kjenson@rutan.com forrest@fkhmaii.com; Robert. Hargreaves@bbklaw.com; Stan Sawa; Devans@la- quinta.org.Ljohnson@la-quinta.org Subject: Letter to Mayor and City Council Members concerning Shaffer application Thursday, April 1.3, 2006 Please introduce this letter into the official file. Honerable Mayor and City Council Members: In the interest of fairness to both sides of the issue under consideration, I would like to introduce documentation that one of the most vocal of the parties in opposition to my application is, in fact, interested in similar development. This is documented in the attached(faxed) correspondence between Mr. Mron Mintz and Mr. Jim Oliver, Manager of PGA West. I am unable to reconcile his opposition to my application while at the same time, he pursues similar development interests on other properties in question. I am hopeful that the Council's reasonable judgment will overturn the recommendation of the Planning Commission concerning residential use for this property versus making a decision based on what appears to be the insincere motivation of Mr. Mintz. Thank you for your time and consideration of the matter before you. Ray D. Shaffer PS: A copy of the letter to me from Mr. Jim Oliver indicating Mr. Mintz specific interest, is being faxed separately. Please distribute it to the other city officials. Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/Ol/ Cl� E��rr�� Ij �I APR A 3 2006 CITY �F LAOUINTA COMM K DEVELQPMENT DEPARTMENIT e1J ?3%' U4/IJ/2UU6 06:57 7607718348 A MSN Hounail - PAGE 02 Pale I of I Mssiet W-MpIp[IIng4pMII* PrinlW: YVedrWSdbVo Febmwwy 1, 2006 4:00 PM Shaftl`11144MM.COM R cm 31rn Oliver <JoIiver@pQavft5LCM> Seat a Wednesday, February 1, 2M6 3:53 PM To 4shaffVI1140msMCOM> Subject CNL land C.: �pk X'. 0 "'p W. Shaffer, Just a follow up to our mmWSatlQn rWding POteritial d&4eIOWble land 'O""Y 'vn*o by CNL I have had hOWd ftm WO of W membws, LrTw EaWn and Myron Mlnb, who are also irtemsted in p=haMg some or all of the places. CAL Is CINMrdY reviewing vw land for potergW sale. I will conaxi you if I hear from CNL Thanks for your irmfesL Jim Olivet Dire= of Club Operations, PGA WEST 35-955 PGA Boule-VaN La Wrda, California 92253 (760) S64-7601 F-ax (760) M-2823 Email: )oliveer� weSLCOM htip,llbYI05f&baYI05.hotimail.msn.comlcgi-binlgetmsg?cLwmbox-m000000009lo2dooWl*2d.-- 2/1/2006 G 16 233 ATTACHMENT #19 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA December 27, 2005 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commissionpas called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice Chairman Quill who asked C missioner Daniels to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Ed Alderson Richard Daniels, Kay Ladner, and Vice Chairman Paul Quill. It was mo ed and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to excuse Chairma Kirk. Unanimously approved. C. Staff present: Community D elopment Director Doug Evans, City Attorney Kathy Jenson, Pla ing Manager Les Johnson, Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit, As slant Planner Jay Wuu, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE ACNDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Vice Chairman bill asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of the December 3, 2005 regular meeting. There being no changes to the minutes, it w moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to approve t e minutes as submitted. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None. A. Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005- 106, Zone Change 2006-126, Specific Plan 83-002, Amendment #5, and Tentative Parcel Map 32752; a request of Ray Shaffer for consideration of: 1) a Negative Declaration of environmental impact; 2) a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from golf Course to Low Density residential; 3) a Specific Plan to allow the conversion of 2.3 + acres 'of existing golf course/common area to residential use; and 4) review of a Parcel Map to subdivide 2.3 + acres into three single-family lots, for the rl.� 234 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2005\12-27-05KAOC Planning Commission Minutes December 27, 2005 property located between Weiskopf and Jack Nicklaus Golf Courses, immediately south of PGA Boulevard, within PGA West. 1 . Commissioner Daniels informed the Commission that he belongs to the Master Homeowners' Association (HOA) for PGA West, but not the HOA for this subdivision. He does not believe it is a conflict of interest. 2. Comm.issioner Ladner declared she has a potential conflict of interest as she insures the Fairways HOA, and left the dais. 3. Vice Chairman Quill asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Les Johnson presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which was on file in the Community Development Department. Staff clarified why a condition had been added requiring the Fire Marshal approval and that the applicant had not obtained approval from the HOA. 4. Vice Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Daniels asked if there was a staff recommendation as to a course of action. Staff stated they have taken a neutral position on the project. There are concerns that this is an established open space area and neighboring properties have grown accustom to the area being open space. Commissioner Daniels asked where the Tee box and green would be relocated. Staff explained based on the conceptual site plan it was proposed outside the proposed lots and stated the applicant would be able to better define the relocation. 5. Commissioner Alderson asked for clarification on the Fire Marshal requirement. Staff explained there needs to be approval from the Fire Department that they have an approved route that provides access to Lot 2. 6. Vice Chairman Quill asked if there was an existing six foot wall along PGA Boulevard. Staff stated yes, there was. Vice Chairman Quill asked clarified currently there is no viewshed looking down into the golf course. Staff stated that was correct. 7. There being no further questions of staff Vice Chairman Quill asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Forrest Haag, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on �1 35 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minuses\2005\12-27-05PC.doc Planning Commission Minutes December 27, 2005 the project. In regard to the condition for the Fire Marshal, a sketch plan has been prepared to show the access to the lots which reflects the Fire Department's minimum requirements. As it relates to the putting green, this area as been redesigned to give players something to do while waiting to play on. 8. Commissioner Daniels asked the applicant to define who owns the property. Mr. Haag identified the property that is owned by the original land developer and the homeowners. Mr. Larry Lichliter, representing the land owner stated this land has been owned by KSL Land Corporation. It was not part of the sale to CNL. The green area is not part of the CNL property holdings. Commissioner Daniels asked why they had not met with the HOA. Mr. Lichliter stated he is the president of the Fairways HOA. The position of the Fairways Board is not to approve or disapprove of a development. The owner of the land has the ability to put the land into the HOA. Commissioner Daniels asked if the Fairways HOA was part of the Master Association and have they been notified on this development. Mr. Ray Shaffer, proposed owner of the property, stated no. Commission Daniels asked if they had submitted the plans to the Fire Department. Mr. Shaffer stated he had met with the Fire Department and asked for their solution to the access. They gave him two copies of the hammer head design that is before the Commission. They have not, however, made application to date to the Fire Department. Commissioner Daniels asked if they have read the letters of objection staff received. Mr. Shaffer stated no he had not seen them but, one of those objecting has a wall at the rear of his property and this development will not block their view. Commissioner Daniels asked the applicant if there would be any long lasting harm in continuing this project to allow the neighbors to be here. Mr. Shaffer stated no. 9. Commissioner Alderson stated he has a problem with the access design. He believes it will be too difficult for emergency vehicles to make the 90-degree turn. Mr. Shaffer stated the Fire Marshal had given him the design. Commissioner Alderson asked if the HOA had anything to do with the golf course. Mr. Lichliter explained there were four HOA which cover different areas within PGA and each has different responsibilities. Commissioner Alderson asked if Lot 1 vacates a storm drain easement and what is physically happening to this easement. Staff explained it was e1.9 236 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2005\12-27-05PC.doc Planning Commission Minutes December 27, 2005 their understanding it would remain. Mr. Haag stated it would be slightly rerouted to fall between the two lots. . 10. Vice Chairman Quill asked for clarification on the property lines. There are existing private road lots. Is there an existing property that exists along the southerly property line that follows the parcel map. Mr. Lichliter stated that when it was originally designed these lots were not proposed to be built on until PGA West had been developed to see how the lots could be laid out. Vice Chairman Quill asked who owned the land that the access easement will be over. Mr. Lichliter stated KSL Land Corporation and they have stated they will grant the easement. It is not under the jurisdiction of any HOA. Vice Chairman Quill asked how the fire hydrants/water mains would be designed to make it workable. Mr. Haag explained the location of the fire hydrants and how they would gain access to the hydrants. Vice Chairman Quill asked if this property were not adopted by the HOA, what would happen to the land. Mr. Lichliter stated the HOA is required to accept the property. 1 1 . Commissioner Daniels asked how those playing golf would get to the first tee. Staff indicated the route on the plans. 12. Vice Chairman Quill asked if the existing storm drain was going to be relocated and why was it not proposed on the tentative map. Mr. Haag stated it will be relocated to the east. 13. Commissioner Daniels asked if the cart path were rerouted, would this create a nine foot climb up to the first tee. Mr. Haag stated it could be. Commissioner Daniels noted residents will object to this as it has always been perceived that this is part of the golf course. Mr. Lichliter noted other open space areas that are currently not developed, but will be coming forward due the value of the land. Commissioner Daniels noted that whether or not it is true, the property owners in the area have perceived this area has an open space and will object to the development of the area. 14. There being no further public comment the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and the matter was opened to Commission discussion. �A0 237 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2005\12-27-05K.doc 4 Planning Commission Minutes December 27, 2005 15. Community Development Director Doug Evans explained that this entire area has been an open space portion of PGA West. It has not been proposed for development prior to this application. The area has always been referred to as open space.. Property owners have relied upon what was shown to them. From a public purpose there is no need to develop the site. From a policy standpoint, staff implements the General Plan and the staff recommendation could have been recommended for denial as it does not comply with the General Plan. If the Commission wishes ,to consider the General Plan Amendment, then the applicant would submit a Specific Plan and Parcel Map to create the three lots that would be reasonable compatible with the adjoining land uses. Staff would then expect to receive public input objecting to the development of the area as the adjoining property owners would be notified. 16. Vice Chairman Quill asked if there were any documents on file that calls this property out as an open space. Staff stated they would need to research the issue. The General Plan controls the underlying use. Vice Chairman Quill asked if the General flan defines the metes and bounds. Staff stated the area has been defined as it currently is designed with open space. In this case the open space area just happens to follow all of the lot lines, and over the time of development, the area has been defined as open space. 17. Commissioner Alderson stated the houses as positioned could be hazardous. The property is not overly landscaped; there is only grass. This development will disturb the serenity of those who live in the area as well as those playing the course. Based on the letters received he would recommend continuing the project. 18. Commissioner Daniels stated he has no objection to the project, but knows it will cause substantial issues with the residents. 19. Vice Chairman Quill stated his issue is the open space. We do not know how this lot was configured and whether or not it was set aside as open space. For this reason he would like to continue the project to better understand how the recorded maps are defined, especially for Lots L and H. 20. Vice Chairman Quill reopened the public hearing. ?38 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2005\12-27-05PC.doc 5 Planning Commission Minutes December 27, 2005 21. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to continue Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2006-126, Specific Plan 83- 002, Amendment #5, and Tentative Parcel Map 32752 project to January 10, 2006, and directed staff to determine how this land was designated and seek information from the HOA regarding the proposed project. Also, direction from the Fire Department as to the general access to the lots. Unanimously approved. Commissioner Ladner rejoined the Commission. B. ite Development Permit 2005-846; a request of Toll Brothers, Inc. for nsideration of a residential tract development for seven single-family pr otypes, each with two different elevation treatments, and typical land ape design plan for the property located within Tract 30834, on the no h side of Avenue 58, ± 1 /2 mile west of Madison Street. 1 . Vic Chairman Quill asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Walla a Nesbit presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which was on file in the Community Develop nt Department. 2. Vice Chairmk Quill asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner aniels asked if the most sensitive lots in regard to the two-story un s were Lots 10-19. Staff stated yes. There are no compatibility s tions in the Zoning Code that specifically make any requirements o these lots but, in light of the concerns that were raised when the . uerta Azul project was built, staff is trying to be sensitive to the t o-story units adjacent to one-story units. 3. Commissioner Alderson as d if the two-story units were sited on the map. Staff stated there . as not been any specific lot siting in regard to the one and two srory units. Staff noted these units have been built in other projec and are production units which are not the same as the existing omes. 4. There being no further questions 84 staff Vice Chairman . Quill asked if the applicant would like to aJ-dress the Commission. Mr. Rick Blackshear, architect for the proje' t the project. He stated two-thirds of th story. They do intend to build single - existing single -story units. On the n gave a presentation on units would be single- siry units next to the orth boundary, they are r)n 23 9 +G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2005\12-27-05PC.doc 6 ATTACHMENT #20 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA January 10, 2006 I. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Com fission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Kirk who asked mmissioner Alderson to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Ed Al rson, Richard Daniels, Paul Quill, and Chairman Tom Kirk. It was oved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to excuse Commissioner Ladner. Unanimously approved. C. Staff present: Community evelopment Director Doug Evans, Assistant City Attorney Michael ouston, Planning Manager Les Johnson, Associate Engineer Paul oble, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planners Wallace Nesbi and Andrew Mogensen, Assistant Planner Jay Wuu, and Executive S retary Betty Sawyer II. PUBLIC COMMENT: Non III. CONFIRMATION OF THIJAGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman K.4fasked if there were any changes to the Minutes of the December 2 , 2005 regular meeting. There being no changes to the minutes, it as moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to approv the minutes as submitted. Chairman Kirk abstained. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None. .■..�..� A. Continued - Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2006-126, Specific Plan 83-002, Amendment #5, and Tentative Parcel Map 32752; a request of Ray Shaffer for consideration of: 1) a Negative Declaration of environmental impact; 2) a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from golf Course to Low Density residential; 3) a Specific Plan to allow the conversion of 2.3 + acres of existing golf course/common area to residential use; and 4) review of a Parcel Map to subdivide 2.3 + acres into three singleV. - G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2006\1-10-06PC.doc " ' 40 Planning Commission Minutes January 10, 2006 family lots, for the property located between Weiskopf and Jack Nicklaus Golf Courses, immediately south of PGA Boulevard, within PGA West. 1 . Commissioner Daniels informed the Commission that he belongs to the Master Homeowners' Association (HOA) for PGA West, but not the HOA for this subdivision. He does not believe it is a conflict of interest and will participate in the meeting. 2. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wanted to speak regarding the project. Mr. Myron Mintz, 80-355 Weiskopf, stated his objections to the project and asked that this item be continued . 3. Staff informed the Commission why the continuance was requested. 4. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Quill to continue Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2006-126, Specific Plan 83- 002, Amendment #5, and Tentative Parcel Map 32752 project to January 24, 2006. Unanimously approved. B. ent Permit 2005-839; a request of Marchi and Associates for Xells Fargo Bank for consideration of development plans and a sign for a nk with a drive-thru with approximately 4,500 square feet of floor area, fo the property located northwest of the intersection of Highway 1 1 1 and Quinta Drive in The Pavilion at La Quinta project. 1 . Chair Kirk asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa pr ented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of ich was on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Kirk sked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner D iels asked about the Americans for Disabilities Act requirements i regard to the sidewalk to Highway 1 1 1. Staff stated access must a provided to the public sidewalk as well as the parking lot. 3. Chairman Kirk stated ked the location of the bus stop. Staff stated they would need review the plans to determine the exact location. F 4 4 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2006\1-10-06PC.doc 2 P 4 1- ATTACH MENIT #21 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA January 24, 2006 I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of th p.m. by Chairman salute. 7:00 P.M. (Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 irk who asked Commissioner Ladner to lead the fiag I B. Present: Comm' sioners Ed Alderson, Richard Daniels, Kay Ladner, Paul Quill, and Chai an Tom Kirk. C. Staff presen Community Development Director Doug Evans, Assistant City Attorn y Michael Houston, Public Works Director Tim Jonasson, Planning nager Les Johnson, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner allace Nesbit, and Consulting Planner Nicole Criste, and Executiv Secretary Betty Sawyer II. PUBLIC COMA/IENT: None. IV. V. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. CONSENY ITEMS: A. lCairman Kirk asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of the nuary 10, 2006 regular meeting. There being no changes to the nutes, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to approve the minutes as submitted. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None. A. Continued - Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2006-126, Specific Plan 83-002, Amendment #5, and Tentative Parcel Map 32752; a request of Ray Shaffer for consideration of: 1) a Negative Declaration of environmental impact; 2) a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from golf Course to Low Density residential; 3) a Specific Plan to allow the conversion of 2.3 + acres of existing golf course/common area to residential use; and 4) review of a Parcel Map to subdivide 2.3 + acres into three single- family lots, for the property located between Weiskopf and Jack Nicklaus G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2006\1-24-06PC.doc 24n Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 2006 Golf Courses, immediately south of PGA Boulevard, within PGA West. 1. Commissioner Ladner informed the Commission she had a potential conflict of interest due to her job and withdrew from the dais. 2. Commissioner Daniels informed the Commission that he belongs to the Master Homeowners' Association (HOA) for PGA West, but not the HOA for this subdivision. He does not believe it is a conflict of interest and will participate in the meeting. 3. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 4. Commissioner Quil asked if staff had obtained any of the information requested by the Commission at the last meeting. Staff stated yes, and the site had been designated as open space and a General Plan Amendment/Zone Change will be required before the use can be changed to residential. The information regarding the CC&R's is still being researched. 5. Commissioner Alderson asked if the plans for the drive approach on the easterly side, that was close to the gate and moved to the south in a reconfigured form, had been revised. Staff stated not to their knowledge. 6. - Commissioner Daniels asked if any of the HOA had responded. Staff stated yes, both HOAs had responded and did not object. 7. Commissioner Daniels asked if the area west of Lot 1 is similar in that it is owned by KSL and not CNL. Staff stated any area similar to this site will require a General Plan Amendment and rezoning application. Commissioner Daniels asked when the master plan for PGA West was approved, was it the practice of the City to give density bonuses and was this land used as credit. Staff would research the issue and report back. 8. Chairman Kirk asked if anyone wanted to speak regarding the project. Myron and Joanne Mintz, 80-355 Weiskopf, asked if staff had stated the HOA had no opposition to the project. Staff stated the letters received stated they had no objection. Mr. Mintz stated G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2006\1-24-06PC.doc 243 z Planning Commission Minutes January 24, 2006 he was a member of the HOA and the subject had not been brought before the HOA. They went on to note corrections that should be made to the minutes of January 10, 2006 and December 27, 2005. 9. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to continue Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2006-126, Specific Plan 83- 002, Amendment #5, and Tentative Parcel Map 32752 project to February 14, 2006. Unanimously approved.. Commissioner Ladner rejoined the Commission. B. V' la a Use Permit 2004-025 and Tentative Parcel Map 33954; a request of . H. LaBranche, Jr. for consideration of three abutting live/work units, eacN onsisting of an office area adjacent to Calle Amigo and a residential unit o the north end of the property; a parcel map to divide the existing lot int\Ie , for the property located on the north side of Calle amigot of Avenida Bermudas. 1. Kirk asked for the staff report. Consulting Planner te presented the information contained in the staff copy of which was on file in the Community nt Department. 2. Chairman k asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissione Alderson asked if the project met the density for the site. Staff sta d it did. Commissioner Alderson asked about the lot division an if the HOA would be formed with all three lot owners. Staff s ted that was correct. 3. Commissioner Da els asked if the property to the north is also zoned for commerc al. Staff stated yes and explained the uses surrounding the site. 4. Chairman Kirk aske if other parking arrangements were considered. Staff sta ed they did not ask them to consider a different use. As it is rimarily a residential use, staff thought it was a good opportunit for shared parking. Alternative parking was very limited. Chair an Kirk stated one consideration is the number of parking space and the other is location. e17 244 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minu1es\2006\1-24-06PC.doc 3 ATTACHMENT #22 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA February 2006 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO RDER A. This m\Chairman anning/on,Richard as called to order at 7:00 p.m. bwho oner Quill to lead the flag salute. B. Presents Ed ADaniels, Kay Ladner, Paul Quill, am Kirk C. Staff present: Communi evelopment Director Doug Evans, Assistant City Attorney Michae ous\andecutive blic Works Director Tim Jonasson, Planning Manager L Johnscipal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Andrew gensen, Secretary Betty Sawyer II. PUBLIC COMMENTZNone. III. CONFIRMATI0 OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT EMS: A. airman Kirk asked if there were any changes to t Minutes of the January 24, 2006 regular meeting. There being no c anges to the minutes, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to approve the minutes as submitted. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None. A. Continued - Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan 00000 Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2006-126, Specific Plan 83-002, Amendment #5, and Tentative Parcel Map 32752; a request of Ray Shaffer for consideration of: 1) a Negative Declaration of environmental impact; 2) a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from Golf Course to Low Density residential; 3) a Specific Plan to allow the conversion of 2.3 + acres of existing golf course/common area to residential use; and 4) review of a Parcel Map to subdivide 2.3 + acres into three single-family lots, for the property located between Weiskopf and Jack Nicklaus Golf Courses, immediately south of PGA Boulevard, fj 28 within PGA West. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minu1es\2006\2-14-06PC.doc J 245 Planning Commission Minutes February 14, 2006 1. Commissioner Ladner informed the Commission she had a potential conflict of interest due to her job and withdrew from the dais. 2. Commissioner Daniels informed the Commission that he belongs to the Master Homeowners' Association (HOA) for PGA West, but not the HOA for this subdivision. He does not believe it is a conflict of interest and will participate in the meeting. 3. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and informed everyone that the applicant had requested a continuance to April 26, 2006. Chairman Kirk asked if anyone wanted to speak regarding the project. Members of the audience asked for an explanation of the request to continue. Chairman Kirk asked staff to give a brief summary of the project. Principal Planner Stan Sawa provided a brief summary of they proposal and the applicant's request for continuance. 4. Commissioner Daniels asked if there were any changes to the applications. Staff stated no changes had been submitted. 5. Commissioner Alderson asked if the applicant had met with any of the neighbors. Staff stated they had not been informed of any meetings taking place. 6. Chairman Kirk asked if anyone would like to speak at this meeting. Mr. Bob Hargraves, attorney for the applicant, gave an overview of the request before the Commission. To his knowledge, no meetings had been held with the homeowners in the area. 7. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any guarantee this would be the last request for continuance and the Commission will not be requested to continue this into the summer. Mr. Hargraves stated it is not their intention to continue it further, but it will depend upon whether or not any entitlement issues are raised. 8. Chairman Kirk asked if anyone else wanted to speak on this subject tonight. Mr. and Mrs. Myron Mintz, 80-355 Weiskopf, gave a presentation on their objections to the project. Mr. Mintz stated he had spoken to the applicant regarding the site and the applicant had offered to sell him the project. He went on to explain his reasons for not wanting the continuance granted. He E'j 4'; 9 246 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2006\2-14-06PC.doc 2 Planning Commission Minutes February 14, 2006 presented a petition of those objecting to the project. Mrs. Mintz stated it was her understanding the Commission could continue the project, deny the continuance, or continue it to a more appropriate date. She suggested if it was to be continued, it should be continued to January 2007. 9. Mr. Brian Ford, 80-970 Spanish Bay, stated his objection was regarding the Fairways HOA. The HOA is made up of five board members and two are homeowners. They may be involved, but do not fairly represent the homeowners. The second concern is that once this is approved, all open spaces on the golf course will then be submitted for development. He asked whether the property had been a part of any density transfers. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated that was included in the study staff was preparing for the Commission. In regard to a density transfer, PGA West is under the housing numbers identified in their Specific Plan and therefore density bonuses were not an issue. 10. Commissioner Daniels stated the decision on this case will be made not on the number of people supporting or opposing the project, but on the merits of the case. He does share the concern raised about the repeated continuances. He would be inclined to continue the project to allow the applicant time to address the issues that had been raised by the Commission and residents. 11. Commissioner Quill asked if staff had been able to find answers to any of the Commission's issues. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated staff had, and had also met with the applicant to strongly encourage the applicant to meet with the HOAs. Based on this conversation and the continuance request, staff did not prepare a complete report for this meeting. 1.2. Commissioner Alderson stated he too had several engineering questions and did not believe they could be addressed at this time. He further asked if the date for continuance could be shortened. Mr. Hargraves stated he had not seen any of the information staff had found and time is needed to review that information. He knows they can make the April 241h date, but he is not certain he can do it before that date. 13. Chairman Kirk stated he would like to shorten the time for the continuance. He asked if there was something in the record that 630 247 G:\WPDOCS\PC M1nutes\2006\2-14-06PC.doc 3 Planning Commission Minutes February 14, 2006 suggested this land was not to be open space. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated the original specific plan will show it to be Tourist Commercial and as this has been refined over time and the last subdivision map was approved, the property was determined and labeled as open space. Staff's report will show a difference of opinion with the applicant. They will argue it was intended to be Tourist Commercial and staff will use the record processed with the Specific Plan and the last decision of the Commission and City Council that it was to be open space. The Commission has asked the applicant to meet with the homeowners and the applicant has not been able to do this yet after two continuances. Chairman Kirk stated he is hesitant to approve the continuance for the length of time requested when he does not elieve the applicant has made a good faith effort to meet the HOAs. 14. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Quill to continue Environmental Assessment 2005-550, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2006-126, Specific Plan 83- 002, Amendment #5, and Tentative Parcel Map 32752 project to March 14, 2006. Unanimously approved. Commissioner Ladner rejoined the Commission. B. Conti ued - Tentative Tract Map 34185; a request of Sienna Corporation for co ideration of the subdivision of 3.14 acres into ten residential lots and oth miscellaneous lots, for the property located 425 feet west of Jefferson reet along the north bank of the CVWD Stormwater Channel, south of Fie Drive. 1. Chairman irk asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Andrew Mo nsen presented the information contained in the staff report, a co of which was on file in the Community Development De rtment. 2. Chairman Kirk ask if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Alders asked where the residents would park other than their drive ys. Staff stated there is no on -street parking, so the driveway would be the only parking areas. 3. There being no further ques kons of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to a ress the Commission. Mr. Mike Rowe, Sienna Corporation, aska4 that the new conditions adTAq � i 248 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minu1es\2006\2-14-06PC.doc 4 0 ATTACHMENT #23 Tuesday, April 11, 2006 S VIA FAX AND X Mr. Stan Sawa Assistant Planning Director City of La Quinta California. La Quinta, California 92247 Re: PGA WEST Specific Plan Amendment 5 Request for a continuance Dear Mr. Sawa: APR 1 3 20% UY CITY OF COMMUNITY LA QUINTq DEPgq Ejy�jEN�PMENT As discussed in our phone call today, this letter is provided in order to document a request for a continuance to May 2nd, 2006 of the above noted item currently scheduled for the I e of April before the City Council. This request will allow the applicant's consulting team to adequately prepare presentation material for the hearing. Thank you for your attention to this matter. K. Haag, ASLA, Inc. 249 roKKEST K. HAAG, ASLA, INC. LANDSCAPE ARCMITECTURC - LAND PLANNING 1251 N. COAST HIGHWAY LAGUNA BEACH. CA 92651 P. (919) 37,6-9066 f: (9't9) 376-906i t: roKKtST@fKMMAIL.COM MEMBER ASLA ATTACHMENT 24 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP A CAUFORNIA UMITED LIABIUTY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS RIVERSIDE LAWYERS SAN DIEGO (909) 686-1 450 74-760 HIGHWAY I 1 1. SUITE 200 (61 9) 525-1 300 -- INDIAN WELLS, CALIFORNIA 922 10 - ONTARIO (760) 568-281 1 ORANGE COUNTY (909) 989-8584 (760) 340-6698 FAX (949) 263-2600 BBKLAW.COM SACRAMENTO (916) 325-4000 ROBERT W. HARGRE4VES ROB ERT. HARGR EAVES@B B KLAW.COM April 14, 2006 Mayor and Members of La Quinta City Council 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92270 FILE No. 79983.00001 Re: Shaffer Development, SP 83-002, Amendment #5 and TPM 32752 Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: In a letter dated March 23, 2006 to the La Quinta Planning Commission, which I understand is part of your agenda packet, I explained that the parcels that are the subject of Mr. Shaffer's application ("Shaffer Parcels") were never intended to be dedicated open space. They were initially mapped to accommodate a tentative entrance to Tract 28444. The entrance was subsequently routed elsewhere. The parcels have remained in private hands pending the final decision on their use. I am writing today to respond to statements by project opponents that they were misled at the time they bought their homes to believe that the Shaffer parcels would be retained in permanent open space. It is my understanding that KSL always conformed to the standard merchant -builder policy of never making representations regarding the disposition of other property, that, instead, buyers would be referred to the City to determine zoning and use restrictions on adjacent property. Additionally, in deeds to other builders, KSL was careful to disclaim any representations or obligations to retain golf course property as such. I have attached a copy of the recorded grant deed transferring title to Capstone's Golf West which is the development immediately to the east of the Shaffer parcels. Subsection 3.2(e) of the attached exhibit states: "[Buyer] acknowledges and agrees that KSL Resorts, and any successor, Golf Property Owner, makes no warranties or representations that a golf course will be developed and constructed adjacent to the Property or that, if so developed and constructed, will be maintained and operated in the manner that existed or was contemplated at the time of the recordation of these CC&Rs.". RMPUBI HARGREAVEM268145.1 2 LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP April 14, 2006 Page 2 The property covered by the attached deed includes the property on which the homes of many of the project opponents are located. It is my understanding that there is similar language in the deeds from KSL to the various other merchant builders within PGA 'West. In summary, the initial plan to develop the Shaffer parcels as an entrance to Tract 28444 was never implemented. The entrance was established elsewhere. KSL retained the expectation that it would be able to develop the property in conformance with the PGA Specific Plan and the City's General Plan and zoning. Mr. Shaffer has purchased the right to develop the property and respectfully requests that the City honor his right to do so. RWH:dm cc: Stan Sawa, Principle Planner Kathy Jenson, Esq., City Attorney Ray Shaffer RMPUBIRHARGREAVES\268145.1 3 10 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: Benzion J. Westreich, Esq. Brown, Rayslnan, Millstein, Felder & Steiner LLP 1880 Century Park East, Ste. 711 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Escrow No. 980948—CMC Order No. 13152-01 MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO Same as above Certified to be a true and correct copy of GRANT DEED Recorded AUGUST 312 1998 As Instrument No. 369257 of Official Records of RIVERSIDE County, Cali omi��,�, By FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE CO. nhnve this line for Recorder's Use CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, 02, 067.2 6- A.P. NO.: STATE OF CALIFORNIA _ DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX IS SHOWN BY SEPARATE AFFIDAVIT NOT OF RECORD. FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, KSL LAND CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation ("KSL Land) and KSL DESERT RESORTS, INC., a Delaware corporation (" KSL Resorts") hereby GRANT to CAPSTONES GOLF WEST LLC, a Delaware limited liability . company ("Grantee") (i) the real property in the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, State of California, described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference together with all buildings, es facilities and structures and other improvements located thereon and all tenements, hereditaments, appurtenances, privileges and other rights and interest benefiting or relating thereto (the "Property") reserving therefrom and subject to easements, rights, covenants, conditions, restrictions and rights as more particularly set forth in said Exhibit A, and (ii) the assignment of certain Declarant's rights under the Master Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for PGA West, Riverside County, California as more particularly set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Da ted: grantdee.03.doc2 KSL LAND CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation KSL DESERT RESORTS, INC., a Delaware corporation Page 1 C1J0 252 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) On AM u�;r C:� (0 , ) q q 1� — before me, --t'5 - , a notary public in and for said State, personally appeared LARRY E LICHLITER personally known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and o ial s al. (Seal) noBARBARAIARSH Commission 01120M :. Wary PUM--Calitn t Riverside Cov* My Comm. Eves Dee 22, 2000 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) Ss. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) On AO,6-) L L(--. r oa (P before me, Q , a notary public in and for said State, personally appeared LARRY E. LICHLITER personally known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. W TNESS y hand and o i i (Seal) BARBARA LARSH COtNnission # 1120M .i NoWy PubUc—CdIbmk Riv"de County My Comm. Expirm Dec 22.2000 grantdee.03.doc2 Page 2 253 EXHIBIT A Real property located in the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, State of California, described as follows: PARCEL 1: Lots 1 through 69, inclusive of Tract No. 28444 as shown by Map on file in Book 271, Pages 57 through 62 inclusive, of Maps, Records of Riverside County, California; PARCEL 2: Lettered Lots A, D, E, J, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U and V of Tract No. 28444 as shown by Map on file in Book 271, Pages 57 through 62 inclusive, of Maps, Records of Riverside County, California; PARCEL 3: Together with the right to grant and transfer same, nonexclusive easements for ingress and egress, over and across the real property described on Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Access Streets"); PARCEL 4: Together with the right to grant and transfer same (subject to the terms provided below), non-exclusive easements on, over, through and across those portions (described below as "Easement Areas") of that certain property (the "Golf Property" as hereinafter defined), as being an easement for storm drain purposes as described on Exhibits "Y1 and Y2" and depicted on Exhibits "71 and Z2" (the "Easement Areas") attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference for (a) the installation, construction, maintenance, repair, replacement and reconstruction of the storm drain facilities herein as necessary to service the real property described in Parcels 1 and 2 above, (b) reasonable drainage through and across such storm drain facilities, and (c) ingress and egress over the Easement Areas as reasonably necessary for the foregoing purposes subject to the following terms and conditions: (a) Assignment of Grantee Obligations. Grantee shall have the right to assign its rights and obligations as Easement Holder (defined in subparagraph (b) below) with respect to the Work (defined in subparagraph (b) below) to any homeowners association to which the Property is annexed only upon the following conditions: Grantee shall remain primarily liable for the performance of Easement Holder's obligations hereunder and the assignee homeowner's association must expressly assume in writing, in a form of recordable document satisfactory to KSL Land and KSL Resorts, all of Easement Holder's obligations hereunder; (b) Performance of Work. Grantee, or its successors and assigns (the "Easement Holder"), shall have the obligation to perform the construction, maintenance, repair, replacement and reconstruction of all of such storm drain facilities (hereinafter, the "Work"), such obligation to include, without limitation, the obligation to periodically cause an inspection to be made of such storm drain facilities to ensure that such storm drain facilities are free of unreasonable accumulations of debris; (c) Failure to Perform Work. If Easement Holder for any reason fails to perform the Work in a timely fashion, the fee owner of the Golf Property, or portion thereof, that is burdened with such easement, including KSL Resorts for as long as KSL Resorts continues to be the fee owner of such real property (the "Burdened Property Owner") may make a written demand upon Easement Holder to timely accomplish such Work. If Easement Holder fails, for any reason, to commence the performance of the Work within twenty (20) days of delivery of such written demand, and to thereafter diligently prosecute the same to completion, such Burdened Property Owner shall have the right, but not the obligation, to perform the Work. An amount equal to one hundred ten percent (110%) of the actual costs incurred by the Burdened Property Owner in performing such Work shall be due and payable by the Easement Holder to such Burdened grawdee.01doc EXHIBIT "A" - Page 1 e3 254 Property Owner within ten (10) days of a request therefor (which request shall be accompanied by documentation reasonably sufficient to evidence such costs incurred) by such Burdened Property Owner; (d) Entry. Entry may be made upon the Easement Areas without notice only in the event of emergency repair involving potential danger to life or property. Entry for the performance of any other Work may be made upon written notice of not less than ten (10) days provided that the performance of such Work does not unreasonably disrupt the golfing or the golfing -related activities upon the Golf Property. The easement for ingress and egress shall be over the Easement Areas only and shall be exercised with as little inconvenience to the Burdened Property Owner as possible. Access to the Easement Areas to accomplish the performance of the Work shall be had from the portion of the Property that is contiguous to such Easement Areas to the extent reasonably possible. Permission to use any other portion of the Golf Property for such purposes shall be reasonably given subject to control of the Burdened Property Owner in accordance with Section 813 of the California Civil Code; (e) Repair of Damage. Any improvements upon the Golf Property that are damaged or destroyed in whole or in part as the result of the use by Easement Holder of the Easement Areas for the easement purposes described herein shall be repaired, replaced, restored or reconstructed at the cost and expense of the Easement Holder as' soon as reasonably possible following such damage or destruction to the condition that existed prior to such damage or destruction; (f) Mechanics' Liens. Easement Holder shall not suffer or permit to be enforced against any portion of the Golf Property any mechanics', materialmen's, contractors' or subcontractors' liens arising out of the Work. Easement Holder shall cause any of such liens to be removed or the enforcement thereof stayed (whether by payment, posting of a property bond, or otherwise) before the foreclosure of any such liens against any such portions of the Golf Property; and (g) Indemnity. Grantee, for itself and on behalf of any other Easement Holders who acquire the easement rights and obligations described herein, agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless KSL Land and KSL Resorts and any other Burdened Property Owner from and against any and all claims, obligations, expenses, liabilities and costs, including, but not limited to, attorneys' fees, for property damage and bodily injury, sickness, disability, disease or death of any person or persons arising directly or indirectly from the failure of the Easement Holder to diligently perform the Work in a manner that will ensure that such storm drain facilities are retained in a safe. and acceptable condition or out of the Easement Holder's activities. in discharging its obligations hereunder, or out of any defect in the construction or the design of the storm drain facilities constructed and/or installed by Easement Holder upon the Golf Property. RESERVING UNTO, KSL Land and/or KSL Resorts together with the right to grant and transfer all or a portion of the same, easements and rights for the benefit of KSL Land, its successors and assigns, and KSL Resorts, its successors and assigns, for the benefit of, and appurtenant to, real property. in said City, County, and State owned by KSL Resorts described on Exhibit X attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Golf Property"), and any successors in title to the Golf Property (the `Benefited Parties"), which shall bind Grantee and any successors in title to the portion of the Property burdened with such easements as follows: A. Oil and Mineral Rights. All oil, minerals, natural gas, and other hydrocarbons by whatsoever name known, geothermal resources, metalliferous or other ores, and all products derived from any of the foregoing, that may be within or under the Property, and all rights associated with the foregoing, together with the perpetual right of drilling, mining, exploring and operating therefor and storing in and removing the same from said land or any other land, including the right to whipstock or directionally drill and mine from lands other than the Property, oil or gas wells, tunnels and shafts into, through or across the subsurface of the Property and to bottom such whipstocked or directionally drilled wells, tunnels and shafts under and beneath or beyond the exterior limits thereof, and to redrill, retunnel, equip, maintain, repair, deepen and operate any such wells or mines e3S grantdee.03.doc EXHIBIT "A" - Page 2 without, however, the right to drill, mine, store, explore and operate on or through the surface, or the upper five hundred (500) feet of the subsurface of the Property; B. Water Rights. The right and power to use or utilize any and all water rights or interests in water rights no matter how acquired by the Benefited Parties, and all water rights or interests in water rights that may be within, under or on the Property, whether such water rights shall be riparian, overlying, appropriative, percolating, prescriptive or contractual; provided, however, that the reservation does not reserve to, or for the benefit of, Benefited Parties any right to enter upon the surface of any portion of the Property in the exercise of such rights or to drill or bore for water, and install, maintain, replace or restore water wells, pumping stations, water lines, or other facilities for the extraction or the transportation of water; C. Easements. Nonexclusive easements as follows: (1) Ingress and Egress Over Private Streets and Common Lots. Over Parcel 2 above upon which private streets, roads, paths and other ways now or hereafter designated as "common areas," "common lots or "landscape lots" as such lots may be mapped, modified, enlarged, replatted, or realigned from time to time; (2) Encroachment of Golf Balls. For the encroachment of golf balls resulting from golfing activities on the Golf Property, including without limitation, the flight, passage and landing of golf balls on, across and over the Property, or any portion thereof; (3) Utilily Easements. (a) For the construction, installation, use, maintenance, repair, replacement and reconstruction of lines, cables, wires, conduits, or other devices for the transmission of electricity for lighting, heating, power, telephone, television and other purposes, storm water drains and pipes, water systems, irrigation lines or sprinkler systems, water heading and gas lines or pipes and any similar public or quasi -public improvements or facilities (i) on, over, under, through and across those portions of the Property five (5) feet in width measured from and running parallel along the boundary of the Property that abuts any portion of the Golf Property (the "Five Foot Easement Area"), and (ii) on, over, under, through and across those portions of the Property designated as lettered lots on the map of Tract No. 28444, as such lots may be modified, enlarged, replatted, or realigned from time to time, and any other portion of the Property now or hereafter designated as "common area" (as such term is defined in Section 1350(b) of the California Civil Code) (hereinafter the "Common Area"); and (b) For ingress and egress over the Property to the extent reasonably necessary to access any of such facilities. (4) For Benefit of Golf Property. For the construction of and/or utilization of underground ways and/or tunnels under and beneath, or bridges over, roads, walkways, utility lines and/or, other lines now or hereafter located within the Common Area so as to provide pedestrian and vehicular access between portions of the Golf Property for golf carts, trucks, and other golf and golf course -related vehicles, traffic and usage, and for pedestrian and vehicular ingress and egress to and from and parking on the Golf Property and the improvements located thereon, (if parking areas are a part of such development plan) roads, private streets, driveways, parking areas, golf cart paths, walkways, bridges, tunnels and other ways now or hereafter located upon the Golf Property, by the Benefited Parties and the customers, guests, permittees, invitees, agents, employees, contractors and vendors of a Benefited Party (the "Easement Users"), which include, without limitation, access to Golf Property under construction (and to be constructed) to enable the transport of supplies, materials and labor to the Golf Property of such Benefited Party. (5) Terms and Conditions. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the use of the Property by the Benefited Parties for the foregoing easement purposes shall be subject to the following terms and conditions: grantdee.03.doc EXHIBIT "A" - Page 3 256 (a) The irrigation lines and facilities, landscaping, streets, roads or other ways and utilities and other lines and/or systems that may be constructed, installed, maintained, repaired, replaced, or reconstructed pursuant to the foregoing easements shall be limited to those areas within the Five Foot Easement Area and the Common Area designated for such purposes on the site improvement plans and other plans approved by the City of La Quinta, California; (b) Benefited Parties shall have the right to hook up or connect to utility lines or other utility services now or hereafter located upon or within the Five Foot Easement Area and the Common Area provided that such utility services are metered to such Benefited Party and provided further that such use shall not unreasonably disturb services then being provided thereby; (c) The use and enjoyment of the easement rights granted as set forth herein by the Easement Users shall be at no cost or expense to Grantee, or any successor in title to the portion of the Property that is burdened by the easements and any damage or destruction of any improvements caused by any of the Easement Users in the exercise of the easement rights acquired hereby shall be repaired and reconstructed by the Benefited Party of such Easement User; (d) The right of a Benefited Party to any construction permitted pursuant to the terms of this easement (the "Construction Easement") shall accrue if and only if Grantee, its successors, assigns, affiliates and its prospective purchasers, fail to construct the improvements contemplated by the reservation described in Parcel 4, paragraph (c) above under, on or through the Five Foot Easement Area and the Common Area in a timely manner and the lack of such improvements has a material adverse impact on the development, use, maintenance or operation of the Golf Property; (e) Benefited Party shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Grantee, its successors and assigns, from any and against all liability, claims, suits, demands, losses, recoveries, damages, costs or expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees, expenses and costs) arising out of or relating to the use of the Construction Easement by such Benefited Party; and (f) Benefited Party shall not permit any liens to attach to the Property, or any improvements located thereon, by reason of the use or exercise of the Construction Easement by such Benefited Party. SUBJECT TO: l . Taxes/Assessments. Current Taxes and Assessments. 2. Record Matters. All other covenants, conditions, restrictions, reservations, rights, rights -of -way and easements of record as well as any of such matters that are apparent. 3. CC&R's. The Golf Property and the Property are being developed as an integrated residential golf course community. KSL Resorts and KSL Land, as the current owners of fee title to the Property and the Golf Property, and their successors in title, by the acceptance of the conveyance of fee title to any portion of the Property or the Golf Property, for itself, himself or herself, and for their respective invitees, personal representatives, assigns, heirs and next of kin, agents, employees (collectively, the "Related Parties") hereby agree that they will all benefit materially from the development of the Property and the Golf Property as an integrated residential golf course community and that the following covenants, conditions, rights and restrictions (collectively the "CC&R's) shall be equitable servitudes, shall run with and bind the Property and the Golf Property and shall inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the parties hereto and shall be binding upon all parties having or acquiring any right or title in the Property and the Golf Property, or any part thereof, and are imposed upon said interests and every part thereof as a servitude in favor of each and every of said interests as the dominant tenement or tenements until and unless terminated or modified as hereinafter provided. gramdee.01doc EXHIBIT "A" - Page 4 257 64® 3.1 Acknowledgment. Each owner of the Property (the "Property Owner") acknowledges the potential effect of stray golf balls, motorized golf carts, golfers and other traffic or events inherent to the activities on the Golf Property (the "Golf Course Hazards"), which include, without limitation, the following: (a) the potential effect of the installation on the Golf Property of protective measures such as trees, fencing or netting or the installation or growth of trees, shrubs and other landscaping on the Golf Property, including without limitation, the impairment of any existing or perceived views; (b) the potential for damage to any improvements, including, without limitation, stucco, tile roofs, pools and related equipment and windows of any structure, attributable to the Golf Property, or any activities thereon; (c) the potential for any adverse effect on any landscaping installed by the Related Parties arising from or attributable to the use of reclaimed water on the Golf Property; (d) the potential for nuisances created by or arising from the Golf Property, including without limitation, noises and other nuisances arising from televised tournaments, landscaping and maintenance of the Golf Property and early morning and late night play or maintenance activities and visibility of lights used in connection with any driving range or clubhouse, if any, installed on the Golf Property, and (e) the potential effects of: G) the irrigation of landscaping upon the Golf Property on any landscaping, walls, fences or other structures on the Property; (ii) overseeding with Winter Rye in the Fall and the heavy use of fertilizers, pesticides and other chemicals that may be applied to the Golf Property; (iii) changes to the Golf Property, including, without limitation, changes in grade, changes in the location, configuration, size and elevation of fences, trees, bunkers, fairways, tees and greens; (iv) disturbances, traffic and other noise from the club house, golf course parking areas, driving ranges, golf cart paths, or any other portion of the Golf Property caused by activities inherent to golf course and club house property such as mowing of putting greens, fairways, roughs and around trees; (v) the use of mowers, aerifiers, mulchers, tractors, utility vehicles and other equipment, circulation pumps, compressors and wells for water features; (vi) early morning and late night play or maintenance activities and the loss of privacy because of the near proximity of the Property to the golf courses or golf cart paths; and (vii) the presence of rodents and/or pests or the existence of rodent and/or pest control activities upon the Golf Property. 3.2 Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, each Property Owner: (a) assumes the risk of any property damage, personal injury or death and/or creation or maintenance of a trespass or nuisance created by or arising in connection with Golf Course Hazards or any matters described above (collectively, "Assumed Risks"); (b) releases, waives, discharges, and covenants not to sue, and agrees to indemnify and to hold harmless KSL Land, its successors and assigns, KSL Resorts, its successors and assigns, any successors in title to the Golf Property, and their respective officers, directors, shareholders, partners, participants, affiliates, subsidiaries, consultants, attorneys, agents, invitees, employees, representatives and contractors grantdee.03.doc EXHIBIT "A" - Page 5 258 E111 and their respective heirs, executors, successors and assigns (collectively, the "Released Parties"), and each of them, from any and all liability to the Property Owner for any losses, costs (including, without limitation, attorneys' fees), claims, demands, suits, judgments or other obligations arising out of or connected with any of the Assumed Risks, whether caused by the negligence of the Released Parties or otherwise; (c) acknowledges that Property Owners have no obligation or right to regulate or control the Golf Property or any activities thereon, in any way or manner except as specifically set forth herein within the easement areas in the exercise of the easement purposes described herein. KSL Resorts, or any successor in title to the Golf Property (the "Golf Property Owner"), has the unilateral right to install any trees or other landscaping or construct any improvements at any location within the Golf Property which could be in near proximity to the Property, or any portion thereof, adjoining the Golf Property; (d) acknowledges and agrees that nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit or restrict in any way, the right of the Golf Property Owner to make any and all modifications, additions, deletions and/or alterations to the Golf Property, or any golf course facilities as such Golf Property Owner deems appropriate, in its sole and absolute discretion, including, but not limited to, relocating fairways, holes, tees and/or golf cart paths; (e) acknowledges and agrees that KSL Resorts, and any successor Golf Property Owner, makes no warranties or representations that a golf course will be developed and constructed adjacent to the Property or that, if so developed and constructed, will be maintained and operated in the manner that existed or was contemplated at the time of the recordation of these CC&R's; (f) acknowledges and agrees that the Golf Property is separate from the Property, that it does not comprise any common area or common property that is to be available for the common use of the Property Owners, and that the Property Owner shall not have any special right or privilege to enter upon or use the Golf Property (including without Iimitation, no right or privilege to enter upon or gain access to the Golf Property for construction purposes) or the golf course facilities which may be developed thereon, other than pursuant to such terms and conditions as are offered to members of the general public from time to time by the Golf Property Owner or for the easement purposes set forth herein; and (g) acknowledges and agrees that the Property Owner, and any successor Property Owner, is restricted from the construction and installation of any swimming pool, spa or other water feature improvements within the Five Foot Easement Area: 3.3 General Provisions. (a) Enforcement. The covenants, conditions and restrictions contained in these CC&R's shall be enforceable equitable servitudes and shall inure to the benefit of and bind all Golf Property Owners and Property Owners and shall be enforceable by all of such entities. Each Golf Property Owner and Property Owner shall have the right of action to enforce by proceedings at law or in equity, all covenants, conditions and restrictions now or hereafter imposed by the provisions of these CC&R's, or any amendment thereto, including the right to prevent the violation of such restrictions, conditions, covenants, and the right to recover damages for such violation. (b) No Waiver. Failure by the Golf Property Owner or any Property Owner to enforce any covenant, condition or restriction contained in the CC&R's in any certain instance or on any particular occasion shall not be deemed a waiver of such right on any such future breach of the same or any other covenant, condition or restriction. (c) Severability. Invalidation of any one or a portion of these covenants, conditions and restrictions by judgment or court order shall in no way affect any other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. grawdee.01doc EXHIBIT "A" - Page 6 259 6 4 2) (d) Term. The CC&R's shall run with the Property and the Golf Property for a term of sixty (60) years from the date these CC&R's are recorded; after which time said CC&R's shall be automatically extended for successive periods of ten (10) years unless owners of Separate Interests (defined to mean as such term is defined in Section in Section 1351(1) of the California Civil Code) within the Property representing not less than sixty-seven percent (67%) of the voting power of such owners based on one vote for each Separate Interest owned by each such owner, and Golf Property Owner agree to terminate such CC&R's. (e) Construction. The provisions of these CC&R's shall be liberally construed to effectuate its purpose of creating covenants running with the land for the development of a residential golf course community. The Section headings have been inserted for convenience only, and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving questions of interpretation or construction. (f) Singular Includes Plural. Whenever the context of these CC&R's requires the same, the singular shall include the plural and the masculine shall include the feminine and the neuter. (g) Nuisance. The result of every act or omission where any provision, condition, restriction, covenant, easement, or reservation contained in these CC&R's is violated in whole or in part, is hereby declared to be and constitutes. a nuisance, and every remedy allowed by law or equity against a private nuisance, shall be applicable against every such result, and may be exercised by the Golf Property Owner or any Property Owner. Such remedy shall be deemed cumulative and not exclusive. (h) Attorneys' Fees. In the event action is instituted to enforce any of the provisions contained in these CC&R's, the party prevailing in such action shall be entitled to recover from the other party thereto reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of such suit as determined by the court or by arbitration as part of the judgment. "Prevailing party" within the meaning of this Section 3.3.(h) includes the party who dismisses an action for recovery hereunder in exchange for payment of the sure allegedly due, performance of covenants allegedly breached, or consideration substantially equal to the relief sought in the action or proceeding. (i) Notices. Any notice to be given to KSL Land, KSL Resorts, or any other Golf Property Owner or Property Owner, or to a holder of a mortgage or deed of trust (a "Mortgagee") shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been properly delivered when directed to such addressee as follows: grawdee.01doc If to KSL Land 56-140 PGA Boulevard La Quinta, CA 92253 Attention: Legal Department If to KSL Resorts 56-140 PGA Boulevard La Quinta, CA 92253 Attention: Legal Department Any Other Golf To the business address of such Golf Property Property Owner Owner. If to Grantee Capstones Golf West LLC 888 Prospect Street, Ste. 340 La Jolla, CA 92037 Attention: Alex Zikakis EXHIBIT "A" - Page 7 260 643 Any Other Property To the street address of the lot or parcel of land Owner within the Property owned by such Property Owner. If to a Mortgagee To the business address indicated for such Mortgagee on the Mortgage that encumbers any lot or parcel of land within the Golf Property and/or the Property. Any party may change the address to which such communications are to be directed to it by giving a written notice to the other parties in the manner provided in this paragraph. Any notice given pursuant to this paragraph shall be deemed to be delivered when addressed to the addressee as set forth herein and: (i) at the time a written notice by mail is deposited in the United States mails, postage. prepaid; or (ii) the time any other written notice, including facsimile, telegram, or other electronic mail message, is personally delivered to the recipient or is delivered to a common carrier for transmission, or actually transmitted by the person giving the notice by electronic means, to the recipient; or (iii) the time any oral notice is communicated, in person or by telephone, including a voice messaging system or other system or technology designed to record and communicate messages, or wireless, to the recipient, including the recipient's designated voice mailbox or address on such a system, or to a person at the office of the recipient who the person giving the notice has reason to believe will promptly communicate it to the recipient. 0) Effect of CC&R's. These CC&R's are made for the purposes set forth herein and KSL Land and KSL Resorts make no warranties or representations, express or implied as to the binding effect or enforceability of all or any portion of such CC&R's, or as to.the compliance of any of these provisions with public laws, ordinances and regulations applicable thereto. (k) Personal Covenant. To the extent the acceptance or conveyance of all or any portion of the Golf Property or the Property creates a personal covenant between KSL Land and the grantee or between KSL Resorts and the grantee, such personal covenant shall terminate and be of no further force or effect from or after the date when a person or entity ceases to be. a Golf Property Owner or a Property Owner, as applicable, except to the extent these CC&R's may provide otherwise. (1) Mortgagee Protection. No breach or violation of the CC&R's shall defeat or render invalid the lien of any mortgage, deed of trust or similar instrument securing a loan made in good faith and for value with respect to the Golf Property or the Property, or any portion thereof, provided, that all of the CC&R's shall be binding upon and effective against any subsequent Golf Property Owner or Property Owner whose title is acquired by or as a result of foreclosure, trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or otherwise pursuant to such liens rights, but such subsequent Golf Property Owner or Property Owner shall take title free and clear of any liability for violations occurring prior to such transfer of title. (m) Cumulative Remedies. All rights, options and remedies of Golf Property Owner and Property Owners or Mortgagees under these CC&R's are cumulative, and no one of them shall be exclusive of any other, and Golf Property Owner, Property Owners and the Mortgagees shall have the right to pursue any one or all of such rights, options and remedies or any other remedy or relief which may be provided by law, whether or not stated in the CC&R's. (n) Amendment. The CC&R's may be canceled, amended or modified only with the written consent of Golf Property Owner and with the approval of Property Owners constituting not less than sixty- seven percent (67%) of the voting power of the Property Owners, based upon one (1) vote for each Separate Interest owned by such Property Owner. grantdee.03.doc EXHIBIT "A" - Page 8 261 EXHIBIT "B" ASSIGNMENT OF DECLARANT RIGHTS UNDER MASTER DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR PGA WEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA This Assignment of Declarant Rights under Master Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for PGA West, Riverside County, California (the "Assignment"), is made by KSL LAND as "Declarant". Recitals. 1. On January 22, 1986 as Instrument No. 15569, Landmark Land Company of California, Inc., a Delaware corporation, (the "Original Declarant") recorded that certain Master Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for PGA West, Riverside County, California, in the Official .Records of the Riverside County Recorder's Office, California, (the "Master Declaration"). 2. By mesne assignments of record and more particularly by Instrument No. 325289 recorded on September 8, 1997, Declarant acquired all rights, reservations and exemptions of the Original Declarant under that certain Master Declaration. 3. Declarant now desires to assign that certain portion of Declarant rights, reservations and exemptions to Grantee applicable to the Property. The Property is located within the PGA West Project described in Paragraphs 1.2(a), and 2.26 of the Master Declaration. 4. Except as defined herein, and unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the terms used in this Assignment are defined to mean the same as such terms are defined in the Master Declaration. Agreement of Assignment A. Declarant declares that it hereby assigns to Grantee, its successors, assigns and personal representatives, and Grantee by acceptance of fee title to the Property hereby accepts the assignment of all of Declarant's rights under paragraphs 3.2, 3.3, 3.5, 6.2(c), 6.7, and 15.10 of the Master Declaration applicable to the Property. B. Declarant declares that it hereby assigns to Grantee, its successors, assigns and personal representatives, and Grantee by acceptance of fee title to the Property hereby accepts the assignment of those Declarant's rights under paragraphs 14. L(a) and 14. L(b) of the Master Declaration applicable to the Property. C. Declarant declares that it hereby assigns to Grantee, its successors, assigns and personal representatives, and Grantee by acceptance of fee title to the Property hereby accepts the assignment of those certain Declarant's rights under paragraph 14. L(c) of the Master Declaration applicable to the Property limited to the right and easement to enter upon, use and enjoy, and to permit others (including Grantee agents, guests,' employees, contractors and prospective purchasers) to enter upon, use and enjoy the areas of the Infrastructure for any purpose in connection with or incidental to (i) the construction, development, sale, lease or other transfer of property within or adjacent to the Property (including, but not limited to, the construction and maintenance of construction, administrative and sales offices, construction and storage yards, displays, exhibits, signs and incidental parking); and (ii) the management, operation and maintenance of all or any portion of the Property (including, without limitation, recreational facilities developed thereon); provided, however, that the exercise of such rights and easements shall not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of any other Owner's Parcel by such Owner or the occupants of such Parcel. D. Grantee by acceptance of fee title to the Property hereby acknowledges and agrees that the Declarant's rights assigned to it as described in this Assignment are subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Declaration of Development Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions by and between Declarant and Grantee recorded concurrently herewith ("Development Declaration") and that in the event of a conflict between the Declarant's rights assigned pursuant to this Assignment and the terms and conditions of the Development Declaration, the Development Declaration shall. control. prop. pgaw. capstm: e.deergh t. m0 2 262. EXHIBIT C ACCESS STREETS The real property located in the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, State of California and described as follows: PARCEL 1: LOT E OF TRACT NO.28340-1 AS PER MAP FILED FOR RECORD IN. BOOK 259, PAGES 44 TO 47, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 2: LOTS A AND B OF TRACT NO. 28118 AS PER MAP FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 254, PAGES 99 TO 104, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 3: LOTS A TO D, INCLUSIVE, OF TRACT NO. 28340-2 AS PER MAP FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 266, PAGES 52 TO 56, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 4: LOTS A -I TO A-7, INCLUSIVE, OF TRACT NO. 25499-3 AS PER MAP FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 228, PAGES 33 TO 39, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 5: LOTS A-3 AND A-4 OF TRACT NO. 25499-2 AS PER MAP FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 222, PAGES 91 TO 97, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 6: LOTS A4, C 1, C2 AND C3 OF TRACT NO. 25500-2 AS PER MAP FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 217, PAGES 19 TO 24, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 7: LOTS Al, A2 AND A3 OF TRACT NO. 25500-4 AS PER MAP FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 232, PAGES 87 TO 94, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 8: LOTS A1, A2 AND A3 OF TRACT NO. 25500-1 AS PER MAP FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 215, PAGES 28 TO 33, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 9: LOT Al OF TRACT NO.25499-4 AS PER MAP FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 231, PAGES 73 TO 76, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 10: LOTS A, B, C AND D OF TRACT NO. 22432-4 AS PER MAP FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 202, PAGES 87 TO 91, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 11: LOT A OF TRACT NO. 22432-3 AS PER MAP FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 199, PAGES 12 TO 16, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 12: LOTS Al, B3, D2, El, E2 AND E3 OF TRACT NO. 20717-2 AS PER MAP FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 153, PAGES 80 TO 96, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 13: LOTS A 1, A2, B, D 1 AND E OF TRACT NO. 20717-2A AS PER MAP FILED FOR RECORD IN BOOK 157, PAGES 10 TO 18, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 14: PARCELS 1 AND 2 OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 97-264, RECORDED FEBRUARY 17, 1998 AS INSTRUMENT NO.054038, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL 15: LOTS C, D AND E OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 97-262, RECORDED DECEMBER 18, 1997 AS INSTRUMENT NO.465078, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. prop. pgam. capstonc. decrgh t. on 02 46 263 t� EXHIBIT X GOLF PROPERTY All of that certain real property located in the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, State of California, described as follows: PARCEL 1: Lots 33, and 34 of Tract No. 21643 as per Map filed in Book 203, pages 37 through 50, inclusive of Maps, Official Records of said County. PARCEL 2: Parcel 1 of Lot Line Adjustment No. 95-208 recorded November 15, 1996 as instrument No. 96-438730 of Official Records of said County. grantdee.02.doc EXHIBIT "X" EXHIBIT "YI " STORM DRAIN EASEMENT LOT 33, TRACT N0. 21643, M.B. 203/37-50 (ADJACENT TO TRACT N0. 28444) THAT PORTION OF LOT 33 OF TRACT NO. 21643 AS FILED IN BOOK 203, PAGES 37 THROUGH 50, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 33; THENCE NORTH 31'29'51" EAST, ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 33, A DISTANCE OF 12.93 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUNIG ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE, NORTH 31'29'51" EAST, 14.14 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE, NORTH 7629'51" EAST, 136.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 7745'33" EAST, 65.14 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 10' 14'27" WEST, 10.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 79-45'33" WEST, 64.77; THENCE SOUTH 76 29'51" WEST, 146.37 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID LOT CONTAINS 2,064 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "ZI " ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF: __u . q . %(IV CHRIS J. B H P.L.6588 DATE EXPIRATION DATE: 12/ 1/99 LAND `sG a C i LS. 6588 * Exp. 12-31-0 P PF CAL 2650 EXHIBIT STORM DRAIN EASEMENT PARCEL 1, LLA 95-208, INST. # 96-438730 (ADJACENT TO TRACT N0. 28444) THAT PORTION OF LOT 1 OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 95-208 IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, RECORDED NOVEMBER 11, 1996 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 96-438730, OFFICIAL RECORDS. OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LETTERED LOT B OF TRACT NO. 28444, AS FILED IN BOOK 271, PAGES 57 THROUGH 62, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF SAID COUNTY RECORDER, THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT B AND LETTERED LOT A, PER SAID TRACT NO. 28444, SOUTH 8949'10" WEST, 21.80 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, SOUTH 0T16'50' EAST, 20.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 8T49'10" WEST, 119.17 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 6719' 10' WEST, 71.36 FEET; THENCE NORTH 74!46'20" WEST, 171.72 FEET; THENCE NORTH 1513,W EAST, 10.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74'46'20" EAST, 168.28 FEET; THENCE NORTH 67'19'10' EAST, 69.92 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89'49' 1(r EAST, 111.16 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0' 1 O'W WEST, 10.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LETTERED LOT S, PER SAID TRACT NO. 28444; THENCE NORTH 8T49'10" EAST, ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT S AND LOT A, 10.00 FEET, TO THE POINT OF. BEGINNING. SAID LOT CONTAINS 3,708 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT 'ja' ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF: _-POAAkng CHRIS J. BER P.LV 6588 DATE EXPIRATION DATE: 12/ 1/99 IANp G s � U � LS. 6588 Exp. 12-31-99 */ r; ,I r7 266 EXHIBIT STORM DRAIN EASEMENT LOT 33, TRACT N0. 216439 M.B. 203/37-50 (ADJACENT TO TRACT N0. 28444) TRACT NO. 2 643 MS 203 1 37-60 LOT 34 PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF: MA:V 0 4`1-4 7 (i� C6, CHRIS J. BE H P.L. 6588 DATE EXPIRATION DATE: 12/ 1 /99 GOLF COURSE� Z N 79•45'3� E oQ 65.A 4' E 6 TRACT No. 21643 MS 203 1 37--50 107 33 SCALE 1" =60' mpq CONSUL T/A/Q mom DOKM SCMAn 17320 Redhill Avenue, Suite 350 (714) 251-8821 Irvine. CA 92614 FAX 251-0516 PLANNING E14GINEERING SURWYAI i } ! / 4lar2/CQi/SW= 8/23/94 EXHIBIT STORM DRAIN EASEMENT PARCEL 1, LLA 95-208, INST. # 96-438730 (ADJACENT TO TRACT N0. 28444) 1O, 28 444 Ivib Z11 I -O7-,i2. 32 GO L P' COURSE LOT J o 4m 00 N 89'49' 10" E 10.00' N 0' 1 O'50" W 10.00' \V\� N �4'46'2 N 89'49'10 E 111.16' N 74"46'20• E 119.17' W N 89'49' 10" 171.72p so N 6�.�36 ( 0 0 PARCEL I N I I A 015-208 I I z INST. # 06--43 3730 LANp sG & fx- U� LS. &W �* Exp. 12-31-99 \ Q' � CALF PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION Of: mw\ � Rmi �lmlq CHRIS J. BERM P.L.S 6588 OATE EXPIRATION DATE: 12/31 /99 SCALE 1"=60' S.E. COR. LOT 8 AfDSMDS CONSUL T/NO mom Doha+ ScHmn 17320 Redhill Avenue, Suite 350 (714) 251-8821 Irvine, CA 92614 FAX 251-0516 PLANNING ENGINEERING SURVEY1f{Q r 41322/EM/lw W 8/2f/O 261 `j OF T TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: DOUG EVANS, COMM�NITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: APRIL 18, 2006 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING NO. 2 - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 32752, RAY SHAFFER Attached are letters received after the staff report was distributed to Council. Also, attached is an amended Resolution for the Environmental Assessment. APR 4 8 2006 Allen Matkins www.allenmatkins.com Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory LLP Attomeys at law 515 South Figueroa, 7'b Floor I Los Angeles, CA 90071-3398 Telephone: 213.622.5555 1 Facsimile: 213.620.8816 Patrick E. Breen E-mail: pbreen@allenmatldns.com ins.com Direct Dial: 213.955.5512 File Number: A0045-136/LA715317.03 April 18, 2006 Mayor Donald Adolph Mayor Pro Tem Stanley Sniff Councilmember Ron Perkins Councilmember Terry Henderson Councilmember Lee Osborne City of La Quinta . 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253-1504 Re: Tentative Parcel Map 32752; Application of Ray Shaffer Dear Mayor Adolph, Mayor Pro Tem Sniff and Honorable Commission Members: This firm is counsel to KSL Land Corporation ("KSL Land"), the owner of the property which is the subject of the above -captioned application. We are writing this letter in the hope of avoiding litigation, litigation that is inevitable if the City sticks to the ill-founded and ill-advised decision of the Planning Commission which bowed to the wishes of residents who purchased property knowing that the planning and zoning for the subject property called for residential development. Moreover, those objecting residents willingly acknowledged the possibility of future development and waived any claims that they might have had with respect to views or other development. Now, having willingly given up their claims, these residents ask that the City Council to undo their agreements. That is not the American way, that is not constitutional, and that is not the right thing for this City to do. 1. The Obiection Letters Misstate The Entitlements That Presently Eidst On The Property. The letters are based on a form objection letter penned by one of the objectors. The language of all the letters is virtually identical, and they misstate the current status of the property and are based on the incorrect assumption that Mr. Shaffer is applying for a zone change: "It is our understanding that [Mr. Shaffer] is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752." That is incorrect. As set forth in the Staff Report to the Planning Commission, after the approval of Tentative Tract 28444 in 1997, the City's General Plan and Zoning Map were adopted and "designated the Los Angeles I Orange County I San Diego ( Century City I San Francisco ( Del Mar Heights Allen Matldns Leck. Gamble & Mallory LLP Attorneys at Law Mayor Donald Adolph April 1 S, 2006 Page 2 subject property ... as Low Density Residential ..." Thus, at least from 1997 to the present, the property has been planned and zoned as residential. As the Staff Report to this Council states, there is no need for either a plan amendment or a zone change. 2. The Land Is Not Now And Never Has Been Restricted To Open Space. Virtually every one of the form letters states that, "The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question had always been perceived as open space." First, the "City of La Quinta" does not speak, and the objectors should be required -to identify who from the City purportedly made that statement. Frankly, it is simply incredible that that exact same statement was made to each of these objectors; the statement, in a form letter, is inherently unbelievable. Second; the fact that the City "perceived" use of the property as open space does not mean that it is open space. There is a set process in the State of California to require open space: by dedication, by easement, by map condition. None of those took place in this case. What an individual planning staffer might have "perceived" is simply irrelevant. What would happen if two staffers had different "perceptions"? Would each contradictory perception then be valid to the extent that somebody relied on it? To pose the question is to answer it: This is absolute nonsense. In fact, under California law, a city can only operate pursuant to its adopted ordinances. Here, there is no ordinance limiting the use of the subject site; to the contrary, the City's ordinances, general plan, specific plan and zoning all call for residential use at the property. While the residents might prefer a vacant piece of property, that is not their right. To countenance this kind of thing would say that if somebody has a vacant lot for any period of time, the neighbors then have some sort of vested right to require that property to remain as vacant. Obviously, this not the law. The objectors, in the Planning Commission, seem to be relying on a statement made on Tract Map No. 28444. In what counsel for the Planning Commission called a "designated reservation" -- a term which has no place or meaning in California law -- KSL Land stated the following: We hereby reserve Lot K for golf course purposes, Lots T & U for street purposes, and Lots A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, W, X & Y for open space and recreational purposes for the sole benefit of ourselves, our successors and assigns. (Emphasis added.) The thrust of this statement is that KSL Land reserved those lots for its own purposes. At the time, certain lots were reserved for golf course, others for streets and still others for open space and recreational but only "for the sole benefit of ourselves, our successors and assigns." No benefit was given to the neighboring owners. No benefit was given to the homeowner's association. No benefit was given to the City. 654 Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory LLP Attorneys at Law Mayor Donald Adolph April 18, 2006 Page 3 Contrast that with the five paragraphs that proceed this "designated reservation." Each of those five paragraphs expressly dedicates property to the City. For example, KSL Land agreed that, "we hereby dedicate to public use for street and public utility purposes, Madison Street..." Similar expressed dedications are made in all five paragraphs. Elsewhere in Tract No. 28444, the City accepted the various dedications that were given to it. For example, the City Clerk stated that the City "accepts the public utility easements as dedicated hereon, and accepts the dedication to public use for street and public utilities, Madison Street.". No such acceptance was made with respect to the "designated reservation" that KSL Land made for itself. That is only logical because the City had no ability to accept it because there was no dedication made for the benefit of the City. 3. The Objectors Signed Agreements Acknowledging The Right Of Further Development And Waiving Any Claims That They Had To Views Or To Protest Construction. In their purchase documents, the homeowners in the area, including the objectors, agreed that a developer could do what Mr. Shaffer is now proposing to do: build in areas that were at the time undeveloped. In the Agreement and Acknowledgment at the PGA West Residential Project, one of the documents signed by various of the complaining homeowners, the homeowners agreed that the Agreement and Acknowledgment "contained significant information and disclosures of facts that will or may affect the Residential Project and the use or enjoyment of the Property by Buyer." The homeowners also acknowledged that they had conducted significant due diligence, had reviewed all pertinent records, were aware of all disclosures contained in the documents and "agree[ ] with all. of the provisions of this Agreement and Acknowledgment." There are a number of specific acknowledgments and releases that the homeowners made at the time they purchased their property, despite their current complaints that they thought the golf course would remain forever in its then -existing state. At paragraph 6 (e), the buyers "acknowledged and agreed that Seller makes no warranties or representations that the Golf Course Property, including the golf course, will be maintained and operated in the manner that existed or was contemplated at the time of the purchase of the Property by the Buyer ... ". Thus, for those objecting homeowners who claimed that they wanted the practice green to remain in a certain state, that claim was waived back at the time they purchased the property. Each homeowner also "acknowledges that Seller and other developers shall conduct construction and sales activity in connection with the continuing development and construction of the Residential Project, including, but not limited to, the development, construction and marketing of additional phases of the Residential Project." The Agreement and Acknowledgment also set out that there had been dedications made to a public agency. The Agreement and Acknowledgment stated that, "The dedications are recorded against the affected property and are reflected in the public records of the County." Importantly, there is no dedication of the subject site as open space, nor is there any dedication recorded against that property as reflected in the public records of the County. 6 :- 5 Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory LLP Attomeys at Law Mayor Donald Adolph April 18, 2006 Page 4 For those objecting homeowners who complained that their views would be obstructed, that claim was also waived: Buyer acknowledges that any construction or improvement by Seller, the Association, the Master Association, Golf Course Owner, Master Developer or any other Owner, or any owner of any other property may change, impair, obstruct or otherwise affect any view that Buyer may have enjoyed at the time of the purchase of the Property. Seller does not guarantee that any views that an Owner may have enjoyed will not be impaired or obstructed in the future by changes to other property. Buyer further acknowledges that any rights acquired do not include the preservation of any view and further consents to such obstruction and/or impairment. No representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, have been given by Seller, Master Developer and/or Golf Course Owner, or their officers, employees, partners, subsidiaries, affiliated companies, or directors and agents or any of them in connection with the preservation of views and Buyer agrees to hold Seller, Master Developer and/or Golf Course Owner, and all of such officers, employees, partners, subsidiaries, affiliated companies, and directors and agents or any of them, free of liability from such damages, costs, expenses or charges incurred in connection therewith, such as, but not limited to, attorneys' fees and court costs and costs arising from any changes, obstruction or impairment of the view from Buyer's Property. Very clearly and very explicitly, the objecting homeowners waived their claims to views. Now, having released those claims, the objecting homeowners are asking this City to do what is improper and illegal and to give them view rights to which they are not entitled. For the City to do so would be illegal. Attached to this letter as Exhibit A is an example of an Agre6ment and Acknowledgment signed by two of the objecting homeowners. 4. But Even Then, The Views Of These People Are Not Being Obstructed By The Three Planned Homes. While it would not be permissible to consider the objecting homeowners' views, even if the City did, it would determine that those views will not be obstructed by the three proposed homes. Attached to this letter in hard copy and on disc are copies of pictures taken from homes adjacent to the proposed project which show the views that the people have from their property as their homes are oriented. For example, the Mintzes, who claim that their views would be obstructed, cannot see the proposed houses because their home is oriented with views down the fairway, away from the r;� Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory LLP Attorneys at Law Mayor Donald Adolph April 18, 2006 Page 5 proposed houses. They would have to leave their house and go around the comer before they could even see those proposed homes. In sum, the complaints that are being made are classic examples of people who don't want any new neighbors. But these objecting parties don't own the property, and KSL Land is free to sell that property and Mr. Shaffer is free to develop it. The issue for KSL Land is significant, and KSL Land intends to pursue its rights, including litigation, if it is prevented from what it and Mr. Shaffer -are entitled to do under law. We hope, expect and trust that such litigation will not be necessary. 5. The Staff Report To The City Council Is Inaccurate In Many Material Respects. The Staff Report just recently presented to the City Council is filled with inaccurate statements, and its conclusions are therefore materially incorrect. A. Lot L. While the Report is correct that, initially, access to the 69 homes was potentially to be provided across Lot L, that access was only temporary and was changed by agreement of the City and the homeowners. As set forth in the testimony provided to the City at the time Tract Map No. 28444 was approved (some, but not all, of which is set forth in the Report), KSL Land was concerned that having a private entry gate would be too expensive for a 69-home development. That concern was alleviated, and the homeowners themselves supported the movement of the second access to a new gated entry. The City concurred in conjunction with ap No. 28960. (KSL Land requests that the record of the approval of Tract Map No. 28960 be included in this record.) Indeed, the fact that there is no access across the subject property shows that access was changed. This new approval is consistent with the language quoted in the Report which says that Lot L will provide the secondary access "unless otherwise approved by the City Council." That is precisely what happened in connection with the approval of Tract Map No. 28960. Further, the movement of the secondary access from Lot L to the gate at Spanish Bay was approved by the lot owners within the tract covered by Tract Map No. 28444. B. General Plan And Zoning. As recognized in the Report, the General Plan was adopted in 2002, and the zoning related thereto was adopted in 2003. Both allow for residential development on the subject site. Thus, residential development was allowed on that site both before and after the 2002 and 2003 adoptions. As the Report further recognizes, the "working maps" and "administrative corrections" are not valid under California law nor under the City's municipal code or otherwise. Rather, as Allen Matkins Leek Gamble & Mallory LLP Attorneys at Law Mayor Donald Adolph April 18, 2006 Page 6 the Report recognizes, the current General Plan and zoning allow for residential uses, and no application or amendment to them is needed for the Shaffer project. C. PGA West Specific Plan. The Staff Report states that the PGA West Specific Plan "does not prohibit" residential uses. Actually, the Specific Plan allows for residential uses. This is consistent with both the. upper tier (general plan) and lower tier (zoning) entitlements for the subject property. The. Report cites to the Specific Plan goal of open space, as if this goal is somehow violated by the proposed project. That is simply not true. Originally, the Specific Plan for the area contemplated 34% of the area maintained as golf course; in fact, the area is now some 47% golf course area. In addition to the golf course open space area which totals some 1,400 acres, there are over 100 acres of other open space areas. Certainly, the City cannot be taking the position that no further development within PGA West is allowed. Had the City desired to take that position, it was required to condition those open space lands — by map conditions, by dedication or by other restrictions — but did not do so. In fact, to the contrary, as the Report recognizes, the Specific Plan "allows various residential uses, including single family residences ... as a matter of right." (Emphasis added.) D. Tract Map No. 28444. Contrary to what the Report says, houses and residential lots were not sold based on a promise that the subject property would be open space. KSL Land always maintained the ability to develop the subject property for residential uses, and both the merchant builders and the subsequent homeowners understood and agreed to this. See discussion above. E. Environmental Considerations. The Report is incorrect in stating that the applicant or KSL Land (the Report is somewhat muddled on the distinction between the two) stated to the Planning Commission that there were other lots, similarly situated to the subject lot. First, there is and has been no showing that there are other lots similar to the subject lot: where the owner reserved them as open space but where the City did not condition them and the owner did not dedicate them. Second, review after the Planning Commission meeting shows that there are no such lots. The testimony to the Planning Commission did not state otherwise. Forrest Haag, the applicant's consultant, stated that they did not lmow of any other similar lots although he said there may be some. As the representative of KSL Land, I specifically stated that I did not -know of any other lots. Therefore, there is no basis for the City to contend that there are potential new environmental considerations or impacts associated with the proposed development. G )O Allen Matldns Leck Gamble & Mallory LLP Attorneys at Law Mayor Donald Adolph April M 2006 Page 7 Nor is there a valid contention that the amount of open space will be significantly reduced. Even after the proposed project, over 1,500 acres of golf course and open space will remain within the PGA West Specific Plan area. F. Legal Issues. The statements in the Report under the heading "Legal Issues" have been previously addressed. However, it is important to note one misstatement that seems to pervade the City's understanding of what was, or was not, required by the City at the time Tract Map No. 28444 was approved. The Report states that the open space nature of Lots H, I and W was "memorialized on the Final Map conditions." That is flat out incorrect. No such map conditions" appear. Rather, as set forth above, KSL Land reserved for itself the right to change the designation of those lots. Had the City required that the lots be open space, it was required to do so via map condition, dedication, or other similar, formal requirement. Clearly, there is no map condition requiring open space, there is no dedication as open space, there is no acceptance by the City as open space, and there is no resolution, ordinance or other City action requiring that these lots be maintained as open space. KSL Land and its successors -in -interest are entitled to develop the subject property. Mr. Shaffer must be allowed to move forward with the development; preventing that is illegal and only subjects the City to legal action. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, . ')�r CIA4 Patrick E. Breen PEB:lvb Enclosures cc: Kathy Jenson, Esq. 6 1 5 APR-21-2000 03:16P FROM:THE MASTERS AT PGA W 760 771 0229 T0:95648003 P:4 AGREEMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT AT THE PGA WEST RESIDENTIAL PROJF-CT IMPORTANT PLEASE READ CAREFULLY THE FOLLOWING SETS FORTH YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF CERTAIN VERY EWFORTANT MATTERS RELATING TO YOUR PURCHASE OF A RESIDENCE IN THE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT THAT IS GENERALLY BEING MARKETED UNDER THE NAME INDICATED ABOVE. YOUR SIGNATURE MAY COA WAIVEROF YOUR RIGHT TO MAKE ANY CLAIM WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS DOCUMENT. YOU SHOULD NOT SIGN THIS DOCUMENT UNTIL AND UNLESS YOU FULLY UNDERSTAND ALL OF TSE PROVISIONS OF THIS DOCUMENT. Lot/Parcel , TractNo. &'184- Street Address - 3 in the City o a uinta, County of Riverside, State of Caillonna a ropiiFy STATEMENT OF BUYER This document is executed by the undersigned buyers} (hereinafter "Buyer") in connection with, and prior to, the execution by Buyer of a Contract of Purchase (the " urchase Contrac " to b tie Property described above in the development described above from (hereinafter "Seller"). Tp 1. ' DEEEI TTIONS. The following tenms.used in this Agreement and Acknowledgement shall , ve the meanings that are set forth below: (a) "Association" shall mean the California nonprofit mutual benefit corporation that is named in the Declaration to manage the portion of the PGA WEST Project that is encumbered by the Declaration. The terms used in this Agreement and Acknowledgement that pertain to the Association or the management documents of the Association are set forth below: 0) "Association Management Documents" shall mean the Architectural Rules, Articles, Bylaws, Association Rules, Budget, Declaration and any Supplementary Decl"aration(s); "Declaration" shall mean the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, by m which the Property was encubered or annexed in the Official Records of said County, and any amendments thereto; (iii) - "Supplementary Declaration" shall mean a Supplementary Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, recorded by Seller for each incremerit of the Residential Project that is annexed by Seller to the plan of the Declaration. (b) "Association Property" shall mean the real property owned in fee by the Assodiation or in which the Association has a right or interest pursuant to a document recorded in the Official Records of said County. (c) "City" shall mean the City of La Quinta, State of California. (d) "DRE" shall mean the Department of Real Estate of the State of California. (e) "Golf Course Owner" shall mean KSL Desert Resorts, Inc., a Delaware corporation, in its capacity as owner and operator of the Golf Course Property, and any successor in title to the Golf Course Property. (f) "Golf Course Property" shall mean the golf course, and any golf course related facilities within the PGA WEST Project, portions o which may border, or be in close proximity to, the Property. Distribution: Original —Seller Copy -- Buyer Copy — Legal Dept-KSL Pr0p.Qgaw.a6c2.5P0aw 03/08100 232PM EXH191T dN E (g) "Lot" shall mean any separately owned lot or parcel shown on the most recently filed tract map or parcerrmap. filed for record in the records of Riverside County against the Property as such .Lot may be adjusted from time to time by any recorded lot line adjustment. (h) "Master Association" shall mean the PGA WEST Master Association, Inc., the California nonprofit mutual benefit corporation that is named in the Master Declaration to manage the Residential. Project that is encumbered by the Master Declaration. The terms used in this Agreement and Acknowledgement that pertain to the Master Association or the management documents of the Master Association are set forth below: (i) "Master Association Management Documents" shall mean the Articles, Bylaws, Master Association Rules, Master Budget, Master Declaration and the Supplemental Declarations. (i) "Master Declaration" shall mean the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for PGA WEST, Riverside County, California, recorded on January 22,1986, as Instrument No. 15569 of the Official Records of said County, and any amendments thereto; and . (ii) "Supplemental Declaration" shall mean a Supplemental Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions For PGA WEST (Master Association) recorded by Seller for each increment of the Residential Project that is annexed by Seller to the plan of the Master Declaration. G� "Master Association Property" shall mean the real property owned in fee. by the Master Association or in which the Master Association has a right or interest pursuant to a document recorded in the Official Records of said County. (k) "Master Developer" shall mean KSL Land Corporation, a Delaware corporation, in its capacity as seller of residential property to the various residential developers within the Residential Project, and its subsidiaries and affiliates. (1) "Owner" shall mean, as defined in the Declaration and the Master Declaration, and includes one or more persons or entities who own fee simple title to a Lot within the Residential Project, including Buyer. (m) "PGA WEST Project" shall mean the Residential Project and the Golf Course Property. (n) "Phase" shall mean each increment of the PGA WEST Project that is covered by a Public Report. (o) "Public Report" shall mean the Final Subdivision Public Report issued by the DRE pursuant to Section 11018.2 of the California Business and Professions Code covering each Phase. (p) "Residential Project" shall mean the real property described as such in the Declaration and Master DDeclaration which maybe annexed to the plan of the Declaration and the Master Declaration pursuant to the provisions of the Declaration and the Master Declaration. 2. EFFECT OF AGREEMMNT AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. This Agreement and Acknowledgement, the Public Report and -the Purchase Contract contain signfficant information and disclosures of facts that will or may affect the Residential Project and the use or enjoyment of the Property by Buyer. By executingthis document, (a) Buyer acknowledges that Buyer has received and has had ample opportunity to review this Agreement and Acknowledgement and numerous documents pertaining to the Association, the Master Association, the Residential Project and the other portions of the PGA WEST Project which include the Public Report, Purchase Contract and copies of the Association Management Documents and the Master Association Management Documents, (b) Buyer acknowledges that Buyer is aware of all disclosures contained in such documents, including but not limited to, thepotential effect of such information and disclosures on the Property, and (c) Buyer agrees with all of the provisions of this Agreement and Acknowledgement. 3. INSPECTION OF PROPERTY. Buyer acknowledges that Buyer or Buyer's spouse has personally conducted an onsite inspection of the Property. 4. PUBLIC REPORT. The Public Report also contains disclosures about the proposed size of the PGA NEST Project, taxes, special assessment districts, assessments, maintenance, and other information of interest to Buyer that affects the Property. Information pertaining to the tax rate for the PGA WEST Project Distribution: Original — Seller Copy — Buyer Copy -- Legal Dept-KSL Pr0P.pg3w.3&2.SPC2W 03/09/00 ?:37P41 eei and for any qpecial assessment districts will be shown on the tax bill and can be obtained from the County Assessor's office. 5. CONTIGUOUS AREA MAP. Exhibit A attached hereto contains information pertaining to public and private irmprovernents inclose proximity to the PGA WEST Project which are inexistence or taut were contemplated as of the date designated on said Contiguous Area Map. Although.Seller believes this information to be factual as of the date indicated on said map, Seller assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information contained therein. ne Contiguous Area Map is being provided for informational purposes . only and is subject to change without notice. Buyers are advised to contact the appropriate public agency for current and more precise information. 6. GOLF COURSE FACILITIES. The PGA WEST Project includes golf courses and golf - course related t6lities that border on, or are in close proximity to, the Property. Buyer, for himself or herself, and for their respective invitees, personal representatives, assigns, heirs and next of kin, agents, employees (collectively, the "Related Parties') hereby: (a) acknowledge (i) the potential. effect an a Lot or on Association Property and Master Association Property of stra olf balls, golf cart o eration and. other events inherent to the activities on the Golf Course Property ("Golf Course Hazards")• (ii�the potential effect of the installation of protective measures such as trees, fencing or netting or the instaiation or growth of trees, shrubs and -other landscaping on such Golf Course Property, including without limitation the impairment of any existing views; (iii) the potential for personal injwpry, death or damage to personal property; ('iv) the potential for damage to any unprovenients, including, without limitation, stucco, the roofs, pools and related equipment and windows of any structure, attributabre to Golf Course Hazards; (v) the potential for any adverse effect on any landscaping installed by an Owner within such Owner's Lot or by the Association or the Mister Association within the Association Property or the Master Association Property arising from or attributable to the use of reclaimed water on such Golf Course Property by the owner thereof, (vi) the potential for nuisances created by.or arising from the Golf Course Property; including.' without limitation, noises and other nuisances arising from televised tournaments, Ian, and maintenance of the Golf Course Property and early morning and late night play or maintenance activities and visibility of lights used in connection with any driving range or clubhouse, if any, installed by the Golf Course Owner, and (vii) the potential effect of the irrigation oFlandscaping upon the Golf Course Property on any walls, fences or other structures; (b) assume the risk of any property damage, personal injury or death and/or creation or maintenance of a trespass or nuisance created by or arising in connection with Golf Course Hazards or any matters described above (collectively, "Assumed Risks"). (c) ,. release, waive, discharge, and covenant not to sue, and agree to indemnify and to hold harmless (i)�Seller, (u) Golf Course Owner, (iii) Master Developer, and (iv) their respective directors, shareholders, affiliates, agents, representatives and employees (collectively, the "Released Parties'% and each of them, from any and aliability to the Related Parties for any losses, costs (including, without limitation, attorneys' fees), claims, demands, suits, judgments or other obligations arising out of or connected with any of the Assuirted Risks, whether caused by the negligence of the Related Parties or otherwise; (d) acknowledge that the Seller and the Association have no obligation or right to regulate or control the Golf Course Property or any activities thereon, in any way or manner except as specifically set forth in any Supplementary Declaration in connection with the maintenance of Storm Drain Improvements located upon such Golf Course Property. The Golf Course Owner has the unilateral right to install any trees or other landscaping or construct any improvements at an location within the Golf course Property, which could be in near proximity to any Lot adjoining the Golf Course Property; (e)acknowledge and agree that Seller makes no warranties or representations that the Golf Course including ncluding the golf course, will be maintained and o erated in the manner that existed or was contemplated at the time of the purchase of the Property by the Wluyer; and (fl acknowledgeand agree that the Golf Course Property is separate from -the Residential Project, does not comprise Association Property or Master Association Property and that no owner shall have any special right or privilege to enter upon or use the Golf Course Property or the golf course facilities which may be developed thereon, other than pursuant to such terms and conditions as are offered to members of the general public from time to time. Distribution: Original —Seller Copy — Buyer Copy —Legal Dept-KSL PMP.PCaw.Z&2_5PC2w 03/0&Va 2:32Ptii 66� 7. SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT SHOOTING GE. The Riverside County Sheriffs Department operates its shooting practice an i ing range on the north side of Lake Cahuilla approximately ,000 feet from the westerly boundaries of the Avenue 5 8 and Interlachen gate (in the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 20, Township 6 South, Range 7 east, S.B.B & M.). This range is used for monthly practice and quarterly qualifying sessions and is also used by various other Coachella Valley agencies. For more specific information contact: Riverside County Sheriffs Department, 82-695 Dr. Carreon Drive, Indio, CA 922011(760) 863-8990, 8. NOISE AND HAZARDS. Buyer acknowledges that Buyer has specifically considered the exposure and potential exposure of the Property to noise and hazards from activities that may occur and conditions that exist outside of the boundaries of the Property and/or the Residential Project and that,in purchasing the Property, Buyer is not relying on any statements made by Seller or its representatives respecting such exposure. Purely as examples, and without limiting the generality of this disclaimer, the Property may be subject to, and Buyer's purchase of the Property is made in full expectation of, noise and hazards being generated from the following: (a) freeways in the vicinity of the PGA NEST Project; (b). active geologic fault lines that exist in the vicinity of the Residential Project; (c) over -flights of general aviation aircraft, and (d) golf course maintenance activities and Golf Course Hazards. 9. MODELS AND PLANS. Buyer has reviewed at the Information Center and/or Seller's sales office at the PGA WEST Pro ect physic models of the dwelling structures together with overall site and land use plans of the Residential project and acknowledges that no representation or warranty has been made that the Property shall be an exact or accurate duplication of the model. There may be differences. in exterior or designs, windows and garage doors. There may also be changes in the design interior elevations, materials; or the construction of the residential dwelling structures and/or the dwelling structures in future Phases. 10. NO REPRESENTATION. (a) Buyer's Improvements. Neither Seller nor Master Developer, or their respective representatives have not made any statements to Buyer concerning the placement, style, height; size or any other feature of any structure or landscaping which Buyer may contemplate placing on the Property. (b) Buyer's Investigation. Buyer has investigated to Buyer's satisfaction all public and private restrictions and laws, and all matters affecting the engineeringg and feasibility pertaining to the construction of improvements on the Property, including, but not limited to, alI fees and expenses in obtainffig required bonus; permits and public utilities and services. (c) Condition of Soil. Soil indigenous to many areas of the Coachella Valley, including the portion within which the P A S Project is located, may contain high levels of alkaline and sodium which can be harmful to many materials used in home and infrastructure construction and to certain plants, trees and shrubs: The Seller has taken precautionary measures in design and construction to mitigate the potential negative effects that the soil may have on the home, and recommends the Buyer be- aware of this potential condition if contemplating future improvements or modifications to the Property, or modifications to landscaping�ua the Property. If the Buyer requires additional information regarding the soil; please contact the City of La inta. 11. CONSTRUCTION AND SALES ACTIVITY BY SELLER. Buyer acknowledges that Seller and other developers shall conduct construction and sales activities in connection with the continuing development and construction of the Residential Protect, including, but not limited to, the development, construction and marketing of additional phases of the Residential Project. Seller has the unilateral right, but not the obligation; to annex anyportion of the Residential Project to the plan of the Declaration as long as such annexation is accomplished within the time limitations set forth in the Declaration. 12. EASEMENTS AND ENCROACHMENTS. Buyer has read and understands from the Association Management Documents and the Master Association Management Documents and from the Distribution: Original— Seller Copy — Buyer Copy Legal Dept-KSL Pra9.9C1W.3 ca.Sp;aw 0310PO 2s32PM 66 preliminary title report covering the PrYco, erty that easements will be granted to Buyer over Association Property, Master Association Property, lfCourse Property, or the property of adjacent Owners and that ea.s-ements may also be reserved over the Buyer's Property that may be granted to, and for the benefit of, the Association, Master Association, Golf Course Owner and such Owners as follows: (a) Easements for Association. Easements reserved to Seller and granted to the Association over Buyer's Property will include: (i) Obligations of Association. Easements for the purpose of performing all of its repair and maintenance obligations and to permit the Association to discharge any other obligations and powers as described in the Declaration; (ii) Drainage. Easements for drainage to and through any storm drain facilities within the Golf Course Property and/or the Property that service Association Property; and ' (iii) Support Settlement and Encroachment. Easements for support, settlement and encroachment of Association Property, including anyport 'on thereof that is comprised of improvements such as fixtures, utility meter cabinets and lighting fixtures. (b) Easements for Buyer. Easements that will be reserved to Seller and granted to Buyer over the Association Property and/or adjacent property of another Owner are: (i) Ingress and Egr_.ress. Easements for ingress, egress, use and enjoyment (which includes but is not limited to the unrestricted right of ingress and egress over the private streets to access Buyer's Property) over the Association Property; and (ii) Drainage. Easements for drainage to and through any storm drain facilities installed by Seller that service the Property located within adjoining Lots, Golf Course Property and/or the private streets or other Association Property. (c) Easements Reserved to Seller. (i) Golf Course Prouerty. Easements that have been reserved to Golf Course Owner or will be reserved to Seller an granted to the Golf Course Owner over the Association Property and the Lot owned by Buyer for the encroachment of golf balls resulting from golfing activities on,the Golf Course Property; (ii) Easements Of Record and Reserved. The preliminary title report issued by the title company that insures the title to the Property which Is available for review, inspection and approval byy Buyer will reveal matters of record that, unless removed as a condition to the close'of the eserow,.,2 continue to be effective against the Property after the close of escrow; and , III) Golf Course Irrigation Easement. Easements that have been or will be reserved to Golf Course Owner ong , a rear five feet of those. Lots abutting the Golf Course Property for utility and imgation purposes, which easement specifically restricts as Owner from the construction and installation of any swimming pool, spa or other water feature improvement within the five foot wide easement area 13.. DEDICATIONS TO PUBLIC AGENCY. Portions of the Residential Prq, ect may have been dedicated in fee or by easement to a public agency. Property deeded to the Association that is subject to a prior dedication to a public agency will automatically be conveyed to the public agency without any prior approval . of the Owners or of the Association if the public agency elects to accet the prior dedication. Portions of the Residential Project may also. be subject to easements in favor of yubFic agency for specific purposes such as open space, access, equestrian, bicycle or other trails. The dcations are recorded against the affected property and are reflected in the public records of the County. 14. VIEW. Buyer acknowledges that any construction or improvement by Seller, the Association, the Master Associ is on. Golf Course Owner, Master Developer or any other Owner, or any owner of any other property may change, Impair, obstruct or otherwise affect any view that Buyer may have enjoyed at the time of the purchase of the Property. Seller does not guarantee that any views that an Owner may have enjoyed will Distribution: Original —Seller Copy — Buyer Copy — Legal Dept-KSL rr0P.Ppw.2&2_5Pg2w 4310W..0 232Py{ l _► . 1 4 not be impaired or obstructed in the future by changes to other propperty. Buyer further acknowledges that any rights acquired do not include the *preservation, of any view and further consents to such obstruction and/or impairment. No representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, have been given by Seller, Master Developer andlor Golf Course Owner, or their officers, employees, partners_ subsidiaries, affiliated companies, or directors and agents of any of them in connection vnth the preservation of views and Buyer agrees to hold Seller, .Master Developer and/orGolf Course Owner, and all of such officers, employees, partners, subsidiaries, affiliated companies, and directors and agents of any of them, free of liability from such damages, costs, expenses or charges incurred in connection therewith, such as, but not limited to, attorneys' fees and court costs and costs arising from any changes, obstruction or impairment of the view from Buyer's Property. 1.5. ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTS. The Association Management Documents provide in part as o ows: (a) Management of Residential Project. The Association has the right and obligation to manage and control all of the property covered by the Declaration in accordance with the Association. Management Documents. (b) Maintenance by Association. Certain common facilities such as private streets, landscaping, pools and spas; storm drain ace an ties, d walls that have been installed or constructed by Seller within the Residential Project will be maintained, repaired, replaced and restored by the Association. Buyer acknowledges that such common facilities will be accepted for mautenance by the Association when such im rovements have been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications and certified as complete by the architect who designed such improvements. Cost for these and other services of the Association are part of the Budget and willTe allocated to the. Owners in the form of Regular Assessments. (c) Architectural Control. Any construction, reconstruction, modification or alteration of any improvements, and the maintenance of the Property shall be subject to control'by the Architectural Committee in compliance with the Architectural Rules. Architectural, engineering, landscaping, building and other restrictions and controls applicable to the Property are also gqvemed by applicable governmental regulations. 16. MASTER ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTS. The Master Association Management Documents provide in part as follows: (a) Management of Residential Project. The Master Association has the right and obligation to manage and control all of the property covered by the Master Declaration in accordance with the Master Association Management Documents. Maintenance by- Master Association. Certain common facilities described iri the Master Declaration asa tructure comprited of the ExteriorWall, the Exterior Wall Landscape Areas, -fhe Exterior Wall Landscaping, the Main Access Way, the Residential Entries and the Maui Entrance, will be maintained repaired, replaced and restored by the Master Association. Cost for these and other services and expense$ o? the Master Association are part of the Master Budget and are allocated to the Owners in the manner and the percentages set forth in Article V11 of the Master Declaration. 17. COMMUNITY INFORMATION. The following information provided by Seller about the site and the improvements will be of interest to the Buyer and to the Association and should be considered by the Buyer and the Association in the course of the maintenance and construction of additional improvements. (a) Fences and Walls. Fences and walls constructed by Seller may not have been constructed on the bound line o a Lot in order to maintain the structural integrity of the fence and/or wall. Changes to party walls�(walls that are constructed to separate the Property from an adjoining Lot and are shared by the Owners who have the use thereof) require approval by the other Owner who shares the use thereof, Changes or modifications to some of -the walls in the Residential Project may not be permitted either by the Architectural Committee or by the public agency that has jurisdiction over the Residential Project. (b) Draina e. Lots are typically graded in accordance with codes of the public agency and sound • engineering practices to accomplish certain objectives such as to (a) direct surface water from the rear to the Distribution: Original -- Seller Copy — Buyer Copy — Legal Dept-KSL Prop.pgaw.aka.Spgaw 0310VOU I:32P.M G G5 APR-21-20FiO 03:16P FROM:THE MASTERS AT PGA W 760 771 0229 TO:95646003 P:5 I= of the Lot at , 44nuo h, ore�eaz tb)�[cveas wa�rtinm aasbe ag (raj FKUTC ot� wa&w Div as Lot eel am fax bas'ba�a F*sd; ust tdl �ocrpt ar�odai gad 000 Yfs� ,sad bite pp pt�6�c dote �abedia �G4 of a��cDada:�cm�- Sama a�io�t b; 4zrinW m "Piciyo lwme AllLass sad has w flawto tyre A= of'ebeLot audio �e '' � s� w�lae�d �tha+n� b®ymbeD�i,t� et��erw m �!s firm of 'mv Lot 1be tm�t onto the iiv�g stsaez Iso ago the ��ca�aae is plod Ala ugy Sbooid tie bo®ao msdll► odw of be ml*& avna=#ff� � . d � ' m1bi'� Pis 4 Is "_• _�MA.� Cm -Ldo 7 ux Twm PAW-9 DONALD F. DUNCAN 80464 Riviera La Quinta, CA 92253 Telephone Number: (760) 777-9853 _ 7 F Facsimile Number: (760) 777-9903 EMAIL: dduncan@dc.rr.com April 5, 2006C I rC APR - 7. Mayor Don Adolph and City Council Members 7)c1'gFT9;=r,T City of La Quinta ✓� 78-4 95 Calle . Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone�� Change 2_005-126, Specific Plan 83�-002.,ALie_idi-.e-1t # 5, Tentaf ve Parcel Map r Dear Mayor Adolph & City Council Members: Mr. Ray D. Shaffer has made an application for a zone change in the Tentative Parcel Map 32752. My wife and I as well as several of the home owners have strong objections to this application for rezoning The City of La Quinta had previously advised that the land in question has been considered open space, The open space in question was confirmed by the Planning Commission's 4 to 0 vote against the zone change at the March 28th meeting. I hope you will honor and be guided by the Planning Commission's judgment. Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land, now considered open space and owned by KSL Land Corporation and CNL, and this is very alarming. Both KSL and CNL are large companies whose overpowering need is primarily the need to make a dollar. In contrast, the home owners primary need is to live in a stable beautiful area with firm non -changing boundaries with full access to fire and security protection. Many of our homeowners have worked their entire lives to live here and have our open areas protected by you Gentlemen and others enforcing agreed upon restrictions. It is our understanding that a portion of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course and many existing home views will be obstructed We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles being able,to access the three proposed homes The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Sincerely, JJ dLU441OC4.1— Donald F. and Vicki Duncan am Joan Sica 81300 Kingston Heath La Quinta, CA 99253 Mayor Don Adolph and City Council Members, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Ouinta, CA 92253 APR -- 7 20 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,Genera I Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Mayor Adolph & City Council Members: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. ",'e have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. T`` I City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has been perceived as o n space. This open space area in question was further reinforced by the F .ning Commission at the March 28th meeting. Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now c: �isidered open space and owned by KSL Land Corporation and CNL and this is very alarming. h cur understanding that a portion of this land is currently used as a catch b , . n for the Golf Course N, ,y existing home views will be obstructed ;uestion the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles being able to access the 3 F sed homes Tuse of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are o sed to this change. T "k you for your consideration, Apr 09 06 02:41p Bob Morrison Address 1 NancyBob Morrison Address 2 80480 Riviera Address 3 La Quinta, CA 92253 Phone Number 760-777-9528 Fax Number 760-777 9608 Web Address Email irccbob@aol.com 760-777-9608 APR 1 0 2006 CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT To: Mayor Don Adolph and Date: 4/102006 City Council Members, City of La Quinta , Phone: Pages:l Fax: 760-777-7101 RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment ## 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Mayor Adolph & City Council Members: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. The City of La Quints had told us the land in question has been perceived as open space. This open space area in question was further reinforced by the Planning Commission at the March 28th meeting. Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and owned by KSL Land Corporation and CNL and this is very alarming. It is our understanding that a portion of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course Many existing home views will be obstructed We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles being able to access the 3 proposed homes. The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration, April 9, 2006 Mayor & City Council Members City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Zone Change 2005-126, Ray D. Shaffer, adjacent to the Weiskopf golf course at PGA West Dear Mayor & Council Members, As a La Quinta City resident, I urge you to affirm the unanimous vote of the La Quinta Planning Commission to not re -zone this Open -Space land into three residential lots. The Planning Commission has spent a great deal of time and effort on this difficult issue in coming to their unanimous decision concerning this property. The La Quinta City Council should show support for the hard and difficult work of the Planning Commission and not allow residential construction on this property adjacent to the Weiskopf course at PGA West. Home owners adjacent to this property paid premiums for their homes to be next to Open -Space land. In this case, one adjacent homeowner was assured this would remain Open -Space land and the other adjacent owner was given the perception that this land would remain Open -Space. I do not believe it is fair nor morally correct that La Quinta residents should pay premiums to be next to Open -Space land to later have the original seller of these home lots change the Open -Space land to residential. The land owner profited by charging a premium for lots next to Open -Space land and is now, due to the escalating land prices in La Quinta, trying to profit again by changing the Open -Space land into residential. If the City Council does not vote in agreement with the Planning Commission, then it sets a precedent for other Open -Space land at PGA West to be turned into residential. In the current situation, if I put aside that the adjacent owners paid to be next to Open -Space land, then it appears that the three new houses would have little impact on the adjacent homeowners. However, what about the next parcel of land to be changed from Open -Space to residential? Representatives of the land owner have already used the argument that the CC & R's specifically state that a homeowners' view is not protected. On the next parcel of land to be changed from Open -Space to residential, not only will the adjacent homeowner lose the value he paid for his home to be next to Open -Space, he will probably also lose his view. Thus the property values of a La Quinta resident will be drastically reduced while allowing the Open -Space owner to receive, for a second time, value from the Open -Space land. Please, I beseech you, to vote with the Planning Commission and not allow re -zoning nor residential construction on this Open -Space property. Respectfully, A,• • R Brian A. Foord 80-970 Spanish Bay La Quinta, CA 92253 bkfoord@earthlink.net 564-5412 670 AP"R-17-2006 01:17 PM DON.MANN 17607771116 P.02 Mayor Don Adolph & City Council Members City of La Quinta RE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2005-106, ZONE CHANGE 2005-126, SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002 AMENDMENT0, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 32752 Dear Mayor Adolph & City Council Members; Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have several objections to rezoning this application. This open space should be kept as open space.. Changing this zoningwill be precedent setting for other parcels and now open land. WE ARE NOT NEIGHBORS THAT WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS VIEW. WE ARE MEMBERS THAT WERE SHOWN TIME LAND THAT WOULD BE USED FOR FUTURE DOMES, THIS OPEN LAND IS NOT ONE! ON AUGUST 12003 I HAD ANOTHER HEART ATTACK ON A GOLF COURSE AND MY HEART STOPPED. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS GUIDED ONTO THE COURSE TO WHERE I WAS LAYING THROUGH THE LY BANNED OPEN SPACE; THEY CAME NEXT TO THE GREEN WHERE I WAS LAYING AND SMOCKED ME THREE TIME TO GET ME GOING. THE DEPARTMENT ONLY BEING FIVE MINUTES AWAY MADE IT POSSIBLE FOR ME TO BE HERE 'TODAY. MY WIFE AND I RAVED WORKED ALL OF OUR .LIVES TO BE ABLE TO SPEND $110,000.00 FOR THIS MEMBERSHIP, NOW MR. SHAFFER WANTS TO CHANGE THE WEISKOF COURSE PUTTING GREEN AND CHIPPING AREA SO HE CAN MAKE SSSSS AT OUR, EXPENSE. AT TIMES WE ALSO NEED THIS LAND TO PARK AS MANY AS 20 PLUS GOLF CARTS WHEN WE HAVE TOVNAMENTS. WE UNDERSTAND THAT MANY OF YOU ARE NOT INTO GOLF, BUT YOU WOULD NOT BE IN THIS POSITION IF YOU DID NOT SEE THINGS FROM OTHERS POINT OF VIEW. PLEASE TURN THIS REQUEST DOWN! THANK YOU. DONALD MANN 55-506 PINEHURST LA QUINTA, CA 92253 (760) 777-1116 67 Ct�✓ Cc�uk� APR-17-2006 01:16 PM DON.MANN 17607771116 P.01 To: Fax: Don Mann & Karylene Mann Fax Routing Sheet 777-7 /&1 Attn;�`� 0 Date: Y /7-D6 Number of pages including cover pagez Additional comments 4285 PEBBLE BEACH DR. STOCKTON CA 95219 (209) 951-2009 HOME FAX: (209) 951-1128 LA QUINTA #s Condo (760) 777-1116 FAX (760) 777-4061 E 7, FROM :HENRY G. EILERS RANCH INC. FAX NO. :2094626713 Apr. 15 2006 08:06RM P1 Henry G. Eilers 56340 Jack Nicklaus Blvd. %a Quinta, CA 92253 April 10, 2006 La Quinta City Council 79495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Ray Shaffer :Proposed Development Dear City Council Members: My name is Henry G. Eilers. I live at 56340 Jack Nicklaus Boulevard, which is the fourth house from the Nicklaus exit gate. My wife and I have resided here since 1997 and ours was in the first group of homes built on the Weiskopf Course. We chose building on this location because of the wonderful views our home site had with the lake, golf course, and open area in question. Before purchasing this property we carefully checked plans where future building would be located. Nowhere was it indicated that the area in question would be anything but open space. To rezone and build homes on this beautiful open area would be a violation of the faith and trust we had in the original planning declaration_ There is no doubt in my mind should this application be approved you as a City Council will be faced with many other proposals to develop additional open space areas at PGA West. This would further alter the beauty and tranquility that we members enjoy. Don't set a precedent. I urge you to vote NO on this request exactly the way the Planning Commission did on March 28. Sincerely, He 7ers 6'7 3 FROM :SA FAX NO. Mayor Don Adolph and City Council Members, City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta. CA 92253 :7607710355 777 7/o Apr. 17 2006 08:37AM P1 RE: Fnvironmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan ��I Amendment 2005-106. Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment # 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Mayor Adolph & City Council Members: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. The City of La Quinta had told us the land in question has been perceived as open space. This open space area in question was further reinforced by the Planning Commission at the March 28th meeting. Changing this zoning will be precedent settinq for other parcels of land now considered open space and owned by KSL Land Corporation and CNL and this is very alarming. It is our understanding that a portion of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Cot irSR Many existing home views will be obstructed We question the feasibility of Emerqency Vehicles being able to access the 3 proposed homes The use of the Weiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank ou for your consideration, 674 RPR-13-2006 08:14R FROM:RLLRN BREGMRN 17607771644 TO:7777101 P.1/1 A1.i.AN AR M yearn-1 S44 i Fix 78a7•n-+ 0" ®R$GrMANOAOL.COM 60860 WELAiBKOPF. A QUINTA, CA 922.53456M VIA FACSIMILE nn l� w • April 13, 2006 Mayor Don Adolph and City Council Members, City of La Quanta V/ 78-495 Calle Tampico O'fj No` La Quanta, CA 92253 "''" �� RE: Environmental Assessment 2005-550,General Plan Amendment 2006-106, Zone Change 2005-126, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment It 5, Tentative Parcel Map 32752 Dear Mayor Adolph & City Council Members: It is our understanding that Mr. Ray D. Shaffer is applying for a zone change in the aforementioned Tentative Parcel Map 32752. We have numerous objections to this application for rezoning. The City of La Quanta had told us the land in question has been perceived as open space. This open space area in question was further reinforced by the Planning Commission at the March 28th meeting. Changing this zoning will be precedent setting for other parcels of land now considered open space and owned by KSL Land Corporation and CNL and this is very alarming. It Is our understanding that a portion of this land is currently used as a catch basin for the Golf Course Many existing home views will be obstructed We question the feasibility of Emergency Vehicles being able to access the 3 proposed homes The use of the Weiiskopf Golf Course will be severely changed and we are opposed to this change. Thank you for your consideration. Yours truly, G2K .lewel Allan Ereg 6) RESOLUTION NO. 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING CERTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO.2005-0550 AND DISAPPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 32752, FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF 2.55 ACRES INTO THREE RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND MISCELLANEOUS LOTS CASE NO.: EA 2005-550 & TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 32752 APPLICANT: RAY SHAFFER WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 181h day of April 2006, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a request by Ray Shaffer to certify Environmental Assessment No. 2005-550 and approve Tentative Parcel Map 32752 to allow for three single-family homes and other miscellaneous lots on approximately 2.55 acres located on or near Weiskopf Street and Jack Nicklaus, immediately south of PGA Boulevard within PGA West; and WHEREAS, the owner and original subdivider, KSL Land Corporation, is selling the property to Ray Shaffer, the applicant for the proposed development; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 3rd day of June 1997, approve Tentative Tract Map 28444, a single-family development of 69 residential and other miscellaneous lots (described as "non- residential common lots" and two "reserved lots") by adoption of Resolution 97-42; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 2nd day of June 1998, grant final map approval for Tract 28444 by adoption of Resolution 98-54; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 6th day of August 1996, grant final map approval for Tract 28340-1, a development of single family residential lots and other miscellaneous common lots by adoption of Minute Order 96-130; and WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision of the 2.55 acres for the project involves Lots "H," "I," "L," and "W" of Tract 28444 and Lot "D" of Tract 28340-1; and WHEREAS, Lots "H", "I" and "W" are listed on the Lot and Land Use Summary on the Tentative Tract Map 28444 as "open space and landscape lots" and were not described as "reserved lots" (only Lots "T" and "U" of the Tentative Map were described as "reserved lots") and were further described in staff reports and agenda titles for the Tentative Map as "various non-residential lots" and "common lots", respectively; and City Council Resolution No. 2006- EA 2005-550 & TPM 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 2 WHEREAS, Lots "H ", "I" and "W" were reserved for "open space and recreational purposes" on the final map; and WHEREAS, Lots "H ", "I" and "W" were voluntarily encumbered by KSL as open space/recreation and landscape lots on Tract 28444 and these lots implement the Goals, Policies and Objectives in Sections III.A. and III.F. of the Specific Plan to provide balance between open space and other uses; and WHEREAS, the City staff members who processed Tract 28444, including Jerry Herman, who was then Community Development Director, Christine di lorio, who was then the Planning Manager, and Stan Sawa, then and now a Principal Planner, have indicated that KSL and its consultants did not, at the time they were processing Tract 28444, indicate that their intention was to ultimately develop the open space lettered lots as residential areas; and WHEREAS, deletion of these lots as open space lots would be inconsistent with these Specific Plan Goals, Policies, and Objectives for the original PGA West section because these lots constitute strategic locations for such amenities as determined by the City and as demonstrated by comments by the developer at the time of approval of Tract 28444; and WHEREAS, there is testimony in the record that adjacent homeowners relied on representations by KSL and others relating to the continued existence of these lots as open space, and indicated further that they were charged a premium for their lots based upon the proximity to open space areas; and WHEREAS, the applicant and KSL have stated on the record that there are other locations in PGA West where open space parcels exist that either they or others intend to develop with residential housing if the City permits the conversion of non- residential open space to residential uses, however, neither the applicant nor KSL have been willing or able to provide the City with information about these specific locations so that the City can truly assess the impact of its actions; and WHEREAS, as a result of not having this information, the City is unable to determine whether granting the approval for this subdivision will have a significant individual or cumulative impact on open space and recreational uses or establish a precedent for future similar projects; and WHEREAS, there is not sufficient evidence in the record that KSL intended to (or communicated to the City its intention to) develop Lots "H ", "I" and "W" as residential development, particularly in light of the fact that the Tentative Map "reserved" only two lots (Lots "T" and "U") and in other residential tracts (e.g., Tract No. 28340-1), KSL has expressly identified certain other lots as being reserved for future development; and G 17'7 City Council Resolution No. 2006- EA 2005-550 & TPM 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 3 WHEREAS, Lot "L" is reserved on the Final Map for Tract 28444 for private street purposes for the benefit of, among others, the 69 individual lot owners of Tract 28444 to provide the owners access to Jack Nicklaus and such lot was also dedicated to and accepted by the City for ingress and egress for service and emergency vehicles and for public utilities; and WHEREAS, the record establishes that KSL intended for Lot "L" to be constructed as the final northern leg of Weiskopf Street as evidenced by testimony before the City Council in connection with approval of Tract 28444 and as evidenced by express written concurrence with certain conditions contained in Amendment #1 to Encroachment Permit #2904; and WHEREAS, neither the applicant nor KSL have provided the City with any evidence that the 69 individual lot owners have relinquished their rights in Lot "L" of Tract 28444; and WHEREAS, neither the City nor the utility easement holders have abandon their easements in Lot "L" of Tract 28444; and WHEREAS, the Specific Plai "D" of Tract 28340-1 as the northern leg with Jack Nicklaus; and identifies Lot "L" of Tract 28444 and Lot of Weiskopf Street, allowing it to intersect WHEREAS, the Environmental Assessment did not address the growth inducing impacts of removing open space from PGA West (either on an individual or cumulative basis) nor did the Environmental Assessment address traffic or circulation impacts in the event that Weiskopf Street is not completed; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 27th day of December 2005, on the 101h and 24th day of January 2006, on the 14th day of February 2006, and on the 14th and 28' day of March 2006, hold noticed public hearings to consider certification of Environmental Assessment 2005- 550 and Tentative Parcel Map 32752, and adopted Minute Motion 2006-003 recommending denial of the Environmental Assessment and proposed subdivision to the City Council; and WHEREAS, upon hearing and consideration of all testimony, evidence, and arguments presented, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard and based upon the entire record for this application, the following facts exist which justify denial of certification of Environmental Assessment 2005-550 and disapproval of Tentative Parcel Map 32752: 1 . That approval of the proposed subdivision would result in conversion of land currently established for open space and recreational use to a residential use designation. The record does not contain substantial evidence that KSL had an F7 City Council Resolution No. 2006- EA 2005-550 & TPM 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 4 intention to convert Lots "H," "I," and "W" to any other use when it created those lots. The record contains specific evidence that KSL believed that these open space and landscape lots would be of benefit to the subdivision in connection with the subdivision's density and in connection with view and other recreational goals associated with these lots. KSL voluntarily designated these lots as open space and landscape lots on the Tentative Map, reserved them for open space and recreational use on the recorded Final Map, and did not expressly reserve them for future development, as compared to other tract maps where such express reservations were made (e.g., Tract 28340-1). 2. That based on evidence in the record, including testimony of and letters from many lot owners, the elimination of the open space and recreational designation of said lots will undermine the reasonable expectation formed by persons who acquired property interests in these developments with the understanding that said lots would remain undeveloped. 3. That the proposed elimination of open space and landscaping uses on Lots "H", "I" and "W" conflicts with section 9.10.010 of the Municipal Code which provides that the objectives of the Zoning Code include establishing "conditions which allow various types of land uses to exist in harmony and to promote the stability of existing land uses protecting them" and "to prevent undue intensity of land use or development." This project would increase density (in contraction to KSL's representations during approval of Tract No. 28444) and would undermine the stability and protection of open space. This is particularly the case where, during the tentative map approval for Tract 28444 the agenda titles and staff reports referred to Lots "H ", "I" and "W" as "common lots" and "non-residential lots", respectively, indicating staff and City Council intention at the time of Tract 28444's approval that these lots would not be developed for residential purposes. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City's General Plan residential policy, which is to encourage the preservation of neighborhood character, including open space. 4. That Section III.A. of the original PGA West Specific Plan provides as a Goal, Policy, and Objective that it is necessary for projects to have a balance between open space and other uses. In furtherance of this concept, the Specific Plan provides for a "continuous, ribbon-like pattern of open space throughout the project." Likewise, Section III.F. of the original Specific Plan, entitled "Conservation, Recreational and Open Space Element," recognizes the importance of maintaining open space by noting its value as a limited resource. In furtherance of these stated concepts, the Specific Plan prescribes that golf courses shall be "designed (laid out) and developed so that adjacent development will have the maximum visual and open space value possible." The removal of Lots "H", "I" and "W" from open space uses will contradict established Goals, Policies and Objectives in the Specific Plan that emphasize the importance of maintaining open space in PGA West and seeks to prevent 679 City Council Resolution No. 2006- EA 2005-550 & TPM 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 5 the removal of this limited and valuable resource. Lots "H ", "I" and "W" were voluntarily included by KSL in Tract No. 28444 as non-residential lots and that these lots are strategically located to maximize open space in an area that is compatible with its present use. In addition, the City Council finds that the purpose of the Open Space Element is to establish the City's goals, policies and programs relating to the preservation and management of open space lands. Open space policies and programs are designed to discourage the premature or inappropriate conversion of open space to more intense land uses. They are also intended to assure the long-term viability of open spaces for continued availability and possible production, and recreational and scenic enjoyment. Preservation, conservation and management of the City's open space lands and scenic resources for enhanced recreational, environmental and economic purposes. The City shall encourage the preservation of open space in privately - owned development projects. As a result, this application is inconsistent with the City's General Plan and PGA West Specific Plan. 5. That KSL made statements during public hearings before the Planning Commission that it (KSL) and CNL currently own similarly situated property within the PGA West Specific Plan and PGA West that are presently designated as open space and landscape lots. Statements were made to the Planning Commission to the effect that a favorable outcome of this application may result in further requests to subdivide these similarly situated lots by KSL, CNL, or others, in a manner similar to this project. Although requested by the Planning Commission to identify the scope of the similarly situated parcels, neither KSL nor the applicant was able and/or willing to provide the Planning Commission additional information regarding the location of or its plans to process these additional lots. 6. That, as a result of the KSL's failure to provide the City with information relating to KSL's intention to further subdivide similarly situated subdivisions within the area covered by the PGA West Specific Plan, the City does not have the necessary information to properly assess the individual or cumulative environmental impacts that could result to the physical environment from the removal of the open space, landscape and recreational uses designated for Lots "H," "I," and "W" and the private street required on for Lot "L". Environmental Assessment 2005-550 is therefore deficient because it does not constitute an adequate informational document to permit the City Council to approve the project. 7. That approving the deletion of the open space, landscape and recreational lots may result in growth inducing effects on the physical environment because the decision to allow elimination of open space, landscape and recreational lots could establish a precedent with respect to conversion of other open space and recreational uses in the area (based on KSL's testimony before the Planning Commission). These growth inducing impacts were not analyzed in the 60 City Council Resolution No. 2006- EA 2005-550 & TPM 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 6 Environmental Assessment. For this reason, and as required by CEQA Guideline 15126.2(d), the potential cumulative effect of a decision to approve this project must be analyzed as part of the project's environmental review documentation. The current environmental review for the project also lacks sufficient analysis on the traffic and circulation impacts that could result from the decision to remove Weiskopf Street as a collector for PGA West and as an entrance to Tract 28444 as evidenced on Exhibit 9 to Specific Plan Amendment #4. The project's traffic and circulation impacts are not sufficiently analyzed. Environmental Assessment 2005-550 is therefore deficient because it does not constitute an adequate informational document to permit the City Council to approve the project. 8. That, as part of recorded Final Map 28444, KSL made an offer to dedicate an easement to the City over certain lots including Lot "L." This dedication was expressly granted to the City for public utilities and for ingress and egress of service and emergency vehicles. The Final Map indicates that the City accepted this dedication, as did a public utility provider. The record reflects that Lot "L" was also expressly intended to provide an access point for the 69 lots to Jack Nicklaus through an extension of Weiskopf Street. The Final Map for Tract No. 28444 expressly reserved Lot "L" to the individual lot owners. Section 13.12.130(G). of the Municipal Code provides that the City shall only approve a tentative map unless it can make a finding that the subdivision "will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision." The proposed subdivision would eliminate the City's easement in that it would prohibit the City from ensuring that Lot "L" is used for its stated purpose and would eliminate the individual lot owner's interests in Lot "L." There is no evidence in the record that the applicant or KSL have obtained the relinquishment of these rights. The City has no authority to permanently relinquish the rights of such lot owners to property interests expressly conferred to such owners without prior consent from each such lot owner and, indeed, not over the objections of such lot owners. Substantial evidence in the record reveals that many of the affected lot owners have not provided their consent to the proposed elimination of the private street depicted as Lot "L" but have, instead, expressed their adamant objection to the proposed subdivision based on the projected negative effects on aesthetics, maintenance of open space, and access for emergency services. 9. The purpose for the individual lots owners' and City's interests in Lot "L" are directly linked to a significant public health and safety issue relating to the community, namely convenient and efficient access for emergency vehicles and as a primary access point for the subdivision. This conclusion is evidenced by the inclusion of Lot "L" as part of the Weiskopf Street connection with Jack Nicklaus in Exhibit 9 of Specific Plan Amendment #4. Notably, KSL concurred to develop Lot "L" as the second phase of Weiskopf Street's extension to Jack Nicklaus and expressly represented to the City that it understood that this City Council Resolution No. 2006- EA 2005-550 & TPM 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 7 obligation was not extinguished. In light of the public health and safety concerns relating to the continued maintenance of Lot "L" for its designated use, it is necessary to maintain its easement in the affected lots, including Lot "L," for the benefit of the City and its residents in the vicinity. 10. KSL's intend to construct Weiskopf Street over Lot "L" is depicted both on Exhibit 9 of the PGA West Specific Plan and in the Grading, Drainage and Paving Plans for Final Map 28444. KSL expressly understood that Lot "L" would be used for the final northern leg of Weiskopf Street to Jack Nicklaus as evidenced by the 1999 Amendment #1 to Encroachment Permit #2409. This demonstrates that KSL did not have an expectation to develop the subject site (which is bisected by Lot "L") as a residential use. 1 1. That, as part of recorded Final Map 28444, KSL retained for itself, successors, assignees, and lot owners certain lots within the tract, including Lot "L," as private streets. Specifically, Lot "L" was designated by KSL on the Final Map for ingress and egress of emergency services. This designation is shown on the recorded Final Map and is directly linked to a significant public health and safety issue relating to the community, namely the preservation of convenient and efficient emergency vehicles. The record further reflects that, in addition to its intended use for ingress and egress of emergency services, Lot "L" was intended to act as a primary access point for the 69 lots to Jack Nicklaus. In order to accomplish the connection, approval of the Final Map was conditioned on KSL extending Weiskopf Street over Lot "L" so that it would connect with Jack Nicklaus. 12. That there is no feasible method to mitigate or avoid the impacts identified in findings above other than by denying Tentative Parcel Map No. 32752 because, including without limit, (1) there has been insufficient environmental analysis relating to removing open space and the connection of Weiskopf Street with Jack Nicklaus, (2) the location of Weiskopf Street terminating at Jack Nicklaus is specified in the Specific Plan for this exact location and there are no other available locations for this intersection that would be as effective, and (3) the individual lot owners, the City and IID have not relinquished their respective property interests in Lot "L". 13. The facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at public hearings, the Staff presentations and Staff report, all materials in the project files, in the Tract No. 28444 files, and the written correspondence and telephone messages left by area residents, the applicant and KSL. There is no other substantial evidence, nor are there other facts that detract from the findings made in this Resolution and the City Council expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. .1$4; City Council Resolution No. 2006- EA 2005-550 & TPM 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 8 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 said City Council in this case. In addition, pursuant to La Quinta Municipal Code Section 13.12.130, the City further finds as follows: A. The proposed subdivision is not consistent with the Open Space Element of the City's General Plan and PGA West Specific Plan for, among others, the reasons outlined above; B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with the PGA West Specific Plan for, among others, the reasons stated above; C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements may cause substantial environmental damage; D. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements may cause serious health problems to the extent that site access is limited by the construction of homes in the right-of-way for Weiskopf Street and due to the inadequate access to one or more of the lots created by the subdivision; E. The site is not physically suitable for the type of development for the reasons stated above; F. The site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development, given that the original approval of the subdivision was based upon the assumption that the area now at issue would remain as open space, and the prior density calculations and representations for Tract No. 28444 were based upon Lots "H ", "I", and "W" remaining open space; and G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements proposed will conflict with easements and access rights held by the City and by the 69 lot owners within Tract No. 28444 in Lot "L" of Tract No. 28444. 2. That the Environmental Assessment and subdivision application are incompatible with significant and objective standards and policies existing on the date the Environmental Assessment and subdivision application were deemed complete. 3. That the subdivision application would create conditions and impacts which cannot be avoided. 4. The City Council denies certification of Environmental Assessment No. 2005- 550 as submitted based on the findings stated herein. Based upon the whole record, the City is unable to find that there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the proposed subdivision will have a significant effect on 683 City Council Resolution No. 2006- EA 2005-550 & TPM 32752 Adopted: April 18, 2006 Page 9 the environment. The Environmental Assessment 2005-550 does not reflect the independent judgment of the City Council. 5. The City Council disapproves of Tentative Parcel Map 32752 based upon these findings. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California held on the 18th of April, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, MMC, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California :, 8; �b P•rn. i6 EXCERPTS FROM THE P� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF DECEMBER 27, 2005 Public Hearing• Environmental Assessment 2005-650, General Plan Amendment 2005-106, Zone Change 2006-126, Specific Plan 83-002, Amendment ##5, and Tentative Parcel Map 32752; applicant Ray Shaffer. Commissioner Daniels: "Its going to be, the perception is, in that neighborhood, that that's all part of the golf course whether it is or not; now we know it is not." Mr. Larry Lichliter: "Again' theres, let me just tell you." Commissioner Daniels: "And there is going to be a loss of their green. I mean that's gonna be the" Mr. Larry Lichliter: "Let me tell you there are a number of other lots that CNL now owns, the other side of Weiskopff course. There are two lots there. There are at least 7 to 10 on the Norman. There's another two on the east side of Jack Nicklaus Boulevard. And all of those things I can assure you will be, coming forward also, because there is a lot of value that is created." 695 Remarks in favor of the Application of Ray D. Shaffer to build on three residential lots in PGA West. My name is Joe Garrett. I live at 80126 Merion, at PGA West, and have for the past 7 years. I speak as a concerned resident of PGA West to try to bring balance and a sense of fairness to the debate about the appropriate use of the three lots in question. I have read all the documents bearing on this issue, and have noted the raft of form letters in opposition, many of them from people who do not reside anywhere near the lots at issue. The staff recommendations prepared by Mr. Evans clearly take the side of those in opposition, when it seems to me that he could just as easily and more correctly have taken the positive view in favor of Mr. Shaffers application. For example: 1. Mr. Evans says that a road originally intended to run across the lots in question, connecting Weiskopf street to Jack Nicklaus Boulevard, is still active in the zoning records, when in fact, the entire need and concept of a road was long ago abandoned. This occurred the minute a new gate was placed near the stadium clubhouse which allowed all residents of the Weiskopf full access to PGA West Boulevard as their means of coming and going. 2. Mr. Evans states that the 69 houses fronting Weiskopf hole # 1 on one side Weiskopf street on the other, still have a private property interest in this road, Even though the road was never even laid out and will never be built. I am Almost certain that none of the 69 homes there have anything in their deeds Indicating an equity interest in this non-existant road. So the issue of a road which is not needed and will never be built seems far fetched to me and unfair as a point in opposition to Mr. Shaffer. 2. The fog of paperwork prepared by staff states that zoning of the lots in question has gone back and forth from open space to tourist commercial to low density residential, but staffs latest interpretation is that it might still be open space since KSL did not specifically change the zoning back to buildable lots when the road idea across the property was abandoned. Some opposition letters state that they were told that these three lots would be open space, yet both KSL and realtors deny this, and no such comments are thought to be in writing. An important test of this theses is, "who has been paying taxes and upkeep on the property for the past many years? Is it the adjacent homeowners? Is it the homeowners association? Or has it been KSL? If the answer has been KSL, there is therefore clear intent to develop the lots for some purpose. And it is clear to anyone who has looked at the lots that there is no open space use of them. They are not landscaped with trees, as some letters indicate, but are merely grassy lots with a cinder block back-up wall, who's appearance would be vastly improved by the upscale housing Mr. Shaffer is proposing, which should also improve property values. Initially, staff regarded the zoning as tourist commercial, and noted that changing the zoning to low density residential would be an improvement and require only administrative approval. In summary, I am speaking as a concerned resident who has visited the lots in question, read the related documents, and looked at the issue from the point of view of a private property owner attempting to make good and legal use of his property. I believe that so long as the use made of the property is compatible with the surrounding structures, and in this case, what is being proposed is an actual improvement, notwithstanding the form letters in opposition, then private property rights should trump unsupported negative concerns, as expressed in those letters. These letter writer of course have the right to express their point of view, which also raise a duty to those of us who want to bring balance and fairness to this issue. I hope the Council will not make a final decision until all the facts are in and understood. Thank you Joe Garrett 4/18/06 rS RE. -Lot L, Tr 28444 n cu� . /%� Page 1 of 2 Betty Sawyer er From: Jenson, Kathy [kjenson@rutan.com] Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 1:01 PM To: Tim Jonasson Cc: Doug Evans Subject: RE: Lot L, Tr 28444 Please make this part of the record. Can be referrenced in oral report. -----Original Message ----- From: Tim Jonasson[mailto:tjonasson(c�r�,la-quinta.org] Sent: Thu Apr 13 12:48:00 2006 To: Jenson, Kathy Subject: FW: Lot L, Tr 28444 FYI from the city surveyor. Tim Jonasson, PE Public Works Director/City Engineer City of La Quinta (760) 777-7042 tjonasson@la-quinta.org -----Original Message ----- From: enelson200@aol.com [mailto:enelson200@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 12:09 PM To: Tim Jonasson Subject: Lot L, Tr 28444 Hi Tim It's been 8 years nearly, since I reviewed and approved this map. There is no doubt however that at the time this map was filed, that Lot L of Tract No. 28444 was understood to be restricted to use as a private street. I no longer have a file on this, but the originally approved tentative map and conditions of approval would have shown this restriction as a requirement of development. If not, the requirement may have been added for reasons which came up in review, such as a fire department requirement for secondary access. However Lot L was clearly planned as a tie-in to PGA Boulevard, because it lines up with the private street shown on previously filed Tract No. 28340-1. This street runs from Jack Nicklaus in Tract No. 28340-1 to the border between the two tracts. Along with the reservation of Lot L as a private street, the City of La r 4 !� 4/13/2006 - Rom. Lot L, Tr 28444 Page 2 of 2 Quinta holds an easement across the lot for public utilities and ingress and egress of service and emergency vehicles. Coachella Valley Water District holds an easement across the lot for domestic water line and sanitation purposes. Imperial Irrigation District holds an easement 10' wide adjacent to and on each side of Lot L for electrical lines and related purposes. I don't see how there could be any doubt about the use of this area. If you have any questions please call me at 760-738-8709 or at the above email address. Thanks, Eric Nelson, PLS Acting City Surveyor rQ(I 4/13/2006 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 18, 2006 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing to Consideration Adoption of Resolutions Certifying Environmental Assessment 2005-557 and Approving Tentative Tract Map 34243, the Subdivision of 20 ± Acres into 70 Single -Family Lots, Located on the North Side of Avenue 58, 1000 ± Feet West of Madison Street. Applicant: Innovative Communities RECOMMENDATION AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council adopting certification of Environmental Assessment 2005-557; and Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Tentative Tract Map 34243 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS None. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW General Plan Designation LDR (Low Density Residential, up to four (4) dwelling units per acre) Zoning RL (Low Density Residential) p:\stan\ttms\tt 33336 ccrpt.doc Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses NORTH: SOUTH: EAST: WEST: Site Description RL / RESIDENTIAL (PGA WEST AND PUERTA AZUL) RL/VACANT RL / RESIDENTIAL (LION'S GATE) RL / RESIDENTIAL (SANTA ROSA TRAILS) The project site is located on the north side of Avenue 58 approximately 1,000 feet west of Madison Street and immediately east of Santa Rosa Trails (Attachment 1). The site is a rectangular site 1,526 feet + deep and 661.3 feet wide. The site is vacant and void of any significant vegetation. The site is surrounded on the north, east and west by block walls. Project Request The applicant is proposing to subdivide the 20 acre site into a gated 70 single- family residential lot project with private streets (Attachment 2) . Several miscellaneous lots would be created for storm water retention, common area landscaping and private streets. The proposed density of this subdivision is 3.5 dwelling units per acre which is below the maximum of four dwelling units per acre allowed by the Zoning Code and General Plan land use designation. The existing RL zoning on the property allows a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. All proposed lots exceed this requirement with the smallest lot being 8,627 square feet, the largest at 15,888 square feet and averaging 9,100 square feet. One long narrow retention basin/recreational space of 64,468 square feet (1.48 acres) is proposed adjacent the middle of the site. Twenty-six of the lots would back-up to the retention basin and have a combination block/metal picket rear yard wall/fence to allow views into the landscaped basin. The project will have gated vehicular and pedestrian access from Avenue 58 in the middle of the site. The project will be provided with a single 36 foot wide loop street. At three of the four corners there will be a short 28 foot wide hammerhead style street to provide access to two lots in the corner. The long legs of the loop street "bow" out at approximately mid point of its length to provide a ten foot wide landscape median island and traffic calming devise. At this point each one way lane is approximately 23 feet wide. A narrow median is shown at the entry off Avenue 58 for landscaping and a gate entry box. An emergency -only vehicle access connection to Avenue 58 is provided between proposed lots 66 and 67 near the east property line. On the east side of the proposed subdivision which is adjacent to residential lots in Lion's Gate, the proposed lots pad grades vary from the same to a maximum three p:\stan\ttms\tt 33336 capt.doc G n feet higher (near the south end). Along the west half of the rear property line to the north in PGA West, there is a landscape strip and then a private street with houses on the north side of the street within PGA West. Along this portion of the property line the subject property site pad grades will be approximately 5-6 feet lower than the adjacent grades in PGA West. Along the east half of the north (rear) property line adjacent to Puerta Azul, the proposed grades will be 2.5-3.5 feet lower. Along the west property line, adjacent to Santa Rosa Trails, the proposed pad grades will be lower, varying from approximately 2-4 feet lower. Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed pad grading and finds them acceptable. Common Area Landscaping and Improvements As part of the application, the common area landscaping and improvement plans have been submitted for review (Attachment 3). The plans include a conceptual common area planting plan, perimeter wall and entry gate designs. A plant palette accompanies the conceptual plan and includes an extensive list of water efficient trees and shrubs. However, specific plants to be used are not called out on any of the landscaping plans. The various plans show residences, but these are not submitted for approval, nor have they been previously approved. The plans include landscaping proposed for the retention basin in the center of the site. Turf and canopy trees are shown throughout the retention basin. Additionally, a meandering walkway is shown the length of the basin and around various parts of the project. The site plans show front yard landscaping identifying two trees per lot with no other yard planting details shown. Additional planting details will be submitted with the residence plans. The vehicular entry on Avenue 58 shows a card gated entry with a center row of palm trees. Canopy trees flank both sides of the entry street. The entry street and three on -site traffic -calming "islands" in the tract will have enhanced brick paving. The islands will also have a palm tree planted in a small planter in the middle of the street. The gate shown appears to be a wrought iron or metal picket type fence with the adjacent entry walls plastered a light color and provided with a brick cap. A small water feature is shown on each side of the entry near Avenue 58. Perimeter landscaping along Avenue 58 shows a mixture, of canopy and palm trees. A meandering sidewalk will be provided. Decorative decomposed gravel along with shrubs will be used along this frontage. Environmental Considerations Environmental Assessment 2004-557 was prepared for this Tentative Tract Map in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. The Community Development Director has determined that the F90 P:\reports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and therefore, recommends that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact be certified. Public Notice This request was advertised in the Desert Sun Newspaper on April 8, 2006 and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet around the project boundaries and to those who submitted letters and addresses. To date, no correspondence has been received from the City Council notice. Public Agency Review The request was sent out for comments, with any pertinent comments received incorporated into the Conditions of Approval (Attachment 4). The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) noted that existing Bureau of Reclamation facilities are not shown on the plan. After discussion with the Public Works Department and applicants engineer, it was determined they are shown on the plan. The facilities consist of old irrigation easements and lines which will be removed. Discussion: The layout of the project is primarily a grid design that maximizes the number of residential lots. As noted before, this tract is proposed at 3.5 dwelling units per acre which generally is only achieved with a grid layout with a slight street meander. During the review process staff met with, and recommended to the applicant that the subdivision be re -designed to provide a more creative and attractive layout. That resulted in a slight redesign amounting to the bulb in the streets and street medians. The adjacent tract to the west is long and narrow with a single cul-de-sac, while the tract to the east has an irregular loop layout. Architectural and Landscape Committee Review: The Architectural and Landscape Review Committee (ALRC) reviewed the common area landscaping and entry gate design at their meeting of March 20, 2006. The ALRC on a 270 vote recommended approval of the project subject to staff's recommended conditions. The conditions recommended by the ALRC are as follows: 1. Typical preliminary -level common area and front yard landscaping plans for the residences shall be submitted for review by the ALRC and approval by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of first production home permit. 2. Turf use in retention basins shall be limited to basin entries and exits where (;9r) PAreports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc they meet the meandering walkway. In the turf's place, decomposed granite and accent plants should be provided. Retention area wall design, heights, materials, colors, etc. shall be reviewed by the ALRC and approved by the Planning Commission during review of architectural and landscaping plans for the residences. 3. The perimeter wall along Avenue 58 shall meander or jog in and out along the property line. Decorative pilasters shall be provided approximately 75 feet on center along Avenue 58 perimeter wall. The Tentative Tract Map (TTM 34243) shall be conditioned to be revised to reflect this and be approved by the Community Development Director. 4. Delete the following plants from the plant palette: A. Pinus canaiensis Canary Island Pine B. Prosopis chilensis Chilean Mesquite C. Macfadyena unguis-cati Cat's Claw D. Pennisetum setaceum Fountain Grass E. Ficus pumila Creeping Fig F. Bracchychiton populneus Bottle Tree 5. The residences adjacent to the east -west green belt (with walkway) shall be constructed with a setback ± 10 feet larger than the minimum of 5 feet (flipping residence as shown on submitted landscape plan). The east and west ends of the green belt shall be flared out. This flare will require revision to the adjacent single-family lots. This revision and final setbacks shall be subject to approval by the Community Development Director. 6. The entry gate shall be re -studied and redesigned to provide an attractive and creative gate consistent with the theme and architecture of the project. These Conditions have been added to those recommended by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission reviewed this request at the meeting of March 28, 2006 (Attachment 5). Staff had recommended the tract layout be re -studied to incorporate a more creative and attractive design. Merits of this recommendation were discussed during the review with the Commission ultimately determining the design was acceptable. Other Commission discussion included design of common area (retention basin, entry) planting. The Commission recommended an amendment to Condition #69 pertaining to the landscaping to ensure they would review the common area design again. Staff noted there may be minor Tract revisions needed which will be approved by staff to comply with the recommended Conditions (e.g. Conditions #81 and 82). G94 PAreports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc A homeowner from Lion's Gate indicated concerns about privacy and density. The applicant indicated they would meet with the adjacent homeowners to resolve all concerns. The applicant has indicated he has met twice with this homeowner to discuss his concerns. Final disposition of these meetings has not been provided to staff. The Planning Commission, on a 5-0 vote, adopted Resolutions 2006-015 and -016 recommending approval of the request subject to Conditions. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The proposed Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract Map comply with applicable City and State requirements. The Findings to approve these requests can be made as noted in the attached City Council Resolutions. The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council certifying Environmental Assessment 2005-557; and Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Tentative Tract Map 34243, subject to Conditions; or 2. Do not adopt Resolutions of the City Council certifying Environmental Assessment 2005-557 and approving Tentative Tract Map 34243; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, 4-e -X� Douglas R.Otvans Community Development Director Approved for submission by: --I Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1. Location map PAreports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc C 9 5 2. Tentative Tract Map 34243 3. Common area landscaping plans 4. Comment letter from CVWD 5. Draft Planning Commission minutes for the meeting of March 28, 2006 G 9 G PAreports - cc\2006\4-18-06\sp 83-002 amend #5\sp 83-002 amend #5 cc rpt.doc RESOLUTION NO. 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2005-557 PREPARED FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2005-557 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (FOR MASQUE DEVELOPMENT, LLC) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 18th day of April, 2006, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Innovative Communities for Environmental Assessment 2005-557 prepared for Tentative Tract 34243 located on the north side of Avenue 58, 1,000 feet west of Madison Street more particularly described as: APN: 762-240-014 WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63). The Community Development Director has determined that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and therefore, is recommending that this Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact be certified. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office as required by Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes; 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 certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed applications 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 2005-557. 2. The proposed project 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. pAreports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243\ea 05-557 cc res.doc City Council Resolution 2006- Environmental Assessment 2005-557 Innovative Communities Adopted: 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 project does 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 project 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 project 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 Planning Commission has considered Environmental Assessment 2005-557 and said Assessment reflects the independent judgment 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 constitute the findings of the City Council for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby certify Environmental Assessment 2005-557 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Mitigation Monitoring Program, attached and on file in the Community Development Department. G 98 P:\Reports - CC\2006\4-18-06\Innovative TT 34243\tt 34243 ea 05-557 cc res.doc City Council Resolution 2006- Environmental Assessment 2005-557 Innovative Communities Adopted: 3. That Environmental Assessment 2005-557 reflects the independent judgment of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 181h day of April, 2006, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Mayor City of La Quinta California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CIVIC, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California G 9 9 P:\Reports - CC\2006\4-18-06\Innovative TT 34243\tt 34243 ea 05-557 cc res.doc City Council Resolution 2006- Environmental Checklist Form — EA 2005-557 1. Project title: Tentative Tract Map 34243 2. Lead agency name and address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact person and phone number: Stan Sawa 760-777-7125 4. Project location: North side of Avenue 58, approximately 660 feet west of Madison Street, APN 762-240-014 5. Project sponsor's name and address: Innovative Communities 200 E. Washington Street, Suite 100 Escondido, CA 6. General plan designation: Low Density 7. Zoning: Low Density Residential 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.) The proposed subdivision of a 20.1 acre parcel into 70 single family lots, as well as lots for streets, open space and retention basin. The proposed lots will be an average of 9,100 square feet, with the smallest lot being 8,627 square feet, and the largest being 15,888 square feet. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: Single family attached and detached development, (Low Density and Medium Density Residential) South: Avenue 58, vacant desert lands (Medium Density Residential, Golf Course Open Space) East: Single family residential (Low Density Residential) West: Single family residential (Low Density Residential) 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Coachella Valley Water District -1- 700 City Council Resolution 2006- 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 Biological Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Mineral Resources Public Services Utilities / Service Agriculture Resources Cultural Resources Hydrology / Water Quality Noise Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance Air Quality Geology /Soils Land Use / Planning Population / Housing Transportation/Traffic Systems 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 envirom-ent, 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 project proponent. 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" impact 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 or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or 1 d' revisins oor mitigation measures that are NEGATIVE DECLARATION, me u mg imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ds Signature -2- March 16, 2006 Date 71. City Council Resolution 2006- 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 referenced 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) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than 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 XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. 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. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures 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. 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) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance -3- City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: X a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (La Quinta General Plan Exhibit 3.6 "Image Corridors") b) Substantially damage scenic resources, X including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Aerial photograph; Site Inspection) X c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Application materials) d) Create a new source of substantial X light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application materials) I. a)-c) The proposed Tract Map would ultimately result in the construction of 70 single family homes on lots of at least 8,627 square feet. Homes will be limited to one and two stories, as required in the Zoning Ordinance. This is consistent with the development within PGA West and Puerta Azul to the north, and approved Specific Plan housing to the south (Coral Mountain Specific Plan). The site is flat, and is surrounded by similarly flat lands. Views of the Santa Rosa Mountains to the south and west will not be significantly blocked by single family home development. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. This portion of Avenue 58 is not designated an Image Corridor in the City's General Plan. There are no significant trees, rock outcroppings or historic structures on the site. d) Single family home development will increase light in the area, since the site is currently vacant. Impacts will be those associated with landscape lighting and car headlights. The City regulates lighting and prohibits spill over onto adjacent properties. Car headlights will be a temporary and sporadic intrusion. Neither impact is expected to be significant. 7 {„ 7 -4- City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would the proj ect: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique X Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? (General Plan EIR p. III-21 ff.) X b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) c) Involve other changes in the existing X environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (General Plan Land Use Map; Site Inspection) II. a)-c) The project site is not in agriculture. Lands surrounding the site are developed in single family residential land uses. Lands to the south are vacant, but are not in agriculture. There are no Williamson Act contracts on the property. The proposed project site and surrounding lands are designated for urban development, and have been so for some time. No impacts to agriculture are expected. -5- City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct X implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any air quality standard or X contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) c) Result in a cumulatively considerable X 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, 2002 PM10 Plan for the Coachella Valley) d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description, Aerial Photo) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? (Project Description, Aerial Photo) III. a)- e) The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is responsible for the monitoring of air quality in the City, and the implementation of air quality management plans. The development of air quality plans by the SCAQMD was based on the City's General Plan land uses and mapping. Therefore, the proposed project is expected to be consistent with these plans. Development of the site will result in both temporary (construction) impacts, and long term (operational) impacts to air quality. Each of these issue areas is addressed below. Construction impacts will be those associated with PM 10, or fugitive dust, and grading equipment. Assuming a mass grading condition, the proposed project can be expected to generate up to 530.6 pounds of fugitive dust per day during grading activities. This exceeds the SCAQMD thresholds of significance of 150 pounds per day. The proposed project will be required to implement a PM10 management plan, which will include "Best Control Measures" established in the 2002 PM10 Management Plan for the Coachella Valley. These include: -6- City Council Resolution 2006- CONTROL MEASURE TITLE & CONTROL METHOD BCM-1 Further Control of Emissions from Construction Activities: Watering, chemical stabilization, wind fencing, revegetation, track -out control BCM-2 Disturbed Vacant Lands: Chemical stabilization, wind fencing, access restriction, revegetation BCM-3 Unpaved Roads and Unpaved Parking Lots: Paving, chemical stabilization, access restriction, revegetation BCM-4 Paved Road Dust: Minimal track -out, stabilization of unpaved road shoulders, clean streets maintenance These measures will reduce impacts associated with PM 10 generation at the site to less than significant levels. The equipment likely to be required to grade the property has been estimated in the table below. The resulting potential vehicular emissions from construction equipment is also shown. Table 1 Grading Equipment Emissions - Diesel powered (hounds per day) Equipment Pieces hrs/day CO ROC Nox Sox PM10 Fork Lift - 50 hp 0 8 - - - - Fork Lift - 175 hp 0 8 - - - - Trucks - Off -Highway 0 8 - - - - Tracked Loader 0 8 - - - - - Tracked Tractor 0 8 - - - - Scraper 1 8 10.00 2.16 30.72 3.68 3.28 Wheeled Dozer 0 8 - - - - - Wheeled Loader 0 8 - - - - - Wheeled Tractor 1 8 28.64 1.44 10.16 0.72 1.12 Roller 0 8 - - - Motor Grader 3 8 3.62 0.94 17.11 2.06 1.46 Mki-Alanenim 1 8 5.40 1.20 13.60 1.14 1.12 Total: 47.66 5.74 71.59 7.61 6.98 SCAQMD Thresholds of Significance 550.00 75.00 100.00 150.00 150.00 As demonstrated in the Table, emissions from equipment used during the grading process are expected to be less than significant. Operational impacts will be those associated with vehicle trips to and from the site. Table 2 demonstrates the long term emissions, based on an average of 670 daily trips'. 1 "Trip Generation, 7 h Edition," prepared by the Institute of Traffic Engineers, for category 210, single family detached. 7 City Council Resolution 2006- Table 2 Moving Exhaust Emission Projections at Project Build out (hounds per dav) Ave. Trip Total Total No. Vehicle Trips/Day Length (miles) miles/day 670 x 15 = 1050 PMIO PMIO PMIO Pollutant ROC CO NOX Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Pounds at 50 mph 2.00 51.91 10.65 - 0.22 0.22 SCAQMD Thresholds of Significance 550.00 75.00 100.00 150.00 As shown in the Table, the proposed project is not expected to exceed thresholds of significance associated with long term air emissions. The development of a single family subdivision is not expected to create objectionable odors. -8- 7 f, City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either x 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 (Biological Resources Assessment, AMEC 6/05) b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any X 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? (Biological Resources Assessment, AMEC 6/05) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on X federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Biological Resources Assessment, AMEC 6/05) d) Interfere substantially with the X movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (General Plan MEA, p. 78 ff.) e) Conflict with any local policies or X ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (General Plan MEA, p. 73 ff.) 0 Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, X Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Biological Resources Assessment, AMEC 6/05) -9- City Council Resolution 2006- IV. a)-f) A biological resource study was prepared for the proposed project2. The study included both records searches and on site investigation. The survey found that the site consists primarily of non-native grasses, with some native vegetation sparsely occurring on the site. No species of concern were found on the site, and none are expected to occur, due to the lack of native habitat. The study concluded that the potential for impacts to biological resources on the site is less than significant. No riparian areas or wetlands were identified on the property. The study further found that the build out of the site will not conflict with any City preservation ordinances, or with the implementation of either the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan or the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. Overall impacts associated with biological resources are expected to be less than significant. 2 "APN 762-240-014 Biological Resources Assessment," prepared by AMEC Earth and Environmental, June 2005. City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of a historical resource as defined in'15064.5? (Historical/Archaeological Report, CRM Tech 5105) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to ' 15064.5? (Historical/Archaeological Report, CRM Tech 5105) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? (General Plan MEA p. 88 ff.) d) Disturb any human remains, including X those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (Historical/Archaeological Report, CRM Tech 5105) V.a)-d) A cultural resource survey was conducted on the proposed project site3. The study included both records searches and on site investigation. The study found no surface evidence of cultural resources, and no historic resources on the property. The City requires, however, that projects include on -site monitoring during grading and trenching activities, due to the high probability of occurrence of resources in the City. Monitors shall include a Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians designee. The proposed project has been required to comply with this policy by the Historic Preservation Committee (HPC). This monitoring will assure that impacts to cultural resources are reduced to less than significant levels. The proposed tract occurs within the ancient Lake Cahuilla lakebed. A paleontological survey was prepared for the proposed project4. The survey found shell fragments on the project site during the on site survey. In its consideration of the project, the HPC required the monitoring of grading and trenching activities. This requirement will assure that potential impacts associated with paleontological resources are reduced to less than significant levels. Overall impacts to cultural resources are expected to be less than significant. 3 "Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report Assessor's Parcel No. 762-240-014," prepared by CRM Tech, May 2005. 4 "Paleontological Resources Assessment Report Tentative Tract Map No. 33085," prepared by CRM Tech. 7 1 0 -11- / 1 City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact 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, X 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 MEA Exhibit 6.2) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X (General Plan MEA Exhibit 6.2) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, X including liquefaction? (General Plan MEA Exhibit 6.3) iv) Landslides? (General Plan MEA Exhibit X 6.4) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or X the loss of topsoil? (General Plan MEA Exhibit 6.5) c) Be located on expansive soil, as X defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property (General Plan MEA Exhibit 6.1) d) Have soils incapable of adequately X supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (General Plan Exhibit 8.1) VI. a)-d) A geotechnical investigation was undertaken for the project sites. The study found that the site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The area is seismically active, however, and the City requires implementation of the Uniform 5 "Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed 20-Acre Residential Development," prepared by Earth Systems Southwest, May 2005. 711 -12- City Council Resolution 2006- Building Code standards required for active seismic areas, to assure that impacts associated with ground shaking are reduced to less than significant levels. The soil did not encounter groundwater in borings, and although historic data indicates a high groundwater level in this area, the study concluded that development, water pumping and the evidence provided in the soil borings lead to a conclusion that liquefaction hazards on the site are very low. The project site and surrounding areas are relatively flat. No hillsides occur in the vicinity. The potential for landslides is therefore non-existent. Soils in the City are not expansive. The proposed project will be required to connect to sanitary sewer, and no septic systems will be installed. Impacts associated with geology and soils will be less than significant. 71 2 -13- City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VH. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? (General Plan MEA, p. 95 ff.) c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle X hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Application materials) d) Be located on a site which is included X on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Application materials) e) For a project located within an airport X 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 X 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 X interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (General Plan MEA p. 95 ff) h) Expose people or structures to a X significant risk of loss, injury or death l/ll t—WL, la\/la -1-------aa �r involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) VII. a)-h) An Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), and Additional Investigation, were prepared for the proposed prof ect6. The ESA found piles of stained dirt on the south and west boundaries warranting further investigation; that the site had been in agriculture in the past, and that pesticides, including DDT could be present; and that potential existing for underground fuel tank(s) on the property. In order to ascertain the potential impacts, additional investigations were conducted. The results of the site testing which was part of these investigations were that no significant amounts of hazardous materials were in the piles of soil; that levels of pesticides on the site were not above reporting limits; and that no underground tanks were identified on the site. The studies conclude that impacts associated with hazardous materials on the site are less than significant. The proposed project will generate waste from household cleaners and similar products in small quantities. These wastes will be disposed of through the City's franchise waste collection, Waste Management, which operates a household hazardous waste program in the City and region. Impacts associated with hazardous materials in the project are expected to be less than significant. The site is not identified in regional, state and federal databases as being the location of contamination. The site does not occur in an influence area for an airport or airstrip. There are no wildlands located adjacent or near the project site. 6 "Report of Phase I Environmental Site Assessment," and "Report of Additional Investigations," both prepared by Earth Systems Southwest, April 2005 and June 2005, respectively. r -15- City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or X waste discharge requirements? (General Plan EIR p. III-187 ff.) b) Substantially deplete groundwater X 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 (e.g., 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 p. III-187 ff.) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage X pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off -site? (Preliminary Hydrology Study, P&D Consultants, 1/06) d) Substantially alter the existing drainage X pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on - or off -site? (Preliminary Hydrology Study, P&D Consultants, 1/06) e) Create or contribute runoff water which X would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (Preliminary Hydrology Study, P&D Consultants, 1/06) f) Place housing within a 100-year flood X hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (Preliminary Hydrology Study, P&D Consultants, 1/06) -16- 7 15 (-i ' C cil Resolution 2006 LY oun g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard X area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Preliminary Hydrology Study, P&D Consultants, 1/06) VIII. a)-g) Residential development on the project site is not expected to violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) will provide domestic water to the site for domestic and landscaping uses. CVWD's Urban Water Management Plan identifies sufficient water supplies, now and in the future, to serve its service area. The City also implements water conservation through landscaping irrigation controls and installation of efficient fixtures. Impacts associated with groundwater are expected to be less than significant. A preliminary drainage study was prepared for the proposed project. The study found that the site drains traditionally from the northwest to the southeast. The study found that during the 100 year storm event, the site will generate 103,700 cubic feet of water which must be retained on site. The site plan includes a central retention basin, which has been sized to accommodate up to 178,800 cubic feet of water, in excess of the 100 year storm generation on the site. The retention basin is therefore sufficient to control the 100 year storm on site, as required by City standards. The City Engineer will continue to review the hydrology analysis through final design, to assure that capacity is sufficient in the basin. In compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) City requires the implementation of best management practices during construction to assure that water erosion does not contaminate surface water. These requirements will reduce potential impacts associated with erosion of soils to less than significant levels. The property is not located within a 100 year flood plain, as mapped by FEMA. 7 "Preliminary Drainage Report for Tentative Tract 34243," prepared by MDS Consulting, October 2005. r� -17- ! 1 City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established X community? (Aerial photo) b) Conflict with any applicable land use X 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 purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (General Plan Exhibit 2.1) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? General Plan MEA p. 74 ff.) IX. a)-c) The proposed project site contains one unoccupied single family residence. Construction of the homes will not divide an established community. The project is consistent with the land use designation assigned to the property in the General Plan, and will be constructed in conformance with the City's Zoning Ordinance. The project will be required to conform to any habitat conservation plan in effect at the time of development. No impacts are expected to land use and planning. 717 -18- City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a X known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.) b) Result in the loss of availability of a X locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.) X. a) & b) The site is located in an area of the City designated Mineral Resource Zone MRZ-1, which indicates that no resources occur. There will be no impact to mineral resources as a result of the proposed project. 718 -19- City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XI. NOISE Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation X of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (General Plan MEA p. 111 ff.) b) Exposure of persons to or generation X of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (General Plan MEA p. 111 ff.) c) A substantial permanent increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan MEA p. 111 ff.) d) A substantial temporary or periodic X increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan MEA p. ill ff.) e) For a project located within an airport X 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? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) XI. a)-f) A noise study was prepared for the proposed prof ect8. The study identified current and projected noise levels in the area of the proposed project, and found that exterior noise levels at lots 1, 66 through 70, inclusive, would exceed City standards at General Plan build out. These lots are located adjacent to Avenue 58, and will have back yards adjacent to that roadway. The exterior noise levels, without mitigation, are expected to 8 "La Quinta Residential development Preliminary Noise Study," prepared by Urban Crossroads, July 2005. �y -20- l 9 City Council Resolution 2006- be approximately 72.3 dBA CNEL on these lots. Traffic generated in this area will be the primary source of future noise. In addition, the study found that in order to provide interior noise levels which meet City standards on these lots, mechanical ventilation must be provided, to allow a "windows closed" condition. Because noise standards will be exceeded, this represents a potentially significant impact which requires mitigation, as follows: 1. The applicant shall construct a 6 foot wall on top of a one foot berm on the southern and western boundary of lot 1. The wall shall be complete prior to occupancy of the house on this lot. 2. The applicant shall construct a 6 foot wall on top of a one foot berm on the southern boundary of lots70 and 69. The wall shall be complete prior to occupancy of the houses on these lots. 3. The applicant shall construct a 6 foot wall on top of a 1.5 foot berm on the southern boundary of lots 67 and 68. The wall shall be complete prior to occupancy of the house on this lot. 4. The applicant shall construct a 6 foot wall on top of a 1.5 foot berm on the southern and eastern boundary of lot 66. The wall shall be complete prior to occupancy of the house on this lot. 5. Mechanical ventilation shall be provided to the homes constructed on lots 1, 66 through 70, inclusive. Noise will also be generated on the site during construction. Sensitive receptors are located to the north, west and east of the site. These homes could be impacted by noise levels generated by project construction. Walls currently occur on the property lines of these tracts, which will help to lower the noise levels generated on the site. Further, the noise during construction will be temporary and periodic, and primarily associated with grading. In order to assure that construction impacts are reduced to the greatest extent possible, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 6. Construction activities shall be limited to those hours prescribed in the La Quinta Municipal Code. 7. All construction vehicles and equipment shall be mufflered and kept in good operating condition. 8. All equipment and materials storage areas shall be located in the south central portion of the site, as far from existing homes as possible. The property is not located within the influence area of an airport or airstrip. With the implementation of the mitigation measures listed above, the impacts associated with noise on and from the project site will be less than significant. 7? 0 -21- City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth X 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, p. 9 ff., application materials) b) Displace substantial numbers of X existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) c) Displace substantial numbers of X people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) XII. a)-c) The proposed project consists of the construction of 70 single family homes. The homes will be absorbed into the market based on normal population growth in the City. The project will not induce substantial population growth. The site is currently the location of an unoccupied single family home. The development of the site will therefore not displace any people or housing. Impacts associated with population and housing are expected to be insignificant. 721 -22- City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact 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, p. 57) X Police protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57) X Schools? (General Plan MEA, p. 52 ff.) X Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks X Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, X p. 46 ff.) XIII. a) The ultimate construction of 70 single family homes on the project site will have less than significant impacts on public services. The project will be required to contribute the required development impact fees, which include police and fire service facilities improvements, as well as park maintenance. In addition, the property tax and sales tax generated from the homes and residents, respectively, of the proposed project will help to offset costs associated with the provision of public safety services. The proposed project will also be required to contribute Quimby fees for the purchase of park lands in the City. The project proponent will be required to pay the school fees in place at the time of development to mitigate potential impacts to schools. 7 2 POW -23- City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of X existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application materials; General Plan Exhibit 5.1) b) Does the project include recreational X facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application materials) XIV. a) & b) The project proponent will be required contribute Quimby and development impact fees to mitigate for potential impacts associated with parks and recreation. No impacts are expected. -24- City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is X 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, p. III-29 ff.) b) Exceed, either individually or X cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, p. III-29 ff.) c) Result in a change in air traffic X patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (No air traffic involved in project) d) Substantially increase hazards due to a X design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (TTM 34243) e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? (TTM 34243) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X (TTM 34243) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, X or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Project description; MEA Exhibit 3.10) XV. a)-g) The proposed project will generate approximately 670 average daily trips. The project is consistent with the land use designation applied to. the parcel in the General Plan. The General Plan EIR, therefore, considered the density of the proposed project in its traffic analysis. The roadways surrounding the proposed project were found to operate at acceptable levels at General Plan build out, and this project is not anticipated to alter that condition. -2517024 - City Council Resolution 2006- The proposed project will include a single access point on Avenue 58, which will be improved to City standards to assure traffic safety. A secondary access is provided for emergency vehicles to the east of the primary access. The City Engineer will continue to review the project to assure that the interior design of streets provides for efficient and safe circulation, within City standards. The proposed project will be required to meet the City's parking requirements. The proposed project will have no impact on transit facilities. Overall impacts associated with traffic and circulation are expected to be less than significant. 7 4- -26- City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment X requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) b) Require or result in the construction of X new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) c) Require or result in the construction of X new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) d) Have sufficient water supplies X available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) e) Result in a determination by the X wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the proj ect's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient X permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) g) Comply with federal, state, and local X statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) XVI. a)-g) The project is served by CVWD for water and wastewater treatment. The District has developed plans for service based on General Plan land use designations. This proje�t -27- City Council Resolution 2006- is consistent with the land use designation on the property. Therefore, the project will not generate a need for additional facilities. The City will require that the project retain the 100 year storm on site, to limit the potential impacts to the City's streets during a storm event. Waste Management of the Desert is the City's franchisee for solid waste. Waste disposal occurs at several regional landfills which have capacity to serve the proposed proj ect. All utility providers structure connection and service fees to include expansion of services as growth occurs. The proposed project, and future residents, will be required to pay these connection and service fees, to offset the cost of service. Overall impacts associated with utilities are expected to be insignificant. City Council Resolution 2006- Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- X 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? X 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 X 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 projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental X effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? XVII. a) Impacts associated with biological and cultural resources were found to be less than significant, due to the conditions of approval and City standards imposed on the proposed project. XVII. b) The proposed project is consistent with the City General Plan, and will not affect the City's General Plan goals. XVII. c) The proj ect's density was considered in the General Plan EIR. Cumulative impacts are expected to be consistent with those identified in that document. XVII. d) The proposed project will have impacts on human beings from noise generation. The mitigation measures required in this Initial Study, however, assure that impacts will be reduced to less than significant levels. -29- 7 City Council Resolution 2006- XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. Not applicable. 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. Not applicable. It 0 0 N N �O ►5 E-� A U p�q �A a� �V O� UU cd cd cd cd cd rA rn O O O O O U U v 0 0 0 0 a a a�•.a a a A A A a o� z W � do an an aA an �w �o aQ �d �d as as as � as as as as 0 j o o ° E+ o, o� c0 O 4° to O c° A to :� o U o O H o� o� o� o °� 0 a. 4 r4 Cd i. 3 :� 3 :-4 3 �. cd Cd O Q �O Q j O W Ed U� v j 0 0 O O ; �+ � U ljo LU F" Q 0 W } Zi Q W JY �w 02 UU 9 o o Q U O O an � o � 54-4'S > bA cd .� M cd to bU coto }� b z� A Cr'-s A c a� O � y Cd cd UA UA Cd o o o a� a� cd 48 Q" �' c 'Lo. � vn U �, G b4 .� r"' r v� G z 0 o O +r, G Or.'d 4•' P. A > O Off. , • r' P. O � OO U > OO bD co to Cd 0 O cn U •d to b > O ,� O U UJ. "o to, v O O U U p, O .�� W v�� O U 'd wb�•��• ��A� a O wb.� o�A� a 45-- •• u .. •• F* z O z� as O ww a E� A zU� dA a�x �WU OW W cd ccf p O O O O O v v0 0 0 0 0 to to x o� cz W ao ono �o an b do b ao b oA b ao b a b b b o F+ d O (c ^' o , c° ° '° tn O 4° in •--� o � � Ui o o o o.> o� o a o n-. co �+W 3. 3~ 3~ 3 a u' o u °°0 ° Cd o b c C dCjU o O O ch Cd o U o'S w .-� ►� W F- Q W Um Z 0 Q W aY w O= UU 0 0 U U W � � Fay � co � bA cd bA Cd cl W to q. O � ►-a A q o a� c13 o Cd " o o N dA U r. C,30 Z En otC's Cd A o 0 a° o o 0' 9 �" o orA bb Cd .- U to °d 5 g ° ° U Ci "0 b 'r4 v� oo wb ► 71-5Q RESOLUTION NO. 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION OF TWENTY ACRES INTO 70 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND MISCELLANEOUS LOTS CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 18' day of April, 2006, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Innovative Communities for the subdivision of twenty acres into 70 single-family residential lots and other miscellaneous lots, located on the north side' of Avenue 58, approximately 1,000 feet west of Madison Street, more particularly described as: APN 763-240-014 WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the La Quinta Community Development Department has prepared Environmental Assessment 2005-557 for this Tentative Tract Map in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. The Community Development Director has determined that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and therefore, is recommending that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact be certified; 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 of Approval to justify approval of said Tentative Tract Map 34243: 1 . The Tentative Tract Map and its improvement and design are consistent with the General Plan in that its street design and lots are in conformance with applicable goals, policies, and development standards, such as lot size, and will provide adequate infrastructure and public utilities. 2. The design of the subdivision and its proposed improvements are not likely to create environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or their habitat because mitigation measures and conditions have been incorporated into the project approval to mitigate impacts where needed. 734 P•\Pannrtc - f r\,)or)A\a_1 R_(1R\Innnxinti is TT gA9A'2\tt gd')d'2 re, rcae rinn City Council Resolution No. 2006- Tentative Tract Map 34243 Innovative Communities Adopted: April 18, 2006 3. The design of the subdivision and subsequent improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems because urban infrastructure improvements are existing, or will be installed based on applicable local, State, and Federal requirements. 4. The design of the revised subdivision and the proposed types of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the subdivision in that none presently exist and access is provided within the project and to adjacent public streets. 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 the City Council does hereby approve Tentative Tract Map 34243 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 18th day of April, 2006, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Mayor City of La Quinta California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC, City Clerk r ,, City of La Quinta, California D•\Rnnnrtc _ rf v)00R\d_1 A-r)R\Inn^woti..n TT QA )AQ\tt QA )A 2 nn inc Ar%^ City Council Resolution No. 2006- Tentative Tract Map 34243 Innovative Communities Adopted: April 18, 2006 APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California P-kPannrtc - rrN )nnAkd_1 TT '4A )Agktt A )A'2 ^r, me rinn CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 GENERAL 1 . The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Tentative Tract Map, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. 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. This Tentative Tract Map, and any Final Map recorded thereunder, shall comply with the requirements and standards of Government Code § § 66410 through 66499.58 (the "Subdivision Map Act"), and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code ("LQM C ") . The City of La Quinta's Municipal Code can be accessed on the City's Web Site at www.la-quinta.org. 3. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain any necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies: Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Green Sheet (Public Works Clearance) for Building Permits, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Coachella Valley Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency • SCAQMD Coachella Valley �� CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvements plans for City approval. A project -specific NPDES construction permit must be obtained by the applicant; and who then shall submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality Control Board's ("RWQCB") acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent ("NOI"), prior to the issuance of a grading or site construction permit by the City. 4. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water), LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08- DWQ. A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs one (1) acre or more of land, or that disturbs less than one (1) acre of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than one (1) acre of land, the Permittee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). The applicant or design professional can obtain the California Stormwater Quality Association SWPPP template at www.cabmphandbooks.com for use in their SWPPP preparation. B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off -site grading being done in relation to this project. C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management Practices ("BMPs") (8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC): 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 5) Non -Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. E. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading, pursuant to this project. F. The approved SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. 5. 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). 6. Approval of this Tentative Tract Map shall not be construed as approval for any horizontal dimensions implied by any site plans or exhibits unless specifically identified in the following conditions of approval. PROPERTY RIGHTS 7. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the 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. 8. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map all public street right-of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 9. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Avenue 58 (Secondary Arterial with Class II Bike Lane, 94' ROW) - Provide 44 feet of right of way from the centerline of Avenue 58 consistent with right of way requirements on the north side of Avenue 58 except an additional variable right of way dedication at the proposed entry measured 54 feet north of the centerline of Avenue 58 and deceleration length of 132 feet plus a transition length of 120 feet to 7 P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 accommodate improvements conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS. 10. The applicant shall retain for private use on the Final Map all private street right-of- ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 11. The private street right-of-ways to be retained for private use required for this development include: A. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Residential Streets measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line shall have a 36-foot travel width with parking allowed on both sides of the street. 2) Dead end residential streets measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line shall have a 28-foot travel width with street parking is prohibited, and provided there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors, and the applicant establishes provisions for ongoing enforcement of the parking restriction in the CC&R's. The CC&R's shall be reviewed by the Engineering Department prior to recordation. 12. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. Pursuant to this requirement, the Applicant shall include in the submittal packet containing the draft final map submitted for map checking, an offsite street geometric layout, drawn at 1 " equals 40 feet, detailing the following design aspects: median curb line, outside curb line, lane line alignment including lane widths, left turn lanes, deceleration lane(s) and bus stop turnout(s). The geometric layout shall be accompanied with sufficient professional engineering studies to confirm the appropriate length of all proposed turn pockets and auxiliary lanes that may impact the right of way .dedication required of the project and the associated landscape setback requirement 13. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street right-of- ways shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map are necessary prior to approval of the Final Map dedicating such right-of-ways, the applicant shall grant the necessary right-of-ways within 60 days of a written request by the City. 740 P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 14. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map a ten -foot wide public utility easement contiguous with, and along both sides of all private streets. Such easement may be reduced to five feet in width with the express written approval of IID. 15. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of- ways as follows: A. Avenue 58 (Secondary Arterial) - 10-foot from the R/W-P/L. The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall design is approved. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on the Final Map. 16. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas on the Final Map. 17. Direct vehicular access to Avenue 58 from lots with frontage along Avenue 58 is restricted, except for those access points identified on the tentative tract map, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final tract map. 18. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. 19. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Tentative Tract Map and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. FINAL MAPS 20. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a standard 74t. P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD program. Where a Final Map was not produced in an AutoCAD format, or produced in a file that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept a raster - image file of such Final Map. The Final Map shall be of a 1 " = 40' scale. 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. 21. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC. 22. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A. On -Site Rough Grading Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal B. PM 10 Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal C. SWPPP 1 " = 40' Horizontal E. Off -Site Street Improvement/Storm Drain Plan Off -Site Signing & Striping Plan 1 if = 40' Horizontal, 1" = 4' Vertical 1 " = 40' Horizontal The Off -Site street improvement plans shall have separate plan sheet(s) (drawn at 20 scale) that show the meandering sidewalk, mounding, and berming design in the combined parkway and landscape setback area. 7412 P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 F. On -Site Street Improvements/Signing & Striping/Storm Drain Plan 1 it = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical NOTE: A through F to be submitted concurrently. The following plans shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department for review and approval. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the Building and Safety Director in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. G. On -Site Residential Precise Grading Plan 1 if = 30' Horizontal Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans and Signing & Striping Plans shall show all existing improvements for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions. All On -Site Signing & Striping Plans shall show, at a minimum; Stop Signs, Limit Lines and Legends, No Parking Signs, Raised Pavement Markers (including Blue RPMs at fire hydrants) and Street Name Signs per Public Works Standard Plans and/or as approved by the Engineering Department. "Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. 23. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction which can be accessed via the Online Engineering Library at the City website (www.la-quinta.org). Navigate to the Public Works Department home page and look for the Online Engineering Library hyperlink. 24. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. 743 PAreports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order to reflect the as -built conditions. Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 25. Prior to approval of any Final Map, the applicant shall construct all on and off -site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City. 26. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of guaranteeing the completion of any improvements related to this Tentative Tract Map, shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC. 27. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include the removal of any existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the proposed improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monumentation. When improvements are phased through a "Phasing Plan," or an administrative approval (e.g., Site Development Permits), all off -site improvements and common on - site improvements (e.g., backbone utilities, retention basins, perimeter walls, landscaping and gates) shall be constructed, or secured through a SIA, prior to the issuance of any permits in the first phase of the development, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations required of each subsequent phase shall either be completed, or secured through a SIA, prior to the completion of homes or the occupancy of permanent buildings within such latter phase, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. In the event the applicant fails to construct the improvements for the development, or fails to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, pursuant to the approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of all permits, and/or final inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. 744 PAreports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 28. Depending on the timing of the development of this Tentative Tract Map, and the status of the off -site improvements at the time, the applicant may be required to: A. Construct certain off -site improvements. B. Construct additional off -site improvements, subject to the reimbursement of its costs by others. C. Reimburse others for those improvements previously constructed that are considered to be an obligation of this tentative tract map. D. Secure the costs for future improvements that are to be made by others. E. To agree to any combination of these means, as the City may require. Off -Site Improvements should be completed on a first priority basis. The applicant shall complete Off -Site Improvements in the first phase of construction or by the issuance of the 20 % Building Permit (add number when applicable). In the event that any of the improvements required for this development are constructed by the City, the applicant shall, prior to the approval of the Final Map, or the issuance of any permit related thereto, reimburse the City for the costs of such improvements. 29. If the applicant elects to utilize the secured agreement alternative, the applicant shall submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed on -site and off -site improvements, including an estimate for the final survey monumentation, for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Such estimates shall conform to the unit cost schedule adopted by City resolution, or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs shall be approved by the City Engineer. At the time the applicant submits its detailed construction cost estimates for conditional approval of the Final Map by the City Council, the applicant shall also submit one copy each of an 8-1/2 if x 11 " reduction of each page of the Final Map, along with a copy of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " Vicinity Map. Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant's detailed cost estimates. P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 Security will not be required for telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V. improvements. 30. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development, or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 31. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 32. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 33. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC, and D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES stormwater discharge permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls), LQMC. E. Proof of retention of archaeological monitors shall be given to the City prior to issuance of the first earth -moving or clearing permit. Monitors shall include a Ramona Band of Mission Indians designee. The site shall be monitored during on- and off -site trenching and rough grading by qualified archaeological monitors. The final report on the archaeological monitoring shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance .of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the project. Any collected archaeological resources shall be properly packaged for long term curation, in polyethylene self -seal bags, vials, or film cans as appropriate, all within acid -free, standard size, comprehensively labeled archive boxes and delivered to the City prior to issuance of first Certificate of Occupancy for the property. Materials shall be accompanied by descriptive catalogue, field notes and records, primary research data, and the original graphics. 7110 PAreports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 F. Proof of retention of paleontological monitors shall be given to the City prior to issuance of the first earth -moving or clearing permit. On- and off -site monitoring of earth -moving and grading in areas identified as likely to contain paleontological resources shall be conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor. The monitor shall be equipped to salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays and to remove samples of sediments that are likely to contain the remains of small fossil invertebrates and vertebrates. The monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert equipment to allow removal of abundant or large specimens. Any recovered specimens shall be prepared to the point of identification and permanent preservation, including washing of sediments to recover small invertebrates and vertebrates. A report of findings with an appended itemized inventory of specimens shall be submitted to the City prior to the first occupancy of a residence being granted by the City. The report shall include pertinent discussions of the significance of all recovered resources where appropriate. The report and inventory, when submitted will signify completion of the program to mitigate impacts to paleontological resources. All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the Final Map that a soils report has been prepared in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit. 34. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 35. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six feet (6') of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All r� t1 P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.51 in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb. 36. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 37.. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining properties and the lots within this development unless there are pre-existing conditions such as existing perimeter walls and pad elevations on adjacent properties are not consistent with the lay of the land. Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 38. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 39. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 40. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the approved preliminary hydrology report. More specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Additionally, the 100 year stormwater shall be retained within the interior street right of way. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets and include any resulting uncaptured tributary stormwater flows. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 74S P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 41. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 42. For properties where sump conditions exist, the applicant must either define a diversion/overflow strategy or retain upstream stormwater as required for existing as - built conditions from all off -site tributary flow from the respective high points. The applicant must provide either on -site retention or alternative facilities of diversion/pass through, if selected. Historical flow paths should be identified and routing provided in the hydrology analysis equivalent to historical flow direction. As local topography allows, tributary areas may exceed limits of property lines adjacent to public roads. The 100-year storm shall be the governing event in the designer's evaluation. 43. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be zero as demonstrated by preliminary percolation tests. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. Nuisance water shall be passed through a injection/dry well system or equivalent system approved by the City Engineer. The injection/dry well system or equivalent system shall be designed to contain surges of up to 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. of landscape area, and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. The injection/dry well system shall be designed to contain nuisance water surges from landscape area, residential unit, and off -site street nuisance water. Flow from adjacent well sites shall be designed for retention area percolation by separate infiltration system approved by the City Engineer. 44. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through underground piping and/or retention facilities) from any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. 45. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 46. For on -site common retention basins, retention depth shall be according to Engineering Bulletin 97.03, and side slopes shall not exceed 3:1 and shall be planted with maintenance free ground cover. 47. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC. P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 48. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 49. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. 50. Due to the unique length to width ratio of the proposed retention basin, the applicant or his design professional shall provide the following as approved by the City Engineer: A. To prevent undermining during a storm event, the applicant shall redesign the wall where it will be beneath the water surface during storms to a single reinforced concrete retaining wall with decorative face or other design approved by the City Engineer or comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. B. Provide for secondary overflow on the internal street system with a one foot freeboard during design storm events. C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC, and D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES stormwater discharge permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls), LQMC. UTILITIES 51. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.110 (Utilities), LQMC. 52. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 53. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground. P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 54. Underground 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 all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 55. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access For Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed. 56. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan (street type noted in parentheses.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Avenue 58 (Secondary Arterial with Class II Bike Lane): Widen the north side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Tentative Map boundary to its ultimate width on the north side as specified in the General Plan and the requirements of these conditions. Rehabilitate and/or reconstruct existing roadway pavement as necessary to augment and convert it from a rural county -road design standard to La Quinta's urban arterial design standard. The north curb face shall be located thirty two feet (32') north of the centerline. Other required improvements in the Avenue 58 right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: a) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. b) A deceleration/right turn only lane at the Primary Entry. The north curb face shall be located forty two feet (42') north of the centerline and length per Engineering Bulletin # 03-08. The deceleration length shall be 132 feet with a transition length of 120 feet. c) 8-foot wide meandering sidewalk. The meandering sidewalk shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes concave and 7,! t P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 convex curves with respect to the curb line that touches the back of curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet, and at each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall meander into the landscape setback lot and approach within 5 feet of the perimeter wall at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. d) A Class II Bike Lane along the north curb face along the Tentative Tract Map boundary. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision 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). The applicant is responsible for construction of all improvements mentioned above. The development is eligible for reimbursement from the City's Development Impact Fee fund in accordance with policies established for that program. The cost of improvements expended by the applicant from the centerline of Avenue 58 to within 20 feet of the outer curb face is eligible for reimbursement. The applicant is responsible for the remaining cost of the improvements. B. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Construct full 36-foot wide travel width measured gutter flow line to gutter flow line where the residential streets are double loaded. And construct a 28-foot wide travel width measured gutter flow line to gutter flow line where parking is prohibited and provided there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors, and the applicant establishes provisions for ongoing enforcement of the parking restriction in the CC&R's. The CC&R's shall be reviewed by the Engineering Department and Community Development Department prior to recordation. 2) The location of driveways of corner lots shall not be located within the curb return and away from the intersection when possible. 57. All gated entries shall provide for a three -car minimum stacking capacity for inbound traffic to be a minimum length of 62 feet from call . box to the street; and shall provide for a full turn -around outlet for non -accepted vehicles. Where a gated entry is proposed, the applicant shall submit a detailed exhibit at a scale of 1 " = 10', demonstrating that those passenger vehicles that do not gai7 J 2 PAreports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 entry into the development can safely make a full turn -around (minimum radius to be 24 feet) out onto the main street from the gated entry. Pursuant to said condition, there shall be a minimum of twenty feet width provided at the turn -around opening. Two lanes of traffic shall be provided on the entry side of each gated entry, one lane shall be dedicated for residents, and one lane for visitors. The two travel lanes shall be a minimum of 20 feet of total paved roadway surface or as approved by the Fire Department. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, standard knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined by the City Engineer. 58. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: Residential 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. Secondary Arterial 4.0" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 59. 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. 60. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: Primary Entry (Avenue 58): All turn movements are permitted. 61. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 62. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City P7 '5 P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. CONSTRUCTION 63. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets in residential developments are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPING 64. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC. 65. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. 66. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 67. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking has been completed by the Public Works Department, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the City Engineer. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 68. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. 69. Front yard landscaping plans for the residences shall be submitted for review by the ALRC and approval by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of first production home permit. Turf use in retention basins shall be limited to basin entries and exits where they meet the meandering walkway. In the turf's place, decomposed granite and accent plants should be provided. Preliminary -level common area and retention area wall design, heights, materials, colors, planting, etc. shall be reviewed by the ALRC and approved by the Planning Commission during review of 754 PAreports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 architectural plans for the residences or separately, whichever occurs first. 70. Delete the following plants from the plant palette: A. Pinus canaiensis Canary Island Pine B. Prosopis chilensis Chilean Mesquite C. Macfadyena unguis-cati Cat's Claw D. Pennisetum setaceum Fountain Grass E. Ficus pumila Creeping Fig F. Bracchychiton populneus Bottle Tree PUBLIC SERVICES 71. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 72. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 73. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate construction supervision. 74. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program, but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and other applicable regulations. 75. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or "As - Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions. MAINTENANCE 76. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 7,551. P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34243 INNOVATIVE COMMUNITIES (MASQUE DEVELOPMENT) ADOPTED: APRIL 18, 2006 77. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. FEES AND DEPOSITS 78. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. 79. 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). 80. Quimby In -lieu park fees shall be paid prior to approval of the Final Map by the City Council. MISCELLANEOUS 81. The perimeter wall along Avenue 58 shall meander or jog in and out along the property line. Decorative pilasters shall be provided approximately 75' on center along Avenue 58 perimeter wall. The Tentative Tract Map (TTM 34243) shall be conditioned to be revised to reflect this and be approved by the Community Development Director. 82. The residences adjacent to the east -west green belt (with walkway) shall be constructed with a setback 10' ± larger than the minimum of 5' (flipping residence as shown on submitted landscape plan). The east and west ends of the green belt shall be flared out. This flare will require revision to the adjacent single-family lots. This revision and final setbacks shall be subject to Community Development Director approval. 83. The entry gate shall be re -studied and redesigned to provide an attractive and creative gate consistent with the theme and architecture of the project. 84. Prior to Final Map approval, the City Fire Marshall shall review and approve Map. 7~6 P:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243 cc coa.doc O �w w w af wcn THE HIDEAWAY PGA WEST ATTACHMENT#1 AVENUE 54 CASE MAP w O Cc Z 0 m AIRPORT BLVD. (AVENUE 56) El AVENUE 1.58 CASE No- TTM 34243 MASQUE DEVELOPMENT (INNOVATIVE.COMMUNITIES) NORTH SCALE: NTS 75 ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC At ATTACHMENT 4 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058 • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (760) 398-2651 • FAX (760) 398-3711 DIRECTORS: OFFICERS: JOHN W. MCFADDEN, PRESIDENT STEVEN B. ROBBINS, PETER NELSON, VICE PRESIDENT GENERAL MANAGER -CHIEF ENGINEER TELLIS CODEKAS MARK BEUHLER, RUSSELL KITAHARA ASST. GENERAL MANAGER PATRICIA A. LARSON JULIA FERNANDEZ, SECRETARY Planning Commission City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Gentlemen: November 21 20005 DAN PARKS, ASST. TO GENERAL MANAGER REDWINE AND SHERRILL, ATTORNEYS File: 0163.1 E C 142WE NOV 3 0 2005D CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Subject: Environmental Assessment 2004-557 and Tentative Tract Map 34243 This area is protected from regional stormwater flows by a system of channels and dikes, and may be considered safe from regional stormwater flows except in rare instances. This area is designated Zone X on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Since the stormwater issues of this development are local drainage, the District does not need to review drainage design further. The District will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area in accordance with the current regulations of this District. These regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the subdivider and said fees and charges are subject to change: Additional domestic water and sewer pipelines will have to be installed by the subdivider in order for the District to. provide service to all parcels. This area shall be annexed to Improvement District No. 55 of the District for sanitation service. There are existing Bureau of Reclamation facilities not shown on the development plans. There may be conflicts with -these* facilities. We request the appropriate public agency to withhold the approval of a tract map until utility clearances .have been completed with the District. TRUE CONSERVATION _ USE WATER WISELY j 8 Planning Commission City of La Quinta 2 November 21, 2005 Plans for grading, landscaping and irrigation systems shall be submitted to the District for review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management. The groundwater basin in the Coachella Valley is in a state of overdraft. Each new dwelling unit contributes incrementally to the overdraft. The District has a Water Management Plan in place to reduce the overdraft to the groundwater basin. The elements of the Water Management Plan include supplemental imported water, source substitution and water conservation. The elements of this plan should be incorporated in the environmental mitigation plan for this development to reduce its negative impact on the Coachella Valley groundwater basin. If you have any questions please call Tyme Fruscella, Stormwater Engineer, extension 2229. Yours ery truly, Mark L. Johnson Director of Engineering cc: Jeff Johnson Riverside County Department of Public Health 82-675 Highway 111, CAC Building, Second Floor, Room 209 Indio, CA 92201 TF:ch\eng\sw\05\nov\env asment 04-557 060721-3 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 79 ATTACHMENT 5 Planning Commission Minutes March 28, 2006 G. Environmental Assessment 2005-557 and Tentative Tract Map 34243; a request of Innovative Communities (for Masque Development) for consideration of subdivision of 20 ± acres into 70 single-family and miscellaneous lots located on the north side of Avenue 58, 1,000 ± feet west of Madison Street. 1 . Vice Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report: - a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Dep. i tm men 2. Commissioner Daniels asked if the ,project rtas lower than the surrounding properties. Staff: replied it was and gave comparison heights for the whole project. 3. Commissioner Daniels said if,..we not apparent to him that there were a lot of design options constdering the shape of the property. He asked if staff dad presented an'yIternatives. Staff replied they had and outlined" theme :o ,,. 4. Commissioner Alderson asked street Configuration. Staff r concerns, e problem with the design was it was one of the design 5. There beingno further questions of staff, Vice Chairman Quill asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Dan Doti ghbron, '`representing the applicant, stated he would take comments. 7. Vice Chairman Quill asked staff if this would be the final opportunity for the Commission to see the landscape plans. Staff replied it was unless the Commission revised the condition. Mr. Doughbron said staff had suggested pockets of desertscape material and he thought that was due to the City's concern about 7r,)0 P:\CAROLYN\Planning Com\PC Minutes\3-28-06PC.doc 30 Planning Commission Minutes March 28, 2006 conserving water. The applicant is open to creating pockets areas, but still wants to maintain the greenbelt. 8. Vice Chairman Quill said the City has a Water Conservation Ordinance and the applicant will have to comply with it as well as the Coachella Valley Water District requirements. Staff replied the applicant will comply with the condition. It. may be necessary for the applicant to redesign the corridor t� comply with the landscaping ordinance. 12. "Commissioner Alderson asked if the revised landscape plans would solve the problem. Staff said a revised landscape plan may resolve some of the problems but it will be a squeezed plan. 13. Commissioner Barrows had a question regarding a revised design and using a more innovative concept. She asked if the applicant could defend the project in terms of what they saw as the innovative elements. The applicant said they were pinched PACAROLYN\Planning Com\PC Minutes\3-28-06PC.doc 31 Planning Commission Minutes March 28, 2006 between three projects. When they purchased the land and looked at the design, the previous owner had done the designing without much forethought. They have used more creativity in designing the project to create more of an open field design. They used Chris Bergh, at MDS Consulting, to prepare eight different design options, all of which were worse than the plan presented. Accessibility seems to be the main design problem. Vice Chairman Quill asked for the location of Lion's Gate project, which Mr. Gresick said was due east of this project. Vice Chairman Quill asked if the elevation differences were the problem. ........................ ....................... ....................... ...................... ...................... ..................... ..................... .................... M:T Gresick explained the height of the wall versus the project. Vice Chairman Quill asked staff what they were proposing to do regarding the perimeter wall in terms of where the existing wall is located. Staff replied the applicant should address that. Mr. Doughbron said there was a suggestion to use the parcel near the entrance as part of a green belt. 18. Vice Chairman Quill asked the applicant's representative, Chris Bergh, MDS Consulting, to address the question regarding the 7F2 P:\CAROLYN\Planning Com\PC Minutes\3-28-06PC.doc 32 Planning Commission Minutes March 28, 2006 wall. Mr. Bergh gave a technical explanation of the elevations on the project and the design of the wall. Vice Chairman Quill asked if he thought they had done their very best to design the wall so there was no significant difference between the lots on one side of the wall versus the other side of the wall. Mr. Bergh replied they had. Vice Chairman Quill asked if the wall was originally constructed by Lion's Gate development. Mr. Bergh replied it was. Vice Chairman Quill asked who the wall belonged to. Mr. Bergh said the wall was right on the line a.nd he wasn't sure who it belonged to, but assumed it was the prpPerty of the Lion's Gates development. 23. Commissioner Alderson made the suggestion to continue this approval until the landscaping plans could be made available and the landscaping and retention basin concerns evaluated. 24. Commissioner Daniels wanted to hear more discussion about grading on the adjacent property. PACAROLYN\Planning Com\PC Minutes\3-28-06PC.doc 33 Planning Commission Minutes March 28, 2006 25. Vice Chairman Quill said it appears as though the applicant has done their best to match the grades. He asked the applicant what the difference was between Lion's Gate and this project. Applicant's representative Chris Bergh gave an explanation of the difference between the two projects and how the difference was measured. He said the largest variation was 3.3 feet at Lot #1 . anywhere along the way. Mr. Bergh replied very little, but it varies. 27. Commissioner Alderson commented thesite balances on the high end. He was also concerned that the Lion's Gate property owners should have an tspp,ortunity to disc.016s. their concerns and provide input to the applicant. Commissioner Alderson asked if the condition was recommending to continue this item. Staff stated the applicant would have to get their landscape details done so they are incorporated in the grading Plan and that plan would be brought back to the Commission for approval. Commission Alderson stated the applicant would probably not go ahead with the design till he was confident of the approval. Staff told the Commissioners if they approved the subdivision it would go forward. 30. Vice Chairman Quill said he was willing to approve the Tentative Tract Map so they could keep moving forward. P:\CAROLYN\Planning Com\PC Minutes\3-28-06PC.doc 34 "7 ' � Planning Commission Minutes March 28, 2006 31. Commissioner Barrows asked if the Commission needed elaboration on the project re -design. Staff stated the grid system design was not as creative as the project could be and wanted to see something with smaller loop streets and culs de sac incorporated. Staff added the landscape corridor, in the final design, is going to be a design challenge. It will get narrower and tighter in all likelihood. It will not really be active open space nor .recreational. It will not function well doe to the size/shape of the project parcel. It may require a very ;x0i nsive design to fix the interior so it is something more,than a fairly straight sidewalk down the middle of a channel. 34. Vice Chairman Q propQs+ad at this said thara were no additional sidewalks Alderson's suggestions,. the applicant to go bacl' suggestions `to improve corrie b c�C with a more the grae belt, pr rnaril: 35. Commissioner Daniels said he would prefer they give approval to the submitted Tentative Tract. Vice Chairman Quill asked if Commissioner Daniels meant they give approval to the Tentative Tract, but with added comments to Condition 76. 37. Commissioner Daniels said they need to address their ideas in the landscape review and move forward to approve the Tentative Tract with the landscape plans coming back for review. 38. Commissioner Ladner said another suggestion would be to flip the placement of the homes on the lots in order to widen the areas. P:\CAROLYN\Planning Com\PC Minutes\3-28-06PC.doc 35 Planning Commission Minutes March 28, 2006 39. Vice Chairman Quill said they need to give extra space to the lots that abut the east/west crosswalk. Staff said it was already in the conditions. 40. Vice Chairman Quill stated there would also need to be east/west access to the greenbelt walkway and it would be addressed in a landscape review. He said the Commission should give the applicant their ideas, approve the map, amend Condition 76 and have detailed landscape drawings come back to the Commission prior to issuance of a grading permit.' 41. Commissioner Barrows asked if:, ..-etornmis:iII00e,rs were satisfied the needs of the neighbors had been addressed. 42. Commissioner Alderson stated he would like to see the Lion's Gate homeowners have the opportunity to' meet with the applicant so their concerns could be addressed. a. condition added: The applicant shall create sidewalk crossings so there is better access to the retention basin/greenbelt floor. b. Condition added: The applicant shall provide an opportunity for the Lion's Gate Homeowners' Association to meet with the design staff. C. Add to Condition 76: The revised landscaping plans shall be brought back to the Planning Commission for review and approval before issuance of grading permits. d. Condition added: The applicant shall remit Quimby Park Fees prior to recordation of the Final Tract Map. 70r PACAROLYN\Planning Com\PC Minutes\3-28-06PC.doc 36 �S C��l OF 'T�ti9 COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 18, 2006 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of a Resolution of the City Council Certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 2005-546 and Approving Tentative Tract Map 33801, the Subdivision of 2.58± Acres into Eight Single -Family Lots and Lettered Lots, Located on the West side of Madison Street, 500 ± Feet North of Avenue 60. Applicant: Blake Jumper RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: 3 Adopt a Resolution of the City Council certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2005-546; and Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Tentative Tract Map 33801 to subdivide 2.58 ± acres into eight single-family residential lots, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS None. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: The project site is a former rural residence located on the west side of Madison Street approximately 500 feet north of Avenue 60. A vacant garage and cluster of tamarisk trees are all that remain on the site. The 2.5 acre property is an elongated, rectangular lot, 660 feet deep with 170 feet of frontage along Madison Street. The General Plan designation of Low Density Residential allows for up to four dwelling units per acre and the zoning requires a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. This property also lies within an existing Equestrian Overlay district which permits equestrian -related accessory uses. This portion of the City was annexed on June 25, 2002. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the 2.58 acre site into eight single-family residential lots (Attachment 1) . Three lettered lots would be created, one for storm water retention, one for landscaping, and a private street. No gate has been proposed at the entry. The proposed density of this subdivision is 3.1 dwelling units per acre, which is within the allowed maximum density of four dwelling units per acre. The smallest lot proposed is 8,170 square feet and the largest is 10,028 square feet, with an average lot size of 8,688 square feet. Surrounding Residential Projects: Although the surrounding properties are currently undeveloped, all have residential projects either proposed or approved. South of the project site is Tract 32201, a 7.7 acre site approved on July 20, 2004 for 24 lots ranging in size from 8,010 to 12,375 square feet. Grading has already begun for Tract 32201. Though no homes have been built, a wall has been constructed along the south perimeter of the proposed site. North of this proposed site, currently the location of a small citrus grove, staff is reviewing an application for Tentative Tract Map 34495, a proposal for 25 single- family residential properties along Calle Conchita. The proposed lots will average 18,061 square feet in size. As the perimeter lots of proposed Tentative Tract 34495 are cul-de-sac lots, if approved they could potentially be up to 8,000 feet larger than those proposed for this project. Tract 31681, Andalusia at Coral Mountain, is located on both sides of this project. Andalusia has lot sizes ranging from ± 9,800 to ± 17,000 square feet. A residential street has been proposed for Andalusia along the western perimeter. Across Madison Street to the east of the project site is the location of Andalusia's golf course maintenance, building, currently under construction. Layout and Conceptual Landscaping: The layout consists of a single, 650 foot long linear cul-de-sac street with a 12'x6' landscaped island at the entry. The project's un-gated entry will access Madison Street. Access onto Madison Street is limited to a right -in, right -out, due to the close proximity of adjacent intersections, within 500 feet in either direction. A recently constructed median is located at the center of Madison Street. A Multi - Purpose Trail has been proposed along Madison Street, though it is not identified in the General Plan for this location and adjacent properties have not been required to construct the trail feature. 76 The applicants have provided a conceptual landscaping and layout plan (Attachment 2), but have not identified a specific landscaping palate or groundcover. Lot "B," the retention basin, and Lot T," a six foot wide perimeter lot along the south wall, are proposed to be landscaped. The proposed entry will be un-gated with stamped concrete paving and a 12'x6' landscaped entry island at the center. In their conceptual landscaping, the applicants have proposed to provide off -site landscaping within the triangular lot located off -site between the northeastern portion of the project and Madison Street. Details concerning the proposed landscaping and wall design will be reviewed and approved during the site development permit process. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission considered the application request at their March 28, 2006 meeting. Following public testimony, discussion and deliberations, the Planning Commission unanimously moved to recommend the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 2005-546 and approve Tentative Tract Map 33801, subject to the following: • The private street shall be designed to the applicant's proposed 28-foot travel width rather than the City standard of 32 feet (COA #10 A [1 ] and COA #51 B [11). • The identified Multi -Purpose Trail shall be installed unless connectivity with adjacent properties is determined by City staff to be unfeasible (COA #51 A [1-c]). Staff is in discussion with the developers of adjacent Tract 32201 in order to provide potential multi -purpose trail connectivity to Avenue 60. Public Notice This map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on March 18, 2006. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code. The official Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted on March 18, 2006 and was also published in the Desert Sun newspaper on April 7, 2005. As of this writing, no comments have been received. Public Agency Review All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made part of the Conditions of Approval for this case. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES Findings necessary to approve the Tentative Tract Map can be made and are contained in the attached Resolutions. The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 2005-546; and Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Tentative Tract Map 33801 to subdivide 2.58 ± acres into eight single family residential lots, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval; or 2. Do not adopt the Resolutions approving the project; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. Respectfully submitted, ,U.f?p r�� Douglas Evans Community Development Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1 . Tentative Tract Map 33801 Exhibit 2. Conceptual Landscaping RESOLUTION NO. 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2005-546 PREPARED FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2005-546 BLAKE JUMPER WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 181" day of April, 2006, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Blake Jumper for Environmental Assessment 2005-546 prepared for Tentative Tract 33801 located on the west side of Madison Street approximately 500 feet north of Avenue 60, more particularly described as: APN 766-080-009 WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63). The Community Development Director has determined that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and therefore, is recommending that this Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact be certified. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office as required by Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes; 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 certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed project 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 2005-546. 2. The proposed project 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. p:\reports-cc\2006\4-18-06\tt 34243\ea 05-557 cc res.doc City Council Resolution No. 2006- Environmental Assessment 2005-546 Blake Jumper Adopted: April 18, 2006 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 project does 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 project 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 project 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 Planning Commission has considered Environmental Assessment 2005-546 and said Assessment reflects the independent judgment 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 constitute the findings of the City Council for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby certify Environmental Assessment 2005-546 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental P:\Reports - CC\2006\4-18-06\Blake Jumper TT 33801\tt 33801 ea 05-546 cc res.doc City Council Resolution No. 2006- Environmental Assessment 2005-546 Blake Jumper Adopted: April 18, 2006 Assessment Checklist and Mitigation Monitoring Program, attached and on file in the Community Development Department. 3. That Environmental Assessment 2005-546 reflects the independent judgment of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 18th day of April, 2006, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Mayor City of La Quinta California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 773 P:\Reports - CC\2006\4-18-06\Blake Jumper TT 33801\tt 33801 ea 05-546 cc res.doc Environmental Checklist Form 1. 2. 3. 4. Project title: Tentative Tract Map 33801 Lead agency name and address: Contact person and phone number: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Andrew Mogensen, Associate Planner 760-777-7125 Project location: The west side of Madison Street, approximately 555 feet north of Avenue 60, APN 766-080-009 5. Project sponsor's name and address: Blake Jumper 80553 Jasper Park Indio, CA 92201 6. General Plan designation: Low Density 7. Zoning: Low Density Residential 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.) A proposed Tentative Tract Map to subdivide a 2.39 acre site into eight single family residential lots, as well as a lot for retention, and for a private cul-de-sac. The lots are proposed to be a minimum of 8,408 square. feet, and range to 9,516 square feet. Access will be taken from Madison Street. The site has been developed as a single family home. 9. . Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: Agriculture (Low Density Residential, Golf Course Open Space) South: Single family homes under construction (Low Density Residential) East: Madison Street West: Vacant lands (Low Density Residential) 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Coachella Valley Water District -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 Biological Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Mineral Resources Public Services Utilities / Service Systems Agriculture Resources Cultural Resources Hydrology / Water Quality Noise Recreation Air Quality Geology /Soils Land Use / Planning Population / Housing Transportation/Traffic Mandatory Findings of Significance 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. X 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 project proponent. 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" impact 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 or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are A sed� the proposed project, nothing further is required. Si March 16, 2006 Date 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 referenced 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) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than 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 XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. 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. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures 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. 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) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a proj ect's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance -3- r7.t U Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a X scenic vista? (La Quinta General Plan Exhibit 3.6 "Image Corridors") b) Substantially damage scenic resources, X including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Aerial photograph; Site Inspection) c) Substantially degrade the existing X visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Application materials) d) Create a new source of substantial X light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application materials) I. a)-c) The proposed project will result in the construction of 8 single family homes. The City's Zoning Ordinance allows single and two story homes to be built in the Low Density Residential designation. This type of development is consistent with the development currently under way or planned in the vicinity of the site. The site and surrounding area are some distance from the Santa Rosa Mountains, and construction of the homes will not block views to these mountains. There are no significant trees, rock outcroppings or history structures on the site. The site is located on Madison Street, which is designated an Agrarian Image Corridor in the General Plan. As such, the project proponent will be required to meet setback and landscaping requirements for the corridor, to improve the aesthetic appearance of Madison Street in front of the property. Impacts associated with scenic resources are expected to be insignificant. d) The construction of 8 houses will result in minor increases in light generation at the site, primarily due to car headlights and landscaping lighting. The car headlights will be intermittent and temporary, and will not impact the area. The City imposes strict standards for landscaping and residential lighting, which is required to contain lighting within the site boundaries. Impacts associated with light are therefore expected to be insignificant. / f � -4- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact H. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique X Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? (General Plan EIR p. III-21 ff.) X b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) c) Involve other changes in the existing X environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (General Plan Land Use Map; Site Inspection) II. a)-c) The project site has been developed as a single family home, and is not currently in agriculture. Lands to the north, and a small area to the east, are small orchards. The development of the site will not impact the ability of these uses to continue in agriculture. Overall, however, there is no significant agriculture in the area, and the land has been designated in the General Plan for urban uses. There are no Williamson Act contracts on the property. No impacts to agriculture are expected. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct X implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or X projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) c) Result in a cumulatively considerable X 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, 2002 PM 10 Plan for the Coachella Valley) d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description, Aerial Photo) e) Create obj ectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? (Project Description, Aerial Photo) III. a)- e) The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is responsible for the monitoring of air quality in the City, and the implementation of air quality management plans. The development of air quality plans by the SCAQMD was based on the City's General Plan land uses and mapping. Therefore, the proposed project is expected to be consistent with these plans. The proposed project will generate the potential for air quality impacts during both construction and operation of the project. Construction impacts will be those associated with PM 10, or fugitive dust, and grading equipment. The project can be expected to generate up to 63.1 pounds of fugitive dust per day during grading operations. This falls below the SCAQMD thresholds of significance of 150 pounds per day. Therefore, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact on PM 10 emissions during construction. Based on mass grading of the site, and the equipment likely to be required to grade the property, the potential vehicular emissions from construction equipment were estimated. The resulting emissions are shown in Table 1, below. -6- Table 1 Grading Equipment Emissions - Diesel powered (hounds per dav) Equipment Pieces hrs/day CO ROC Nox Sox PM10 Fork Lift - 50 hp 0 8 - - - - - Fork Lift - 175 hp 0 8 - - - - - Trucks - Off -Highway 0 8 - - - - - Tracked Loader 0 8 - - - - - Tracked Tractor 0 8 - - - - - Scraper 1 8 10.00 2.16 30.72 3.68 3.28 Wheeled Dozer 0 8 - - - - - Wheeled Loader 0 8 - - - - - Wheeled Tractor 1 8 28.64 1.44 10.16 0.72 1.12 Roller 0 8 - - - - - Motor Grader 2 8 2.42 0.62 11.41 1.38 0.98 Miscellaneous 1 8 5.40 1.20 13.60 1.14 1.12 Total: 46.46 5.42 65.89 6.92 6.50 SCAQMD Thresholds of Significance 550.00 75.00 100.00 150.00 150.00 As demonstrated in the Table, emissions from equipment used during the grading process are expected to be less than significant. The proposed project will also result in air emissions in the long term. These will be primarily associated with vehicle trips to and from the project site. Table 2 demonstrates the resulting emissions, based on an average of 77 daily trips'. Table 2 Moving Exhaust Emission Projections at Project Buildout (pounds per day) Total No. Vehicle Trips/Day 77 Ave. Trip Length (miles) x 15 Total miles/day 1,155 PM10 PM10 PM10 Pollutant ROC CO NOX Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Pounds at 50 mph 0.23 5.97 1.22 - 0.03 0.03 SCAQMD Thresholds of Significance 550.00 75.00 100.00 150.00 As demonstrated, the proposed project is not expected to exceed thresholds of significance associated with long term air emissions. The proposed subdivision is not expected to create objectionable odors. 1 "Trip Generation, 7t' Edition," prepared by the Institute of Traffic Engineers, for category 210, single family detached. 730 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either X 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 (Biological Technical Report, EcoSystems, 2/06) b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any X 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? (Biological Technical Report, EcoSystems, 2/06) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on X federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,. vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Biological Technical Report, EcoSystems, 2/06) d) Interfere substantially with the X movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (General Plan MEA, p. 78 ff.) e) Conflict with any local policies or X ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (General Plan MEA, p. 73 ff.) f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, X Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservationplan? (Biological -8- i Technical Report, EcoSystems, 2/06) IV. a)-f) A biological resource study was prepared for the proposed project2. The study included both records searches and on site investigation. The on site survey identified non- native plant communities on the site, consisting of grasslands, tamarisk and ruderal habitats. No sensitive plants were identified during the site survey. No sensitive animal, bird or lizard species were observed, nor was sign identified. A cactus wren was observed foraging off -site. The site includes a stand of non-native tamarisk, which could harbor nests of species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. In order to assure that no protected species are nesting on the subject property, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. 1. To avoid impacts to nesting birds, the removal of potential nesting vegetation (i.e., trees, shrubs, ground cover, etc.) supporting migratory birds/raptors shall be avoided during the nesting season (if feasible), recognized from February 1 through August 31. If vegetation removal must occur during the nesting season, a qualified biologist shall conduct a migratory nesting bird survey to ensure that vegetation removal would not impact any active nests. Surveys must be conducted no more than three days prior to vegetation removal. If active nests are identified during nesting bird surveys, then the nesting vegetation would be avoided until the nesting event has completed and the juveniles can survive independently from the nest. The biologist shall flag the nesting vegetation and would establish an adequate buffer (e.g., construction fencing) around the nesting vegetation. The size of the buffer would be based on the type of bird nesting (i.e., raptors shall be afforded larger buffers). Clearing/grading shall not occur within the buffer until the nesting event has completed. This condition assures that the impacts to nesting birds are reduced to less than significant levels. The biology study found that there is neither riparian habitat nor wetland areas on the project site. The development will not conflict with any City preservation ordinances, or with the implementation of either the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan or the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. Overall, impacts associated with biological resources are expected to be less than significant. 2 "Draft Biological Technical Report" prepared by EcoSystems Restoration Associates, revised February 2006. r� -9- �:. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Impact Significant w/ Mitigation Significant Impact Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of a historical resource as defined in'15064.5? (Cultural Resource Survey, Applied Earthworks, 9/05) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to '15064.5? (Cultural Resource Survey, Applied Earthworks, 9/05) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? (General Plan MEA p. 88 ff.) d) Disturb any human remains, including X those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (Cultural Resource Survey, Applied Earthworks, 9/05) V.a)-d) A cultural resource survey was conducted on the proposed project site'. The study included both records searches and on site investigation. The on site investigation found no evidence of archaeological resources on the property. The structures located on the site were constructed in the 1960's,- and are not historically significant. The City's standard policy is to require monitoring of all properties during trenching and grading to assure that any buried cultural resources that might be found are properly identified. The proposed project has been required to comply with this standard policy by the Historic Preservation Committee (HPC). This standard monitoring requirement will assure that any impacts to currently unknown cultural resources are less than significant. C The project site lies on the edge of the ancient Lake Cahuilla lakebed. No paleontological resources were identified in the cultural resource survey. While reviewing the survey, HPC considered the potential for paleontological resources on the site, and required the preparation of an on -site investigation prior to the initiation of grading activities. In order to assure that no unique paleontological resources exist on the subject property, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. 1. Prior to any grading activity, a field survey shall be conducted by the applicant in order to identify and document potential surface fossiliferous resources. A report of findings from the field survey shall be transmitted to the Community Development Department and site monitors. This condition of approval will assure that potential impacts associated with paleontological resources are reduced to less than significant levels. Overall impacts to cultural resources are expected to be less than significant. "Cultural Resources Survey of Tentative Tract 33801," prepared by Applied Earthworks, September 2005. t73 3 -10- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact 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, X 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 MEA Exhibit 6.2) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X (General Plan MEA Exhibit 6.2) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, X including liquefaction? (General Plan MEA Exhibit 6.3) iv) Landslides? (General Plan MEA Exhibit X 6.4) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or X the loss of topsoil? (General Plan MEA Exhibit 6.5) c) Be located on expansive soil, as X defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property (General Plan MEA Exhibit 6.1) d) Have soils incapable of adequately X supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (General Plan Exhibit 8.1) VI. a)-d) The site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The project proponent will be required to implement the Uniform Building Code standards required for active seismic areas such as the City and region, to assure that impacts associated with ground shaking are reduced to less than significant levels. The site is located in an area with high potential for liquefaction. The City requires the preparation of site specific geotechnical analyses prior to construction. In order to assure that this analysis addresses, and provides recommendations for the potential liquefaction hazard, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. 1. Pre -construction geotechnical analysis shall include a specific focus on the potential for liquefaction at the site. Should high groundwater levels be encountered, the geotechnical engineering report shall include recommendations for foundation design and site preparation to alleviate the hazard. The site is flat, and is located in an area that is similarly flat. No hillsides occur in the surrounding area, so there is no potential for landslides at the site. Soils in the City are not expansive. The proposed project will be required to connect to sanitary sewer, and no septic systems will be installed. With implementation of the mitigation measure listed above, impacts associated with geology and soils will be less than significant. -12- "l Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VH. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? (General Plan MEA, p. 95 ff.) c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle X hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Application materials) d) Be located on a site which is included X on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Application materials) e) For a project located within an airport X 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 X 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 X interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (General Plan MEA p. 95 ff) h) Expose people or structures to a X significant risk of loss, injury or death -13- involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) VH. a)-h) The ultimate development of 8 homes will not result in any impacts from hazards or hazardous materials. The residents will participate in the household hazardous waste programs implemented by Waste Management throughout the City. There are no identified hazardous materials sites within the project area. The project has been integrated into the City's emergency preparedness planning for some years. There are no wildlands located adjacent or near the project site. -14- r7S171 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or X waste discharge requirements? (General Plan EIR p. III-187 ff.) b) Substantially deplete groundwater X 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 (e.g., 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 p. III-187 ff.) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage X pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off -site? (Preliminary Hydrology Study, P&D Consultants, 1/06) d) Substantially alter the existing drainage X pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on - or off -site? (Preliminary Hydrology Study, P&D Consultants, 1/06) e) Create or contribute runoff water which X would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (Preliminary Hydrology Study, P&D Consultants, 1/06) f) Place housing within a 100-year flood X hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (Preliminary Hydrology Study, P&D Consultants, 1/06) -15- g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Preliminary Hydrology Study, P&D Consultants, 1/06) X VIII. a)-g) The development of eight single family homes is not expected to violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The homes will utilize ground water provided by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) for domestic and landscaping uses. CVWD's Urban Water Management Plan identifies sufficient water supplies, now and in the future, to serve its service area. The City also implements water conservation through landscaping irrigation controls and installation of efficient fixtures. Impacts associated with groundwater are expected to be less than significant. A hydrology study was prepared for the proposed project4. The study determined the configuration required for the retention basin to be located at the east boundary of the site. The basin is required by the City to contain the 100 year storm on site. The analysis resulted in a basin which will have a capacity of 17,220 cubic feet, which will accommodate the 100 year storm flow of 15,839 cubic feet. The City Engineer will continue to review the hydrology analysis through final design, to assure that capacity is sufficient in the basin. The City requires the implementation of best management practices during construction to assure that water erosion does not contaminate surface water. These requirements will reduce potential impacts associated with erosion of soils to less than significant levels. The property is not located within a 100 year flood plain, as mapped by FEMA. 4 "Preliminary Hydrology Study for Tentative Tract No. 33801" prepared by P&D Consultants, January 2006. -16- 7 7 O Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established X community? (Aerial photo) b) Conflict with any applicable land use X 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 purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (General Plan Exhibit 2.1) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? General Plan MEA p. 74 ff.) IX. a)-c) The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan designation assigned to the property. The site contains an unoccupied residential unit, and construction of the project will therefore not impact an existing community. The proposed project will be required to comply with any habitat conservation plan in effect at the time of development of the site. No impacts associated with land use are expected. -17- 790 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a X known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.) b) Result in the loss of availability of a X locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.) X. a) & b) The site is located in an area of the City designated Mineral Resource Zone MRZ-1, which indicates that no resources occur. There will be no impact to mineral resources as a result of the proposed project. -18- 791 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XI. NOISE Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards X established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (General Plan MEA p. 111 ff.) b) Exposure of persons to or generation X of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (General Plan MEA p. 111 ff.) c) A substantial permanent increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan MEA p. 111 ff.) d) A substantial temporary or periodic X increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan MEA p. 111 ff.) e) For a project located within an airport X 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? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) XI. a)-f) The proposed project will be located in the southern end of the City, on the west side of Madison Street. Due to the location of the retention basin adjacent to the roadway, the nearest residential property will be located approximately 100 feet from the right of way. The project also proposes a 6 foot high block wall across the frontage on Madison Street. This portion of Madison Street was determined in the General Plan EIR to be an area of relative low noise levels. Build out of the General Plan will not cause the proposed project to experience noise levels in excess of City standards. -19- 799 Impacts are expected to be less than significant. The project site will generate higher noise levels during construction. However, there are no sensitive receptors adjacent to the site, and impacts are expected to be less than significant. The property is not located within the influence area of an airport or airstrip. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth X 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, p. 9 ff., application materials) b) Displace substantial numbers of X existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) c) Displace substantial numbers of X people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) XII. a)-c) The ultimate build out of 8 single family residences will not result in substantial population growth, or the need for additional housing. The site is currently vacant, and development of the project will not displace people. No impacts associated with population and housing are expected. 794 -21- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact 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, p. 57) X Police protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57) X Schools? (General Plan MEA, p. 52 ff.) X Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks X Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, X p. 46 ff.) XIII. a) The development of 8 single family homes will have. no impact on public services. The project will be required to contribute the required development impact fees, which include police and fire service facilities improvements, as well as park maintenance. Quimby fees will be required for the purchase of park lands The project proponent will be required to pay the school fees in place at the time of development to mitigate potential impacts to schools. 95 -22- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of X existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application materials; General Plan Exhibit 5.1) b) Does the project include recreational X facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application materials) XIV. a) & b) As stated above under Public Services, the proposed project will contribute Quimby and development impact fees to mitigate for potential impacts associated with parks and recreation. No impacts are expected. -23- 796 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is X 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, p. III-29 ff.) b) Exceed, either individually or X cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, p. III-29 ff.) c) Result in a change in air traffic X patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (No air traffic involved in project) d) Substantially increase hazards due to a X design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (TTM 33801) e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? (TTM 33801) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X (TTM 33801) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, X or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Project description; MEA Exhibit 3.10) XV. a)-g) The proposed project will generate approximately 77 daily trips. This portion of Madison Street is projected to operate at acceptable levels of service at General Plan build out. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. Therefore, impacts associated with the proposed project will be less than significant. The proposed project will include a single straight cul-de-sac accessing Madison Street at a 90 degree angle. No hazards are expected. The proposed project will be required to -24- meet the City's parking requirements. The proposed project will have no impact on transit facilities. 793 -25- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment X requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) b) Require or result in the construction of X new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) c) Require or result in the construction of X new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) d) Have sufficient water supplies X available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) e) Result in a determination by the X wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient X permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) g) Comply with federal, state, and local X statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) XVI. a)-g) Development of eight single family homes will have no impact on utilities. The project is served by CVWD for water and wastewater treatment, and the development of eight ;� {� -26- ( 9 �1 homes will have no impact on their facilities. The proposed retention basin will be designed to control the 100 year storm, so that storm flows do not impact City streets. Waste Management of the Desert serves the project, and will add these homes to their service when constructed. They dispose of waste at several regional landfills which have capacity to serve the proposed project. -27- 19 1� Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- X 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 X achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are X 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 projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental X effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? XVII. a) Biological and cultural resource studies on the project site concluded that impacts associated with these resources would be less than significant. XVII. b) The proposed project is consistent with the City General Plan, and will not affect the City's General Plan goals. XVII. c) The development of the homes will have no cumulative impacts, because the project is consistent with the land use designations assigned to the site. XVII. d) The proposed project will not have any significant impact on human beings. -28- XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. Not applicable. 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. Not applicable. -29- a� 0 CIS. ° 0 o � b � 0 0 � 00 00 o z a� Eo •• o A Z rWUti�p�C,.� d'wa�ndN O 00 M M CIS O 1.4¢, N O z rr�11 Iv � a A V W -let H A V p�q �A a�x �w OV W 0 0 o � o z H b Cd Cd to to A A 964 cd Cd UA UA to V a� c o o .. E� vl cod v ° � Cd a, OU U •� o o U cd V � ° ^ bA °v I g = U � cn U Cd x cl a b 16-4 U p�q �A �w OV cd to to oCd �V�aaa z 0-4 E F-F C13 a a a 0-4O �A to � U~ a a3 O 00 � bQ � � W �3 3 H A U p�q A a �W OV 0 0 F c M � Cd a o � � Wz o �oQ � a UA t� wCd •t 1� F4-4••� RESOLUTION NO. 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SUBDIVISION OF 2.58 t ACRES INTO EIGHT RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND LETTERED LOTS CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 33801 BLAKE JUMPER WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 181h day of April, 2006, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Blake Jumper for the subdivision of 2.58 acres into eight single-family residential lots and other miscellaneous lots, located on the west side of Madison Street approximately 500 feet north of Avenue 60, more particularly described as: APN 766-080-009 WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the La Quinta Community Development Department has prepared Environmental Assessment 2005-546 for this Tentative Tract Map in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. The Community Development Director has determined that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and therefore, is recommending that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact be certified; 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 of Approval to justify approval of said Tentative Tract Map 33801: 1. The Tentative Tract Map and its improvement and design are consistent with the General Plan in that its design is in conformance with applicable goals, policies, and development standards, such as lot size, and will provide adequate infrastructure and public utilities. The density and design for the tract will comply with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. 2. The design of the subdivision and its proposed improvements are not likely to create environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or their habitat because mitigation measures and conditions have been incorporated into the project approval to mitigate impacts where needed. 8 `J` PAReports - CC\2006\4-18-06\Blake Jumper TT 33801\tt 33801 cc res.doc City Council Resolution No. 2006- Tentative Tract Map 33801 Blake Jumper Adopted: April 18, 2006 3. The design of the subdivision and subsequent improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems because urban infrastructure improvements are existing, or will be installed based on applicable local, State, and Federal requirements. 4. The design of the revised subdivision and the proposed types of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the subdivision in that none presently exist and access is provided within the project and to adjacent public streets. 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 the City Council does hereby approve Tentative Tract Map 33801 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 18th day of April, 2006, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Mayor City of La Quinta California P:\Reports - CC\2006\4-18-06\Blake Jumper TT 33801\tt 33801 cc res.doc City Council Resolution No. 2006- Tentative Tract Map 33801 Blake Jumper Adopted: April 18, 2006 ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California P:\Reports - CC\2006\4-18-06\Blake Jumper TT 33801\tt 33801 cc res.doc CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER ADOPTED: GENERAL 1 . The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta 1"City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Tentative Tract Map, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. 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. This Tentative Tract Map, and any Final Map recorded thereunder, shall comply with the requirements and standards of Government Code § § 66410 through 66499.58 (the "Subdivision Map Act"), and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code ("LQMC"). The City of La Quinta's Municipal Code can be accessed on the City's Web Site at www.la-quinta.org. 3. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain any necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Coachella Valley Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency SCAQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District) Coachella Valley The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvements plans for City approval. A project -specific NPDES construction permit must be obtained by the applicant; and who then shall submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality Control Board's 8 ^i 8 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 ("RWQCB") acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent ("NOII, prior to the issuance of a grading or site construction permit by the City. 4. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water), LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ. A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs one (1) acre or more of land, or that disturbs less than one (1) acre of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than one (1) acre of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). The applicant or design professional can obtain the California Stormwater Quality Association SWPPP template at www.cabmphandbooks.com for use in their SWPPP preparation. B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off -site grading being done in relation to this project. C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management Practices ("BMPs") (8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC): 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. 5) Non -Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. E. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading, P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 pursuant to this project. F. The approved SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. 5. 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). PROPERTY RIGHTS 6. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the 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. 7. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map all public street right-of- ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 8. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Madison Street (Primary Arterial, Option A 1 10' ROW) — The standard 55 feet from the centerline of the Realigned Madison Street (Plan Set No. 02099) for a total 110-foot ultimate developed right of way. 9. The applicant shall retain for private use on the Final Map all private street right- of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 10. The private street right-of-ways to be retained for private use required for this development include: A. PRIVATE STREETS 810 PAREPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 1) Private Residential Streets measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line shall have a 28-foot travel width with parking restricted to one side and provided there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors, and the applicant establishes provisions for ongoing enforcement of the parking restriction in the CC&R's. The CC&R's shall be -reviewed by the Engineering Department prior to recordation. B. CUL DE SACS 1) The cul de sac shall conform to the shape shown on the tentative map with a 38-foot curb radius at the bulb or larger as shown on the tentative map. 11. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. Pursuant to this requirement, the Applicant shall include in the submittal packet containing the draft final map submitted for map checking, an offsite street geometric layout, drawn at 1 " equals 40 feet, detailing the following design aspects: median curb line, outside curb line, lane line alignment including lane widths, left turn lanes, deceleration lane(s) and bus stop turnout(s). The geometric layout shall be accompanied with sufficient professional engineering studies to confirm the appropriate length of all proposed turn pockets and auxiliary lanes that may impact the right of way dedication required of the project and the associated landscape setback requirement 12. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street right-of-ways shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map are necessary prior to approval of the Final Map dedicating such right-of-ways, the applicant shall grant the necessary right-of-ways within 60 days of a written request by the City. 13. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map a ten -foot wide public utility easement contiguous with, and along the house side of all private streets. Such easement may be reduced to five feet in width with the express written approval of IID. ` 14. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right- of-ways as follows: 811 P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 A. Madison Street (Primary Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on the Final Map. 15. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas on the Final Map. 16. Direct vehicular access to Madison Street from lots with frontage along Madison Street is restricted, except for those access points identified on the tentative tract map, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final tract map. 17. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, access roadway, or other encroachments will occur. 18. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Tentative Tract Map and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. FINAL MAPS 19. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a standard AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD program. Where a Final Map was not produced in an AutoCAD format, or produced in a file that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept a raster -image file of such Final Map. The Final Map shall be of a 1 " = 40' scale. �12 PAREPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 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. 20. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC. 21. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A. On -Site Rough Grading Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal B. PM 10 Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal C. SWPPP 1 " = 40' Horizontal D. Off -Site Street Improvement/Storm Drain Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical E. Off -Site Signing & Striping Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal The Off -Site street improvement plans shall have separate plan sheet(s) (drawn at 20 scale) that show the meandering sidewalk, mounding, and berming design in the combined parkway and landscape setback area. F. On -Site Street Improvements/Signing & Striping/Storm Drain Plan 1 if = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical NOTE: A through F to be submitted concurrently. 813 P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 The following plans shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department for review and approval. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the Building and Safety Director in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. G. On -Site Residential Precise Grading Plan 1 " = 30' Horizontal Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans and Signing & Striping Plans shall show all existing .improvements for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions. All On -Site Signing & Striping Plans shall show, at a minimum; Stop Signs, Limit Lines and Legends, No Parking Signs, Raised Pavement Markers (including Blue RPMs at fire hydrants) and Street Name Signs per Public Works Standard Plans and/or as approved by the Engineering Department. "Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1- foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. 22. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction which can be accessed via the Online Engineering Library at the City website (www.la-quinta.org). Navigate to the Public Works Department home page and look for the Online Engineering Library hyperlink. 23. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order to reflect the as -built conditions. PAREPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 24. Prior to approval of any Final Map, the applicant shall construct all on and off - site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City. 25. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of guaranteeing the completion of any improvements related to this Tentative Tract Map, shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC. 26. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include the removal of any existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the proposed improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monumentation. 27. If the applicant elects to utilize the secured agreement alternative, the applicant shall submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed on -site and off -site improvements, including an estimate for the final survey monumentation, for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Such estimates shall conform to the unit cost schedule adopted by City resolution, or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs shall be approved by the City Engineer. At the time the applicant submits its detailed construction cost estimates for conditional approval of the Final Map by the City Council, the applicant shall also submit one copy each of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " reduction of each page of the Final Map, along with a copy of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " Vicinity Map. Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant's detailed cost estimates. Security will not be required for telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V. improvements. P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.130C CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 28. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development, or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 29. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 30. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 31. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC, and D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES stormwater discharge permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls), LQMC. E. Immediately prior to the commencement of grading or other site disturbance, including vegetation removal, between February 1 and August 15th, the project biologist shall conduct Migratory Treaty Bird Act -compliance (MTBA) surveys and report the results to the City and applicant. Any necessary protection shall be put in place prior to the initiation in the areas of potential impact. 85. At least one nesting bird survey shall be conducted, and more if deemed necessary by the consulting biologist, ending no less than three days prior to grading. In the event active nests are found, exclusionary fencing shall be placed 200 feet around the nest. F. Proof of retention of archaeological monitors shall be given to the City prior to issuance of the first earth -moving or clearing permit. Monitors shall include an Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians designee. The site S 1 P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 shall be monitored during on- and off -site trenching and rough grading by qualified archaeological monitors. The final report on the archaeological monitoring shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the project. Any collected archaeological resources shall be properly packaged for long term curation, in polyethylene self -seal bags, vials, or film cans as appropriate, all within acid -free, standard size, comprehensively labeled archive boxes and delivered to the City prior to issuance of first Certificate of Occupancy for the property. Materials shall be accompanied by descriptive catalogue, field notes and records, primary research data, and the original graphics. G. Prior to groundbreaking, a field survey shall be conducted by the applicant in order to identify and document potential surface fossiliferous resources. A report of findings from the field survey shall be transmitted to Community Development Department and shall be provided to site monitors. H. Proof of retention of paleontological monitors shall be given to the City prior to issuance of the first earth -moving or clearing permit. On- and off - site monitoring of earth -moving and grading in areas identified as likely to contain paleontological resources shall be conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor. The monitor shall be equipped to salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays and to remove samples of sediments that are likely to contain the remains of small fossil invertebrates and vertebrates. The monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert equipment to allow removal of abundant or large specimens. Any recovered specimens shall be prepared to the point of identification and permanent preservation, including washing of sediments to recover small invertebrates and vertebrates. A report of findings with an appended itemized inventory of specimens shall be submitted to the City prior to the first occupancy of a residence being granted by the City. The report shall include pertinent discussions of the significance of all recovered resources where appropriate. The report and inventory, when submitted will signify completion of the program to mitigate impacts to paleontological resources. All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. 817 PAREPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 A statement shall appear on the Final Map that a soils report has been prepared in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit. 32. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 33. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 34. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more than one foot higher from the building pads in adjacent developments or as required by the Public Works Department in the plan review process. Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 35. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 36. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. 811 P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 DRAINAGE 37. The applicant shall comply with the approved Preliminary Drainage Report dated February 6, 2006 and provisions of Section. 13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Additionally, the 100 year stormwater shall be retained within the interior street right of way. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets and include any resulting uncaptured tributary stormwater flows. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 38. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 39. For properties where sump conditions exist, the applicant must either define a diversion/overflow strategy or retain upstream stormwater as required for existing as -built conditions from all off -site tributary flow from the respective high points. The applicant must provide either on -site retention or alternative facilities of diversion/pass through, if selected. Historical flow paths should be identified and routing provided in the hydrology analysis equivalent to historical flow direction. As local topography allows, tributary areas may exceed limits of property lines adjacent to public roads. The 100-year storm shall be the governing event in the designer's evaluation. 40. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be passed through a prefilter system comparable to the MaxWell Plus Primary Settling Chamber (or equivalent) before being disposed in a trickling sand filter and leach field or equivalent system approved by the City Engineer. A geotechnical study shall confirm the applicability of sand filter use for the development based on the existing soil conditions. The sand filter and leach field or equivalent system shall be designed to contain surges of up to 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. of landscape area, and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. The sand filter and leach field shall be designed to contain nuisance water surges from landscape area, residential unit, and off -site street nuisance water. Flow from adjacent well sites shall be designed for retention area percolation by separate infiltration system approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter design shall be per La 9- 121 P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 Quinta Standard 370 with the equivalent of 137.2 gph of water feed per sand filter to accept the abovementioned nuisance water requirements. Leach line requirements are 1.108 feet of leach line per gph of flow. 41. No fence or wall shall be constructed along the street sides of any retention basin unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. Pursuant to the aforementioned, the applicant may be required to extend the northerly property as required by the City Engineer. 42. For on -site common retention basins, retention depth shall be according to Engineering Bulletin 97.03, and side slopes shall not exceed 3:1 and sha// be planted with maintenance free ground cover. For retention basins on individual lots, retention depth shall not exceed two feet. 43. Stormwater may not be retained in Landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC. 44. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 45. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. I IT11 ITIFS 46. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.1 10 (Utilities), LQMC. 47. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 48. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground. 49. Underground 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 all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 50. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access For Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed. 51. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan (street type noted in parentheses.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Madison Street (Primary Arterial; 1 10' R/W): Widen the west side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Tentative Map boundary to its ultimate width on the west side as specified in the General Plan and the requirements of these conditions. Rehabilitate and/or reconstruct existing roadway pavement as necessary to augment and convert it from a rural county -road design standard to La Quinta's urban arterial design standard. The west curb face shall be located forty three feet (43') west of the centerline. Other required improvements in the Madison Street right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: a) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs, plus a single overhead street light at each street connecting to Madison Street. �w PAREPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 b) 8-foot wide meandering sidewalk. The meandering sidewalk shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the curb line that either touches the back of curb or approaches within five feet of the curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet and at each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall meander into the landscape setback lot and approach within 5 feet of the perimeter wall at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. c) Unless adjacent developments lack Multi -Purpose Trail connectivity, a 10-foot wide Multi -Purpose Trail shall be provided with landscaping. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision 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). B. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Lot A - Construct 28-foot wide travel width measured from gutter flow line to gutter flow line, provided parking is restricted to the south side and there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors, and the applicant makes provisions for perpetual enforcement of the restrictions. 2) The location of driveways of corner lots shall not be located within the curb return and away from the intersection when possible. 3) The applicant shall provide a 10-foot street setback along the southerly property line for construction of landscaping and/or the proposed retaining wall. C. PRIVATE CUL DE SACS 1) Shall be constructed according to the lay -out shown on the tentative map with 38-foot curb radius or greater at the bulb similar to the layout shown on the rough grading plan. 2) The applicant shall provide a 10-foot street setback along the southerly property line for construction of landscaping and/or the9,? P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 proposed retaining wall. Additionally, the cul de sac shall have a 10-foot setback to the westerly property line. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, standard knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined by the City Engineer. 52. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: Residential 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. Primary Arterial 4.5" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 53. 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. 54. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: Primary Entry (Madison Street): Right turn movements in and out are permitted. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. 55. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 56. Entry paving within Lot A shall be designed and constructed with colored, stamped concrete to the specifications of the City Engineer. 57. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking PAREPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. CONSTRUCTION 58. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly - maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets in residential developments are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPING 59. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC. 60. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and entry median. , 61. The applicant shall work with the adjacent property owner in order to provide landscaping for the off -site, triangular shaped parcel, located between the northeast corner of the project site and Madison Street. 62. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 63. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community Development Department (CDD), prior to rough grading plans checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking has been completed by CDD, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the City Engineer. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 64. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 65. Wildflower seed mixes, if used, that are susceptible to weed control problems shall not be used in any hydro -seed operations. An alternative seed mix which will achieve erosion and dust control, with minimal weed growth, shall be approved by the Community Development Department. QUALITY ASSURANCE 66. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 67. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate construction supervision. 68. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program, but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and other applicable regulations. 69. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions. MAINTENANCE 70. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 71. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. FEES AND DEPOSITS 72. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts sha§ •- P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. 73. 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). 74. Tentative Tract 33801 shall provide for parks through payment of an in -lieu fee, as specified in Chapter 13.48, LQMC. The in -lieu fee shall be based on the fair market value of the land within the subdivision. Land value information shall be provided to the Community Development Director, via land sale information, a current fair market value of land appraisal, or other information on land value within the subdivision. The Community Development Director may consider any subdivider -provided or other land value information source for use in calculation of the parkland fee. The amount of the fee may be determined prior to Tentative Tract Map approval or the fee amount may be deferred by the Community Development Director upon written request by the applicant. The amount of parkland used in the fee calculation is .0672. 75. The developer shall pay school mitigation fees based on their requirements. Fees shall be paid prior to building permit issuance by the City. FIRE DEPARTMENT 76. Blue dot retro-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. 77. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. Two sets of water plans are to be submitted to the Fire Department for approval. 78. Final Fire Department conditions will be addressed prior to final map. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. All questions regarding Fire Marshall conditions should be directed to the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. MISCELLANEOUS 79. Should casitas be part of the home design for the production homes on the site, a master Minor Use Permit for all such casitas shall be secured in conjunction with the recordation of the Final Map. A covenant and provision in the CC&R's shall be recorded informing all property owners of the Minor Use Permit and its P:\REPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2006- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33801 BLAKE JUMPER APRIL 18, 2006 conditions of approval. 80. A permit from the Community Development Department is required for any temporary or permanent tract signs. Uplighted tract identification signs are allowed subject to the provisions of Chapter 9.160 of the Zoning Ordinance. 81. Any model home/sales complex shall comply with the requirements of Section 9.60.250 of the Zoning Ordinance, which requires a Minor Use Permit approval and deposit, prior to establishing any model units or temporary sales facilities. PAREPORTS - CC\2006\4-18-06\BLAKE JUMPER TT 33801\CC COA TM-33801.DOC