Loading...
2004 07 13 PCT,i&t 4 4 Qum& Planning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-guinta.org PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California J U LY 13, 2004 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2004-042 Beginning Minute Motion 2004-013 I. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call I1. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the Minutes for the Regular Meeting of June 22, 2004. B. Department Report G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PCAgendaW.doc V. RESOLUTIONS OF RECOGNITION FOR COMMISSIONERS JACQUES ABELS AND ROBERT TVLER VI. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR VII. PUBLIC HEARING: For all Public Hearings on the Agenda, a completed "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Executive Secretary prior to the start of the Planning Commission consideration of that item. The Chairman 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 Planning Commission before a public hearing, may appear and be heard in support of, or in opposition to, the approval of the 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 at, or prior to the public hearing. A. Item ................ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-480 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31087 Applicant.......... Tahiti Partners V, LLC Location........... South side of Darby Road, ± 1 /4 mile east of Washington Street Request............ Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and consideration of a subdivision of ± 5 acres into 19 single-family lots. Action .............. Move to Continue to July 27, 2004 B. Item ................ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-495 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31852 Applicant.......... Ehline Company Location........... Northwest corner of Avenue 52 and Madison Street Request............ Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and the subdivision of ± 8.5 acres into 14 single-family lots. Action .............. Move to continue to July 27, 2004 C. Item ................ STREET NAME CHANGE 2004-017 Applicant.......... Larry Sherman Location........... East of Washington Street, south of and parallel to Highway 111 Request............ Consideration of a street name change from Simon Drive to Deputy Lee Drive. Action .............. Resolution 2004- SAWebsite Updates\Community DevelopmentTCAgenda7-11doc D. Item ................ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-508 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 Applicant.......... Duc Housing Partners, Inc. Location........... North side of Avenue 58, 2,100 ± feet west of Madison Street Request............ Consideration of the subdivision of 9.71 acres into 31 single-family and other miscellaneous lots Action .............. Resolution 2004- and Resolution 2004- E. Item ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-810 Applicant.......... La Quinta Golf Estates Location........... Coachella Drive between Eisenhower Drive and Avenida El Nido Request............ Consideration of architectural plans to remodel the existing La Quinta Golf Estates guardhouse and driveway access improvements. Action .............. Resolution 2004- F. Item ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-808, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-028 AMENDMENT #1, AND SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION 2004-797 Applicant.......... Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. Location........... 79-900 Highway 1 1 1, northwest corner of Jefferson Street and Highway 1 1 1 Request............ Consideration of architectural plans for a 1,992 sq. ft. one story building addition and 960 sq. ft. outdoor equipment storage area on the west side of the store within Specific Plan 96-027, and consideration of a new building sign on the south facade. Action .............. Resolution 2004- Resolution 2004- and Minute Motion 2004- G. Item ................ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-505, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2004-101, ZONE CHANGE 2004-120, SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32070, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 Applicant.......... RJT Homes L.L.0 Location........... South of Avenue 52, east of Jefferson Street Request............ Consideration of 1) Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; 2) & 3) Change the General Plan land use and Zoning designation from Neighborhood Commercial to Medium High Density Residential; 4) "Codorniz" Specific Plan for development standards and design guidelines; 5) The subdivision of 15.16 acres into SAWebsite Updates\Community DevelopmentTCAgenda7-13.doc 145 residential lots; and 6) Five prototype plans for 145 residential units and a clubhouse facility. Action .............. Resolution 2004- Resolution 2004- Resolution 2004- Resolution 2004- Resolution 2004- , and Resolution 2004-_ V111 BUSINESS ITEM: None IX CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None X. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Discussion regarding the Commission going dark B. Review of City Council meeting XI. ADJOURNMENT: This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be held on July 27, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. DECLARATION OF POSTING I, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the foregoing agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday, July 13, 2004, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico, the bulletin board at the La Quinta Post Office, Chamber of Commerce, and Stater Bros. 78-630 Highway 1 1 1, on Friday, July 9, 2004. DATED: July 9, 2004 BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California S:\Website Updates\Community DevelopmentTCAgenda7-11doc 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 Planning Commission, arrangements should be made in advance by contacting the City Clerk's office at 777-7025. A one (1) week notice is required. If background material is to be presented to the Planning Commission during a Planning Commission meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the Executive Secretary for distribution. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the 7:00 p.m. meeting. SAWebsite Updates\Community DevelopmentTCAgenda7-11doc MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA June 22, 2004 I. CALL TO ORDER VA4I61111alkyl A A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Kirk who asked Commissioner Tyler to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Rick Daniels, Paul Quill, Robert Tyler, and Chairman Tom Kirk. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston, Planning Manager Oscar Orci, Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer, and Principal Planner Stan Sawa. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of the regular meeting of June 8. 2004. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 4, Item #6 be amended to state: "...enough room for a deceleration right turn..."; Page 6, Item #20, "...primary entrance deceleration lane wil be required..."; 10, Item #3, "...the current owner as the property is currently listed for sale." There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Quill to approve the minutes as amended. B. Department Report: None. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Site Development 2004-809; a request of Watermark Villas LQ, L.L.C. for consideration of development plans for the construction of 250 resort residential condominiums, a restaurant/clubhouse, and other minor ancillary facilities for the property located at the northwest corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-22-04.doc Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 2004 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Oscar Orci presented the information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff informed the Commission that communications had been received from the Citrus Homeowners' Association requesting three items be clarified: 1) the applicant has agreed to replace the proposed 24-inch trees with 36-inch trees; 2) mounding around the perimeter along the Citrus neighborhood; and 3) the planting of palms. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Daniels stated this project was given a change in zone as it was to create Transient Occupancy Tax for the City. Staff clarified the project was to be a resort condominium project and the units would not be fully occupied throughout the year. Council agreed to this designation, but no development agreement was drafted between the applicant and the City. 3. Commissioner Quill stated part of the justification for the zone change was that there would be an offset with the TOT fees. 4. Commissioner Abels asked about the tunnel to the City's golf course. Staff stated it is yet to be resolved. 5. Chairman Kirk asked if the landscaping accommodates the right of way that will be needed. 6. Commissioner Daniels asked if the tunnel would be open to the public. Staff stated yes. 7. Commissioner Tyler stated his concern about the name change to Watermark Villas at SilverRock. He then asked if the issue regarding the deceleration lane was resolved. Staff stated there were two accesses; one off Avenue 52 and one off Jefferson Street. Neither has a deceleration lane. He is also troubled by the letter from the Citrus HOA as some of the issues raised are not within the purview of the City to approve. 8. Planning Manager Oscar Orci stated a condition needed to be added regarding the applicant meet the City's standard landscaping requirement for water efficiency. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-22-04.doc 2 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 2004 9. Commissioner Tyler asked the height of the restaurant building. Staff stated it would be 22 feet. Commissioner Tyler asked that the number of parking stalls be defined. 10. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Matthew Hladek, developer for the project, gave a presentation on the project. In regard to the HOA letter they have worked very diligently with them to accommodate their requests. In regard to the TOT, they are in agreement and request staff's assistance in completing the forms. The tunnel location is still in process. 11. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Daniels clarified that the applicant was willing to meet the requests of the HOA, except for the ten foot poles staking on buildings. Mr. Hladek stated they had met with the HOA before the processing to ensure they were in agreement with the plan. 12. There being no further questions of the applicant Chairman Kirk asked if anyone else would like to speak on this issue. Mr. Doug Nairne, 79-780 Citrus, stated the restaurant will be 22 feet in height. With some excavation, all the buildings could be 22 feet in height. The landscaping plan they reviewed shows 82 trees along the Citrus border. They would like it to be a requirement that all the trees are planted. Lastly, the builder should be required to post a bond to ensure the work is completed. 13. Commissioner Tyler asked for clarification on what Mr. Nairne was asking for in regard to the trees. Mr. Nairne stated he wanted to be sure the Commission would require the developer to plant all the trees that are shown on the landscape plan. 14. Ms. Barbara Kennard, 79-780 Citrus, stated her property was across the street from the project. She has no objection to the project, but has the following reservations: prior to construction, the height poles delineating the size and shape of the condos be erected by the builder and pendant flags be attached across the top to outline the shape and position of the buildings in question. This will serve as a guide for the accurate placement and timely planting of the trees as they are crucial. The builder be held to the G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-22-04.doc 3 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 2004 planting of the species noted in the staff report. The trees be of adequate density and height so the condo project is not visible from the Citrus street side. The number of trees shall not be limited to 40 as mentioned in a previous report. It should be as many trees as necessary to accommodate a thorough screening process. No certificate of occupancy be granted until after the final approval of the planting of the trees by the Citrus HOA. These requests are made to protect their property values. 15. Mr. Hoyt , 79-900 Citrus Drive, representing the HOA, stated they were only asking that the mutually agreed upon issued be required. In regard to making the buildings with the flags is to get the trees in the ground as soon as possible to block the view of the framing. 16. There being no other public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing. 17. Commissioner Quill stated that if the number of trees are on the plans, then they will not receive a certificate of occupancy until they have complied with the plans. In his opinion, the applicant has gone beyond what has been asked of him by the City and the HOA. 18. Commissioner Daniels stated he is impressed with the project. Access to the tunnel will bring a lot to the neighboring communities as far as access to the City's golf course. In his opinion, the measure the applicant has gone to meet the requests of the adjoining project as well as his own, is beyond the expectation. 19. Commissioner Tyler stated the Citrus HOA may want to consider reaching a balance. In regard to setting poles, this was done for the Tradition project trying to resolve the height of homes to be constructed. There were mixed results and no evidence was seen as to what they accomplished. He likes the project, especially the underground parking. In regard to the height of the buildings, this is what the Code allows. He supports the project. 20. Commissioner Daniels stated there is one assurance for the HOA, that if the vote is to approve the project with the revisions submitted, no building will be built until all details are constructed. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-22-04.doc 4 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 2004 21. Commissioner Tyler asked about Condition #7. Staff stated the only issue to be resolved is the berm. This will not be addressed when they submit their grading plans. 22. Chairman Kirk asked if the Commission was going too far by requiring the developer to meet the HOA requests. Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston stated the City can incorporate these requests into the conditions if they chose to. As to what off -site requirements are included on the plans, it is a policy decision. Chairman Kirk noted the type of trees, mounding, poles, etc. have all been addressed and required by the Commission previously on other projects. He sees no reason not to include these requirements in the conditions. 23. Commissioner Tyler stated his concern is that if there is a disagreement later on, the City is part of the decision which puts the City into an awkward position. Planning Manager Oscar Orci stated that if the Commission approves the landscape plan as submitted, the Commission is approving what the HOA has requested. 24. Chairman Kirk stated this is a good project. With the reduction in the sea of asphalt, it is a welcome project. The Commission should hold both parties to the agreement they have made informally by including the letter as part of the Conditions of Approval. In addition, the Commission should hold to the requirements in regard to the TOT. Planning Manager Oscar Orci stated that in reviewing the Specific Plan, there are conditions that address the TOT requirement. Rental information is to be provided to potential owners/renters of the project. 25. Commissioner Tyler noted that he was in opposition to the position the City was taking but would not vote against the project. 26. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Daniels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-037, approving Site Development Permit 2004-809, as amended: a. Condition #7 amended: The applicant shall comply with the City's Water Efficient Ordinance. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-22-04.doc 5 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 2004 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. B. Environmental Assessment 2004-504 and Tentative Tract Map 32201; a request of Choice Enterprise for consideration of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and the subdivision of 7.41 acres into 24 single-family lots and one retention lot for the property located at the northwest corner of Madison Street and Avenue 60. 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planner Manager Oscar Orci presented the information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked about Condition #14.A. in that it does not address Avenue 60 landscaping. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated Avenue 60 west of Madison Street is a local street and does not have any setback requirement. Commission Tyler asked about Condition #56 A.2.a. be corrected to note this street is not paved. 3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Gabriel Lujan, representing Choice Enterprises, stated they had no objections to the conditions as submitted. 4. Commissioner Tyler stated the configuration of the lots will make it difficult to market. Mr. Lujan stated they have a couple flag lots and these may have custom lots. 5. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. Mr. Willie Alexander, 53-450 Avenida Ramirez, asked if the Commission was requiring them to improve 14 feet of Avenue 60 on the south side of the site. Staff stated this was correct. 6. There being no further questions of the applicant and no other public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-22-04.doc 6 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 2004 7. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Daniels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-038, recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 2004-504, as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 8. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Daniels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-039, recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 32201, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. C. Tentative Tract Map 32453; a request of ND La Quinta Partners, Inc., LLC, for approval of the subdivision of 27 f acres into 29 residential lots, one clubhouse lot and other miscellaneous lots for the property located on the east side of Jefferson Street, north of Avenue 54, within The Hideaway. 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff noted changes to Condition #10 and #16 and a condition that all Fire Marshal conditions shall be complied with. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Daniels asked if the applicant has reviewed the conditions. Staff stated yes and he is aware of the changes to the conditions. 3. Commissioner Tyler stated the staff reports stated the garage lots are adjacent to each other and yet the tract map does not show this. Staff stated the report refers to the lots being adjacent and the garage units are detached from the dwelling lot. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-22-04.doc 7 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 2004 4. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. John Gamlin, representing the applicant, stated they have reviewed the conditions and have no objections. He went on to describe the project. 5. Commissioner Quill stated there appear to be locations where the lot lines cross over what appears to be rear yard courtyard walls that would be affiliated with a specific units. These are areas that would not be part of the common use. Mr. Gamlin stated the walls were to be designed to be on property lines, but there were cases where easements were recorded over the lots to accommodate the wall condition. This is a higher density product and they wanted some intimate spaces between the units for some of the products. Discussion followed regarding how this was to addressed. 6. Commissioner Tyler asked where Lot A would go. The applicant stated it provides access to the back lot of the clubhouse as well as Lots 28 and 29. 7. Commissioner Quill asked about the lots set aside for the garages, will there be deed restrictions recorded to keep it from being sold separately. The applicant stated it would be addressed in the CC&R's. 8. Commissioner Tyler stated his concern of the marketability of resident having to walk a great distance to get to the garages. Mr. Gamlin stated it is a seasonal community and he trusts his marketing people to produce a unit that will sell. 9. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. There being none, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed. 10. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Daniels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-040, recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 32453, as recommended: ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-22-04.doc 8 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 2004 VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Street Name Change 2004-018; a request of ND La Quinta Partners for consideration of adoption of a Resolution of Intent setting July 27, 2004 as a Public Hearing date to consider a street name change from Via CC to Via Montecito and Via DD to Via Mallorca. 1. Chairman Kirk asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. There being no questions it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Daniels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-041, approving a Resolution of Intent setting the date of July 27' as the public hearing date to consider Street Name Change 2004-018, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Chairman Kirk noted this was this last meeting for Commissioners Abels and Tyler and commended them on their dedication to the City. He also noted the new Commissioners Krieger and Ladner who would be joining the Commission at their next meeting. IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abelsl/Daniels to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on July 13, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned 8:21 p.m., on June 22, 2004. Respectfully submitted, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-22-04.doc 9 PH #A DATE: CASE NO: APPLICANT/OWNER: REQUEST: LOCATION: BACKGROUND: STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION J U LY 13, 2004 TENTATIVE TRACT 31087 TAHITI PARTNERS V, LLC A SUBDIVISION OF t 5 ACRES INTO 19 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS SOUTH SIDE OF DARBY ROAD, t'/4 MILE EAST OF WASHINGTON STREET Staff is requesting a continuance of this item to the regular Planning Commission meeting of July 27, 2004, based on revisions that will need to be made to the Cultural Resources Survey, as predicated by the Historic Preservation Commission action of May 20, 2004. The HPC is scheduled to review the revised survey on July 15, 2004. RECOMMENDATION: Move to continue consideration of Tentative Tract 31087 to the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of July 27, 2004. Prepared by: Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner DATE: CASE NO: APPLICANT/OWNER: REQUEST: LOCATION: BACKGROUND: STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION J U LY 13, 2004 TENTATIVE TRACT 31852 EHLINE COMPANY A SUBDIVISION OF t8.5 ACRES INTO 14 SINGLE- FAMILY LOTS NORTHWEST CORNER OF AVENUE 52 AND MADISON STREET Staff is requesting a continuance of this item to the regular Planning Commission meeting of July 27, 2004, based on revisions that will need to be made to the Cultural Resources Survey, as predicated by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) action of May 20, 2004. The HPC is scheduled to review the revised survey on July 15, 2004. RECOMMENDATION: Move to continue consideration of Tentative Tract 31852 to the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of July 27, 2004. Prepared by: Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner PH #C PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JULY 13, 2004 CASE NO.: STREET NAME CHANGE 2004- 017 APPLICANT: LARRY SHERMAN REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A STREET NAME CHANGE FROM SIMON DRIVE TO DEPUTY LEE DRIVE LOCATION: EAST OF WASHINGTON STREET, SOUTH OF AND PARALLEL TO HWY 1 1 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THIS STREET NAME CHANGE HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15301, CLASS 1. THEREFORE, NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS DEEMED NECESSARY. BACKGROUND Site Background Simon Drive presently exists as a "L" shaped connection road between Washington Street and Highway 111. Originally, the street was named Oreste Drive, but was changed to Simon Drive when the automobile dealership of the same name was established in the City, at the southwest corner of Simon Drive and Highway 1 1 1. Applicable Code Provisions The Municipal Code permits the applicant to request a street name change. The request requires a public hearing before the Planning Commission and final approval by the City Council. Required is the written concurrence of at least 60% of the affected property owners along the street in question. The property owners have given written approval of the proposed name change. PUBLIC NOTICE The Planning Commission at their meeting of June 8, 2004 adopted Resolution 2004- 036 setting this date for consideration of this street name change. As required by Code, the Resolution was published in the Desert Sun and posted. REQUEST The applicant had submitted a request to change the existing name of Simon Drive to Deputy Lee Drive. The applicant is proposing to change the street to honor Deputy Bruce Lee, a police officer killed in the line of duty in the City of La Quinta last year. DISCUSSION A search of the City records as well as the United States Postal Service database indicated there are no addresses on Simon Drive. Further, the property owners along Simon Drive have given consent to the proposed street name change. Lastly, this matter was circulated to the United States Postal Service, Fire and Sheriff Departments and no concerns have been expressed regarding the proposed street name. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004- , recommending to the City Council approval of Street Name Change 2004-017. Attachment: 1. Location Map for street name change Prepared by: Oscar W. Orci, Planning Manager 2 CASE No. w I = /._ CASE MAP S N C 2004-017 ATTACHMENT 1 s"my I 1. I I / / 1 � / I 11 i 1 I I 1 I I �- SIMON DRIVE N.T.S Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Street Name Change 2004-017 Mr. Larry Sherman Adopted: July 13, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A STREET NAME CHANGE FROM SIMON DRIVE TO DEPUTY LEE DRIVE CASE NO.: STREET NAME CHANGE 2004-017 APPLICANT: MR. LARRY SHERMAN WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13th day of July, 2004, consider a street name change as requested by Mr. Larry Sherman; and, WHEREAS, said street name change has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended by Resolution 83-68, in that the Community Development Department has determined that the proposed street name change is categorically exempted pursuant to Section 15301(Class 1 ) of the guidelines and no further review is deemed necessary; and, WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify a recommendation for approval of Street Name Change 2004-017: 1. The change would not detrimentally affect tenants along the affected street since there no addresses for tenants along the street. 2. More than 60% of the property owners along the street have given consent to the street name change as required by Municipal Code Section 14.08.020. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. The above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Street Name Change 2004-017 per the attached Exhibit A and attached Conditions of Approval; 4 Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Street Name Change 2004-017 Mr. Larry Sherman Adopted: July 13, 2004 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 13`h day of July, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: , Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California ATTACHMENT 1 CASE Nm H+ fl�� 0 n iinnuu.iniunin rprm o-hQH++a" f� S ■ME CASE MAP S N C 2004-017 SIMON DRIVE NORTH SCALE: N.T.S PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED STREET NAME CHANGE 2004-017 MR. LARRY SHERMAN ADOPTED: JULY 13, 2004 GENERAL 1. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Prior to the installation of the street sign, clearance shall be obtained from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal Public Works Department • Sheriffs Department • Building and Safety Department R PH #D STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: J U LY 13, 2004 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-508 AND TENTATIVE TRACT 32279 APPLICANT: DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ENGINEER: P&D CONSULTANTS, INC. LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF AVENUE 58, 2,100f FEET WEST OF MADISON STREET REQUEST: SUBDIVISION OF 9.71 ACRES INTO 31 SINGLE-FAMILY AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS LOTS ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-508 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 PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND THEREFORE, RECOMMENDS THAT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BE RECOMMENDED FOR CERTIFICATION. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LDR (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, UP TO 4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) ZONING: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USES: NORTH: RL / PGA WEST SOUTH: RL/VACANT EAST: RL / RANCH DWELLING WEST: RL / RESIDENTIAL UNDER CONSTRUCTION P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 SR.doc BACKGROUND: The site is a 1,323 foot deep lot with 330 feet of street frontage on the north side of Avenue 58. The project site is located immediately south of PGA West and east of Stone Creek Ranch which is under construction (Attachment 1). The site has been improved with a single-family residence and is covered with desert shrubs. The site was used in the past, at least on the northern part of the site, for agricultural purposes. Trees exist along Avenue 58 and around the house. PROJECT REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to subdivide the 9.71-acre site into 31 single-family residential lots (Attachment 2). Several miscellaneous lots would be created, primarily for storm water retention areas, landscaping and the private street. The proposed density of this subdivision is 3.19 dwelling units per acre which is within the maximum four dwelling units per acre range allowed in the Zoning Code and General Plan land use designation. The existing RL zoning on the property requires a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. All lots exceed this requirement with the smallest lot being 10,006 square feet, the largest 11,906 square feet and average 10,668 square feet. Three retention basin lots are proposed. The project will have a single 36-foot to 46-foot wide curvilinear street with a card access security gate near Avenue 58. The street "bows" out at approximately the mid point of its length to provide a turnaround and traffic calming devise. The street is shown with landscape islands used at the cul-de-sac bulb and bow -out point. A six-foot wide landscape median is shown in a portion of the private street. On -site storm water retention is provided in three basins, two of which are along Avenue 58 on both sides of the street entry. The remaining smaller basin is near the middle of the project. Public Notice This map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 3, 2004. 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. 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. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 SR.doc +� ISSUES: Entry The General plan requires a minimum 250 feet between driveways along Avenue 58. As designed, the driveway is 120± feet (curb return to curb return) from the driveway to the east that serves one single-family residence and 1 10± feet from the driveway to the west (Stone Creek Ranch development). There are no driveway configurations on this site that will totally comply with the General Plan provision. However, a shared driveway (between the subject site and the currently developing property to the west whose driveway is at their abutting property line or the single- family home to the east) would comply with the General Plan. Staff has discussed driveway design options with the applicant's engineer. As of this writing, the applicant is attempting to obtain the consent from the adjacent property owners to relocate or eliminate the need for the driveway entrance. Staff has incorporated a Condition of Approval (Condition No. 17) that will require the applicant to make a good faith effort to construct a shared driveway with either the property to the east or west. In the event that the applicant is not able to relocate the driveway, Staff has incorporated an additional Condition of Approval (Conditions No. 17) that would relocate the driveway to the east property line (adjacent to the single family home). Should the property to the east ever be developed with additional residences, Staff would then require a shared driveway access, and thereby satisfying the General Plan driveway separation provision. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings necessary to recommend approval of this request can be made, as conditioned, and contained in the attached Resolutions for the Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract Map. RECOMMENDATION: 1 . Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004- , recommending to the City Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2004-508; and, 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004- , recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 32279, subject to attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 SR.doc Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. TT 32279 map exhibit Prepared by: Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner R\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 SR.doc 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-508 PREPARED FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-508 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 131h day of July, 2004 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Duc Housing Partners, Inc. for Environmental Assessment 2004-508 prepared for Tentative Tract 32279, generally located on the north side of Avenue 58, approximately 2,100 feet west of Madison Street, more particularly described as follows: APN 763-240-011 WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the La Quinta Community Development Department has prepared Environmental Assessment 2004-508 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, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify recommending certification of said Environmental Assessment: 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 2004-508. 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 PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 EA508 Reso.doc 1 r� Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Environmental Assessment 2004-508 Duc Housing Partners, Inc Adopted: or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. 4. The proposed project do not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the Environmental Assessment. 5. The proposed 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 2004-508 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 Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment. Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Environmental Assessment 2004-508 Duc Housing Partners, Inc Adopted: 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 2004-508 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. 3. That Environmental Assessment 2004-508 reflects the independent judgment of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 131h day of July, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California v ._ 2 3 4. 5 A Environmental Checklist Form Project title: Lead agency name and address: Contact person and phone number: Tentative Tract Map 32279 City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Stan Sawa 760-777-7125 Project location: North side of Avenue 58, approximately 2,100 feet west of Madison Street. APN: 772-270-016 Project sponsor's name and address: Duc. Housing Partners, Inc. 14107 Winchester Blvd., Suite H Los Gatos, CA 95032 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.) Subdivision proposed to allow 31 single family lots on 9.71 acres, with a central, gated cul de sac and three retention basin areas. The lot is long and narrow (approximately 330 feet wide by 1,324 feet in length), and a single row of lots is proposed on each side of the center cul de sac street. Lot sizes are proposed to range from approximately 10,000 to 11,900 s.f. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: Single family residential, golf course, (Low Density Agriculture) South: Avenue 58, vacant, (Low Density Residential and Golf Course Open Space) West: Single family residential (Low Density Residential) East: Vacant (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 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 environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the X 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 imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. June 18, 2004 Signature Date -2- EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the 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 proj ect. 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. -3- C _. 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 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? (General Plan Exhibit 3.6) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, X including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Aerial photograph) 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)-d) Avenue 58 is designated an Agrarian Image Corridor according to the General Plan. This corridor is required to include landscaped parkways which reflect the agriculture which historically occurred in this area. The project will be required to comply with these requirements The site does not include, nor is it near, a scenic resource. The proposed project will result in single family homes on lots of approximately 10,000+ feet in size. The City regulates height in residential zones, so that the maximum potential height for the homes would be two stories. Given the size of the proposed lots, the homes will not create a significant impact to views in the area. The ultimate construction of single family homes on the site will result in a slight increase in light generation, primarily from car headlights and landscape lighting. The City regulates lighting levels and does not allow lighting to spill over onto adjacent property. Impacts will not be significant. -4- r Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact H. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would theproject: 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) II. a)-c) The proposed project site is vacant desert land. There are no Williamson Act contracts on the property. Agricultural lands occur further east and south, but not adjacent to the project site. The site is located in an area of the City which is urbanizing, and represents a logical extension of development in the City. Impacts to agricultural resources are expected to be insignificant. -5- G 4. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact 11I. 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, site inspection) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) III. a), b) & c) The Tentative Tract Map proposes 31 single family lots, which could generate up to 297 trips per day'. Based on this traffic generation, and an average trip length of 10 miles, the following emissions can be expected to be generated from the project site. "Trip Generation, 66 Edition," Institute of Transportation Engineers, Single Family Detached category 210. -6- Moving Exhaust Emission Projections at Project Buildout (Dounds Der dav) Ave. Trip Total Total No. Vehicle Trips/Day Length (miles) miles/day 297 x 10 = 2,970 PM10 PM10 PM10 Pollutant ROC CO NOX Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Grams at 50 mph 267.30 6,949.80 1,425.60 - 29.70 29.70 Pounds at 50 mvh 0.59 15.34 3.15 - 0.07 0.07 SCAQMD Threshold (lbs /day) 75 550 100 150 Assumes 297 ADT. Based on California Air Resources Board's EMFAC7G Emissions Model. Assumes Year 2005 summertime running conditions at 75T, light duty autos catalytic. As demonstrated above, the proposed project will not exceed any of SCAQMD's recommended daily thresholds. The project's potential impacts to air quality from moving emissions are therefore expected to be less than significant. The City and Coachella Valley are a severe non -attainment area for PM10 (Particulates of 10 microns or less). The Valley's 2002 PM10 Plan adopted much stricter measures for the control of dust both during the construction process and during project operations. These include the following, to be included in conditions of approval for the proposed project: 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 The proposed project will generate dust during construction. Under mass grading conditions, this could result in the generation of 256.3 pounds per day, for a limited period while grading operations are active. The contractor will be required to submit a PM10 Management Plan prior to initiation of any earth moving activity. In addition, the potential impacts associated with PM10 can be mitigated by the measures below. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. -7- , 2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary power poles to avoid on -site power generation. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities. 4. Imported fill shall be adequately watered prior to transport, covered during transport, and watered prior to unloading on the project site. 5. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of three feet prior to the onset of grading activities. 6. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on- going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall be watered at the end of each work day. 7. Any area which remains undeveloped for a period of more than 30 days shall be stabilized using either chemical stabilizers or a desert wildflower mix hydroseed on the affected portion of the site. 8. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. Landscape parkways on Avenue 58, and the project's perimeter wall, shall be installed immediately following precise grading. 9. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean-up of construction - related dirt on approach routes to the site. 10. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour Implementation of these mitigation measures will ensure that impacts associated with PM10 are mitigated to a less than significant level. III. d) & e) The project will consist of single family homes and will not result in objectionable odors, nor will it expose residents to concentrations of pollutants. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, X either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (General Plan MEA, p. 73 ff.) b) Have a substantial adverse effect on X any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (General Plan MEA, p. 73 ff.) 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? (General Plan MEA, p. 73 ff.) 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. 73 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 X adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, -9- dv _,_ 1.3 Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (General Plan Exhibit 6.3) IV. a)-f) The proposed project site is currently partially developed, with one single family house, and has therefore been considerably disturbed. The subject property is not located in a recommended survey area for sensitive species identified in the General Plan. Lands to the north and west are already developed, and lands to the east have been disturbed. Lands to the south are isolated from this property by Avenue 58. The property is therefore isolated habitat, and is not expected to contain sensitive species. There is no known riparian or wetland habitat on the subject property. The proposed project site is located outside the mitigation fee area for the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard. -10- .1 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would theproject: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of a historical resource as defined in'15064.5? ("Historical/ Archaeological Resources Survey..." CRM Tech, May 2004) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to '15 064.5 ("Historical/ Archaeological Resources Survey..." CRM Tech, May 2004) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ("Paleontological Resources Assessment," CRM Tech, May 2004) d) Disturb any human remains, including X those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ("Historical/ Archaeological Resources Survey..." CRM Tech, May 2004) V. a)-c), e) A Phase I archaeological survey was conducted on the subject property. The survey included both records searches and on site investigation. The records searches identified a number of studies and associated records of both cultural and historic resources in the area of the project site. The on site investigation was completely negative. The house on the subject property is not historic. The report concludes that no further analysis or investigation of the subject property is required, but that should resources be uncovered during earth moving activities, work should be diverted or stopped until a qualified archaeologist can properly analyze the find. The Historic Preservation Commission at its meeting of June 17, 2004 required the following mitigation measures be implemented to mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant level: 1. The site shall be monitored during on- and off -site trenching and rough grading by qualified archaeological monitors. Proof of retention of monitors shall be given to the City prior to issuance of first earth -moving or clearing permit. 2. The final report on the monitoring shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the project. 2 "Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report Assessor's Parcel No. 762-240-011," prepared by CRM Tech, Mav 2004. -11- C 6 3. 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. 4. That the Native American Heritage Commission, Torres -Martinez Band of Indians, Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, and Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians be consulted for a search of their files to determine the presence of Native American cultural resources. Implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. V. d) A paleontologic assessment was conducted for the project site 3. The study found that the project site is within the historic lakebed of ancient Lake Cahuilla. The study further found that disturbance of the site could result in a significant impact to paleontological resources. In order to assure that these impacts are mitigated to a less than significant level, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented. L. 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. Proof that a monitor has been retained shall be given to City prior to issuance of first earth -moving permit, or before any clearing of the site is begun. 2. Recovered specimens shall be prepared to the point of identification and permanent preservation, including washing of sediments to recover small invertebrates and vertebrates. 3. 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. 3 "Paleontological Resources Survey Report Assessor's Parcel No. 762-240-011," prepared by CRM Tech, May 2004. .p k -12- B+J' t 4. Collected resources and related reports, etc. shall be given to the City. Packaging of resources, reports, etc. shall comply with standards commonly used in the paleontological industry. Implementation of these mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. 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? (MEA Exhibit 6.2) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (MEA X Exhibit 6.2) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, X including liquefaction? (MEA Exhibit 6.3) iv) Landslides? (MEA Exhibit 6.4) X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or X the loss of topsoil? (MEA Exhibit 6.5) d) 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 (MEA Exhibit 6.1) e) 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? (MEA Exhibit 8.1) VI. a)-e) The proposed project site is not located in an Alquist Priolo Study zone, but will experience significant groundshaking in the event of an earthquake in the Coachella Valley. The site is in an area of potential liquefaction. The City Engineer will require the preparation of site specific geologic analysis, including liquefaction, as part of the building permit process, to assure that any potential hazard is remedied through construction techniques. The soils on the site are not expansive, and that the site will not be subject to landslides. The project site will be connected to sanitary sewer service, and -14- '� soils will not be impacted by septic tanks. Impacts associated with soils and geology are expected to be less than significant. The project site is located in an area of blow sand potential. The mitigation measures included above under air quality are designed to mitigate the potential impacts associated with blow sand at the project site to a less than significant level. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would theproject: 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? (Application materials) 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? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing) 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) 0 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 X -16- L.i .•+ d physically 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 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) Phase I and Phase H environmental site assessment reports were prepared for the subject property4. The Phase II study was required to determine the nature of four areas of stained soil on the property. The property had many years ago been in agriculture, and the presence of organochlorine pesticides was suspected. The Phase II determined that although trace amounts of pesticides were present in the soil, they were likely remaining from many years ago, and no further study was warranted. The site is otherwise clear of hazardous materials. The development of single family homes will not result in a risk associated with hazardous materials. The City implements, through its solid waste provider, a household hazardous waste program, which will allow residents to dispose of materials safely. The site is not in an area subject to wildland fires. 4 "Report of Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Assessor's Parcel Number 762-240-01 l," and letter report "Phase II Samplings and Analysis" dated April and May, 2004, respectively, prepared by Earth Systems Southwest. -17- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER UALITY -- Would theproject: 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 X drainage 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? ("Retention Basin Design Calculations, Tract No. 32279," P&D Consultants, Inc., April 2004) d) Substantially alter the existing X drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? ("Retention Basin Design Calculations, Tract No. 32279," P&D Consultants, Inc., April 2004) e) Create or contribute runoff water X which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? ("Retention Basin Design Calculations, Tract No. 32279," -18- �,.J P&D Consultants, Inc., April 2004) 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? (General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.) g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard X area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 6.6) VIII. a) & b) Domestic water is supplied to the project site by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The eventual development of the site will result in the need for domestic water service for single family homes. The CVWD has prepared a Water Management Plan which indicates that it has sufficient water sources to accommodate growth in its service area. The CVWD has implemented or is implementing water conservation, purchase and replenishment measures which will result in a surplus of water in the long term. The project proponent will also be required to implement the City's water efficient landscaping and construction provisions, which will ensure that the least amount of water is utilized within the homes. The applicant will also be required to comply with the City's NPDES standards, requiring that potential pollutants not be allowed to enter surface waters. These City standards will assure that impacts to water quality and quantity will be less than significant. VIII. c) & d) The City requires that all projects retain the 100 year storm on site. A preliminary analysis of the retention requirements for the site was prepared to address this requirements. The analysis found the need for three basins, which will receive water through the central cul de sac. The City Engineer will review and approve the analysis for the site, prior to the issuance of any permits. These City requirements are expected to lower potential impacts to a less than significant level. VIII. e)-g) The site is not located in a flood zone as designated by FEMA. 5 "Retention Basin Design Calculations, Tract No. 32279," prepared by P&D Consultants, Inc., April 2004.. -19- C 6 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 Land Use Element) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 74 ff.) IX. a) & c) The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan land use category in which it is located, and the lots are designed to be similar in size to approved maps located in this area. The site is currently generally vacant, with only one residential structure, and development on the site will have no impact on an existing community. The site is not within the boundaries of the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan fee area. b) The General Plan requires a minimum 250 feet between driveways along Avenue 58. As designed, the project will be 112E feet from the driveway to the east, and 110± feet from the driveway to the west. In order to assure that these impacts are mitigated to a less than significant level, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented. Direct vehicular access to Avenue 58 from lots with frontage along Avenue 58 is restricted, except for the access point conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final tract map. The applicant is hereby conditioned to make a good faith effort to establish a joint access to his/her development either with the easterly or westerly abutting property owner. If such attempt(s) with the abutting property owner are unsuccessful, the applicant is conditioned to locate the access point at the easterly property line and provide access to the access drive for future development of the Cr) " -20- — T easterly property. The final access point shall be approved by the Public Works Department. Implementation of these/ this mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. 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 proposed project site is within the MRZ-1 Zone, and is therefore not considered to have potential for mineral resources. -21- 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 EIR p. III- 144 ff.) b) Exposure of persons to or generation X of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (General Plan EIR p. III-144 ff.) c) A substantial permanent increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan EIR p. III-144 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 EIR p. III- 144 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) 0 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 include the construction of single family homes, which are considered sensitive receptors to noise. The area in which the project is located, however, is not an area of the City where General Plan buildout noise levels are expected to be elevated. Furthermore, the proposed project includes the construction of a 6 foot high perimeter wall, which will lower noise levels within the project. In addition, the two -22- `" ' retention basins proposed for the southern portion of the site will cause the first housing units on the site to be further set back from Avenue 58. Impacts associated with exterior noise sources are expected to be less than significant. The construction of homes on the site will also generate noise. The site is located adjacent to residential land uses, which may experience temporary and short term increases in noise levels during site construction. However, since the proposed project has been conditioned to construct its perimeter wall prior to the initiation of construction, and the adjacent projects also have existing perimeter walls, it is expected that these impacts will be less than significant. The site is not located in the vicinity of an air strip or airport. -23- l� 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 is currently vacant desert lands, with one residential unit, and construction of the project will not displace an existing community. The development of 31 single family homes is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning designations on the project site, and will not generate a substantial population growth in the area. Impacts are expected to be negligible. -24- �% -� 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) Buildout of the site will have a less than significant impact on public services. The proposed project will be served by the County Sheriff and Fire Department, under City contract. Buildout of the proposed project will generate sales and property tax which will offset the costs of added police and fire services, as well as the costs of general government. The project will be required to pay the mandated school fees and park in lieu fees in place at the time of issuance of building permits. -25- 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) 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 construction of 31 residential units within the project will be supported by the payment of the City's parkland fee, to mitigate any additional impact to City parks. -26- C J . 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)? (Tentative Tract Map 32279) e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? (Tentative Tract Map 32279) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X (Tentative Tract Map 32279) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, X or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Project description) XV. a)-g) The construction of 31 homes will not have a significant impact on the City's circulation system. The density proposed for the site is consistent with the General Plan designation for the property, and was therefore analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Avenue 58 is -27- v Ij r expected to operate at acceptable levels of service at buildout of the General Plan. The 297 trips expected to be generated by this site daily will not significantly impact the circulation system. The project proponent will be required to provide on -site parking for the homes in the form of garages. The design of the tract does not include any roadway hazards. The site is within the service area of SunLine Transit, and may eventually be provided bus service as development occurs. n n �' -28- U J 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 which 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.) -29- y b XVI. a)-g) Utilities are available at the project site. The service providers for water, sewer, electricity and other utilities have facilities in the immediate vicinity of the site, and will collect connection and usage fees to balance for the cost of providing services. The CVWD has indicated its ability to serve the project's water and sewer needs. The construction of the proposed project is expected to have less than significant impacts on utility providers. -30- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to X 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? b) 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)? c) Does the project have environmental X effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? XVII. a) The site has been identified as having the potential for paleontological resources. However, mitigation measures proposed above will reduce these potential impacts to a less than significant level. XVII. b) The proposed project supports the long term goals of the General Plan by providing a variety of housing opportunities for City residents. XVII. c) The construction of 31 residential units will not have considerable cumulative impacts and is consistent with the General Plan. -31- V XVII. d) The proposed project has the potential to adversely affect human beings, due to air quality impacts. Since the Coachella Valley is in a non -attainment area for PM 10, and the site will generate PM10. Section III), above, includes a number of mitigation measures to reduce the potential impacts on air quality. 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. -32- v a Ell a� 3 w 0 0 N 0 00 d 4-� O O b o z o N z "OVA za�� �oavN� �daa od i i i M ' � U � N c� o U �v H � on •� N 0O � .-. `n 1 x O U � ®z I�iM 1•N A U W d a F d A dA A a� av U� a ° o 0 a o Cd .. AI b G7 0 O �; o o y Cd y U U F v�i v�i a� L3 U a o cd Q � aaaaa�o Q Q Q a Q �' Ca dto to 0 0 to r 0 N a� � '~ ON Oti cd N o o 0 M w 0 ,�� a no r.y N N ... Cd }.N W N O p F Q A A dAW aX av UU F ° U U � on 4. '5 0 44cl ,D O 0 ti Wz 0.4O Uq Q�y •r � a. C� _ t Cd � .> Cdd >O w .� �, p Q) bA O v OV bA 4 O° .0 En' 4p O O w a �, O 0 3 �, ? w. oA 3 (n ti W o r .� -d o o .� ti 0� }, b a� ° cn tin b N via rA Enbn ' bh c �' a� Cd >, � o . o ,V w°�°.00�0 >o�on°��>, oonw �,°�'°'��> d�¢'U a,ba0a tcd o N U > > 0 0 0 }r. 0 0 b CA N 3 �'.. to N w oA �C's O 'bA .- c.'� U i. N U � � � U ti s0. a> ."� . + O .� .' .O oon ,a y �, 'd °o. ° � 'd ° °�' v on i o g a) & a� a) cat . y !s. ... O cad ~° a - 8. cd O O �b Ei E O E ,0 �. E-y N � U A O O �. � O P1 U ti ., cd �• ca ~ �. P, v �. co .., ¢. U i� U n. F� o Q. . � r 0 0 CA 6n cow Z w� En � .�w x ONLI U cd .�+ U cd �. ,O 4. v O .cd V cOi� N +-' O Cad " U vi 3-cd Uj Cd y ° U ' - 0 :-� ¢' ^'-' cd H cd • 0 '� ai U Cd v; a� + 'L3 ti F d A Q� A a�x aWWTv UV W F c � n. U � c 0 a ca E m c_ G7 `` z � H Q a- m O w L O �L a. a o� acu E coo 4) zz o � Wa .n a 00 V1 0A Q N N U Cry a)x '� Cd Z �O .>1 4 �b o sc:,s,.Cd �w CA Q" N v] 00 tn O y cd O ° f� O cl 4) a '� �. 0 '"' cdd cd Ca"d °>=rn H°a�v § k ° ° 0 c >1 Id @ o k 2 a k � � 2to u © a cd nc� ® © u t A u k ° ucd > \ o•— .- k oA k q O kO-ro (+� � > O%' § 0 k / PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE SUBDIVISION OF 9.7 + ACRES INTO 31 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND MISCELLANEOUS LOTS CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. WHEREAS, The Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13th day of July, 2004, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Duc Housing Partners, Inc. for the subdivision of 9.7 + acres into 31 single-family residential lots and other miscellaneous lots, located at on the north side of Avenue 58, approximately 2,100 feet west of Madison Street, more particularly described as: APN 763-240-011 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 2604-508 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 Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of Approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said Tentative Tract Map 32279: 1. The Tentative Tract Map and its improvement and design are consistent with the General Plan in that its street design when revised as required, and lots are in conformance with applicable goals, policies, and development standards, such as lot size, and will provide adequate infrastructure and public utilities. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 Reso.doc U [ Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Tentative Tract Map 32279 Duc Housing Partners, Inc. Adopted: 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. 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 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 the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map 32279 to the City Council 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 Planning Commission, held on this 13`h day of July, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 Reso.doc r, v b Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Tentative Tract Map 32279 Duc Housing Partners, Inc. Adopted: Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California 4 P J P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 Reso.doc ILA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: 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 • Coachella Valley Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency 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. 4. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc a PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: 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 his/her designer 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, pursuant to this project. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 2 1,J ;� PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: 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) Avenue 58 (Proposed General Plan Secondary Arterial, 96' ROW) — If a proposed General Plan Amendment is adopted by the City Council, sufficient right of way shall be dedicated to accommodate the proposed standard 48-foot right of way from the centerline of Avenue 58 to comply with the existing Secondary Arterial Roadway Classification plus a Class II bicycle except for an additional variable right of way dedication at the proposed primary entry measured 56 feet north of the centerline of Avenue 58 and length to be determined by a traffic study prepared for the applicant by a licensed traffic engineer per Engineering Bulletin # 03-08. As a minimum, the required right of way shall be for a length of 100 feet plus a variable dedication of an additional 50 feet to accommodate improvements conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 3 C rl U PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: 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 Property line shall be placed at the back of curb similar to the lay out and typical street section shown on the tentative map. Private Residential Streets without Median. Measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line shall be 32 feet with parking restricted to one side, 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. Private Residential Streets with Medians. Layout and street section as shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map. As a minimum, travel widths shall be at least 16 feet on one side of the median and 20 feet on the opposite side. 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 and left turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. 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 PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: 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. 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 the access point conditioned in these conditions PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final tract map. The applicant is hereby conditioned to make a good faith effort to establish a joint access to his/her development either with the easterly or westerly abutting property owner. If such attempt(s) with the abutting property owner are unsuccessful, the applicant is conditioned to locate the access point at the easterly property line and provide access to the access drive for future development of the easterly property. The final access point shall be approved by the Public Works Department. 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 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. 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. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 6 l J PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: 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 City. 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. 0 c A H Off -Site Street Plan: Vertical 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' The street improvement plans shall include permanent traffic control and 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. On -Site Street Plan: 1 " = 4' Vertical On -Site Rough Grading Plan On -Site Precise Grading Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 40' Horizontal 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. "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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 7 iI J PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: The On -Site Precise Grading plans are required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official and the City Engineer. "Street Parking" plan shall include appropriate signage to implement the "No Parking" 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. 23. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction on the Public Works Online Engineering Library at: http://www.la-g.uinta.org/publicworks/tractl/z onlinelibrary/0 intropage.htm. 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. 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 8 f i PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: 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. 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. 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. r, PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: 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 33. stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 34. 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 (6) of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches 0.5") in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb. 35. 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. 36. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot from the building pads in adjacent developments. 37. 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. - P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 10 '-`J PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: 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. If►!N9 40. The applicant shall revise proposed retention basins to comply with the 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. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 41. 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. 42. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leach field or equivalent system approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field 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. 43. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 44. 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 P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 11 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: planted with maintenance free ground cover. For retention basins on individual lots, retention depth shall not exceed two feet. 45. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls on to 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. 46. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 47. 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. 48. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. UTILITIES 49. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.110 (Utilities), LQMC. 50. 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. 51. 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 - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 12 -- ►- v vJ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: 52. 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 53. 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. 54. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan (street type noted in parentheses.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS �) Avenue 58 (Proposed General Plan Secondary Arterial, 96' ROW) — If a proposed General Plan Amendment is adopted by the City Council, widen the north side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Subdivision boundary to its ultimate width as specified in the Proposed General Plan Amendment 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 six feet (36') north of the centerline, except at locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate: a► A deceleration/right turn only lane at the Primary Entry. The north curb face shall be located forty eight feet (44') north of the centerline, if a proposed General Plan Amendment is adopted by the City Council as specified above. t' f ` P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 13 tj '-F PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: Other required improvements in the Avenue 58 right of way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: b) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs, plus a single overhead street light at the street connection to Avenue 58. c) An 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 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. B. PRIVATE STREETS Private Residential Streets without Median. Measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line shall be 32 feet with parking restricted to one side, 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. Private Residential Streets with Medians. Layout and street section as shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map. As a minimum, travel widths shall be at least 16 feet on one side of the median and 20 feet on the opposite side. 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. r-' n P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 14 �` J PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: 55. All gated entries shall provide for a three -car minimum stacking capacity for inbound traffic; 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 gain entry into the development can safely make a full turn -around out onto the main street from the gated entry. 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. 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. 56. 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 Secondary Arterial 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. 4.0" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 57. 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. 58. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: Primary Entry (Avenue 58): Full turn movements are permitted. u j PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 15 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: 59. 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. 60. 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 61. 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 62. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC. 63. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. Plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department. 64. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 65. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community Development Department (CDD), prior to plan 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 16 _ . J �� PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 66. 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. QUALITY ASSURANCE 67. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 68. 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. 69. 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. 70. 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 71. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 72. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 17 r, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: FEES AND DEPOSITS 73. 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. 74. 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). 75. Prior to final map approval by the City Council, the developer shall meet the Parkland Dedication requirements by payment of in -lieu fees as set forth in Section 13.48 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 76. Within 24 hours of approval of the tentative tract map by the City Council, the developer shall submit to the Community Development Department, a check made out to the "County of Riverside" for $1,314 to allow filing of a Notice of Determination for Environmental Assessment 2004-508 as required by State law. FIRE MARSHAL 77. For residential areas, approved standard fire hydrants, located at each intersection and spaced 330 feet apart with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPM for a 2-hour duration at 20 PSI. 78. 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. 79. Any turn or turn -around requires a minimum 38-foot outside turning radius. 80. All structures shall be accessible from an approved roadway to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior of the first floor. 81. The minimum dimension for access/egress roads and gates is 20 feet clear and unobstructed width with a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches in height. Parking is permitted on one side for roads that are 28 feet, PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 18 I. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: and on both sides for roads that are 36 feet or more clear and unobstructed. Parking is not permitted on roadways less than 28 feet in width and must be posted and red -curbed. Islands are considered an obstruction. 82. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and signs. 83. Any gate providing access from a public roadway to a private entry roadway shall be located at least 35 feet setback from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road. Where a one- way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 38- foot turning radius shall be used. 84. Gates shall be automatic, minimum 20 feet in width and shall be equipped with a rapid entry system (KNOX). Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. Automatic gate pins shall be rated with a shear pin force, not to exceed 30 pounds. Gates activated by the rapid entry system shall remain open until closed by the rapid entry system. 85. 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. MISCELLANEOUS 86. Perimeter wall designs including height, color, material, design shall approved by the Community development Department prior to issuance of grading permit or building permit for the wall, whichever occurs first. 87. Proposed street names with a minimum of two alternative names per street shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval. Names to be approved prior to recordation of final map. 88. All mitigation measures contained in Environmental Assessment 2004-508 shall be met. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 19 r V PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32279 DUC HOUSING PARTNERS, INC. ADOPTED: 89. Prior to final map approval, the developer shall submit to the Community Development Department for review, a copy of the proposed Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC and R's) for the project. 90. This tentative tract map shall expire two years after City Council approval, unless recorded or granted a time extension pursuant to the requirements of Division 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 91. Minor lot configuration modifications required to comply with these conditions and Fire Marshal requirements shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department and Public Works Department. 92. Approval of production home designs and landscaping requires approval of a Site Development permit application by the Planning Commission. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\DUC TT 32279 COA.doc 20 ATTACHMENT 1 s - °� Bp 0 � K%sko f LEgends Wa o c* Saint Andrews pp;�ECT . J� SITE a Hermitage Shinnecock F o cn Hts. o N J J 0 p V N � O F- N Avenue 58 CASE MAP ORTH CASE Na \ EA 2004-508 TT 32279 SCALE: NTS PH ##E PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JULY 13, 2004 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-810 OWNER: LA QUINTA GOLF ESTATES REQUEST: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS TO REMODEL THE EXISTING LA QUINTA GOLF ESTATES GUARDHOUSE AND DRIVEWAY ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS LOCATION: COACHELLA DRIVE BETWEEN EISENHOWER DRIVE AND AVENIDA EL NIDO ARCHITECT: MOISES G. TROCHE' GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/RL DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303 (CLASS 3(C&E)) OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA), AN EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING GUARDHOUSE BUILDING IS EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS IN THAT IT IS LESS THAN 2,500 SQ. FT. IN SIZE. SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: EXISTING LA QUINTA GOLF ESTATES SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES SOUTH: EXISTING LA QUINTA GOLF ESTATES SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES EAST: ACROSS AVENIDA EL NIDO, EXISTING LA QUINTA GOLF ESTATES SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES WEST: ACROSS EISENHOWER DR., AN UNDER CONSTRUCTION RESORT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT BY CENTEX DESTINATION PROPERTIES ON 44+ ACRES (TRACT 31379) AND VACANT PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH LEGAL: LOT D OF LA QUINTA GOLF ESTATES NO. 1; SE 1 /4 OF SECTION 36 T5S R6E SBBM (MB 37/96-98) BACKGROUND: The La Quinta Golf Estates, a private single family residential development, was created under the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside in 1959, and part of the original City incorporation in 1982. The development has approximately 160 houses and 10 vacant lots. Detached houses in the immediate area abutting Coachella Drive are typically located on 1/4-acre lots. PROJECT REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to remodel the existing Coachella Drive guardhouse structure and its associated access improvements (Attachment 1) as follows: 1. New building facades and clay the roofing, including a 14'-0" high wood trellis over the driveway lanes; 2. Decorative interlocking concrete pavers and colored concrete accents for access driveway surfaces; 3. Raised landscape planter (10'-0" wide) separating the dual 10-foot wide traffic lanes; 4. Hardscape surfaces and access gates for emergency vehicles; and 5. Decorative walls and access gates for vehicles and pedestrians to the east of the guardhouse building. The gatehouse and gates will be moved further east providing additional stacking for entering vehicles. The overall height of the Spanish -theme building is 21 feet. The area for the 24-hour security guard office measures 8'-wide by 21'-long, and includes a desk, kitchen and restroom. Facade materials consist of smooth plaster, cantera stone veneer accents, fixed pane windows in wood muntins, exposed wood beams and projecting roof eaves. A mechanical room of 64 square feet and mechanical yard of 64 square feet are proposed behind the security guard's office. The equipment yard is enclosed by a six-foot high decorative wall. Architecture and Landscape Review Committee - The Architecture and Landscape Review Committee reviewed this request at its meeting of July 7, 2004, and on a 3-0 vote, adopted Minute Motion 2004-022 recommending approval of the proposed project, subject to the attached conditions (Attachment 2). Public Notice - This request was published in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 2, 2004, and mailed to all affected property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the project site as required by Section 9.200.1 10 of the Zoning Code. To date, no correspondence has been received. Public Agency Review - A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City Departments on June 2, 2004. All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. Applicable comments received have been included in the recommended Conditions of Approval. CONCLUSION: The trellis structure is proposed within six inches of the property line, the City's public safety personnel state there are no problems as adjacent residential structures cannot be within 10 feet of the common property line based on RL Zoning Code provisions. The City Attorney has also determined that the decorative shade structure is not subject to the residential development standard, Section 9.60.040 of the Zoning Code, which would have required separations from the vertical supports (5'-0" minimum) and roof eaves (3'-6" minimum) to the property line for the reason that the improvements are being placed on a street. The Fire Department has requested the trellis comply with the following requirement: "The minimum dimension for access roads and gates is 20 feet clear and unobstructed width and a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches in height." The applicant's plans comply with the Fire Department request. Regarding the possibility that the trellis structure will block views of adjacent properties, staff was unable to access the private properties to examine the implications of the project. However, staff has not received any written comments for, or against, the remodel request from affected homeowners. Additional information will be presented at the meeting by the applicant concerning the proposed site improvements and discussions that have occurred between the HOA and the four abutting property owners. MANDATORY FINDINGS: As required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the Zoning Code, all findings to approve this request can be met and are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_, approving Site Development Permit 2004-810, subject to findings and conditions. Attachments: 1 . Site Plan 2. Draft ALRC Minutes of July 7, 2004 (Excerpt) 3. Large Exhibits (Planning Commission only) Prepared by: LA �--� Greg TrOsdell,�Associate Planner PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ARCHITECTURE PLANS TO REMODEL THE EXISTING LA QUINTA GOLF ESTATES GUARDHOUSE ON COACHELLA DRIVE CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-810 APPLICANT: TROCHE' DESIGN FOR LA QUINTA GOLF ESTATES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13" day of July, 2004, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Troche Design on behalf of the La Quinta Golf Estates Country Club to approve the architecture plans for the expansion of the guardhouse facilities on Coachella Drive between Eisenhower Drive and Avenida El Nido, more particularly described as: Lot D of the La Quinta Golf Estates No. 1 Portion SE 1 /4 of Section 36, TSS, R6E SBBM WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, on July 7, 2004, at a regular meeting, recommended approval of the project's architectural components and conceptual landscape plan by adoption of Minute Motion 2004-022, subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit is Categorically Exempt from the requirement of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15303 (Class 3, C and E) in that the building improvements are less than 2,500 square feet in overall size. A wood trellis is planned to shade vehicles that stop at the guardhouse. The planned improvements serve the private country club development and will not adversely impact City services nor impact City development; 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 find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of said Site Development Permit pursuant to Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code: 1. Consistency with General Plan. The proposed guardhouse building is an accessory building that serves the private country club in a Low Density Residential area. Therefore, restructuring the existing site improvements on a private street will not impact the City's growth and development. Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Site Development Permit 2004-810, Troche' Design Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 2 2. Consistency with Zoning Code. The proposed guardhouse building is an accessory building that serves the private country club in a RL District area. Therefore, restructuring the existing site improvements on a private street will not impact the City's growth and development because local public agencies and City Departments have examined the improvements and have incorporated conditions to ensure that the new structure complies will all required public safety measures, namely the wood trellis has a minimum clearance height of 13'-6" from the paving surface height. 3. Architectural Design. The proposed architectural design elements of the single -story building are enhanced because the roof elements vary in height and the exterior building materials (e.g., smooth plaster, clay barrel roof tiles, exposed wood beams, projecting roof eaves, cantera stone veneer, etc.) match surrounding residential houses. The height of the trellis structure has been design to allow fire safety vehicles to pass under it during emergency responses. 4. Site Design. As conditioned, the proposed site improvements will create dual 10-foot wide access lanes, divided by a landscape median, for the private single family residential development, which will improve traffic access on Eisenhower Drive, a Primary Arterial. Access gates are properly located and have been reviewed by the City Engineer and Fire Marshal. 5. Landscape Design. As conditioned, a final landscape plan shall be submitted and approved by the Community Development Department. 6. Sign Program. As conditioned, permanent signs for the project shall be submitted and approved by the Community Development Department as required by Chapter 9.160 of the Zoning Code. 7. Lighting Design. As conditioned, the Building and Safety Department shall approve exterior building lights under Section 9.100.150 of the Zoning Code. 8. Infrastructure. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety, in that the site is in a developed urban area where services are provided. Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Site Development Permit 2004-810, Troche' Design Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 3 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; and 2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2004-810 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of La Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 131h day of July, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: , Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California U J I/ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-810, TROCHE DESIGN JULY 13, 2004 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site Development Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain applicable permits and/or clearances from the following agencies, if applicable or required: Fire Marshal Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) Community Development Department (CDD) Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department (RCEHD) Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) Imperial Irrigation District (IID) California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) Sunline Transit Agency 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. 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 Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Site Development Permit 2004-810 Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 2 be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SW PPP") . 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, pursuant to this project. F. The approved SWPPP and BMP's shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. PROPERTY RIGHTS 4. 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. C Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Site Development Permit 2004-810 Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 3 5. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map or other development application 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. 6. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial - Option B, 100' ROW) — No additional right of way dedication is required. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. 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. 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Site Development Permit 2004-810 Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 4 11. 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. 12. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City. 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. Off-Site/Off-Site Street Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical The street improvement plans shall include permanent traffic control and 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. Site Development/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/On-Site Plan & Profile Street 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. "Site Development/Precise Grading" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements, retaining and perimeter walls, etc. ADA accessibility to public streets, adjacent buildings and existing handicap parking shall be shown on the Site Development Plans at a scale to be determined by the Public Works Department. 13. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee, established by City Resolution, the Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Site Development Permit 2004-810 Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 5 applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes from the City. 14. 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. PRECISE GRADING 15. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 16. 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. 17. 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. A statement shall appear on the Final Map that a soils report has been prepared in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953. Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Site Development Permit 2004-810 Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 6 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. 18. 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. DRAINAGE "Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report for La Quinta Golf Estates. Nuisance water shall be retained onsite and disposed of via an underground percolation improvement approved by the City Engineer." UTILITIES 19. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within the right of way and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 20. 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. 21. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 22. 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Site Development Permit 2004-810 Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 7 23. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial - Option B, 100' ROW): No widening of the south side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Site Development Permit is required. Other required improvements in the 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. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Coachella Drive (Private Street) - Street improvements as shown on the Site Development Permit Site Plan except for the following: a) A four -foot wide sidewalk on the east side of Coachella Drive. The applicant may reduce the travel width to 16 feet on the outbound side of Coachella Drive if approved by the Fire Marshall. B. TRAFFIC SIGNAL (EISENHOWER DR. AND COACHELLA DR.) - The applicant shall pay for the relocation of existing traffic signal controller to the north side of Eisenhower Drive. The applicant and/or his engineer shall coordinate the work with the Hidden Canyon Development on the north side for the inclusion of the relocation in their traffic signal modification plans. Cost shall include the relocation of the traffic signal controller and all appurtenances involved but not limited to the cost of new conduit, cable and new foundation. 24. 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: Access Drive 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Site Development Permit 2004-810 Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 8 Secondary Arterial 4.0" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 25. 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. LANDSCAPING 26. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC. 27. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. 28. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 29. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community Development Department (CDD), prior to plan 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. 30. 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Site Development Permit 2004-810 Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 9 31. The Architecture and Landscape Review Committee shall review and approve the plant material palette before working drawings are prepared. The landscaping plan shall indicate the following design elements: A. Shrub sizes shall be two -gallon and larger. Bubblers and emitters shall be used to irrigate shrubs and trees. B. Parkway shade trees shall be delivered to the site in 24-inches or larger boxes with minimum 1.5-inch calipers. Trees shall be a minimum height of nine feet once installed. Double lodge poles (two-inch diameter) shall be used to stake trees. Palm trees shall be a minimum brown trunk height of six feet tall. Mature Date Palm trees (20' high and taller) may be used for the project as long as the trees are examined by the landscape architect and/or certified arborist before being brought to the site for installation. C. Existing plant materials to be retained in place shall be noted on the landscape plans prepared for the ALRC. D. Trellis structure landscaping should be reconsidered due to long-term maintenance costs to the HOA and difficulty in maintaining the elevated shrubbery. Bougainvillea should not be used to landscape the top of the trellis. E. If a raised planter (8-inches high or higher) is proposed, the materials and height of the planter shall be approved by the ALRC. QUALITY ASSURANCE 32. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 33. 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. 34. 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. t'. Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Site Development Permit 2004-810 Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 10 35. 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 36. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 37. 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 38. 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. 39. 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). FIRE DEPARTMENT 40. The minimum dimension for access roads and gates is 20 feet clear and unobstructed width and a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches in height. 41. Any gate providing access from a public roadway to a private entry roadway shall be located at least 35 feet setback from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road. Where a one- way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 38- foot turning radius shall be used. Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Site Development Permit 2004-810 Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 11 42. Main entry gates shall be automatic, minimum 20 feet in width and shall be equipped with a rapid entry system (KNOX). Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation (may be included on the building plan submittal). Automatic gate pins shall be rated with a shear pin force, not to exceed 30 pounds. Gates activated by the rapid entry system shall remain open until closed by the rapid entry system. 43. The secondary fire department egress gates may be manually operated and must be equipped with a Knox padlock that is accessible from both sides of the gate. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation (may be included on or with the building plan submittal). 44. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs. 45. Building plan check is to run concurrent with the City plan check. Submittals are the responsibility of the owner. All questions regarding the meaning of the Fire Department conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff (c/o Dale Evenson, Fire Safety Specialist) at (760) 863-8886. MISCELLANEOUS 46. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking processes. 47. The Architecture and Landscape Review Committee shall review and approve the following project details before working drawings are prepared: A. Trellis and roof eave construction materials and design elements; B. Construction materials and design elements for access gates; and C. Construction materials and design elements to upgrade the existing fire access gates, ensuring the gates complement the new project and enhance the Eisenhower Drive corridor. 48. Minor amendments to the architectural plans may be approved by the Community Development Director. For review consideration, the applicant shall submit a letter outlining plan changes along with drawings to the Community Development Department before working drawings are prepared. Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Site Development Permit 2004-810 Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 12 A decision will be made by the Director within ten working days after submittal of the review request. Major changes to the overall design of the development shall require Planning Commission review as a public hearing. 49. A sign permit application shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval for temporary and/or permanent signs during review of the final construction plans. 50. This permit shall expire on July 13, 2005, unless a one-year time extension is applied for and granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 9.200.080 of the Zoning Code. A request for a time extension shall be filed with the Community Development Department on, or before, June 13, 2005. 51. In the event that the permittee violates or fails to comply with any of the Conditions of Approval of this permit, no further permits, licenses, approvals, certificates of occupancy shall be issued until such violation has been fully remedied. 52. Access gates shall be constructed of heavy gauge metal. ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 2 MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA July 7, 2004 10:00 a.m. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee was called to order at 10:05 a.m. by Planning Manager Director Oscar Orci who led the flag salute. B. Committee Members present: Bill Bobbitt, Frank Christopher, and David Thorns. C. Staff present: Planning Manager Oscar Orci, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Staff asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of June 2, 2004. There being no changes, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Thoms/Bobbitt to approve the Minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved with Committee Member Christopher abstaining. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Development Permit 2004-810; a request of Troche Design for consideration of architectural plans to remodel the guardhouse and access improvements for the La Quinta golf Estates located on Coachella Drive between Eisenhower Drive and Avenida El Nido. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. GAWPD0CS\ALRC\7-7-04 WD.doc Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee July 7, 2004 2. Committee Member Thoms asked that the landscape plan be submitted to the Committee for approval. 3. Committee Member Christopher asked about . the wall configuration and how it will impact the two adjacent homes. Staff stated the Homeowners' Association is the applicant and it is assumed they have obtained approval of the four adjoining homes that will be impacted. As the applicant is not present at this meeting, staff is unable to know for certain. Unless something is received in writing, it will be up to the Planning Commission to make that determination. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the wood detail and material for the trellis is not stipulated and is a concern to him in regard to the maintenance. The look is attractive,, but bougainvillea plants on a trellis are hard to maintain. Both the plant and wood will be a problem. The gatehouse belongs to the HOA and although it will not be seen from Eisenhower Drive he would like them to know they will have maintenance problems. He would like to see a cross section of the planters to see that they are constructed correctly. Also a listing of the proposed trees. 5. Committee Member Christopher noted the end caps of the trellis and building are not defined as to how they will be tied together. In totality there seems to be a lot of issues that are pertinent to this remodel that the Committee should review and see that it is done correctly. Yet, it appears that all the information is not before the Committee for them to make a decision. From Eisenhower Drive you will see the redesign of the fire access gates, but the plans do not show any elevation of the new fire gates, which the public will see. Planning Manager Oscar Orci stated the Fire Department did not want them to make any changes to the fire gates. Committee Member Christopher noted the plans submitted show them moved and set back from their existing position. Staff noted it was their understanding that the existing gates will be retained and only moved back. G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\7-7-04 WD.doc 2 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee July 7, 2004 6. Committee Member Thorns stated the fire gates need to be updated to what is being proposed for the gatehouse remodel. 7. Committee Member Christopher asked if staff knew the materials or colors of the gate. Staff stated the elevations submitted is all that has been received. The Committee can make a recommendation regarding what they want to be used. 8. Committee Bobbitt asked how they could expand the entrance from one lane in each direction to two lanes in each direction. The landscape area noted, on the plans in front of the gatehouse is not explained as to whether or not it is a raised planter or a six inch curb. This information should be provided to the Committee. 9. Committee Member Christopher stated he would like to know that the homeowners of the four houses to be affected have been notified and given their input. 10. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Christopher to adopt Minute Motion 2004-022 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2004-810, as recommended by staff and amended: a. Condition added: the landscaping plan shall be submitted for approval by the Committee. b. Condition added: the end caps of the trellis structure and building should be better defined. C. Condition added: the trellis material shall be reviewed and approved by the Committee. It shall consist of a material that will not be a wood timber to withstand the desert weather. d. Condition added: the fire gates shall be upgraded to complement the project. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\7-7-04 WD.doc 3 PH #F PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JULY 13, 2004 CASE NUMBERS: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-808, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-028 AMENDMENT #1 AND SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION 2004-797 APPLICANT: HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC. REQUEST: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR A 1,992 SQ. FT. ONE STORY BUILDING ADDITION AND 960 SQ. FT. OUTDOOR EQUIPMENT STORAGE AREA ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE STORE WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN 96-027, AND CONSIDERATION OF A NEW BUILDING SIGN ON THE SOUTH FACADE. LOCATION: 79-900 HIGHWAY 1 1 1, NORTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND HIGHWAY 1 1 1 PROPERTY OWNER: CREDIT SUISSE LEASING 92A, LP ARCHITECT: GREENBERG FARROW ARCHITECTURE INC. (DOUG COUPER, AIA) ENVIRON- MENTAL CONSIDER- ATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT THE REQUEST HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY ASSESSED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-325, PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 96-027 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-028, AND CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 17, 1996, BY RESOLUTION 96-71. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES, CONDITIONS OR NEW INFORMATION IS PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162. 1 GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL/CR ZONING DISTRICT SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: REGIONAL STORMWATER CHANNEL SOUTH: ACROSS HIGHWAY 1 1 1, EXISTING GASOLINE SERVICE STATION (CITY OF INDIO) AND VACANT PARCELS EAST: ACROSS JEFFERSON STREET, EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES IN THE CITY OF INDIO WEST: PHASE 2 OF SP 99-027 (PARTIALLY DEVELOPED) LEGAL: ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 649-020-032 BACKGROUND: The existing Home Depot building, constructed in 1997 on a 13.44-acre parcel, is within the partially completed Jefferson Square Shopping Center (Specific Plan 96- 027). Specific Plan 96-027 was approved by the City Council in September 1996, allowing a shopping complex of 218,300 square feet on 20+ acres for property located at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street. Home Depot is the major anchor tenant for the commercial center; other large tenants planned for the Center are the 990 Only Store (23,000-sq. ft.) and Smart and Final (21,700-sq. ft.). The Center's site plan abuts the larger buildings along the Whitewater Wash with parking and smaller pad buildings located abutting Highway 111. Existing building within Phase 2 of the shopping center are the IHOP and Jack -In -The -Box restaurants that were built a few years ago under SDP's 98-623 and 2000-687. In 1996, the City Council approved the Jefferson Plaza Sign Program during consideration of SP 96-027. The existing Home Depot signs consist of four building signs (approximately 578-sq. ft. total) on the south and east facades and two freestanding monument signs per Sign Application 97-378. The shopping center's Phase 2 sign program was approved by the Planning Commission on July 22, 1997. On November 2, 1999, the City Council approved an Amendment to SP 96-027 that allows special events in the Home Depot parking lot for up to 10 days in length not to exceed 40 days per year. 2 PROJECT PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting to enlarge the west side of the 105,700-square foot commercial building by adding a 1,992 square foot addition, which will be used for tool rentals (Attachment 1). The one story, 18'-0" high flat roof addition, measuring 24 feet wide by 83 feet long, will have stucco walls with architectural elements similar to the existing 32-foot high structure. Also planned to the north is a 960-sq. ft. outdoor equipment storage area that is to be enclosed using 12-foot high black vinyl mesh fencing. Building colors consist of shades of brown to match the existing building. On June 22, 2004, the Community Development Department received a letter from Sign Methods Inc. requesting to install a non -illuminated "Tool Rental Center" sign (approx. 33 sq. ft.) on the southwest side of the building. The orange sign letters are 18-inches high. In order to install this new sign, the existing 144 sq. ft. "California Home Improvement Warehouse" sign on the front of the building will be removed, a net loss of 1 1 1 sq. ft. Architecture and Landscape Review Committee (ALRC) - The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of June 2, 2004, and on a 2-0 vote, adopted Minute Motion 2004-018, recommending approval, subject to conditions (Attachment 2). Public Notice - This request was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 2, 2004, and mailed to affected property owners as required by Section 9.200.1 10 of the Zoning Code. No written correspondence has been received. Public Agency Review - A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City Departments on June 7, 2004. All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. Applicable comments received have been included in the recommended Conditions of Approval. ISSUES: A. Outdoor Storage - In 1996, the City's Zoning Code required any development with over 200 square feet of outdoor storage to be authorized by a CUP application. The existing outdoor garden center was allowed by City Council Resolution 96-73. Under this request, the developer is amending the existing entitlement to permit the equipment storage area to the north of the new tool rental building, which is currently used for construction material storage in the parking lot, a use that has not been permitted by the City. The new addition is located so that it will not be visible from Highway 111 and is designed to be compatible with Phase 2 shopping center uses and the on -site circulation system. See CUP Condition #6 for design standard requirements to enhance the open mesh enclosure. 3 `� MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings necessary to approve the request per Zoning Code Sections 9.210.010 (Site Development Permit) and 9.210.020 (Conditional Use Permit), and Chapter 9.160 (Signs) can be made and are contained in the attached Resolutions. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_, approving Conditional Use Permit 96-028 Amendment #1, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_, approving Site Development Permit 2004-804, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Approve Minute Motion 2004-_ for Sign Permit Application 2004-797, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1 . Site Plan Exhibit 2. ALRC Minutes of June 2, 2004 (Excerpt) 3. , Large Development Plans (Planning Commission only) Prepared by: r,✓ 1 Greg Tr usdqfl, Associate Planner PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ADDITIONAL OUTDOOR STORAGE AREA TO THE HOME DEPOT STORE CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-028, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: HOME DEPOT USA, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13" day of July, 2004, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Home Depot to add 960 sq. ft. of outdoor storage area to the west side of the building located at 79-900 Highway 111 in the Regional Commercial Zone District within Specific Plan 96-027, more particularly described as: Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 649-020-032 Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 28469; Section 29 of T5S R7E SBBM WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, did on the 2"d day of June, 2004, at a regular meeting, recommended approval of the architectural plans by adoption of Minute Motion 2004-018, subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, said CUP Amendment 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 this request has been previously assessed in conjunction with Environmental Assessment 96-325, prepared for Specific Plan 96-027 and Conditional Use Permit 96-028, for which a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was certified by the City Council on September 17, 1996, by Resolution 96-71, and that no changed circumstances, conditions or new information has been provided that would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental assessment pursuant to Section 15162. 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 find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of said Conditional Use Permit Amendment pursuant to Section 9.210.020 of the Zoning Code: 1. Consistency with General Plan. The proposed expansion of the store's outdoor storage will not impact this Regional Commercial land use area in Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditional Use Permit 96-028, Amendment #1, Home Depot July 13, 2004 that high intensity commercial uses where permitted under Specific Plan 96- 027, the developments master planning document. 2. Consistency with Zoning Code. The proposed outdoor storage area is consistent with the development standards of the CR Zoning District, and has been designed to comply with the development standards of Specific Plan 96-027 with regard to setbacks and location to other planned shopping center facilities. The new storage area is located so that it will not be visible from Highway 1 1 1, a Major Arterial Image Corridor. 3. Architectural Design. The proposed fencing material is consistent with the adopted design guidelines of Specific Plan 96-027 and consistent in design to the outdoor nursery storage area approved by the City Council in 1996. 4. Site Design. As conditioned, the proposed storage area is designed to be consistent with the circulation pattern in Specific Plan 96-027. 5. Infrastructure. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety, in that the site is in a developed urban area where services are provided. 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; and 2. That the project is in compliance with the provisions and conditions of Specific Plan 96-027 and Environmental Assessment 96-325 (City Council Resolution 96-71) as designed; and 3. That it does hereby approve Conditional User Permit 96-028 Amendment #1 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions attached hereto. 17 J Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditional Use Permit 96-028, Amendment #1, Home Depot July 13, 2004 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of La Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 13" day of July, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: , Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-028 AMENDMENT #1, HOME DEPOT JULY 13, 2004 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site Development Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking processes. 3. The property owner shall comply with all applicable conditions of Specific Plan 97-027 and Site Development Permit 2004-808. 4. This permit shall expire on July 13, 2005, unless a one-year time extension is applied for and granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 9.200.080 of the Zoning Code. A request for a time extension shall be filed with the Community Development Department on, or before, June 13, 2005. 5. In the event that the permittee violates or fails to comply with any of the Conditions of Approval of this permit, no further permits, licenses, approvals, certificates of occupancy shall be issued until such violation has been fully remedied. 6. The equipment storage area shall be encased by a 42-inch high split -face block wall and vinyl coated mesh fencing above to match materials used to construct the existing outdoor garden sales facility that was approved by the City Council under Resolution 96-73. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ARCHITECTURE PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE HOME DEPOT STORE, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-808 APPLICANT: HOME DEPOT USA, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13th day of July, 2004, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Home Depot to approve the architecture plans for a 1,992 square foot building addition located at 79-900 Highway 111 in the Regional Commercial Zone District within Specific Plan 96-027, more particularly described as: Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 649-020-032 Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 28469 Section 29 of T5S R7E SBBM WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, on the 2nd of June, 2004, at a regular meeting, recommended approval of the architectural plans by adoption of Minute Motion 2004-018, subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the Community Development Director has determined this request has been previously assessed in conjunction with Environmental Assessment 96-325, prepared for Specific Plan 96-027 and Conditional Use Permit 96-028, for which a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was certified by the City Council on September 17, 1996, by Resolution 96-71, and that no changed circumstances, conditions or new information has been provided that would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental assessment pursuant to Section 15162. WHEREAS, on- and off -site infrastructure improvements exist to service the planned project; and WHEREAS, the recordation of Parcel Map 28469 in 1998 established the development parcels for Specific Plan 96-027; 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 Resolution 2004-_ Site Development Permit 2004-808, Home Depot July 13, 2004 Page 2 Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of said Site Development Permit pursuant to Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code: 1 . Consistency with General Plan. The proposed building is within a Regional Comical land use area which encourages high intensity commercial uses as defined under the policies and goals of Specific Plan 96-027. Therefore, no impacts to surrounding properties can be foreseen. 2. Consistency with Zoning Code. The proposed building is consistent with the development standards of the CR Zoning District, and has been designed to comply with the development standards of Specific Plan 96-027 with regard to setbacks, building heights and parking arrangements. 3. Architectural Design. The proposed architectural design elements of the commercial project are consistent with the adopted design guidelines of Specific Plan 96-027. 4. Site Design. As conditioned, the proposed project site is designed to be consistent with the circulation pattern in Specific Plan 96-027. 5. Landscape Design. Existing landscape improvements will be unaffected by this development request. 6. Sign Program. As conditioned, the proposed commercial sign is consistent with the Sign Program guidelines for Specific Plan 96-027. 7. Lighting Design. As conditioned, exterior lighting for security is consistent with the City requirements to provide a variety of lighting types with cutoff fixtures ensuring glare is not created. 8. Infrastructure. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety, in that the site is in a developed urban area where services are provided. 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; and Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Site Development Permit 2004-808, Home Depot July 13, 2004 Page 3 2. That the project is in compliance with the provisions and conditions of Specific Plan 96-027 and Environmental Assessment 96-325 (City Council Resolution 96-71) as designed; and 3. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2004-808 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of La Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 13`h day of July, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: , Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California A �. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-808, HOME DEPOT J U LY 13, 2004 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site Development Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain applicable permits and/or clearances from the following agencies, if applicable or required: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department (CDD) • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department (RCEHD) • Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits or clearances from the above listed agencies and departments. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. PROPERTY RIGHTS 3. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for construction or proper functioning of the proposed development particularly Parcel 4 of Tract No. 28573, 99-Cent Store. 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Site Development Permit 2004-808, Home Depot Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 2 4. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property owner. 5. 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. 6. Additional CVWD easement at the existing driveway at the Vista Grande intersection to provide access to the Whitewater Storm Channel and Channel Easement to the north of the above -mentioned intersection. 7. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Jefferson Street (Major Arterial, 120' ROW) — A portion along the easterly boundary of Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 28469 to provide for the standard 60 feet from the centerline of Jefferson Street for a total 120-foot ultimate developed right of way and an additional right of way dedication at the existing driveway at the Vista Grande intersection measured eighty six feet west of the centerline of Jefferson Street for traffic signal equipment maintenance purposes. 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. 8. 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. 9. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Site Development Permit 2004-808, Home Depot Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 3 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. Site Development Plans: 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. The applicant shall prepare an accessibility assessment on a marked up print of the building floor plan identifying every building egress and notes the 2001 California Building Code accessibility requirements associated with each door. The assessment must comply with submittal requirements of the Building & Safety Department. A copy of the reviewed assessment shall be submitted to the Engineering Department in conjunction with the Site Development Plan when it is submitted for plan checking. The "Site Development" plan is required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official and the City Engineer. "Site Development" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements. 10. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction on the Public Works Online Engineering Library at http://www.la-quinta.org/publicworks/tractl /z online library/0 intropage.htm. 11. 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Site Development Permit 2004-808, Home Depot Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 4 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. GRADING 12. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 13. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each pad, the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 14. "Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan for CUP 96-028. Nuisance water shall be disposed of (in an approved method)." 15. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or building permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest intake land within this Site Development Permit excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. sJ - Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Site Development Permit 2004-808, Home Depot Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 5 16. 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. QUALITY ASSURANCE 17. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 18. The applicant shall employ or retain qualified civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other appropriate professionals to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 19. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program but required by the City as evidence that construction materials and methods comply with plans, specifications and applicable regulations. 20. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. MAINTENANCE 21. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. The applicant shall maintain required public improvements until expressly released from this responsibility by the appropriate public agency. FEES AND DEPOSITS 22. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. C A'_ Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Site Development Permit 2004-808, Home Depot Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 6 23. 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). FIRE DEPARTMENT 24. Tenant improvement plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run concurrent with the City plan check. 25. Fire sprinkler changes/additions will need to be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review. 26. The existing fire sprinkler system will need a current certification sticker on the riser and/or fire department connection (FDC), dated within the last five years. 27. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs. 28. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code. 29. A site inspection prior to occupancy will be required by the Fire department to verify the following: 30. That approved super fire hydrants, are spaced every 330 feet and located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the buildings as measured along outside travel ways. 31. Blue dot reflectors are placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 32. That a KNOX key box is installed on the building. Please contact the Fire Department for an application, if needed. 33. Any submissions to the Fire Department are the responsibility of the applicant. All questions regarding the meaning of the Fire Department conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff (c/o Dale Evenson, Fire Safety Specialist) at (760) 863-8886. Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Site Development Permit 2004-808, Home Depot Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 7 MISCELLANEOUS 34. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking processes. 35. The stucco columns on the west facade shall project out from the building surface a minimum width of three inches. 36. Minor amendments to the architectural plans may be approved by the Community Development Director. For review consideration, the applicant shall submit a letter outlining plan changes along with drawings to the Community Development Department before working drawings are prepared. A decision will be made by the Director within ten working days after submittal of the review request. Major changes to the overall design of the development shall require Planning Commission review as a public hearing. 37. This permit shall expire on July 13, 2005, unless a one-year time extension is applied for and granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 9.200.080 of the Zoning Code. A request for a time extension shall be filed with the Community Development Department on, or before, June 13, 2005. 38. In the event that the permittee violates or fails to comply with any of the Conditions of Approval of this permit, no further permits, licenses, approvals, certificates of occupancy shall be issued until such violation has been fully remedied. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE MOTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SIGN APPLICATION 2004-797, HOME DEPOT JULY 13, 2004 FINDINGS 1. Sign Consistency - The proposed 33 square foot sign meets the design specifications of Specific Plan 96-027 and Section 9.160.090(D) of the Zoning Code because the maximum amount of sign area for the building will be limited by removal of the 144 square feet California Home Improvement Warehouse sign. The proposed sign graphics are well presented using a contrasting color to the facade. 2. Visual Harmony - The proposed channel letter building sign is consistent in design with surrounding businesses and is not overly large for the location it serves, provided the conditions are met. 3. CEQA Compliance - Pursuant to Section 1531 1 (Class 11 a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), on -premise signs are exempt from environmental analysis as they supplement permanent building structures that were assessed under Environmental Assessment 96-325 (City Council Resolution 96-71) for Specific Plan 96-027. GENERAL 1. The applicant/property owner agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this application and any other challenge pertaining to this project. This indemnification shall include any award toward attorney's fees. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. The proposed non -illuminated sign shall not exceed 33 square feet using 18- inch high letters. This new sign shall replace the existing 144 sq. ft. "California Home Improvement Warehouse" sign on the south building facade. The Community Development Director may approve material changes that are architecturally compatible with the shopping center's sign program, subject to approval by the property owner. 3. A building permit is required to install the permanent building sign. n � k ATTACHMENTS • "llow., go �"" .,. • • I'' "- I ATTACHMENT 1 43a T cauPEoa siaw+F 1p5,700 S.F• oEo s 1 i sm r "m cmm s g __ _ __ __ — — — Cff d U qwq ARDEA or Am L4smul FM Sm. pumpom PEA P16 tAi/ES-97. AEC Ei/EO/EA ' HIGHWAY _ 1 a.L------------------- �� �° c' 0 GA g4,102 5.F- 11 POT U.S.A., INC. i --t'l,t�,111�®t��ir�.�r��l����1 [rN U E / 5 U I T E 200 u ATTACHMENT 2 MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA June 2, 2004 10:00 a.m. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting o rchitectural and Landscaping Revie mittee was called r at 10:05 a.m. by Planning Manag ctor Oscar Orci who a flag salute. B. Co ee Members present: Bill Bobbitt avid Thorns. It was d and seconded by Committee bers Bobbitt/Thoms to cuse Committee Member Cunnin Staff present: Planning M Oscar Orci, Associate Planners Wallace Nesbit and Greg T ell. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALJMIrAR: A. Shed if there were any changes to the Mi f May 5, 2004. T} e being no changes, it was moved and I ded by Committee Members Thoms/Bobbitt to approve inutes as submitted. Unanimously approved with Co ee Member Cunningham abstained. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Development Permit 2004-808; a request of the Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. for consideration of architectural plans for an addition to the existing Home Depot Store within Specific Plan 96-027 located at 79-900 Highway 1 1 1 . 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced Doug Cooper, Greenberg Farrell Architecture, who gave a presentation of the project. GAMDOMALR06-2-04 WD.doc Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee June 2, 2004 2. Committee Member Bobbitt asked for an explanation of the synthetic stucco material. Mr. Cooper stated it was to match the existing material. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he has no issues with the request. He asked why staff was requesting the popout columns. Staff stated to add some articulation to the building. 3. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Thoms/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2004-018 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2004-808, as recommended by staff. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2004AQ8, a request of Integral Associates, LLC for review of deveplans for a three story, 192 unit apartment complex inor e story recreation building loc ed on the east side of Du d and approximately 650 outh of Highway 1 1 1. 1. Asso Planner Greg Trousdell pres the information co ed in the staff report, a copy ich is on file in the munity Development Depart Staff introduced John eardall Integral Associates Scales with KTGY Group, architect, Seth Hoffman wi tex Landscape Architects, and Roger Devill, owner of oject, who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee M Bobbitt asked about the Highway 111 access as t ether it is an easement. Mr. Beardall stated it will be p sed and become part of the project. Committee Mem bbitt stated the site plan does not show the acce goi Highway 111. Mr. Beardall stated the lot line ded to go to Highway 1 1 1. .A Committee Member Bobbitt asked about California Sycamore as not being appropriate for the , . Mr. Hoffman stated their experience with the Sycam generally that it is used sparingly as it is a large water Committee Member Bobbitt noted it is prone to d disease. Mr. Hoffman stated they generally use the oastal areas where they can G:\WPOOCS\ALRC\6-2-04 WD.doc 2 PH #G STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 13, 2004 CASE NOS.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-505 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2004-101 ZONE CHANGE 2004-120 SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: 1011Eno NL&l*ymME" CHAD MEYER REQUEST: 1) CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; 2) & 3) CHANGE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATION FROM NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; 4) APPROVAL OF "CODORNIZ" SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 FOR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES; 5) A SUBDIVISION OF 15.16 ACRES INTO 145 RESIDENTIAL LOTS; AND 3) APPROVAL OF FIVE PROTOTYPE PLANS FOR 145 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND A CLUBHOUSE FACILITY ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-502 WAS PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2004-101, ZONE CHANGE 2004-120, TENTATIVE TRACT 32070, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED. BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, WITH MITIGATION MEASURES THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT; THEREFORE, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS RECOMMENDED THAT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BE CERTIFIED IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONSIDERATION LOCATION: SOUTH OF AVENUE 52, EAST OF JEFFERSON STREET P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SR.doc ZONING: NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (CN) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH: NEIGH BORHOODCOMMERCIAL (CN) SOUTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) EAST: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR) WEST: GOLF COURSE (GC) BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: The project site is 15.16 acres in size and located at the southeast corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street; the All American Canal on the southern property line (Attachment 1). There currently exists on site a temporary bank housed in a residential structure. On February 19, 2002, the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from Low Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial, and approved a Specific Plan for 120,700 square feet of commercial buildings including a grocery and drug store. The project was never initiated. The General Plan update, adopted by City Council on March 20, 2002, maintained the Neighborhood Commercial land use designation for the subject property. Applications Under Consideration General Plan Amendment and Zone Change The applicant is requesting to change the General Plan and Zoning use designation from Neighborhood Commercial to Medium High Density Residential. The Medium High Density Residential General Plan designation allows up to 12 units per acre; the proposal is for 145 residential units on 15.16 acres which yields a density of 9.6 units per acre. Specific Plan The request is for approval of the "Codorniz" Specific Plan" establishing residential guidelines and standards, including the distribution of land uses, location and sizing of improvements, and requirements for public and private improvements. The Specific Plan proposes an enclave of 145 attached and detached residential dwelling units (each unit will be separately owned) with a centrally located common amenity area, pool and clubhouse. Illustrative site plan and key elements for the project, such as entries, the clubhouse, and walls are provided in the document. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SR.doc — - ) 4 Development Standards Development standards proposed for the Specific Plan must be consistent with the General Plan development standards. Some development standards proposed for the Specific Plan differ from the Zoning Code. The Specific Plan proposes variations in standards that are tailored to this site location and the proposed use. The following table represents the proposed Specific Plan development standards as compared to the Zoning Code development standards for Medium High Density Residential: Standard Proposed Code Minimum lot size 2,000 s.f. 2,000 s.f. Maximum lot size 5,500 s.f. none Minimum lot width (thru) 27 feet 40 feet (front) Maximum building height 23.5 ft. 28 ft. Maximum No. of stories 2 2 Minimum Front Yard setback NA 20 ft. from street or pkg. 5 ft. none from walkways 2 ft. none Side yard setback NA 5 ft. Minimum Combined side yard setback- Detached Unit 8 ft. none Minimum Open side side yard setback- Duplex Unit 4 ft. none *The Zoning Code restricts the maximum structure height to 22 feet for all buildings within 150 feet of any General Plan designated Image Corridor. Both Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 are General Plan designated Image Corridors. Parkin Applicant proposes two car garages for every unit and proposes 78 on -street parking spaces for guests. Total parking provided is 368 spaces. Proposed parking meets Code requirements. Design Guidelines The guidelines provide design themes compatible with Mission and Santa Barbara architectural character that capture the "desert lifestyle". Building massing, a variety of roof forms, front wall off sets, and second story setbacks provide a neighborhood/ pedestrian scale. Architectural recesses and projections offer a design mixture providing visual relief. The use of windows, archways, columns, and entries enhance and define spaces. Porches, balconies, and patios provide outdoor living spaces. Colors and materials include stucco walls using earth tones accented with wood, the and wrought iron. Roofs are covered with earth tone concrete tiled. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SR.doc Tentative Tract Tentative Tract 32070 (Attachment 2) proposes 145 residential lots on 15.16 acres as well as one clubhouse facility lot, street lots, common driveway lots, and open space/landscape lots. All 145 residential lots are proposed to have driveway access from an internal road. "Auto court driveways" provide driveway access to each individual garage. Residential lot sizes range from 2,000 to 5,483 square feet. The proposed site plan has frontage and access on Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street. Jefferson Street access will be right -in, right -out and left -in; Avenue 52 access will be right -in and right -out. No additional right-of-way dedications are needed for Jefferson Street and Avenue 52, except as required by a traffic study The Tract Map is conditioned to complete a traffic study to determine the need for deceleration lanes on both Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street. A homeowners' association will be formed to maintain retention basins, common landscaped areas, private roads and perimeter landscaping. Site Development Permit Architectural Plans The applicant proposes five single-family prototypical plans (attached and detached), each with two front elevation variations per plan (Attachment 2). Codorniz units consist of five plans and make up 145 lots. The Codorniz plans are as follows: Plan Description Unit Sq. Ft. Garage Sq. Ft. SF1 Single -Family Plan 1 1250 427 SF2 Single -Family Plan 2 1385 462 SF3 Single -Family Plan 3 1592 447 P2-4 Paired home 2 attached P-4 1353 525 P2X Paired home 2 standing alone 1353 525 P4-2 Paired home 4 attached to P2 1350 463 P4-4 Paired home 4 attached to P4 1350 463 SF3 SG Single -Family plan 3 with split garage 1574 545 P2XFG Paired home with front load garage 1353 525 All structures are two stories in height (23.5 feet maximum) and have concrete tile roofs and plaster walls. The attached plans provide detailed information on the units. Tile roof colors are proposed along with six exterior color combinations. Colors vary from beige to tans and brown. Conceptual landscaping plans, consistent with the Specific Plan palette for the entire site are included in the submittal. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SR.doc Landscape Plans The Landscaping Plan identifies a palette of plant material consisting of shrubs, groundcover, and trees for the entries, the setbacks, the on -site planting areas, and the buildings perimeter planters. The applicant proposes Palo Verde, Mesquite, Desert Willow, Smoke Trees, and other trees. Palm trees include California Fan Palms Mexican Fan Palms, and Blue Hesper Palms. A variety of additional trees for shade and accent are proposed throughout the site. Accent pavers are proposed to delineate courtyards, pathways, patios, and pool decking. Other Site Development Permit information provided An additional bound document is provided to assist in the evaluation of the project and includes the following: • Site Perspective A conceptual perspective of the site fully developed from Jefferson Street. • Illustrative Site Plan Provided is a conceptual site plan delineating access, landscaping and special surface treatment, the community core, and residential footprint. • Phasing Plan The plan identifies the order in which the project is proposed to be developed. • Open Space/ Landscape Calculation The plan demonstrates that the proposed open space and landscaping meets Code requirements. • Typical Enclave Configuration and Typical Lot Configurations The site plan identifies where on the site the typical configuration occurs on the site. The illustrations show typical enclave lots with lot lines and building footprints and landscaping. • Parking Calculation The plan demonstrates that the proposed parking meets Code requirements of 2.5 spaces per unit. • Parking Court Traffic Patterns This graphic illustrates the pattern is which automobiles will be able to enter and exit from garages to the driveway courts • Height Study/Image Corridor This site plan depicts the 150 foot Image Corridor on Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 and that portion of roof tops that the Specific Plan is proposing to exceed the Code standard of 22 feet in height. Also included are elevations illustrating the same 23.5 feet in height request in the Specific Plan. • Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 Streetscapes Views • Landscape Plans for Clubhouse, Main Entry, Corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson, Secondary Entry P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SR.doc 1 l� Fiscal Impact Study At the request of staff, to provide decision makers with additional information regarding changing the use designation for the property, the applicant provided a Fiscal Impact Analysis for the project. The study, prepared by the Sedway Group, describes the fiscal impact of the proposed residential development as compared to the previously approved commercial development. Three alternative development scenarios were used for this analysis: 1) Proposed "Codorniz" Specific Plan; 2) Existing and approved Specific Plan with 120,700 square feet of commercial development with a grocery store anchor; and 3) general commercial zoning with a mixture of 120,700 square foot mixture of office and retail development. A principal finding of the study delineates the annual surplus or deficit on the City's General Fund for each alternative. The residential alternative shows an annual deficit of $22,282; the grocery store alternative shows an annual surplus of $1 18,187; and the office/retail mix alternative shows an annual deficit of $9,547. Market Study The Sedway Group also prepared a Market Study for the project. The study concludes that an additional 10-15,000 residents in the southern portion of the City to support a new neighborhood center, Staff did not request this type of study. Staff is submitting the study without comment as a courtesy for your consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Based on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, staff prepared Environmental Assessment (EA) 2004-502 for the project. The Noise Assessment Study, prepared for the EA, recommends certain noise control mitigation measures including a minimum eight feet in height noise barrier along Jefferson Street which can be achieved with berming and a wall combination. Staff recommends certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact. ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC) REVIEW: The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of February 4, 2004 (Attachment 3). The Committee unanimously adopted Minute Motion 2004-008, recommending approval subject to the following condition which has been incorporated into this review: 1. Landscaping plans are to be resubmitted for approval by the ALRC. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SR.doc G -11 6 COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES: The project was sent out for comment to City departments and affected public agencies on April 23, 2004, requesting comments be returned by May 14, 2004. All applicable comments are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. PUBLIC NOTICE: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper and posted on June 28, 2004. 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 Zoning Code. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: The findings, as noted in the attached Resolutions, required by the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, can be made subject to the recommended Conditions of Approval. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_recommending to the City Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2004-505; and, 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_, recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 2004-101; and, 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change 2004-120; and, 4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 2004-070, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval; and, 5. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 32070, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval; and, 6. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit 2004-799, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SR.doc ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map 2. Special studies, and Plans and Elevations 3. Minutes of the February 4, 2004 meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee Prepared by: Fred Baker, AICP, Principal Planner PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SR.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2004-101, ZONE CHANGE 2004- 120, SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 ,TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32070, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-505 APPLICANT: RJT HOMES L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did on the 13th day of July, 2004, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a request of R.J.T. Homes, L.L.C. for approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change from Neighborhood Commercial to Medium High Residential designation, development standards and design guidelines for Specific Plan (SP) 2004-070, Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 32070 for the subdivision of 15.16 acres into 145 lots, and Site Development Permit (SDP) 2004-799 for five prototypical residential plans and ancillary improvements, collectively (the "Project") generally, located at the southeast corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street and more particularly described as: A.P.N 772-410-021 AND 772-410-022: AND, WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared for the Project; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et. seq., (CEQA Guidelines); and WHEREAS, the City mailed a Notice of Intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration in compliance with Pubic Resources Code Section 21092 on June 28, 2004 to landowners within 500 feet of the Project Site, and notified all public entities entitled to notice under CEQA, which notice also included a notice of the public hearing date for the City Council on August 3, 2004; and, WHEREAS, the City published a Notice of Intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and associated Initial Study in the Desert Sun newspaper on June 28, 2004, and further caused the notice to be filed with the Riverside County Clerk in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines; and C► `� Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Environmental Assessment 2004-505 RJT Homes L.L.C. Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 2 WHEREAS, during the comment period, the City received no comment letters. WHEREAS, the above recitations are true and correct and are adopted as the Findings of the Planning Commission as follows: 1. The Planning Commission finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and processed in compliance with the State CEQA Guidelines and the City's implementation procedures. The Planning Commission has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and finds that it adequately describes and addresses the environmental effects of the Project, and that, based upon the Initial Study, the comments received thereon, and the entire record of proceeding for this Project, there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record that there may be significant adverse environmental effects as a result of the Project. The mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration have been incorporated into the Project and these measures mitigate any potential significant effect to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects will occur as a result of this Project. 2. The 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 2004-505. 3. The 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. 4. There is no evidence before the City that the Project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. 5. The 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. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz EA505 Reso.doc 4 11 Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Environmental Assessment 2004-505 RJT Homes L.L.C. Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 3 6. The 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 Project. 7. The Project will not have the 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. 8. The Planning Commission has fully considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and the comments, if any, received thereon. 9. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. 10. The location of the documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission decision is based is the La Quinta City Hall, Community Development Department, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 92253, and the custodian of those records is Jerry Herman, Community Development Director. 11. A Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby adopted pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081.6 in order to assure compliance with the mitigation measures during Project implementation. 12. Based upon the Initial Study and the entire record of proceedings, the Project has no potential for adverse effects on wildlife as that term is .defined in Fish and Game Code § 711.2. 13. The Planning Commission has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 California Code of Regulations 753.5(d). 14. The Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby recommended for certification. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz EA505 Reso.doc p Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Environmental Assessment 2004-505 RJT Homes L.L.C. Adopted: July 13, 2004 Page 4 1. That the above recitations are true and correct, and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2004-505 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum, on file in the Community Development Department and attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 13th day of July, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz EA505 Reso.doc ��1ti 2. 3 4. 5. 31 Environmental Checklist Form Project title: General Plan Amendment 2004-101, Zone Change 2004-120, Specific Plan 2004-070, Tentative Tract Map 32070, Site Development Permit 2004-799 Lead agency name and address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Contact person and phone number: Fred Baker 760-777-7125 Project location: Southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52. APN: 772-410-021 and -022 Project sponsor's name and address: RJT Homes, Codorniz, LLC 1425 E. University Drive Phoenix, AZ 85034 General plan designation: Current: Neighborhood Commercial Requested: Medium High Density Residential 7. Zoning: Current: Neighborhood Commercial Requested: Medium High Density Residential 8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) General Plan Amendment and Zone Change: Proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from Neighborhood Commercial to Medium High Density Residential, up to 12 units per acre. Specific Plan: Specific Plan to establish development standards and guidelines for the construction of a residential project, allowing 145 units on 15.16 acres, or a density of 9.6 units per acre, as well as a 0.58 acre common area amenity, consisting of a tennis court, swimming pool, spa, club building with locker and meeting rooms, and an outdoor barbeque area. The outdoor area is proposed to double as a retention basin. Residential units will be detached and attached, two story units. Access will be provided from both Jefferson Street and Avenue 52. Interior streets are proposed to range from 29 feet to 37 feet in width. Building heights are proposed to 23.5 feet, with lots ranging from 1,800 to 5,500 square feet. Setbacks are minimal, with street setbacks at 4 feet, and pedestrian setbacks at 2 feet. Site Development Permit: Site Development Permit to implement the development standards and guidelines in the Specific Plan. -1- 0 ' 3 J- Tentative Tract Map: Tentative Tract Map to divide 15.16 acres into 145 residential lots, a clubhouse/retention basin lot, and lettered lots for interior streets and driveways. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: Avenue 52, vacant (Neighborhood Commercial) South: All American Canal, Single family residences, golf course (Low Density Residential, Golf Course Open Space) West: Jefferson Street, Golf course under construction (Golf Course Open Space) East: Vacant (High Density Residential) 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Coachella Valley Water District -2- 6 A 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. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the X 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 imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. June 18, 2004 Signature Date -3-O 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 proj ect. 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 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? (General Plan Exhibit 3.6) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, X including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Aerial photograph) 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)-d) Jefferson Street is designated a Primary Image Corridor in the General Plan. Avenue 52 is designated a Secondary Image Corridor in the General Plan. These designations require the implementation of landscaping setbacks and height restrictions adjacent to the roadways, to protect the aesthetic integrity of the area. The Development Code requires that building heights within 150 feet of any Image Corridor be no more than 22 feet. The proposed Specific Plan would exceed this standard, and allow structures up to 23.5 feet within the 150 foot setback area. The Site Development Permit application includes a submittal which would have structures up to 22' 11 1/2" in height. The tract map proposes buildings as close as 15 feet from the property line on Jefferson Street, and as close as about 20 feet from the property line on Avenue 52. The building mass in the project will vary from single family detached homes, primarily in the southwest portion of the site, clusters of 4 and six units. All units in the project are two story. The proposed Specific Plan request for an increase in the allowable setback of 1.5 feet will not represent a significant increase in the overall permissible height in the setback. Further, since the exceedance will occur primarily in the ridgeline of the pitched roofs, the areas where the standard is exceeded will not involve significant building mass. The potential impacts -5- 0 I ' 1, associated with building height within the proposed project are expected to be less than significant. The ultimate construction of single family homes on the site will result in a slight increase in light generation, primarily from car headlights and landscape lighting. The City regulates lighting levels and does not allow lighting to spill over onto adjacent property. Impacts will not be significant. K -6- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would theproject: 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) H. a)-c) The proposed project site is currently vacant desert land which has been significantly impacted by off -road vehicle use and dumping. A temporary bank building, housed in a converted dwelling unit, currently occurs but will be removed. The parcel is not, nor has it been, in agriculture. No Williamson Act contracts occur on the property. There are no agricultural lands surrounding the property. The area is generally developed, and is not in a rural portion of the City. No impacts to agricultural resources are expected to result from implementation of the proposed project. -7- 10 � J 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 PM 10 Plan for the Coachella Valley) d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) IIl. a), b) & c) The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would allow up to 182 residential units on the site, while the Specific Plan proposes 145. In order to provide the most conservative and comprehensive analysis, the higher density has been used in calculating air quality impacts. The potential 179 residential units on the site could generate up to 1,343 trips per day'. Based on this traffic generation, and an average trip length of 10 miles, the following emissions can be expected to be generated from the project site. 1 "Trip Generation, 6t' Edition," Institute of Transportation Engineers, category 270, Residential Planned Unit Development. Moving Exhaust Emission Projections at Project Buildout (pounds per day) Ave. Trip Total Total No. Vehicle Trips/Day Length (miles) miles/day 1.348 x 10 = 13,480 PM10 PM10 PM10 Pollutant ROC CO NOX Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Grams at 50 mph 1,208.70 31,426.20 6,446.40 - 134.30 134.30 Pounds at 50 mph 2.67 69.37 14.23 - 0.30 0.30 SCAQMD Threshold (lbs /day) 75 550 100 150 Assumes 1,343 ADT. Based on California Air Resources Board's EMFAC7G Emissions Model. Assumes Year 2005 summertime running conditions at 75T, light duty autos, catalytic. As demonstrated above, the proposed project will not exceed any of SCAQMD's recommended daily thresholds. Further, the project as proposed will generate only 26% of the trips which could be generated by the approved commercial project on the site 2. The air quality impacts associated with the residential project, therefore, are considerably lower than those currently approved. The project's potential impacts to air quality resulting from vehicular emissions are therefore expected to be less than significant. The City and Coachella Valley are a severe non -attainment area for PM 10 (Particulates of 10 microns or less). The Valley's 2002 PM10 Plan adopted much stricter measures for the control of dust both during the construction process and during project operations. These include the following, to be included in conditions of approval for the proposed project: 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 The proposed project will generate dust during construction. Under mass grading conditions, this could result in the generation of 392.83 pounds per day, for a limited period while grading operations are active. The contractor will be required to submit a Environmental Assessment 2001-433, Pueblo Plaza Shopping Center. -9- �' PM 10 Management Plan prior to initiation of any earth moving activity. In addition, the potential impacts associated with PM 10 can be mitigated by the measures below. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. 2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary power poles to avoid on -site power generation. 3. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities. 4. Imported fill shall be adequately watered prior to transport, covered during transport, and watered prior to unloading on the project site. 5. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of three feet prior to the onset of grading activities. 6. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on- going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall be watered at the end of each work day. 7. Any area which remains undeveloped for a period of more than 30 days shall be stabilized using either chemical stabilizers or a desert wildflower mix hydroseed on the affected portion of the site. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. Landscape parkways on Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 shall be installed with the first phase of development on the site, as shall the project's perimeter wall. 9. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean-up of construction - related dirt on approach routes to the site. 10. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour Implementation of these mitigation measures will ensure that impacts associated with PM 10 are mitigated to a less than significant level. I1I. d) & e) The project will consist of residential units and will not result in objectionable odors, nor will it expose residents to concentrations of pollutants. -10- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, X either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (General Plan MEA, p. 73 ff.) b) Have a substantial adverse effect on X any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (General Plan MEA, p. 73 ff.) 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? (General Plan MEA, p. 73 ff.) 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. 73 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 X adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, -11- Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (General Plan Exhibit 6.3) IV. a)-f) The proposed project site is not located in an area of sensitivity for any of the species mapped in the General Plan. The site has been impacted by off road vehicle use, grubbing and other activities, and contains little native habitat. The proposed project site is not located within the mitigation fee area for the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would theproject: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of a historical resource as defined in'15064.5? ("Cultural Resources Assessment of a 15 acre Parcel...," Archaeological Associates, July 2001) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to'15064.5? ("Cultural Resources Assessment of a 15 acre Parcel...," Archaeological Associates, July 2001) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ("Paleontological Resources Assessment...," CRM Tech, March 2004) d) Disturb any human remains, including X those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ("Cultural Resources Assessment of a 15 acre Parcel...," Archaeological Associates, July 2001) V. a)-b) & d) A cultural resource survey and associated report were prepared for the previously approved commercial project on the subject property3. The assessment found no surficial deposits, but identified the area as a high wind zone which can regularly cover or uncover artifacts. As a result, the report recommends the imposition of the following mitigation measure: 1. A qualified archaeological monitor shall be present during all earth moving and grading activities. The monitor shall be empowered to stop or redirect activities on the site should a resource be identified. A final report shall be filed with the Community Development Department prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building on the project site. The project contractor is required by state law to report a finding of human remains, should such a find be made during project grading. Law enforcement officials are responsible for the proper investigation and disposal of remains. "Cultural Resources Assessment of a 15 acre Parcel...," prepared by Archaeological Associates, July 2001 -13- -1 - U-0 V. c) A paleontologic survey was prepared for the proposed project site4. The study found that the project site is within the historic lake bed of ancient Lake Cahuilla. The study further found mollusk shells on the property, which date back to the Holocene period. Development of the site could, therefore, result in significant impacts to paleontologic resources without mitigation. In order to assure that these potential impacts are mitigated to a less than significant level, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. 1. A paleontologist shall be present on site during all earth moving and trenching activities. The paleontologist shall be empowered to stop or redirect earth moving activities to adequately investigate potential resources. The paleontologist shall be required to submit to the Community Development Department, for review and approval, a written report on all activities on the site prior to occupancy of the first building on the site. 4 "Paleontological Resources Assessment Report," prepared by CRM Tech, March 2004. -14- 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? (MEA Exhibit 6.2) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (MEA X Exhibit 6.2) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, X including liquefaction? (MEA Exhibit 6.3) iv) Landslides? (MEA Exhibit 6.4) X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or X the loss of topsoil? (MEA Exhibit 6.5) d) 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 (MEA Exhibit 6.1) e) 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)-e) The project site lies in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The property, as with the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the event of a major earthquake. Structures on the site will be required to meet the City's and the State's standards for construction, which include Uniform Building Code requirements for seismic zones. The site is not located in an area having a potential for liquefaction hazards. The City Engineer will require the preparation of site -specific geotechnical n i -15- - f analysis in conjunction with the submittal of grading plans. This requirement will ensure that impacts from ground shaking are reduced to a less than significant level. The project site is located in an area of very severe blow sand potential. The mitigation measures included above under air quality are designed to mitigate the potential impacts associated with blow sand at the project site to a less than significant level. The site is not subject to landslides, nor does it have expansive soils. -i6- C"1 6 Potentially Less Than i Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would theproject: 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? (Application materials) 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? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing) 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 X physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency -17- 6 evacuation plan? (General Plan MEA p. 95 ff) h) Expose people or structures to a X significant risk of loss, injury or death 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) The construction of residential units on the proposed project site will not result in significant impacts associated with hazardous materials. The City implements the standards of Household Hazardous Waste programs through its waste provider. These regulations and standards ensure that impacts to surrounding areas, or within the project itself, are less than significant. The site is not in an area subject to wildland fires. -18- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER UALITY -- Would theproject: 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. I1I-187 ff. c) Substantially alter the existing X drainage 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? (General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.) d) Substantially alter the existing X drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? (General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.) e) Create or contribute runoff water X which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.) f) Place housing within a 100-year flood X -19- _. hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.) g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard X area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 6.6) VIII. a) & b) Domestic water is supplied to the project site by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The eventual development of the site will result in the need for domestic water service for residential units, both for domestic water and landscaping irrigation. The implementation of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change will result in greater rates of water consumption, due to the residential land uses. Commercial land uses are not significant water users, while residential land uses generally consume larger amounts of water. The CVWD has prepared a Water Management Plan which indicates that it has sufficient water sources to accommodate growth in its service area. The CVWD has implemented or is implementing water conservation, purchase and replenishment measures which will result in a surplus of water in the long term. The project proponent will be required to implement the City's water efficient landscaping and construction provisions, including requirements for water efficient fixtures and appliances, which will ensure that the least amount of water is utilized within the homes. The applicant will also be required to comply with the City's NPDES standards, requiring that potential pollutants not be allowed to enter surface waters. These City standards will assure that impacts to water quality and quantity will be less than significant. VIII. c) & d) The City requires that all projects retain the 100 year storm on site. The proposed project includes a retention area (shown as lot 146), which will be required to accommodate the 100 year storm. The retention area is to be located in the area proposed for the tennis court, and will be located underground. The hydrologic data submitted will require review by the City Engineer to assure that the proposed underground system will accommodate the flows generated by the project site. Also of concern is the route storm flows will take in order to reach the detention area, specifically as relates to the potential of polluting these flows with pool chemicals, since the pool is located immediately south of the tennis court. In order to assure that the potential impacts are mitigated to a less than significant level, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented. 1. Prior to the issuance of grading permits for the proposed project, the City Engineer shall approve a detailed hydrology analysis which includes a comprehensive description of how the retention area will function in the tennis -20-J .A re court area. The study shall also address how the storm flows will be directed away from the pool area, to assure that pool chemicals do not enter the storm water flows. This mitigation measure is expected to lower potential impacts to a less than significant level. VIII. e)-g) The site is not located in a flood zone as designated by FEMA. 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 Land Use Element) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 74 ff.) IX. a)-c) The project site is currently vacant, and will not impact any existing community. The requested General Plan Amendment and Zone Change will result in the loss of 15.16 acres of Neighborhood Commercial land, and a corresponding increase in Medium High Density Residential land. The General Plan includes policies relating to changes in conditions in the City, and amending the General Plan maps to reflect these changes. The request is consistent with these policies, insofar as the approved commercial project has not developed, and the present applicant believes that a residential product is highly saleable on this parcel. The subject site is located in an area of the City which is rapidly urbanizing, and does not represent leapfrog development. The project site is outside the boundary of the mitigation fee for the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan. -22- 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 proposed project site is within the MRZ-1 Zone, and is therefore not considered to have potential for mineral resources. -23- tj J 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? ("Noise Impact Analysis," LSA, October 2003) b) Exposure of persons to or generation X of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? ("Noise Impact Analysis," LSA, October 2003) c) A substantial permanent increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ("Noise Impact Analysis," LSA, October 2003) d) A substantial temporary or periodic X increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ("Noise Impact Analysis," LSA, October 2003) 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 General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would result in residential units on a parcel previously planned for commercial land uses. The corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 is already impacted by high noise levels, and these levels are expected to increase as the General Plan builds out, and traffic, which is the primary noise -24- -1 , 6 J generator in the City, continues to increase. The commercial land uses currently approved on the project site are not considered sensitive receptors, and the impacts associated with noise at the site for a commercial project are considered less than significant. Residential land uses, however, are sensitive receptors, and noise levels for such land uses must not exceed 65 dBA CNEL exterior, and 45 dBA interior, in order to meet General Plan requirements. A noise study was prepared for the proposed projects. The study found that noise generated by traffic on both Jefferson Street and Avenue52 exceeds the City's 65 dBA CNEL exterior standard under current conditions. The study further found that residences located within 251 feet of center line of Jefferson, and 146 feet of center line of Avenue 52 will have unacceptable exterior noise levels, without mitigation, and that any residences located within 140 feet of center line of Jefferson, and 83 feet of centerline on Avenue 52, will exceed interior noise standards, without mitigation. The study recommends a number of mitigation measures, as enumerated below, to lower the potential impacts to less than significant levels. 1. An six foot wall on a 2 foot berm shall be constructed along Jefferson Street, along the entire property line. The wall shall be completed prior to occupancy of any dwelling unit along that street. 2. A six foot wall shall be constructed along Avenue 52, along the entire property line. The wall shall be completed prior to occupancy of any dwelling unit along that street. 3. All units within 140 feet of the center line of Jefferson Street shall be equipped with windows with a minimum sound rating of STC-32. 4. All units within 83 feet of the center line of Avenue 52 shall be equipped with windows with a minimum sound rating of STC-30. 5. A five foot plexiglass and concrete wall five feet in height, shall be erected on the perimeter of all balconies for outdoor living areas located within 251 feet of Jefferson Street, and fronting on Jefferson. 6. A five foot plexiglass and concrete wall five feet in height, shall be erected on the perimeter of all balconies for outdoor living areas located within 140 feet of Avenue 52, and fronting on Avenue 52. 7. Air conditioning units shall be required in all units along Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street. The study also analysed the potential impacts associated with construction noise during buildout of the site. The study found that noise levels from construction will be elevated, and that without mitigation, residential units to the east and south will be impacted. In order to reduce these impacts, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1. All construction equipment shall be mufflered and properly maintained during all phases of construction. 2. Stationary equipment and equipment staging shall be located in the northwest quadrant of the site. 5 "Noise Impact Analysis 52°d and Jefferson Residential Development," prepared by LSA, October 2003. -25- 3. Construction activities shall be limited to those hours specified in the La Quinta Municipal Code. With implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts associated with noise shall be reduced to less than significant levels. The proposed project site is not located within the vicinity of an air strip or airport. 6" J -26- 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 construction of 145 residential units will not generate growth in the City, but will rather accommodate growth pressures caused by commercial and other types of projects in the area. -27- -- �� 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) Buildout of the site will have a less than significant impact on public services. The proposed project will be served by the County Sheriff and Fire Department, under City contract. Buildout of the proposed project will generate sales and property tax which will offset the costs of added police and fire services, as well as the costs of general government. The project will be required to pay the mandated school fees and park in lieu fees in place at the time of issuance of building permits to reduce the impacts to those services. -28- C 110 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) 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 development of the site will include a common recreational area, which will provide residents with recreational amenities. In addition, park in lieu fees will be collected to address the project's impacts on the City's recreational facilities. -29- a 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)? (Tentative Tract Map 32070) e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? (Tentative Tract Map 32070) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X (Tentative Tract Map 32070) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, X or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Project description) XV. a)-g) The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change will result in a change from commercial to residential land uses on the project site. As described in the air quality section above, the project site, with residential land uses, has the potential to generate -30- 1,343 average daily trips. The previously approved commercial center, and General Plan, had an estimated 5,180 average daily trips generated from the site. The proposed General Plan Amendment, and associated applications, therefore, will reduce overall impacts to traffic in the vicinity of the site, particularly in the long term. The project does not include inadequate parking or unsafe designs. The site is located within the service area of SunLine Transit, and can be served by it. Overall impacts to traffic are expected to be less than significant. -31- i�, �_t 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 which 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.) -32- XVI. a)-g) Utilities are available at the project site. The service providers for water, sewer, electricity and other utilities have facilities in the immediate vicinity of the site, and will collect connection and usage fees to balance for the cost of providing services. The construction of the proposed project is expected to have less than significant impacts on utility providers. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to X 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? b) 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)? c) Does the project have environmental X effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? XVII. a) All impacts associated with paleontologic resources can be mitigated. The site does not contain significant biological resources. XVII. b) The proposed project supports the long term goals of the General Plan by providing a variety of housing opportunities for City residents. XVII. c) The construction of 145 residential units will not have considerable cumulative impacts. The implementation of the General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone will have a beneficial impact on buildout traffic generation in the vicinity. -34- 6 16 XVH. d) The proposed project has the potential to adversely affect human beings, due to air quality and noise impacts. Since the Coachella Valley is in a non -attainment area for PM10, and the site will generate PM10, Section III), above, includes a number of mitigation measures to reduce the potential impacts on air quality. Noise impacts have been addressed through a series of stringent mitigation measures, which will lower the potential for significant impacts to less than significant levels. 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. Environmental Assessment 2001-433 was used in review of this application. 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. -35- Q b i ti i w C.. O G N N O U +, i ti N ti o o v H w d � tWi,UO a daa� io 0 4 �o o0 4 oa�o` Q. off ('t -d o > E� o N cd O ., C7UHAN�a H o z� z a� A U W d i F Q A Q� G a� OV U on o y y p p Ur.O O v Cd y U U E En b cl U..+ •.+ �+ Q+ U V p1) v to to p U Q Q c In. Q Q [am O o 0-4 QnEA a, a � o •� Q �-'..' � Q Q Q Q to to to OD w 0 Cd U U w U A CA 00 � p a� ° � N O U coEn v a� a� N b q `, u a`di d , toCd to � r c cd CA cl N cC H N 0 En F e A WAW ax av UU w o 0 U z F C� a 0o a Q EA � to t b b on on oD to 'd U oam 0 Q W�to to — co o ce o cd cqs o —03 —C,3 w e A WAW aX av U� 0 0 d F O O a a w� �o 00 w V 0 F 'd a� zi b � o f• a F d A QA A a� aWWTU UV •° ° o o O o 0 0 0 /�FWy/+ U N U U U U 9F. U U U o 0 0 0 0 0 0 z031, CA o 0 0 o 0 o O 0 Q q q A A w C� A Ca O zz Ri 0.i a a s a a a a to to to to to to to N d d 4u y y0 N .fl 0 G ti F. 3 y 3 U O N Q 0 e; ti 0Q V m 0C,3 .fl bA Q O O O O r. O a w -d y w ^d ° c cd y N CdF. U c�C. 0 N cd co N 100 It p W Cd 9 U Uj ai U 'uoo C �00 `i'3 �3 `r'o`'� in. "'ode a. 83 v� Z v `� •d o�+ ti 0 0 w Cd U t+ A i+ O O O O U CG ti Ca a o PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) TO MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MHDR) ON APPROXIMATELY 15.16 ACRES LOCATED EAST OF JEFFERSON STREET, SOUTH OF AVENUE 52 CASE NO.: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2004-101 APPLICANT: RJT HOMES - CODORNIZ, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 131h day of July, 2004, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of RJT Homes -Codorniz, L. L.C. for a General Plan Amendment, for the property located at the southeast corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street as shown on Exhibit A., and more particularly described as: A.P.N 772-410-021 and 772-410-022; and, WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that the Community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 2004-505), and determined that the proposed Site Development Permit will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact is recommended for certification; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify a recommendation for approval of said General Plan Amendment: 1. The new land use designation is suitable and appropriate for the property involved because it is a small rectangular shaped lot more suitable for the higher intensity use. 2. The new land use designation is compatible with other similar designations within the City because the property is accessible from Arterial streets. 3. The proposed Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting land use does not exceed standards in the General Plan. 1,Maa PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz GPA101 Reso.doc ki 11 _i. Planning Commission Resolution 2004- General Plan Amendment 2004-101 RJT Homes L.L.C. July 13, 2004 4. That the General Plan Amendment is within an area that will be provided with adequate utilities and public services to ensure public health and safety. 5. That the General Plan Amendment is warranted since there has been a change in development patterns in the general vicinity since the commercial designation was made. 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 correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described General Plan Amendment request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 131h day of July, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chairman City of LaQuinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California 0: EXHIBIT "A" AVENUE 52 J�,�--T-MjEC17 LOCATION LW LN C) Uj The proposed General Plan/Land Use for the plan area provides for Medium High Density Residential (MEDR) land use which allows up to 12 Dwelling Units per acre. �A,�I R- rg E.�'z ? a � p OC PRCjECT r "k LU R� bda The proposed Zoning for the plan area is Medium High Density Residential - (RiVH). PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONE CHANGE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ON APPROXIMATELY 15.16 ACRES LOCATED EAST OF JEFFERSON STREET, SOUTH OF AVENUE 52 CASE NO.: ZONE CHANGE 2004-120 APPLICANT: RJT HOMES - CODORNIZ, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 13th day July, 2004, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and to consider the request of, R.J.T. L.L.C., for a Zone Change for the property located at the southeast corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street, as shown on Exhibit "A"., and more particularly described as: A.P.N.: 772-410-021 and 772-410-022, and; WHEREAS, said Zone Change has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that the Community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 2004-505), and determined that the proposed Site Development Permit will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact is recommended for certification; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify a recommendation for approval of said Zone Change: 1. This Zone Change is consistent the updated General Plan, in that the zone change category proposed are consistent with those goals, objectives, and policies in the General Plan. 2. The Zoning Change is suitable and appropriate for the property involved because it is a small rectangular shaped lot more suitable for the medium high intensity development. 3. The new land use designation is compatible with the similar designations within the City because the property is accessible from Arterial streets. r P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz ZC120 Reso.doc 1 Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Zone Change 2004-120 RJT Homes L.L.C. July 13, 2004 9. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Daniels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-049, approving Tentative Tract Map 32201, as recommended: ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 4. This Zone Change will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting land uses will require Planning Commission review and approval of development plans, which will ensure adequate conditions of approval. 5 That the Zone Change is warranted since there has been a change in development patterns in the general vicinity since the commercial designation was made. 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 correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described Zone Change for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, as shown on the attached Exhibit „A„ PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 13th day of July, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chairman City of La Quinta, California Gj 5 Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Zone Change 2004-120 RJT Homes L.L.C. July 13, 2004 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California AP- : V J t: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A 15.16 ACRE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 APPLICANT: RJT HOMES — CODORNIZ, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 131h day of July, 2004, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and recommended approval of a request of RJT Homes, L. L.C. for a Specific Plan that establishes residential design guidelines and development standards for the property located at the southeast corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street, and more particularly described as: A.P.N. 772-410-021 AND 772-410-022: AND; WHEREAS, said Specific Plan 2004-070 has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that the Community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 2004-505), and determined that the proposed Specific Plan will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact is recommended for certification; and, WHEREAS, at said public hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of the Specific Plan: 1. That the proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan in that the property is designated Medium High Density Residential which permits the uses proposed for the property. 2. That the Specific Plan is compatible with the existing and anticipated development in the area, in that the project, as conditioned, provides adequate circulation. 3. That the proposed Specific Plan will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting uses will require Planning Commission review and approval of development plans under a Site Development Permit, which will ensure adequate Conditions of Approval. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 Reso.doc 1 Planning Commission Resolution 2004- RJT Homes L.L.C. Specific Plan 2004-070 Adopted: July 13th, 2004 Page 2 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 correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above - described Specific Plan request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 131h day of 2004, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 Reso.doc 2 .- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 - R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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 Specific Plan 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 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. 4. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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 his/her designer 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, pursuant to this project. 2 P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 F. The approved SWPPP and BMP.s 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) Jefferson Street (Major Arterial, 120' ROW) — The standard 60 feet from the centerline of Jefferson Street for a total 120-foot ultimate developed right of way except an additional variable right of way dedication at the proposed primary entry measured sixty six feet (661 east of the centerline of Jefferson Street and length to be determined by a traffic study prepared for the applicant by a licensed traffic engineer per Engineering Bulletin # 03-08. As a minimum, the required right of way shall be for a length of 100 feet plus a variable dedication of an additional 50 feet to accommodate improvements conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS. 2) Avenue 52 (Primary Arterial, Option A 110'/100' ROW) — The standard 55 feet from the centerline of Avenue 52 for a total 1 10- P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 3 r, r` i V t_) i- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 foot ultimate developed right of way except for an additional variable right of way dedication at the proposed secondary residential entry measured sixty one feet (61') south of the centerline of Avenue 52 and length to be determined by a traffic study prepared for the applicant by a licensed traffic engineer per Engineering Bulletin # 03-08. As a minimum, the required right of way shall be for a length of 100 feet plus a variable dedication of an additional 50 feet to accommodate improvements conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS. 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 Private Residential Streets measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line: 36-foot travel width. The travel width may be reduced to 32 feet with parking restricted to one side, and 28 feet 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 CC&R's shall be reviewed by the Engineering Department prior to recordation. B. COURTYARD DRIVEWAYS Courtyard Drives shall have a minimum travel width of 26 feet provided that parking is prohibited, there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors, and provisions are established 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. 1) The turn around shall conform to the shape shown on Tentative Tract No. 32070 except for minor revisions as may be required by the City Engineer. As a minimum, the applicant's engineer or architect may be required to demonstrate vehicular back out from garages at dead ended courtyard driveways are acceptable to the PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 4 s PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 Engineering Department in the plan review process. 11. 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 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 when submitted, a ten - foot wide public utility easement contiguous with, and along both sides of all private streets and courtyard driveways or as approved by IID. 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: A. Jefferson Street (Major Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. B. Avenue 52 (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. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 5 r, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 15. Direct vehicular access to Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 from lots with frontage along Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 is restricted, except for those access points identified on Tentative Tract No. 32070, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final tract map. 16. 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. 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. 17. 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. 18. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City. 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. Off -Site Street/Signing and Striping/Drainage Plans: 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical The street improvement plans shall include permanent traffic control and 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. B. On -Site Street Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical 6 P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc � PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 C. On -Site Rough Grading Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal D. On -Site Precise Grading Plan: and/or E. Site Development 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. "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. The applicant shall prepare an accessibility assessment on a marked up print of the building floor plan identifying every building egress and notes the 2001 California Building Code accessibility requirements associated with each door. The assessment must comply with submittal requirements of the Building & Safety Department. A copy of the reviewed assessment shall be submitted to the Engineering Department in conjunction with the Site Development Plan when it is submitted for plan checking. In addition to the normal set of improvement plans, a "Site Development" plan is required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official and the City Engineer. "Site Development" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements. "Street Parking" plan shall include appropriate signage to implement the "No Parking" 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. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 19. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction on the Public Works Online Engineering Library at http://www.la-guinta.org/publieworks/tractl/z onlinelibrary/0 intropage.htm. 20. 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 21. 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. 22. 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 Tentative Tract No. 32070, shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC. 23. 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 PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 8 ' t 6 .. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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. 24. Depending on the timing of the development of Tentative Tract No. 32070, 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. 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. 25. 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 P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 9 _ f PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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. GRADING 26. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 27. 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. 28. 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. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 10 n t PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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. 29. 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. 30. 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 (6) of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches 0 8") behind the curb. 31. 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. 32. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot from the building pads in adjacent developments. 33. 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 11 �" P:\Reports - PC17-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc U PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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. 34. 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. 35. 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 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. 36. The applicant shall revise proposed retention basins/and or underground retention systems to comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More specifically, stormwater failing on site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 37. 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. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 38. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leach field or equivalent system approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field 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. 39. 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. 40. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 41. 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. For retention basins on individual lots, retention depth shall not exceed two feet. 42. 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. 43. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 44. 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. 45. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. UTILITIES 46. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.1 10 (Utilities), LQMC. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 13 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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. 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 with street type noted in parentheses. A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Jefferson Street (Major Arterial; 120' R/W): No additional street improvement widening is required, except at locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate: a) Bus turnout (if required by Sunline Transit). P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 14 V PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 b) A deceleration/right turn only lane at Primary Entry. The east curb face shall be located fifty nine feet (59') east of the centerline. Other required improvements in the Jefferson Street right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: c) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. d) 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. e) Reconstruct the existing landscaped median on Jefferson Street to provide for a deceleration lane for left turn in only movements as approved by the City Engineer. f) Establish a benchmark in the Jefferson Street right of way and file a record of the benchmark with the County of Riverside. 2) Avenue 52 (Primary Arterial, Option A; 1 10' R/W): No additional street improvement widening is required, except at locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate: a) Bus turnout (if required by Sunline Transit) b) A deceleration/right turn only lane at Secondary Entry. The south curb face shall be located fifty four feet (54') east of the centerline. r, . P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 15 U 'k PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 Other required improvements in the Avenue 52 right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: c) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. d) 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. 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 full street improvements to provide for 36-foot wide travel width measured gutter flow line to gutter flow line where the residential streets are double loaded or construct full street improvements to provide for 28-foot wide travel width measured gutter flow line to gutter flow line where on -street parking is prohibited and the applicant makes provisions for perpetual enforcement of the No Parking restrictions. C. COURTYARD DRIVEWAYS 1) Courtyard driveways shall have a travel width of 26 feet with parking prohibited, and there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors and provisions are established for ongoing enforcement of the parking restriction in the CC&R's. The CC&R's P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 16 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 shall be reviewed by the Engineering Department prior to recordation. 52. All gated entries shall provide for a three -car minimum stacking capacity for inbound traffic; 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 gain entry into the development can safely make a full turn -around out onto the main street from the gated entry. 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. 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. 53. 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/Parking Lots Primary Arterial Major Arterial 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. 4.5" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. 5.5" a.c./6.5" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 54. 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. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 17 U PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 55. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Primary Entry (Jefferson Street): Right turn in, right turn out and left turn in movements are permitted. Left turn movements out are prohibited. B. Secondary Entry (Avenue 52): Right turn movements in and out are permitted. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. 56. 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. 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 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 park areas. 18 F- P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc �J ; PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 61. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 62. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community Development Department (CDD), prior to plan 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. 63. 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. PUBLIC SERVICES 64. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer. 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 PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc 19 U PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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. 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). COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 73. Landscaping plans shall comply with the City's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance for this project. Said landscaping plans shall include a complete irrigation system showing location and size of water lines, valves, clock timers, type of sprinklers, etc. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the landscape plans shall also be approved by the Coachella Valley Water District prior to final approval by the Community Development Department. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SP070 COA.doc all PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 15.16 ACRES TO ALLOW A 145 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 APPLICANT: RJT HOMES L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 131h day of July, 2004, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for the subdivision of 15.16 acres site into 145 single-family lots plus amenity and street lots, generally located at the southeast corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street and more particularly described as: A.P.N 772-410-021 AND 772-410-022: AND; 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 an Environmental Assessment was completed for this project. WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify said Tentative Tract Map 32070: A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan. The project is within a Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) District per the provisions of the amended 2002 General Plan Update. Tentative Tract Map 32070 is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with the General Plan, and mitigation measures pursuant to Environmental Assessment 2004-505 B. The proposed map is consistent with Specific Plan 2004-070. Tentative Tract Map 32070 is consistent with the design and development standards of the Specific Plan provided conditions and mitigation measures, pursuant to Environmental Assessment 2004-505, contained herein are met to ensure consistency, C. The design, or improvement, of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan and the Subdivision Ordinance. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 Reso.doc 1 4. V �U Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Tentative Tract Map 32070 RJT Homes L. L.C. Adopted July 13, 2004 All streets, lot density and designs and other related improvements in the project conform to City standards. All on -site streets will be private. Access for the single- family lots will be provided from internal streets planned under the Tentative Tract Map. D. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife, or their habitat. The subject site has been previously mass graded and development currently exists. Further an environmental analysis concluded that this project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures will be implemented that will reduce the impacts to a level of less than significant. E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 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. F. 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 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. G. The design of the lot, or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems in that the Fire Marshal, Sheriff's Department, and the City's Building and Safety Department have reviewed the proposal for public health conditions and the project is conditioned as appropriate. H. The design of the lot, 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 in that the proposed internal streets will be privately owned and maintained, and that there will be no publicly -owned improvements within the Tentative Tract Map. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 Reso.doc 2 L Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Tentative Tract Map 32070 RJT Homes L. L.C. Adopted July 13, 2004 The design of the lots and grading improvements, including the pad elevation differentials within the tract bare an acceptable minimum in that the tract design preserves community acceptance and buyer satisfaction. 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 recommend approval to the City Council of Tentative Tract Map 32070 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 Planning Commission, held on this the 13th day of July, 2004 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 Reso.doc 3 rJ C' PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 - R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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 • Coachella Valley Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 1 U PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvements plans for City approval. 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 his/her designer 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 2 n V� PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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) Jefferson Street (Major Arterial, 120' ROW) — The standard 60 feet from the centerline of Jefferson Street for a total 120-foot ultimate developed right of way except an additional variable right of way dedication at the proposed primary entry measured sixty six feet (661 east of the centerline of Jefferson Street and length to be determined by a traffic study prepared for the applicant by a licensed traffic engineer per Engineering Bulletin # 03-08. As a minimum, the required right of way shall be for a length of 100 feet plus a variable dedication of an additional 50 feet to accommodate improvements conditioned under STREET AND PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 3 ^+ ; PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS. 2) Avenue 52 (Primary Arterial, Option A 110'/100' ROW) - The standard 55 feet from the centerline of Avenue 52 for a total 1 10- foot ultimate developed right of way except for an additional variable right of way dedication at the proposed secondary residential entry measured sixty one feet (61') south of the centerline of Avenue 52 and length to be determined by a traffic study prepared for the applicant by a licensed traffic engineer per Engineering Bulletin # 03-08. As a minimum, the required right of way shall be for a length of 100 feet plus a variable dedication of an additional 50 feet to accommodate improvements conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS. 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 Private Residential Streets measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line: 36-foot travel width. The travel width may be reduced to 32 feet with parking restricted to one side, and 28 feet 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 CC&R's shall be reviewed by the Engineering Department prior to recordation. B. COURTYARD DRIVEWAYS Courtyard Drives shall have a minimum travel width of 26 feet provided that parking is prohibited, there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors, and provisions are established 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 4 n r. 6 v, t PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 1) The turn around shall conform to the shape shown on Tentative Tract No. 32070 except for minor revisions as may be required by the City Engineer. As a minimum, the applicant's engineer or architect may be required to demonstrate vehicular back out from garages at dead ended courtyard driveways are acceptable to the Engineering Department in the plan review process. 11. 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 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 both sides of all private streets and courtyard driveways or as approved by IID. 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: A. Jefferson Street (Major Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. B. Avenue 52 (Primary Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. n r PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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. Direct vehicular access to Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 from lots with frontage along Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 is restricted, except for those access points identified on the approved 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. 16. 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. 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. 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 19. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City. 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. Off -Site Street/Signing and Striping/Drainage Plans: 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical The street improvement plans shall include permanent traffic control and 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. B. On -Site Street Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical C. On -Site Rough Grading Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal D. On -Site Precise Grading Plan: and/or E. Site Development 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. "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. The applicant shall prepare an accessibility assessment on a marked up print of the building floor plan identifying every building egress and notes the 2001 California Building Code accessibility requirements associated with each door. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codomiz TT32070 COA.doc 7 r" U PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 The assessment must comply with submittal requirements of the Building & Safety Department. A copy of the reviewed assessment shall be submitted to the Engineering Department in conjunction with the Site Development Plan when it is submitted for plan checking. In addition to the normal set of improvement plans, a "Site Development" plan is required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official and the City Engineer. "Site Development" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements. "Street Parking" plan shall include appropriate signage to implement the "No Parking" 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 on the Public Works Online Engineering Library at http://www.la-guinta.org/publicworks/tractl/z onlinelibrary/0 intropage.htm. 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 8 P , U .. U PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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. 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. 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: PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 9 U } PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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. 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" 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 10 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 GRADING 27. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 28. 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. 29. 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. 30. 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 11 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 31. 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 (6) of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb. 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 perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot from the building pads in adjacent developments. 34. 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. 35. 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. 36. 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 PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codomiz TT32070 COA.doc 12 �� � C PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year) flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall furnish elevation certifications, as required by FEMA, that the above conditions have been met. r)RAINAC;F 37. The applicant shall revise proposed retention basins/and or underground retention systems to comply with the 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. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 38. 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. 39. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leach field or equivalent system approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field 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. 40. 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. 41. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Community Development Director and 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 shall be planted with maintenance free ground cover. For retention basins on individual lots, retention depth shall not exceed two feet. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 13 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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. 46. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. UTILITIES 47. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.1 10 (Utilities), LQMC. 48. 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. 49. 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. 50. 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 14 G PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 51. 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. 52. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan with street type noted in parentheses. A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Jefferson Street (Major Arterial; 120' R/W): No additional street improvement widening is required, except at locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate: a) Bus turnout (if required by Sunline Transit). b) A deceleration/right turn only lane at Primary Entry. The east curb face shall be located fifty nine feet (59') east of the centerline. Other required improvements in the Jefferson Street right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: c) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. d) 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 PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 15 G PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. J U LY 13, 2004 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. e) Reconstruct the existing landscaped median on Jefferson Street to provide for a deceleration lane for left turn in only movements as approved by the City Engineer. f) Establish a benchmark in the Jefferson Street right of way and file a record of the benchmark with the County of Riverside. 2) Avenue 52 (Primary Arterial, Option A; 1 10' R/W): No additional street improvement widening is required, except at locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate: a) Bus turnout (if required by Sunline Transit) b) A deceleration/right turn only lane at Secondary Entry. The south curb face shall be located fifty four feet (54') east of the centerline. Other required improvements in the Avenue 52 right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: c) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. d) 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 PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 16 tG �i PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 not to exceed 250 feet. 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 full street improvements to provide for 36-foot wide travel width measured gutter flow line to gutter flow line where the residential streets are double loaded or construct full street improvements to provide for 28-foot wide travel width measured gutter flow line to gutter flow line where on -street parking is prohibited and the applicant makes provisions for perpetual enforcement of the No Parking restrictions. C. COURTYARD DRIVEWAYS 1) Courtyard driveways shall have a travel width of 26 feet with parking prohibited, and there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors and provisions are established 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. 53. All gated entries shall provide for a three -car minimum stacking capacity for inbound traffic; 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 gain entry into the development can safely make a full turn -around out onto the main street from the gated entry. 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 17 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. J U LY 13, 2004 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. 54. 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/Parking Lots Primary Arterial Major Arterial 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. 4.5" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. 5.5" a.c./6.5" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 55. 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. 56. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Primary Entry (Jefferson Street): Right turn in, right turn out and left turn in movements are permitted. Left turn movements out are prohibited. B. Secondary Entry (Avenue 52): Right turn movements in and out are permitted. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. 56. 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 18 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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 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 park areas. 61. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 62. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community Development Department (CDD), prior to plan 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. 63. 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 PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 19 1 -) 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 streets. PUBLIC SERVICES 64. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer. 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. 70. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 20 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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). FIRE MARSHALL 64. For residential areas, approved standard fire hydrants, located at each intersection and spaced 330 feet apart with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPM for a 2- hour duration at 20 PSI. 65. For any buildings with public access i.e. recreational halls, clubhouses, etc. or buildings with a commercial use i.e. gatehouses, maintenance sheds, apartments, etc. Super fire hydrants are to be placed no closer than 25 feet and not more than 165 feet from any portion of the first floor of said building following approved travel ways around the exterior of the building. Minimum fire flow for these areas would be 1500 GPM for a 2-hour duration at 20 PSI. Actual fire flow will be determined during building plan check. 66. The water mains shall be designed to provide a for a potential fire flow of 2500 GPM and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant connected to any given main of 1500 GPM for a 2-hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. 67. Blue dot retro-reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline b the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 68. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all buildings, other than single family, 5,000 sq. ft. or larger to be fully sprinkled. NFPA 13 Standard. If required, sprinkler plans will need to be submitted to the Fire Department. Area separation walls may not be used to reduce the need for sprinklers. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 69. Any turn or turn -around requires a minimum 38-foot turning radius. 70. All structures shall be accessible from an approved roadway to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior of the first floor. 71. The minimum dimension for access roads and gates is 20 feet clear and unobstructed width and a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches in height. Roads shall not exceed 1,320 feet without secondary access/egress. This access/egress may be restricted to emergency access only however, public egress must be unrestricted. 72. Any gate providing access from a public roadway to a private entry roadway shall be located at least 35 feet setback from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road. Where a one- way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 38-foot turning radius shall be used. 73. Gates shall be automatic, minimum 20 feet in width and shall be equipped with a rapid entry system (KNOX). Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. Automatic gate pins shall be rated with a shear pin force, not to exceed 30 pounds. Gates activated by the rapid entry system shall remain open until closed by the rapid entry system. 74. 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. One set of water plans are to be submitted to the Fire Department for approval. 75. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs. 76. Building plan check is to run concurrent with the City plan check. Submittals are the responsibility of the owner. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz TT32070 COA.doc 22 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32070 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 SHERIFF DEPARTMENT 77. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall review building plans with the Sheriff's Department regarding Vehicle Code requirements, defensible space, and other law enforcement and public safety concerns. All questions regarding the Sheriff's Department should be directed to the Deputy at (760) 863- 8950. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 78. Landscaping plans are to be resubmitted for approval by the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee. 79. Landscaping plans shall comply with the City's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance for this project. Said landscaping plans shall include a complete irrigation system showing location and size of water lines, valves, clock timers, type of sprinklers, etc. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the landscape plans shall also be approved by the Coachella Valley Water District prior to final approval by the Community Development Department. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codomiz TT32070 COA.doc 23 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR FIVE PROTOTYPE UNIT PLANS AND OTHER ANCILLARY FACILITIES CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 APPLICANT: RJT HOMES L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13T" day of July, 2004, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of RJT Homes L.L.C. to approve architectural plans for five new prototype residential plans and other ancillary facilities for construction in Tentative Tract Map 32070, located at the southeast corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street more particularly described as: A.P.N. 772-410-021 AND 772-410-022; AND, WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that the Community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 2004-505), and determined that the proposed Site Development Permit will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact is recommended for certification; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of said Site Development Permit: 1. Compliance with General Plan- The project is in compliance with the land use type and density of the amended General Plan in that the property to be developed is designated Medium High Residential, as proposed. 2. Compliance with Zoning Code- The project is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of the Zoning Code and Specific Plan 2004-070, which requires varied roof heights, and window and door surrounds for flat elevation planes, and multiple facades. P:\Reports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SDP799 Reso.doc j Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Site Development Permit 2004-799 RJT Homes, L.L.C. Adopted July 13, 2004 3. Architectural Design- The architectural design of the project, including but not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, are compatible with surrounding development and related Specific Plan 2004-070. 4. Compliance with CEQA- This request has been assessed in conjunction with Environmental Assessment 2004-505 that was previously certified by the City Council. 5. Site Design- The site design of the project, including but not limited to project entries, interior circulation, pedestrian and bicycle and trail circulation, pedestrian amenities, exterior lighting, and other site design elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City and laid out and provided in compliance with the Zoning Code requirements and related Specific Plan. 6. Landscape Design- New home project landscaping, which will be approved prior to issuance of building permits, will include but not be limited to the location, type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant materials that will be designed so as to provide relief, complement buildings, visually emphasize prominent design elements and vistas, screen undesirable views, provide a harmonious transition between adjacent land uses and between development and open space, provide an overall unifying influence, enhance the visual continuity of the project, complement the surrounding project area and as conditioned will comply with City and CVWD water efficiency, ensuring efficient water use. 7. Unit Sizes- The proposed unit sizes are within the approved range of house sizes allowed in Specific Plan 2004-070 and therefore, acceptable. 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 recommend approval of Site Development Permit 2004-799, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions, attached hereto; PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SDP799 Reso.doc 2 J Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Site Development Permit 2004-799 RJT Homes, L.L.C. Adopted July 13, 2004 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 131h day of July, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SDP799 Reso.doc 3 t PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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 • Coachella Valley Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency 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. I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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. 5. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of thelnfrastructure 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 approved Tentative Tract Map No. 32070, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 8. 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. 9. 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 and courtyard driveways or as approved by IID. Such easement may be reduced to five feet in width with the express written approval of IID. 10. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right- of-ways as follows: PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SDP799 COA.doc 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 A. Jefferson Street (Major Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. B. Avenue 52 (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. 11. Direct vehicular access to Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 from lots with frontage along Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 is restricted, except for those access points identified on the approved 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. 12. 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. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 13. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC. 14. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City. 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codomiz SDP799 COA.doc 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. J U LY 13, 2004 A. Site Development 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. The applicant shall prepare an accessibility assessment on a marked up print of the building floor plan identifying every building egress and notes the 2001 California Building Code accessibility requirements associated with each door. The assessment must comply with submittal requirements of the Building & Safety Department. A copy of the reviewed assessment shall be submitted to the Engineering Department in conjunction with the Site Development Plan when it is submitted for plan checking. In addition to the normal set of improvement plans, a "Site Development" plan is required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official and the City Engineer. "Site Development" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements. 15. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction on the Public Works Online Engineering Library at http://www.la-guinta.org/publicworks/tractl/z onlinelibrary/0 intropage.htm. 16. 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SDP799 COA.doc 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 GRADING 17. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 18. 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. 19. 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. 20. 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 PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SDP799 COA.doc 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 Plan. 21. 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 (6) of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches 0.5") in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb. 22. 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. 23. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot from the building pads in adjacent developments. 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. 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 114 PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codomiz SDP799 COA.doc 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. J U LY 13, 2004 be located within a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year) flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall furnish elevation certifications, as required by FEMA, that the above conditions have been met. r)RAINAr;F 27. The applicant shall revise proposed retention basins/and or underground retention systems to comply with the 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. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 28. 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. 29. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leach field or equivalent system approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field 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. 30. 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. 31. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 32. 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 PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SDP799 COA.doc 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 planted with maintenance free ground cover. For retention basins on individual lots, retention depth shall not exceed two feet. 33. 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. 34. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 35. 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. 36. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. UTILITIES 37. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.1 10 (Utilities), LQMC. 38. 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. 39. 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. 40. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SDP799 COA.doc 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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 41. 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. 42. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan with street type noted in parentheses. A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Jefferson Street (Major Arterial; 120' R/W): No additional street improvement widening is required, except at locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate: a) Bus turnout (if required by Sunline Transit). b) A deceleration/right turn only lane at Primary Entry. The east curb face shall be located fifty nine feet (59') east of the centerline. Other required improvements in the Jefferson Street right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: c) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. d) 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 PARepor's - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codomiz SDP799 COA.doc 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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. e) Reconstruct the existing landscaped median on Jefferson Street to provide for a deceleration lane for left turn in only movements as approved by the City Engineer. f) Establish a benchmark in the Jefferson Street right of way and file a record of the benchmark with the County of Riverside. 2) Avenue 52 (Primary Arterial, Option A; 1 10' R/W): No additional street improvement widening is required, except at locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate: a) Bus turnout (if required by Sunline Transit) b) A deceleration/right turn only lane at Secondary Entry. The south curb face shall be located fifty four feet (54') east of the centerline. Other required improvements in the Avenue 52 right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: c) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. d) 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 PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codomiz SDP799 COA.doc 10 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. J U LY 13, 2004 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. 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 full street improvements to provide for 36-foot wide travel width measured gutter flow line to gutter flow line where the residential streets are double loaded or construct full street improvements to provide for 28-foot wide travel width measured gutter flow line to gutter flow line where on -street parking is prohibited and the applicant makes provisions for perpetual enforcement of the No Parking restrictions. C. COURTYARD DRIVEWAYS 1) Courtyard driveways shall have a travel width of 26 feet with parking prohibited, and there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors and provisions are established 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. 43. All gated entries shall provide for a three -car minimum stacking capacity for inbound traffic; 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 gain entry into the development can safely make a full turn -around out onto the main street from the gated entry. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codomiz SDP799 COA.doc 11 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 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. 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. 44. 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/Parking Lots Primary Arterial Major Arterial 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. 4.5" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. 5.5" a.c./6.5" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 45. 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. 46. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Primary Entry (Jefferson Street): Right turn in, right turn out and left turn in movements are permitted. Left turn movements out are prohibited. B. Secondary Entry (Avenue 52): Right turn movements in and out are permitted. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. 47. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SDP799 COA.doc 12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. J U LY 13, 2004 sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 48. 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 49. 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 50. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC. 51. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. 52. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 53. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community Development Department (CDD), prior to plan 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. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SDP799 COA.doc 13 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 54. 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. PUBLIC SERVICES 55. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 56. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 57. 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. 58. 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. 59. 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 60. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 61. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codomiz SDP799 COA.doc 14 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. J U LY 13, 2004 maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. FEES AND DEPOSITS 62. 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. 63. 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). FIRE MARSHALL 64. For residential areas, approved standard fire hydrants, located at each intersection and spaced 330 feet apart with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPM for a 2- hour duration at 20 PSI. 65. For any buildings with public access i.e. recreational halls, clubhouses, etc. or buildings with a commercial use i.e. gatehouses, maintenance sheds, apartments, etc. Super fire hydrants are to be placed no closer than 25 feet and not more than 165 feet from any portion of the first floor of said building following approved travel ways around the exterior of the building. Minimum fire flow for these areas would be 1500 GPM for a 2-hour duration at 20 PSI. Actual fire flow will be determined during building plan check. 66. The water mains shall be designed to provide a for a potential fire flow of 2500 GPM and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant connected to any given main of 1500 GPM for a 2-hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. 67. 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. 68. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all buildings, other than single family, PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SDP799 COA.doc 15 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 5,000 sq. ft. or larger to be fully sprinkled. NFPA 13 Standard. If required, sprinkler plans will need to be submitted to the Fire Department. Area separation walls may not be used to reduce the need for sprinklers. 69. Any turn or turn -around requires a minimum 38-foot turning radius. 70. All structures shall be accessible from an approved roadway to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior of the first floor. 71. The minimum dimension for access roads and gates is 20 feet clear and unobstructed width and a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches in height. Roads shall not exceed 1,320 feet without secondary access/egress. This access/egress may be restricted to emergency access only however, public egress must be unrestricted. 72. Any gate providing access from a public roadway to a private entry roadway shall be located at least 35 feet setback from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road. Where a one- way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 38-foot turning radius shall be used. 73. Gates shall be automatic, minimum 20 feet in width and shall be equipped with a rapid entry system (KNOX). Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. Automatic gate pins shall be rated with a shear pin force, not to exceed 30 pounds. Gates activated by the rapid entry system shall remain open until closed by the rapid entry system. 74. 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. One set of water plans are to be submitted to the Fire Department for approval. 75. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs. 76. Building plan check is to run concurrent with the City plan check. Submittals are the responsibility of the owner. PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codomiz SDP799 COA.doc 16 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-799 R.J.T. HOMES L.L.C. JULY 13, 2004 SHERIFF DEPARTMENT 77. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall review building plans with the Sheriff's Department regarding Vehicle Code requirements, defensible space, and other law enforcement and public safety concerns. All questions regarding the Sheriff's Department should be directed to the Deputy at (760) 863-8950. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 78. Landscaping plans are to be resubmitted for approval by the Architecture Landscape Review Committee. 79. Landscaping plans shall comply with the City's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance for this project. Said landscaping plans shall include a complete irrigation system showing location and size of water lines, valves, clock timers, type of sprinklers, etc. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the landscape plans shall also be approved by the Coachella Valley Water District prior to final approval by the Community Development Department. 1-,5 PAReports - PC\7-13-2004\RJT Codorniz SDP799 COA.doc 17 ATTACHMENT 40 AVENUE 50th AVENUE ra P W 0 W W I }� W 52nd AVENUE = N O N 3 =a 54th AVENUE AIRPORT BOULEVARD VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE PROJECT LOCATION MAP ROJECT LOCATION ATTACHMENT 3 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee February 4, 2004 2. Committee Members unanimously appr d the design of the project. 3. ' There being no furt questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconde y Committee Members Cunningham/Thorns to ;De opt to Motion 2004-007 recommending approval of Site opment Permit 2004-798, as recommended by staff. nanimously approved G. Site Development Permit 2004-799; a request of RJT Homes, Codorniz LLC for review of architectural plans for four prototype single family units and landscape palette located at the southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52. 1. Planning Manager Oscar Orci presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced Forrest Haag and Chad Myers who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Bobbitt noted the change in land use for this site and the amount of traffic that will be generated. The architecture is nothing outstanding, but meets the need. He asked if the landscape would be maintained by a contractor. Mr. Haag stated yes. 3. Committee Member Thorns complimented the pool area design. 4. Committee Member Cunningham noted parking drives density. This type of project is a good project for the City and the developer has proven to develop excellent products. 5. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2004-008 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2004-799, as recommended by staff and amended: a. Landscaping plans are to be resubmitted for approval by the ALRC. Unanimously approved P G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\2-4-04 WD.doc 7