Loading...
2004 08 10 PC0 . ission Agendas are now %-410; 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 AUGUST 10, 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 2004-060 Beginning Minute Motion 2004-014 I. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call II. 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 July 27, 2004. B. Department Report G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PCAgendaW.doc V. 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 2004-511, SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-073, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31874 Applicant.......... Stonefield Development, Inc. Location........... Northwest corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 53 Request............ Consideration of establishing development principles, guidelines and programs to allow the subdivision of 40 acres into 102 residential lots. Action .............. Continue to September 14, 2004 B. Item ................ TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32371 Applicant.......... Ehline Company Location........... South of Miles Avenue, on the east side of Seeley Drive (proposed extension of Seeley Drive from the north). Request............ Consideration of the subdivision of 8.99 acres into 54 single-family lots. Action .............. Resolution 2004- C. Item ................ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2004-084 Applicant.......... Verizon Wireless Location........... South side of Avenue 48 and 190 feet west of Jefferson Street Request............ Consideration of a 184 square foot one story unmanned telecommunication building and 60 foot high monopalm antenna camouflaged as a palm tree. Action .............. Resolution 2004- G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PCAgendaW.doc D. Item ................ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-502 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32225 Applicant.......... Vince D'Ambra Location........... Northwst corner of Madison Street and Avenue 58 Request............ Consideration of adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and the subdivision of 8.08 acres into 33 residential lots and other common lots. Action .............. Resolution 2004- and Resolution 2004- VI. BUSINESS ITEM: None VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Review of City Council meeting IX. ADJOURNMENT: This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be held on August 24, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PCAgendaW.doc 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, August 10, 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, August 6, 2004. DATED: August 6, 2004 BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California Public Notices The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's office at 777-7025, twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations will be made. If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the 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. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PCAgendaMdoc MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA July 27, 2004 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Kirk who asked former Commissioner Jacques Abels to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Rick Daniels, Kay Ladner, and Chairman Tom Kirk. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to excuse Commissioners Krieger and Quill. C. Chairman Kirk presented a Resolution of Recognition to Jacques Abels and thanked him for his years of service on the Planning Commission. D. Staff present: Planning Manager Oscar Orci, Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston, Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planners Greg Trousdell and Wallace Nesbit, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: A. Mr. Michael Keebler, a consultant representative from the Coachella Valley Unified School District, stated he will be attending future Commission meetings to speak on matters that pertain to the District. 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 July 13. 2004. There being no corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to approve the minutes as submitted. B. Department Report: Planning Manager Oscar Orci gave an update on the revisions to the Highway 111 Design Guideline, procedures for Commissioners attendance at City Council meetings. PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\7-27-04 minutes\7-27-04.doc Planning Commission Minutes July 27, 2004 V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Continued - Site Development Permit 2004-808, Conditional Use Permit 96-028 Amendment #1, and Sign Permit 2004-797; a request of Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. for consideration of architectural plans for a 1,992 square foot one story building addition and a 960 square foot 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 for the property located at 79-900 Highway 1 1 1, the northwest corner of Jefferson Street and Highway 111 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff informed the Commission of a change to Condition #6 as requested by the Public Works Department. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Daniels asked if the applicant was aware of the change in conditions. Staff stated yes. 3. Chairman Kirk asked about the maintenance of the Highway 111 frontage landscaping. Staff stated it has been an issue for Code Compliance with several of the tenants and staff has not been informed of any issues with Home Depot. 4. Commissioner Daniels asked about the reference to the letter from Mr. Dale Evanson of the Fire Department. Staff stated the Fire Department supplies the City with general conditions on proposed projects and again reviews the project during plan check for corrections. 5. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Doug Couper, representing the applicant, stated they have no objections to the conditions, including the added conditions. 6. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. There being no other public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing. PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\7-27-04 minutes\7-27-04.doc 2 Planning Commission Minutes July 27, 2004 7. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-052, approving Conditional Use Permit 96-028, Amendment #1, as recommended: ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Krieger and Quill. ABSTAIN: None. 8. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-053, approving Site Development Permit 2004-808, as amended: a. Condition #6: Additional CVWD easement at the existing driveway at the Vista Grande intersection to provide access to the Sewer Lift Station located in the Whitewater Storm Channel right of way as exhibited in the Jefferson Street Widening Phase II - Jefferson Street Right -of -Way Dedication. The aforementioned easement shall be waived if the applicant accepts an offer of payment for such easement in the amount of $3,103 from the City of La Quinta. b. Property Rights add the following: All above -mentioned right-of-way dedications and/or acceptance of offer shall be made within 30 days of approval of this site Development Permit. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Krieger and Quill. ABSTAIN: None. 9. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to adopt Minute Motion 2004-013, approving Sign Permit 2004-797, as recommended: ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Krieger and Quill. ABSTAIN: None. B. Continued - Environmental Assessment 2003-480 and Tentative Tract Map 31087; a request of Tahiti Partners V, LLC for Certification of a PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\7-27-04 minutes\7-27-04.doc 3 Planning Commission Minutes July 27, 2004 Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and consideration of a subdivision of ± 5 acres into 10 single-family lots for the property located on the south side of Darby Road, ± 1 /4 mile east of Washington Street. 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff noted changes to the conditions as recommended by the Public Works Department. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioners Daniels asked about the requirement for a uniform perimeter wall. Staff stated it would be located along the property line of Darby Road. Staff is requesting a common architectural design for the wall. 3. Chairman Kirk asked about the Phase I Archaeological Report being remanded. Staff explained the Historical Preservation Commission's reasons for remanding the first report back to the applicant. They were asking that specific issues be discussed in more detail in the report. Commissioner Kirk asked how long this took and did the recommendations change from the first report to the second. Staff stated it was submitted to HPC on May 20, 2004 and staff received it back in July, 2004, and no further recommendations were made. 4. Commissioner Daniels noted he thought a development proposal had been reviewed for this site. Staff noted a proposal had been submitted for the area south of this project and it was denied at the Council level. Also, a residential proposal had been proposed for another adjacent area. Staff went on to explain the proposals in this area. 5. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Dan Beal, the applicant, gave a history of the project. It is their intent to build out the site and not develop just the lots. He has reviewed all the conditions including the revisions and has no objections. 6. Chairman Kirk asked why the grading plan did not show any sewer PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\7-27-04 minutes\7-27-04.doc 4 Planning Commission Minutes July 27, 2004 lines. Mr. Beal stated there are no existing sewer lines, but they will flow to Darby Road. They will meet all of CVWD requirements and noted where the existing lines were on the tract map. Chairman Kirk asked where this is done in the process as it is not on the map. Staff noted it would be accomplished through the final map process. If it required a redesign of the map, it would be brought back through the approval process. Chairman Kirk asked where the retaining walls would be located. Mr. Beal stated they would be on the eastern boundary and indicated them on the map. Discussion followed. 7. Chairman Kirk asked if the Historic Preservation Commission process caused any unneeded delay. Mr. Beal stated he was surprised, but it was necessary. 8. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. There being no other public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing. 9. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-054, recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 2003-480, as recommended: ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Krieger and Quill. ABSTAIN: None. 10. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-055, recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 31087, as amended: a. Condition #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 streets. Such easement may be reduced to five feet in width with the express written approval of IID. b. Condition #10: The applicant shall retain ownership of all common lot areas to include street landscaping lots and retention basins, unto itself, its heirs, or assignees. PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\7-27-04 minutes\7-27-04.doc 5 Planning Commission Minutes July 27, 2004 C. Condition #67: The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping on Darby Road and Lot "A", the retention basin and all related appurtenances to include sand filter and landscaping, access drives and sidewalks. The applicant shall create a Homeowners' Association or a Maintenance Association for such continuous and perpetual maintenance. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Krieger and Quill. ABSTAIN: None. C. Environmental Assessment 2004-495 and Tentative Tract Map 31852; a request of Ehline Company for consideration of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and the subdivision of 8.5 acres into 14 single-family lots for the property located at the northwest corner of Madison Street and Avenue 52. 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Larry Ellison, representing the Ehline Company, stated they had no objections to the conditions as proposed. 3. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. Mr. John Gamlin, representing The Hideaway, stated his concerns about the street improvements for Avenue 52, screening requirements for maintenance buildings, as well as the lighting. They would like to ensure they comply with the Dark Sky Ordinance. He also sees no reimbursement condition for the street improvements they have completed. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated noted the process that would need to be followed to receive what was due them through the Developer Impact Fees. Planning Manager Oscar Orci stated that in regard to the landscaping lighting requirements, they will be reviewed during PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\7-27-04 minutes\7-27-04.doc 6 Planning Commission Minutes July 27, 2004 the plan check process in accordance with the conditions. The landscape plans will be brought back for approval. 4. There being no other public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing. 5. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-056, recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 2003-495, as recommended: ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Krieger and Quill. ABSTAIN: None. 6. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-057, recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 31852, as amended: a. Condition #13.A.: Avenue 52 and Madison Street (primary Arterial, Option A) — A minimum 20 foot from the R/W-P/L b. Condition #52.A.2.c: 10-foot wide Multi -Use Trail. The applicant shall construct a meandering multi -use trail along the Madison Street frontage within the proposed landscaped setback. Additionally, the applicant's design for the at - grade street crossing of the multi -purpose trail shall incorporate use of surface(s) other than concrete and be approved by the Public Works Department. The location and design of the multi -purpose trail shall also be approved by the Public Works Department. The multi -use trail, trail signs, and the split rail fence shall be completed prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for the first residence. Bonding for the fence to be installed shall be posted prior to final map approval. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Krieger and Quill. ABSTAIN: None. D. Street Name Change 2004-018; a request of ND La Quinta Partners for consideration of a street name change from Via Cc to Via Montecito and Via DD to Via Mallorca for streets within The Hideaway located on the PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\7-27-04 minutes\7-27-04.doc 7 Planning Commission Minutes July 27, 2004 east side of Jefferson Street, north of Avenue 54. 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. 2. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. John Gamlin, representing ND La Quinta Partners, gave a presentation on the project. 3. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. There being no other public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing. 4. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-058, recommending approval of Street Name Change 2004-018, as recommended: ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Krieger and Quill. ABSTAIN: None. E. Tentative Tract Map 32068; a request of Marvin Investments for certification of the subdivision of four acres into 12 single-family lots for the property located on the south side of Mandarina, west of Pomelo, within the Citrus Country Club. 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 amendments to several conditions being recommended by the Public Works Department. 2. There being no questions of staff Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Wells Marvin, representing the applicant, stated he was available to answer any questions. He has no objections to the conditions as proposed. He did note the on -site storm water drainage would go to the golf course. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated that the condition could be amended to state that if there was PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\7-27-04 minutes\7-27-04.doc 8 Planning Commission Minutes July 27, 2004 suitable offsite location, it would be allowed. 3. There being no other public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing. 4. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-059, recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 32068, as amended: a. Condition #10: Add, "Additionally, the applicant shall not build any structures within ten feet south of the Mandarina Street right-of-way." b. Condition #41: Add, "Additionally, the applicant shall provide a 4-foot landscape planter along the existing service road located south of the tentative tract as a buffer between Lots 6-9 and any CMU wall to be constructed. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Krieger and Quill. ABSTAIN: None. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. Vlll. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Discussion regarding Commission meeting date to be cancelled. Following discussion, it was determined the Commission would cancel the meeting of August 24, 2004. IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on August 10, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned 8:06 p.m., on July 27, 2004. Respectfully submitted, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary, City of La Quinta, California PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\7-27-04 minutes\7-27-04.doc 9 PH #A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: AUGUST 10, 2004 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-51 1, SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-073 AND TENTATIVE TRACT 31874 APPLICANT: STONEFIELD DEVELOPMENT, INC. ENGINEER: THE KEITH COMPANIES LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF MONROE STREET AND AVENUE 53 REQUEST: SPECIFIC PLAN TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, PRINCIPLES, GUIDELINES AND PROGRAMS TO ALLOW SUBDIVISION OF 40 ACRES INTO 102 RESIDENTIAL LOTS FOR PROPERTY TO BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA CONTINUATION OF BEARING This item was advertised prior to completion of the environmental review and completion of the revised Specific Plan document. As of this writing, the information has not been completed for the Planning Commission's review. Therefore, it is necessary to continue this item to the meeting of September 14, 2004. RECOMMENDATION By Minute Motion continue this item to the meeting of September 14, 2004. Attachment: 1. Location Map Prepared by: Stan Sawa, Principal Planner T- i PH #B STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: AUGUST 10, 2004 CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 32371 APPLICANT: EHLINE COMPANY ENGINEER: MAINIERO, SMITH AND ASSOCIATES, INC. LOCATION: SOUTH OF MILES AVENUE, ON THE EAST SIDE OF SEELEY DRIVE (PROPOSED EXTENSION OF SEELEY DRIVE FROM THE NORTH) REQUEST: SUBDIVISION OF 8.99 ACRES INTO 54 SINGLE-FAMILY AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS LOTS IN THE RM (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP HAS BEEN ASSESSED IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-436 PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 2001-055, AMENDMENT #1, WHICH WAS CERTIFIED ON JUNE 3, 2003. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS ARE PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162 OF THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: MDR (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, UP TO 8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) ZONING: RM (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USES: NORTH: P AND RM / FUTURE PARK AND SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SOUTH: TC / FUTURE BOUTIQUE HOTEL PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\Ehline TT 32371\tt 32371 pc rpt.doc EAST: LDR / SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WEST: 0 / FUTURE MEDICAL OFFICE COMPLEX BACKGROUND The 14.9 acre project site is south of Miles Avenue and east of Washington Street (Attachment 1). It is a part of the 50 acre Centre Pointe mixed -use project originally approved by the City Council on February 5, 2002, and amended on June 3, 2003. This residential project is part of the Specific Plan that includes a hotel and casitas units, as well as 22 additional residential units, two restaurants, a neighborhood park, a medical office/surgical facility and a development containing 26 sanctuary villas. A Disposition and Development Agreement has also been recorded on the property between the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency and CP Development La Quinta, LLC, the master developer for the Centre Pointe project. PROJECT REQUEST The applicant is proposing to subdivide the 8.99-acre site into 54 single-family residential lots (Attachment 2). Several miscellaneous lots would be created, primarily for common areas, landscaping and the private street. Forty of the lots will be restricted for the sale of homes to moderate -income families at an affordable housing cost. The proposed density of this subdivision is six dwelling units per acre which is within the maximum eight dwelling units per acre range allowed in the Zoning District and General Plan land use designation on the property. The existing zoning on the property requires a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. However, the approved Specific Plan permits 2,975 and 2,200 square foot lots for the single-family detached units and cluster courtyard villas, respectively. All proposed lots exceed these minimum lot size requirements with the single-family detached unit lots 6,000 to 9,253 square feet in size. The single-family detached unit lots require a minimum 50-foot lot frontage while the cluster courtyard villa lot requires a minimum 40-foot lot frontage. The project is proposed to be improved with a private 25 ± foot wide loop street with a card access security gate at the project entry on the new Seeley Drive that will connect to Miles Avenue and Washington Street. The lots along the outside of this loop street will be the larger lots. The smaller cluster courtyard villa lots will be located along the sites core area, three cul-de-sac streets and a short frontage street. Several cut outs in the street are shown to allow parallel street parking. On -site storm water is shown draining to the Coachella Valley Whitewater Channel to the south. An easement will need to be recorded to cross the boutique hotel lot between the subject property and channel. PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\Ehline TT 32371\tt 32371 pc rpt.doc The proposed Tentative Tract Map shows lot pad grade elevations for the lots as well as those of the existing single-family lots to the east. With the exception of proposed Lot 25 at the north end, the lots adjacent to the east property line are lower, or at the same grade as those existing residences to the east. Lot 25 is shown at .2 feet higher than the lot behind it. These pad elevations are in compliance with those reviewed in February, 2002, during processing of the hotel and casitas plans. Housing and landscaping plans have not yet been submitted for approval. Common area amenities such as swimming pools, barbeques, and passive play areas will be provided as required in the Development Agreement that applies to the Centre Pointe project. Public Notice This map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 31, 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. ISSUES Lots 1, 11, 12, 13, and 25, need to be widened to meet the minimum 50-foot lot width requirement of the Specific Plan. Currently, the interior private street widths are shown at 29-feet wide including a wedge curb. The Specific Plan requires a 32-foot curb face to curb face, which allows on -street parking on one side. Therefore, conditions of approval have been added to address the requirements. The three cul de sac streets that serve the 40-foot wide lots in the center of the site do not show a turnaround at their west ends. The Fire Marshal is requiring an acceptable turnaround for emergency vehicles. This turnaround is also needed for trash truck access. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS Findings necessary to recommend approval of this request can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution, subject to the attached Conditions of approval. PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\Ehline TT 32371\tt 32371 pc rpt.doc RECOMMENDATION Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004- , recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 32371, subject to attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. TT 32371 map exhibit Prepared by: Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\Ehline TT 32371\tt 32371 pc rpt.doc 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 8.99 + ACRES INTO 54 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND MISCELLANEOUS LOTS CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 32371 EHLINE COMPANY WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 10th day of August, 2004, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Ehline Company, Inc. for the subdivision of 8.99 acres into 54 single-family residential lots and other miscellaneous lots, located south of Miles Avenue, on the east side of Seeley Drive, more particularly described as: PORTION OF APN'S 604-040-023 AND -037 WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map has been assessed in conjunction with an Addendum to Environmental Assessment 2001-436 prepared for Specific Plan 2001-055, Amendment #1, certified on June 3, 2003. No changed circumstances or conditions are proposed which would trigger the preparation of subsequent environmental analysis pursuant to Section 15162 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act; 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 32371: 1 . The Tentative Tract Map and its improvement and design are consistent with the General Plan and approved Specific Plan in that the lot and street design are in conformance with applicable goals, policies, and development standards, such as lot size, and will provide adequate infrastructure and public utilities. 2. The design of the subdivision and its proposed improvements are not likely to create environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or their habitat because mitigation measures and conditions have been incorporated into the project approval to mitigate impacts. 3. The design of the subdivision and subsequent improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems because urban infrastructure orto ,n_-)nna\rh1inP rr 32371\tt 32371 Pc res.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Tentative Tract Map 32371 Ehline Company Adopted: 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 32371 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 10th day of August, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: OSCAR ORCI, Planning Manager City of La Quinta, California P:\Reports - PC\8-10-2004\Ehline TT 32371\tt 32371 pc res.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company 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"), Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code ("LQMC"), and the approved Specific Plan 2001-055, Amendment No. 1 and Tentative Parcel Map No. 31116. The City of La Quinta's Municipal Code can be accessed on the City's Web Site at www.la-quinta.org. 3. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain any necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley 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 Management PAstan\centre Pointe\tt 32371 pc coa.doc E„ Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: 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. 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. :I:\stan\centre pointe\tt 32371 pc coa.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: 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) Seeley Drive (Non -conforming Collector Street, 80' ROW) — The required eighty feet (80') right of way dedication for a total 80-foot ultimate developed right of way from Washington Street to Miles Avenue shown on the approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 31116. Additional right of way to accommodate the roundabout at the proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 32371 access allowed per the approved Specific Plan 2001-055, Amendment No. 1 and as conditioned of the approved Tentative Parcel Map 31116. 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: 'Astan\centre pointeut 32371 pc coa.doc i_; - . U Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: A. PRIVATE STREETS Private Residential Streets measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line shall have a 28-foot travel width with on -street parking prohibited, 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. 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. 12. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, roundabout intersection and other features contained in the approved construction plans. 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 the Imperial Irrigation District. 15. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of- ways as follows: A. Seeley Drive (Non -conforming Collector Street, 80' ROW) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L per the approved Specific Plan 2001-055, Amendment No. 1. This landscaping setback shall be a separate lot and not a part of Lots 1, 2, and B. 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. PAstan\centre pointett 32371 pc coa.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: 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 Seeley Drive from lots with frontage along Seeley Drive is restricted, except for those access points identified on the Tentative Tract Map, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final tract map. 18. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. 19. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Tentative Tract Map and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. FINAL MAPS 20. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a standard 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. 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 \stan\centre pointeAt 32371 pc coa.doc `� Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: 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 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. B. On -Site Street Plan: Vertical C. On -Site Rough Grading Plan D. On -Site Precise Grading Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' 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. 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 "Precise Grading" plan is required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official and the City Engineer. 'Astantentre pointe\tt 32371 pc coa.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: "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. 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-guinta.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. 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. Depending on the timing of the development of this Tentative Tract Map, and the status of the off -site improvements at the time, the applicant may be required to: A. Construct certain off -site improvements. 3Astaftentre pointeltt 32371 pc coa.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: 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. 29. If the applicant elects to utilize the secured agreement alternative, the applicant shall submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed on -site and off -site improvements, including an estimate for the final survey monumentation, for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Such estimates shall conform to the unit cost schedule adopted by City resolution, or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs shall be approved by the City Engineer. At the time the applicant submits its detailed construction cost estimates for conditional approval of the Final Map by the City Council, the applicant shall also submit one copy each of an 8-1 /2" 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. 30. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development, or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. 'Astaftentre pointeltt 32371 pc coa.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: M.OU11191i0[ei 31. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 32. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 33. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC, and D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES stormwater discharge permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls), LQMC. All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the Final Map that a soils report has been prepared in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit. 34. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 35. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the Plstaftentre pointeltt 32371 pc coa.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: 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. 36. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 37. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot from the building pads in adjacent developments. 38. 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. 39. 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. 40. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 41. 41. "Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report for approved Specific Plan 2001-055, Amendment No. 1 and as conditioned of the approved Tentative Parcel Map 31116. F R\stan\centre pointeltt 32371 pc coa.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: 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. The nuisance water percolation system shall be designed/sized to accommodate nuisance water produced by residential uses and any domestic well sites located within the project area. 43. 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. 44. 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. 45. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 46. 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. 47. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 48. When an applicant proposes discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to the issuance of any grading, construction or building permit, and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this tentative parcel map excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the final development CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. ':lstan\centre pointe\tt 32371 pc coa.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: 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. 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 52. 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. 53. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations that will convey water without ponding, and provide lateral containment of dust and residue during street sweeping operations. If a wedge or rolled curb design is approved, the lip at the flowline shall be near vertical with a 1 /8" batter and a minimum height of 0.1'. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to standard curb height prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot. 54. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the Specific Plan 2001-055, Amendment No. 1 (street type noted in parentheses.) and if Street Improvements are not completed by Tentative Tract Map No. 31116. A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Seeley Drive (Non -conforming Collector Street, 80' ROW): 'Astanlcentre pointeltt 32371 pc coa.doc �_ Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: Widen the east side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Tentative Map boundary to its ultimate width on the east side as specified in the Specific Plan 2001-055, Amendment No. 1 and Tentative Parcel Map 31116 and the requirements of these conditions. The east curb face shall be located twenty-eight feet (28') east of the centerline, except at locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate: a) Roundabout at the Residential Parcel accesses as approved by the Public Works Department during the improvement plan approval process. Other required improvements in the Seeley Drive 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. c) 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. d) Full width of a 12-foot wide raised landscaped median adjacent to the Tentative Tract Map boundary except for variable widths as needed for the aforementioned roundabout at the project entrance. 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) Private Residential Streets measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line shall have a 28-foot travel width with on -street parking is 3:\stan\centre pointet 32371 pc coa.doc t Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: 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. 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 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. Collector 4.0" a.c /5.0" 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: ':\stan\centre pointe\tt 32371 pc coa.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: Primary Entry (Seeley Drive): Right turn movements in and out are permitted. Left turn movements in and out are restricted based on the prohibitive nature of the roundabout at the project entry. 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. 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. Astantentre pointet 32371 pc coa.doc �' Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company 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. 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 P:\stan\centre pointeut 32371 pc coa.doc j Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. 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). MISCELLANEOUS 74. Lots 1, 11, 12, 13, and 25 shall have a minimum 50-foot lot frontage as required by Specific Plan 2001-055, Amendment #1. 75. Perimeter walls shall be compatible with existing and/or proposed walls in the area of the project site and approval by the Community Development Department. Walls shall be placed to provide adequate intersection visibility. 76. Proposed street name with a minimum of two alternative names shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval. Names shall be approved prior to recordation of Final Map. 77. 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. 78. Minor lot configuration modifications required to comply with these conditions and requirements shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department and Public Works Department. 79. Production home designs and front yard and common area landscaping requires approval of a Site Development Permit application by the Planning Commission. Site amenities as required by the applicable Specific Plan and Disposition and Development Agreement shall be provided and included in the plans approval. 80. The applicant shall provide a minimum of 26 feet clear road width along Lots 52 through 54 to accommodate vehicle ingress and egress to garages/parking stalls. FIRE MARSHAL 81. 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. :\stantentre pointeltt 32371 pc coa.doc S Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Conditions of Approval — Recommended Tentative Tract Map 32371 — Ehline Company Adopted: 82. Blue dot retro-ref lectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 83. Streets may not dead-end without an approved turn -around 84. Any turn or turn -around requires a minimum 38-foot outside turning radius. 85. All structures shall be accessible from an approved roadway to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior of the first floor. 86. 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. 87. 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. 88. 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. 89. 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. 90. 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. 91. Building plan check is to run concurrent with the City plan check. Submittals are the responsibility of the owner. \staftentre pointett 32371 pc coa.doc ' PH #C PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: AUGUST 10, 2004 CASE NO: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2004-084 APPLICANT: VERIZON WIRELESS REQUEST: APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A 184 SQUARE FOOT ONE- STORY UNMANNED TELECOMMUNICATION BUILDING AND 60-FOOT HIGH MONOPALM ANTENNA LOCATION: PROPERTY OWNER: REPRESENTATIVE: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: SURROUNDING LAND USES: SOUTH SIDE OF AVENUE 48 APPROXIMATELY 190 FEET WEST OF JEFFERSON STREET IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT (IID) COMPASS TECHNOLOGY (LAURA BISHOP) THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32) IN THAT THIS IS AN IN - FILL DEVELOPMENT SITE SURROUNDED BY URBAN SERVICES AND MAJOR THOROUGHFARES IMPROVEMENTS. GOLF COURSE OPEN SPACE NORTH: ACROSS AVENUE 48, MIRAFLORES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SOUTH: RANCHO LA QUINTA COUNTRY CLUB GOLF COURSE WITH PRIVATE RESIDENCES BEING APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET FROM THE IID PARCEL EAST: PARKWAY IMPROVEMENTS FOR RANCHO LA QUIINTA WEST: RANCHO LA QUINTA COUNTRY CLUB GOLF COURSE LEGAL: APN 649-100-010 BACKGROUND: The project site, located on the south side of Avenue 48 approximately 190 feet west of Jefferson Street (Attachment 1), is developed with an electric utility substation that is owned and operated by the Imperial Irrigation District (IID). Overhead transmission lines supply 92 kV electric service to commercial and residential customers. Security fencing for the substation consists of seven- and eight -foot high chain link that is topped with three -strands of barbed wire. Off -site landscaping improvements, within Rancho La Quinta, provide screening of the unmanned IID buildings and a majority of the mechanical equipment for residential properties to the south. A six-foot wide sidewalk exists on Avenue 48. In the last few months, parkway landscaping has been added to IID's property to match the Rancho La Quinta Country Club improvements, consisting of turf, shade trees (approximately 24' on center with uplighting) and colorful groundcover. Evergreen trees have also been planted on the north side of the chain link fence, and eventually the fence will not be visible from the street because the trees are spaced three feet apart and will cover the fence. Masonry walls, in varying heights, flank the Avenue 48 driveway entrance. Bougainvillea vines have been planted along the easterly masonry wall at 15-foot intervals. PROJECT REQUEST: Verizon Wireless is requesting approval to install a 60-foot high digital cellular telephone antenna inside a 1.8-acre IID site (Attachment 2). The monopole antenna is designed to replicate a palm tree (e.g., flexible green resin palm fronds) with the support pole covered in brown fiberglass bark. Three mast arms for the 12 antennas are proposed along with a 2'-0" diameter microwave dish within the palm frond canopy. The new improvements are located at the southeast corner of the parcel, approximately 277 feet from the Avenue 48 property line (See Attachment 4 for the applicant's Photo Simulation exhibits). The applicant also proposes installing an unmanned equipment building at the southeast corner of the site measuring 11.5 feet wide by 16 feet long. This structure is clad in stucco and does not exceed 10'-1 " high. A 12-foot access driveway is planned to connect the building site to Avenue 48. On the south side of the building are wall mounted air-conditioning units. Security fencing, consisting of chain link and masonry walls, is proposed around the equipment building and monopalm. The communication site will utilize both digital and analog technologies to provide voice, e-mail, and Internet access. The system also features a locator device that connects 911 calls to local police and fire departments. Verizon Wireless states the IID site is needed to improve service based on three factors: "1) market demand; 2) system capacity requirements for a specific geographic area; and 3) the need to provide continuous coverage from one site to another in a particular geographic region." The site location and antenna height are determined by an engineering study, which examines topography and geographic features. Public Notice The case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 28, 2004, and mailed to surrounding property owners and residents within 500 feet as required by Section 9.210.020 of the Zoning Ordinance. To date, one letter has been received (See Attachment 3). Public Agency Review A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City Departments on June 9, 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. Zoning Code Provisions Under Chapters 9.130 and 9.170 of the Zoning Code, the small equipment building is required to be located 20 feet from the property boundaries while the monopalm base requires a 85-foot setback (i.e., tower height + 25 feet = 85'-0"). The applicant was informed of these Code provision on June 11, 2004. The Community Development Department has received a letter, dated June 23, 2004, stating that Verizon is pursuing a Rancho La Quinta property easement to allow the proposed project improvements without having to relocate the building and monopalm farther away from the property line boundaries and closer to IID electric facilities. To date, no new information has been received concerning the availability of a Rancho La Quinta Country Club easement. See Condition #19. Public Utility Commission (PUC) Under Appendix A (Section II) of General Order 159 of the PUC of the State of California, the "Commission delegates its authority to regulate the location and design of cellular facilities to local agencies, except in those instances when there is a clear conflict with statewide interests. In those instances, the Commission will review the need to preempt local jurisdiction, allowing local agencies and citizens an opportunity to present their positions. The cellular utility will have the burden of proof to demonstrate that accommodating to local agency requirements for any specific site would frustrate the Commission's objectives. If the cellular utility is able to prove this point, the Commission will preempt local jurisdiction pursuant to its authority under Article IX, Section 8 of the California Constitution." Verizon Wireless states the FCC has "allocated 60 MHz of the radio spectrum to Verizon Wireless for the provision of Cellular services. The frequency at which the Verizon Wireless system transmits and receives signals is 835 to 895 MHz. The service wattage for the facility will be between 200 and 400 watts and will have a maximum Effective Radiated Power (ERP) of approximately 53 uW/cm2 (microwatts per centimeter squared), which is significantly lower than the maximum allowable public exposure standard of 550 uW/cm2 as set by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE)." Verizon also states the proposed facility has been designed to "not interfere with the surrounding properties or their uses, and will not cause interference with any electronic equipment, to include telephones, televisions, or radios." Existing Monopalm Sites Currently, there are a few monopalm antennas within the City that have been approved by the Planning Commission, including two on the Highway 111 commercial corridor in the vicinity of Adams Street. ISSUES: The Planning Commission may require Verizon to allow another service provider the opportunity to locate on the proposed monopalm. Should the Commission desire to require this determination, a condition is required. A monopine antenna can support additional service providers, whereas the number of users is limited for a monopalm. To date, no telecommunication company has applied to build a monopine in the City, probably due to palm trees being heavily used for agriculture purposes and resort residential developments. Other local valley cities also have allowed the monopalm design because it is an attractive product that has more visual appeal than the metal tower structures that were traditionally built 50 years ago for radio and TV stations. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: This project is being proposed to enhance service coverage needs for voice, e-mail and Internet access requirements for Coachella Valley customers. The Verizon Wireless facility will be unmanned and will not require any water, waste treatment, or management of hazardous materials. Findings necessary to approve this project are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ approving Conditional Use Permit 2004-084, subject to the attached finding and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Site Plan 3. Letter from Mr. Moen 4. 11 " by 17" Exhibits (Commission only) Transmitted by: Greg ousdell, Associate Planner V ,� PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A 60- FOOT HIGH MONOPALM COMMUNICATION ANTENNA AND 184 SQ. FT. ONE STORY UNMANNED EQUIPMENT BUILDING ON A PORTION OF A 1.8-ACRE IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT ELECTRIC POWER SUBSTATION SITE, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2004-084 APPLICANT: VERIZON WIRELESS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 10" day of August, 2004, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Verizon Wireless to install a 60-foot high monopalm communication antenna and unmanned one story equipment building (184 sq. ft.) on the south side of Avenue 48 and 190 feet west of Jefferson Street in an Golf Course Open Space land use area, more particularly described as: APN 649-100-010 (Portions of Parcels 18 & 19 of Parcel Map 20469) WHEREAS, The Community Development Department has determined that this project is Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15332 (Class 32) in that this is an in -fill development site surrounded by urban services and major thoroughfares improvements; and WHEREAS, on June 10, 2004, the Community Development Department mailed case file materials to all affected agencies for their review and comment. All written comments are on file with the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the public hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 28, 2004, for the August 10, 2003 Planning Commission meeting as prescribed by Section 9.200.110 (Public Notice Procedure) of the Zoning Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners and residents within 500 feet of the site; 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 Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Section 9.210.020 of the Zoning Code: PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\Verizon CUP\Reso CUP84.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditional Use Permit 2004-084, Verizon Wireless August 10, 2004 Page 2 1. Consistency with General Plan. The design and improvements of the proposed monopalm are consistent with La Quinta General Plan (Chapter 7) that requires utilities and communication facilities to blend in with the surrounding improvements and insures residents have access to reliable services such as wireless telephones. This communication antenna is designed to replicate a Date Palm tree to be compatible with existing mature landscaping thereby lessening its visibility from surrounding public thoroughfares. The proposed antenna is located over 300-feet to the north of existing Rancho La Quinta houses ensuring adequate space separation between both land uses. 2. Consistency with Zoning Code. The proposed monopalm antenna and equipment building are consistent with current standards of the Zoning Code (Chapters 9.130 and 9.170) in that potential adverse visual effects have been mitigated by design of the structures through the use of Date Palm trees, fencing, and other man-made structures. 3. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The monopalm antenna and equipment building are not likely to cause serious public health problems, or adversely impact the general public welfare or safety, in that the site is currently developed with a regional electrical power substation and conditions are being imposed to ensure consistency with surrounding land uses for the 1.8-acre parcel. Based on information from the City's General Plan, this site is located approximately 16 miles from the San Andreas earthquake fault which means groundshaking activities occur, but do not preclude development because of soils stabilizations measures. Site flooding is unlikely based on flood insurance maps on file with the City's Public Works Department and information received from the Coachella Valley Water District. Roadway noises will not impact the communication site, as the building structure is unmanned and located 200 feet or more from Arterial thoroughfares. As the site is approximately 2.8 miles south of the Bermuda Dunes Airport, Verizon Wireless must obtain a clearance from the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) that the monopalm will not impact air travel. As the monopalm is less than 150 feet tall, Verizon should not have a problem securing an FAA entitlement in that existing overhead utility lines in the area are placed at a similar height to the monopalm. Based on the City's General Plan EIR, the project is not within an area designated for endangered, rare or threatened wildlife species. 4. Compatibility with Surrounding Uses. The proposed Verizon improvements are located over 300-feet to the north of existing Rancho La Quinta houses P:\Reports - PC\8-10-2004\Verizon CUP\Reso CUP84.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditional Use Permit 2004-084, Verizon Wireless August 10, 2004 Page 3 ensuring adequate space separation between both land uses. The monopalm will be screened by existing landscape improvements. Monopalm-type telecommunication antennas are one of the most architecturally attractive tower facilities available and are visually appealing for urban areas, especially abutting Date Palm trees. 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 in -fill project, as designed, is consistent with the guidelines of Section 15322 (Class 32) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Therefore, the project is not detrimental to public health and safety services or sensitive to environmental wildlife habitats; and 3. That it does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit 2004-084 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 10th day of August, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\Verizon CUP\Reso CUP84.doc L Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditional Use Permit 2004-084, Verizon Wireless August 10, 2004 Page 4 ATTEST: OSCAR ORCI, Planning Manager City of La Quinta, California PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\Verizon CUP\Reso CUP84.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2004-084, VERIZON WIRELESS AUGUST 10, 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) • Public Utilities Commission (PUC) • Federal Communications Commission (FCC) • Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) 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. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site. P:\Reports - PC\8-10-2004\Verizon CUP\cond CUP84 Verizon2004.doc Cl Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Conditional Use Permit 2004-084 August 10, 2004 Page 2 GRADING 3. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 4. 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. 5. 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 grading plan 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. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide a building pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. 7. 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 Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Conditional Use Permit 2004-084 August 10, 2004 Page 3 valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. PARKING/ACCESS POINTS 8. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials): Access Driveway 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b. 9. Genera► access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: Access Driveway - The applicant shall use the existing access to the IID Substation site. The access driveway shall be a paved surface from Avenue 48 to the access gate. The applicant shall provide a decorative access gate to replace the existing chain link fence gate to be approved by the Engineering and Community Development Departments. QUALITY ASSURANCE 10. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. 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 Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Conditional Use Permit 2004-084 August 10, 2004 Page 4 surveyor certifying to the accuracy revise the CAD or raster -image file MAINTENANCE s 14. 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 15. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. FIRE DEPARTMENT 16. A minimum 2A-10BC fire extinguisher shall be mounted on the inside of the equipment building. 17. A KNOX padlock shall be installed on the gate and a KNOX key box installed on the building. In lieu of the KNOX padlock, a key storage box may be mounted at the gate entrance with both gate and building keys. Please contact the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff (c/o Dale Evenson, Fire Safety Specialist) at (760) 863-8886 if you have any questions. MISCELLANEOUS 18. This permit shall expire one year from the effective date of approval, as defined in Section 9.200.060, 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, July 10, 2005. 19. Building and monopalm setbacks shall comply with the rules and regulations of Chapters 9.130 and 9.170 of the Zoning Code. An easement can be secured restricting development on the Rancho La Quinta golf course in order to satisfy the requirements of Section 9.170.060 (Items C and D). The recorded easement shall run concurrently with the subject improvements. ~d, Planning Commission Resolution 2004-_ Conditions of Approval — Recommended Conditional Use Permit 2004-084 August 10, 2004 Page 5 The recorded easement may only improvements are removed, or if, modified to permit such changes, Manager or City Attorney. be extinguished or modified when the City's Zoning Code standards and subject to approval by the the are City 20. A minimum of two paved parking spaces shall be provided in close proximity to the equipment building as require by the Zoning Code. 21. The synthetic palm fronds shall extend a minimum of three feet beyond the communication antennas. Placement of the palm fronds shall be heaviest around the antenna assembly to guarantee that off -site locations (e.g., 200 feet and beyond) do not see the telecommunication equipment. A visual inspection by the Community Development Department shall be required before a Certificate of Occupancy permit is issued by the Building and Safety Department. 22. If the existing Rancho La Quinta landscape improvements abutting the Verizon site are removed in the future, the applicant shall install replacement vegetation around their lease site pursuant to the requirements of the Zoning Code. 23. 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. CITY OF LA QUINTA ` � rPR rat se 500 FT. RADIUS MAP cmm GC MAPPING SERVICE A aw omw mm DAYM 4 - so - 64 711 MISSION STREET SUITE B SOUTH PASADENA CA 91030 oYY HOOKt3rI11 t• •zoo (026)441 - 1080 ----------------------- 48T- AVE Wrs or t85 m Pftmc pny� p/ aap[lIC tColpx.24 UnnAZ ]S .I xY PptM �otanroc tttr ta• +as vczr M�1 ¢tv.nw xt' 1••va eel Posner 6 t)pnwplw.lFS Un1110E 1T .t' SS.Y nO3 IWOn� 11S b' p7Y WMST (Nb]7) s.0.B. pwT df 1EIMN5 v u.0 —1 uILI 4Lpli nnE w[C,gwG SUM OES Tnw cowPrttvtra (arilaM. nrswvtcc a[caPosl MPro[A nxs wr[n Aa4 a�5t5. vtnri.tr.E/nncsrt nllf ro wPtu. u�fRRs uo urtCT P.s a®tom n-• vuna5 pots �� ATTACHMENT 2 — m w P.SEIOt --- � {yPR Ol lESsat4 pnpPpin GRAPHIC SCALE ( YI PST ) t itte6 � Sn n. ATTACHMENT 3 City of La Quinta Planning Commission Community Development Department City Hall Council Chambers 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 44 Cascade Key Bellevue, WA 98006 July 28, 2004 Subject: Conditional Use Permit 2004-084; Notice of Public Hearing on August 10, 2004 Dear Sirs/Madams, My wife and I own a house located at 79-880 Rancho La Quinta Drive, La Quinta, CA. The purpose of this letter is to request that any permit issued to Verizon Wireless, pursuant to Conditional Use Permit 2004-084, require Verizon Wireless to plant sufficient landscaping to obstruct the one story telecommunications building from the view of the houses located on Rancho La Quinta Drive. If the planned building is within the view of the referenced houses, our property values will be adversely affected. By requiring the requested landscaping as a condition of issuing the permit, the adverse impact on our property values will be mitigated. In addition, Verizon Wireless currently has an electric power substation on subject parcel, where the planned one story building is to be located, which has structures that are in excess of 12 feet high. I also request that as a condition of issuing the subject permit, that Verizon Wireless be required to further landscape in front of the power substation to hide those structures from view from the houses on Rancho La Quinta Drive. Thank you for your consideration. Please advise, at the above address, of the Commission decision in this matter. �Sincerely Richard J. Moen PH #D STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: AUGUST 10, 2004 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-502 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32225 REQUEST: 1) CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;AND 2) SUBDIVISION OF 8.08 ACRES INTO 33 RESIDENTIAL LOTS APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: VINCE D' AMBRA LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF MADISON STREET AND AVENUE 58 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-502 WAS PREPARED FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 32225 IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS RECOMMENDED THAT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BE CERTIFIED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) ZONING: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-502 WAS PREPARED FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 32225 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 SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RM) SOUTH: NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (CN) EAST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) BACKGROUND: The site is located at the northwest corner of Madison Street and Avenue 58 (Attachment 1). Madison Street is the east boundary and Avenue 58 and the southern boundary. The site is a 1, 324 foot deep lot from Avenue 58 and 590 feet deep form Madison Street. The project site is located immediately south of Puerta Azul and east of Stone Creek Ranch which is under construction. The site is covered with desert shrubs. Applicant Request Tentative Tract 32225 The applicant is proposing to subdivide the 8.08 acre site into 33 single-family residential lots (Attachment 2). Several miscellaneous lots would be created, including storm water retention, landscaping and the private street lots. The existing RL zoning on the property requires a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. All lots are consistent with this requirement. Access into the property is proposed at the mid- point of the property on Madison Street with right -in and right -out turning movements. The project will have a single 36-foot wide curvilinear street with a card security gate near Madison Street. The street "bows" out at approximately the entry/mid point to provide a turnaround and traffic calming. Cul-de-sacs turnarounds are provided at the north and south ends of the street. A homeowners' association will be formed to maintain retention basins, common landscape areas, private roads, and perimeter landscaping. Public Notice The case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 30, 2004. All property owners within 500 feet of the entire development were mailed a copy of the public notice. Public Agency Review The project was sent out for comment to City Departments and affected public agencies on May 26, 2004. Agency comments received have been made a part of the Conditions of Approval. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: The applicant's request to subdivide 8.08 acres of land into 33 residential lots is consistent with the General Plan and the Subdivision Ordinance provided the recommended Conditions of Approval are met. Findings necessary to approve this request can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004- , recommending to the City Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2004-502; and, 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004- , recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 32225, subject to attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Tentative Tract 32225 Prepared by: 5 A,* -�- Fred Baker, AICP Principal Planner 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 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32225 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2004-502 APPLICANT: VINCE D'AMBRA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did on the 10" day of August, 2004, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of Vince D'Ambra for approval of Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 32225, referred to as the "Project" for the subdivision of 8.08 acres into 33 residential lots, generally, located at the northeast corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street and more particularly described as: A.P.N: 62-240-015 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 August 10, 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 August 10, 2004, and further caused the notice to be filed with the Riverside County Clerk in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, during the comment period, the City did not receive comment letters; and 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 PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\D'Ambra\PC RESO EA 2004-502 Reso.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Environmental Assessment 2004-502 - Vince D'Ambra Adopted: August 10, 2004 Page 2 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. 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 2004-502. 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. 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 P:\Reports - PC\8-10-2004\D'Ambra\PC RESO EA 2004-502 Reso.doc ti _ Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Environmental Assessment 2004-502 - Vince D'Ambra Adopted: August 10, 2004 Page 3 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 in the La Quinta City Hall, Community Development Department, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 92253. 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: 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 2004-502 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. PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\D'Ambra\PC RESO EA 2004-502 Reso.doc [] Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Environmental Assessment 2004-502 - Vince D'Ambra Adopted: August 10, 2004 Page 4 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 10th day of August, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: OSCAR ORCI, Plannung Manager City of La Quinta, California PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\D'Ambra\PC RESO EA 2004-502 Reso.doc i Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project title: Tentative Tract Map 32225 2. Lead agency name and address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact person and phone number: Fred Baker 760-777-7125 4. Project location: Northwest corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street. APN: 762-240-015 5. Project sponsor's name and address: Santa Rosa Development LLC P.O. Box 11335 Palm Desert, CA 92255 6. General plan designation: Low Density 7. Zoning: Low Density Residential Residential 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 of 8.08 acres into 33 single family lots around a central spine road, with access on Madison Street. Also included is a retention basin along the southern property line. Lots are proposed to be a minimum of 7,200 square feet. Overall parcel dimensions are 330 feet by 1,325 feet. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: Attached single family residential (Medium Density Residential) South: Avenue 58, single family residential and golf course (Low Density Residential and Golf Course Open Space) West: Single family residential (Low Density Residential) East: Madison Street, Single family residential and golf course (Low Density Residential and Golf Course Open Space) 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Coachella Valley Water District 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 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. , } Signature I7at 1' EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the 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," maybe 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 -3- �- 1 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) Madison Street is designated an Agrarian Image Corridor in 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 site is surrounded on two sides by existing residential development, and on the other two sides by roadways. The proposed single family homes will be regulated in terms of height by the City's Zoning Ordinance. No significant impacts to scenic resources are expected to result from the proposed development. 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- S 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) H. a)-c) The site has, at some time in the past, been in agriculture, but is not currently farmed, and has not been for some time. There are no Williamson Act contracts on the property. The site is a long narrow parcel which is surrounded by development. The site does not represent a valuable or significant agricultural parcel, given its isolation in a suburban setting. Impacts to agricultural resources are expected to be insignificant. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct X implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any air quality standard or X contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) c) Result in a cumulatively considerable X net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, 2002 PM10 Plan for the Coachella Valley) d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) X e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) III. a), b) & c) The Tentative Tract Map proposes 33 single family lots, which could generate up to 316 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, Oh Edition," Institute of Transportation Engineers, Single Family Detached category 210. -6- s Moving Exhaust Emission Projections at Project Buildout (hounds per day) Ave. Trip Total Total No. Vehicle Trips/Day Length (miles) miles/day 316 x 10 = 3,160 PM10 PM10 PM10 ROC CO NOX Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Grams at 50 mph 284.40 7,394.40 1,516.80 - 31.60 31.60 Pounds at 50 mph 0.63 16.32 3.35 - 0.07 0.07 SCAQMD Threshold lbs./da 75 550 100 150 Assumes 316 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 213.32 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. 1. 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. -7- 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. 8. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. Landscape parkways on Madison Street, the project's perimeter wall, and the retention basin on Avenue 58 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. -8- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse affect, 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? ('Biological Assessment...," James Cornett, May 2004) 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? ('Biological Assessment...," James Cornett, May 2004) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on X federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? ('Biological Assessment...," James Cornett, May 2004) X d) Interfere substantially with the 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? ('Biological Assessment...," James Cornett, May 2004) X e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? ('Biological Assessment...," James Cornett, May 2004) X f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, -9- or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (General Plan Exhibit 6.3) IV. a)-f) A biological impact analysis was completed for the project site2 The survey found that the site is disturbed saltbush habitat, impacted by agricultural activity and recent adjacent roadwork. The animal species found during the survey did not identify any species of concern. The site is disturbed and surrounded by developed areas, and its loss as biological habitat will not be significant. The proposed project site is located outside the mitigation fee area for the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard. 2 'Biological Assessment and Impact Analysis of the proposed La Quinta 9-Acre Site," prepared by James Cornett, May 2004. -10- IV. a)-f) A biological impact analysis was completed for the project site2 The survey found that the site is disturbed saltbush habitat, impacted by agricultural activity and recent adjacent roadwork. The animal species found during the survey did not identify any species of concern. The site is disturbed and surrounded by developed areas, and its loss as biological habitat will not be significant. The proposed project site is located outside the mitigation fee area for the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard. 2 'Biological Assessment and Impact Analysis of the proposed La Quinta 9-Acre Site," prepared by James Cornett, May 2004. -10- Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No 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 remains of a house, date grove and standpipe were identified on the project site. Extensive research into the property did not yield any historical significance for the property or the structures on the property. The structures were determined to have no significant historical context. 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. 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 Community Development Department 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. 3 "Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report Assessor's Parcel No. 762-240-015," prepared by CRM Tech, May 2004. -11- -� 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. V. d) A paleontologic assessment was conducted for the project site4. 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. 1. A paleontologist shall be present on site during all grubbing and earth moving 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. Implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. 4 "Paleontological Resources Survey Report Assessor's Parcel No. 762-240-015," prepared by CRM Tech, May 2004. -12- 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? X ("Geotechnical Engineering Report...," Earth Systems Southwest, February 2004) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, X including liquefaction? ("Geotechnical Engineering Report...," Earth Systems Southwest, February 2004) iv) Landslides? ("Geotechnical Engineering X Report...," Earth Systems Southwest, February 2004) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or X the loss of topsoil? ("Geotechnical Engineering Report...," Earth Systems Southwest, February 2004) X d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property ("Geotechnical Engineering Report...," Earth Systems Southwest, February 2004 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) -13- VI. a)-e) A geotechnical investigation was conducted for the proposed project' Although the site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Study Zone, it will be subject to groundshaking during an earthquake. The City implements the latest versions of the Uniform Building Code, which include provisions and requirements for the construction of housing in seismically active areas. The proposed project will be subject to these requirements. The proposed project occurs in an area subject to liquefaction. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of about 50 feet during the site investigation. The study finds, however, that although the site has historically experienced higher water levels in the past, it is unlikely that this condition will again occur during the life of the project. The study found that the site is not susceptible to ground subsidence or slope instability. The site is susceptible to wind and water erosion. The project proponent will, however, be required to conform to both PM 10 Management and water erosion requirements of the City, which have been implemented to reduce these impacts. Impacts associated with geological conditions at the site are expected to be less than significant. The project site will be connected to sanitary sewer service, and soils will not be impacted by septic tanks. Impacts associated with soils and geology are expected to be less than significant. 5 "Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Residential Development NWC Avenue 58 and Madison Street," Earth Systems Southwest, February 2004 -14- Potentially Significant Less Than Significant w/ Less Than Significant No 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) X e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a 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) X g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (General Plan MEA p. 95 ffl -15- 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) A Phase I environmental site assessment report was prepared for the subject property 6. The study found no evidence of surficial contamination on the site. The survey did find, however, that because of the site's historic use in farming, it is possible that underground storage tank(s) occur on the site. An underground tank could result in contamination of the soils and groundwater in the area. This would represent a potential significant impact without mitigation. In order to assure that this impact is adequately mitigated, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1. Prior to the issuance of any earth moving permit on the project site, a geophysical survey shall be conducted in areas nears buildings or other suspect features occur on the site, to evaluate whether a UST is still present at the site. Should a UST be identified, it shall be removed and disposed of in a manner consistent with local and state standards prior to the issuance of grading permits. 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. 6 ,Report of Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 8.89 Acre Parcel NWC Avenue 58 and Madison Street," prepared by Earth Systems Southwest, January 2004. -16- 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. 32225," P&D Consultants, Inc., March 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. 32225," P&D Consultants, Inc., March 2004) X fl Place housing within a 100-year flood 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 requirement. The analysis found that a 0.25 acre retention basin, as planned for the frontage of the site along Avenue 58, will adequately retain storm flows from the siite. The City Engineer will review and approve the final 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. 7 "Retention Basin Design Calculations, Tract No. 32225," prepared by P&D Consultants, Inc., March 2004.. -18- +r J 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. Development to the west and north are similar in style and scope to the proposed project. Residences on the site will be subject to the standards of the Zoning Ordinance. The site is not within the boundaries of the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan fee area. -19- 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. -20- XI. NOISE Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? ("Noise Impact Analysis Report...," P.A. Penardi & Associates, May 2004) b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? ("Noise Impact Analysis Report...," P.A. Penardi & Associates, May 2004) c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ("Noise Impact Analysis Report...," P.A. Penardi & Associates, May 2004) d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ("Noise Impact Analysis Report...," P.A. Penardi & Associates, May 2004) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project 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 private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X X X X X X -21- XI. a)-O A noise impact study was conducted for the proposed project$. The study found that with the inclusion of the proposed 6 foot wall surrounding the property, the noise impacts for exterior yards and interior ground floor spaces would meet the City's standards of 65 dBA and 45 dBA, respectively. Second story spaces, should two story houses be proposed on lots 18 through 33, would experience interior noise levels of 45.7 to 47.7 dBA, without mitigation. Since this standard exceeds the City's standard, mitigation is proposed to reduce the potential impacts associated with interior noise levels for lots 18 through 33, as follows: 8 1. Should two story homes be proposed on lots 18 through 33, any window facing or at an angle to Madison Street shall have a minimum STC rating of 27, as determined by laboratory tests. 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. "Noise Impact Analysis Report for Single Family Residential Development, Tract No. 32225 in La Quinta," prepared by P. A. Penardi & Associates, May 2004. U -22- 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 land, and construction of the project will not displace an existing community. The development of 33 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. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XHI. 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 X Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, X p. 46 ff.) XIH. 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. -24- �, XIV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application materials) b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application materials) Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X X XIV. a) & b) The construction of 33 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. -25- -, _ l; J K— 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 32225) e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? (Tentative Tract Map 32225) 0 Result in inadequate parking capacity? X (Tentative Tract Map 32225) 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 33 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 analysed in the General Plan EIR. Avenue 58 and Madison Street are expected to operate at acceptable levels of service at buildout of the General Plan. The 316 trips expected to be generated by this site daily will not significantly impact the circulation system. -26- 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, and may eventually be provided bus service as development occurs. -27- "� 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.) D 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.) -28- , J 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. -29- ;.. _; U 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 33 residential units will not have considerable cumulative impacts and is consistent with the General Plan. XVII. 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 -30-` the site will generate PM10. Section III), above, includes a number of mitigation measures to reduce the potential impacts on air quality. Noise impacts can be mitigated through the implementation of mitigation measures as well. -31- 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- ; ;1 w FIR F—, � A oCD C', ,oP4 �n ::3 F d A U pq �A a WWv�� Uv ry .� v, v� bD � � b 0 o `� O 0 0 cQ U U to E., cyCd vi O O b0 a+ �. .+ 0 b0 bq L: Ape Q o �o td OO c A .. A A A b U U PQ UA W a� �o z *-4 b� ro o w °° d acy a�-o Id U Q °° A v ° a ° H ,b .; 0 a� U 'o U N y U> U t-j cts cad vi �N •.. O O cd F A v� OU O O U a a tN C �A bA t+ � f` cad m m G C � Q a r W � G� a Cd Q o to m ;o m an Oo � Ey Cd o � U F s N bA H A U � av U� 0 O U O to W a w� a 0 � a 40 cn zz Q vA z .. �' C7 rA end o bUA Y a� U� N A U pq av U� H O U U � Rp, C". ur G bA N U O � O � i1. U a w� a� u. ap A b 0 3 low O cn bA 8 N N 0-4 �+ zcd 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 8.08 ACRES INTO A 33 LOT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 32225 APPLICANT: VINCE D'AMBRA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 101h day of August, 2004, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Vince D'Ambra for the subdivision of 8.08 acres site into 33 single-family lots plus amenity and street lots, generally located at the northeast corner of Avenue 58 and Madison Street and more particularly described as: A.P.N.:762-240-015 WHEREAS, The La Quinta Community Development Department has completed Environmental Assessment 2004- 502 in accordance with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63). Based upon this assessment, there may be a significant adverse effect on the environment; however, mitigation measures have been imposed on the project that will reduce the impacts to less than a significant level; therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended for approval; and WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify recommending approval of said Tentative Tract Map 32225: A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan. The project is within a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions of the amended 2002 General Plan Update. Tentative Tract Map 32225 is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistencywith Assessmenta2004 �502 and mitigation measures are also met pursuant to Environmental B. The design, or improvement, of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan and the Subdivision Ordinance. PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\D'Ambra\PC RESO RESO TT32225.doc �; Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Tentative Tract Map 32225 - Vince D 'Ambra Adopted August 10, 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. C. 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. 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. D. 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. E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. The proposed 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. F. 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. G. 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. H. 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 PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\D'Ambra\PC RESO RESO TT32225.doc t, Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Tentative Tract Map 32225 - Vince D 'Ambra Adopted August 10, 2004 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 to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 32225 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 10th day of August, 2004 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN Tom Kirk, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: OSCAR ORCI, Planning Manager City of La Quinta, California PAReports - PC\8-10-2004\D'Ambra\PC RESO RESO TT32225.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32113 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 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. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 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. 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. ....,-m-re oria_, n_gnnAXn'AMBRA\PC COA TT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 F. The approved SWPPP and BM Ps shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. 5. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). PROPERTY RIGHTS 6. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. 7. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map all public street right-of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 8. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Madison Street (Major Arterial, 120' ROW) — The standard 60 feet from the centerline of Madison 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 72 feet west of the centerline of Madison 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 58 Provide a 48 foot right-of-way from the centerline of Avenue 58 along the Tentative Tract Map boundaries. 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 ., ..,-nTe or,xa_4 n-gnnA%n'AMBRA\PC COA TT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 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 1) Private Residential Streets measured at gutter flow line shall have a 36- foot travel width as shown on the Tentative Tract Map. 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. 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, 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- (- ways shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map are necessaryprior 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 g both sides of all private streets. Such easement contiguous with, and alon# o.12conPTC - pr\A-10-2004\D'AMBRA\PC COA TT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 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. Madison Street (Major Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. B. Avenue 58 (Secondary Arterial) - 10-foot from the R/W-P/L. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on the Final Map. 15. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas on the Final Map. 16. Direct vehicular access to Madison Street from lots with frontage along Madison Street is restricted, except for those access points identified on the tentative tract map, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. Direct vehicular access to Avenue 58 is restricted. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final tract map. 17. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. 18. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date approval easement is approved byt he City date of recording of any Final Map, unless such Engineer. FINAL MAPS 19. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a standard AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD program. --roonoTe - Pr.%R.in-200AD'AMBRA\PC COA TT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 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. 20. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC. 21. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the 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 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. B. On -Site Street Plan: Vertical C. On -Site Rough Grading Plan D. On -Site Precise Grading Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' 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. o- .,..nconoTc - or%A_1n_200AD'AMBRA\PC COATT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 "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. In addition to the normal set of improvement plans, a "Precise Grading" plan are required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official and the City Engineer. 22. 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. 23. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all approved The files improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Enginee r. 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 24. Prior to approval of any Final Map, the applicant shall construct all on and off -site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City. 25. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose Tract Mapa shallng the comply witthe of any improvements related to this Tentative provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC. 26. Improvements to be made, or agreed to bemade, arealnotcaude parte removal of any of the proposed existing structures or other obstructions improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monumentation. 27. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development, or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City shall have me,%o tn_,)nnAXn'AMRRA\PC COA TT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 28. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 29. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 30. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC, and D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES stormwater discharge permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls), LQMC. All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the Final Map t a soil § report as been prepared in Safety accordance with the California Health & Y 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. 31. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, u re Dust Control Pland with such other erosion control measures, as were approved In the Fugitive 32. 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 _ me,%o , n_,)nnA%n'AMRRA\PC COA TT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 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. 33. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 34. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot from the building pads in adjacent developments. Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 35. Prior to any proposed site grading or regrading the site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 36. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 37. 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 10ear storm s all be neeetained within the development, unless otherwise approvedby the City r. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline ho24dhouene public nt producing the design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6ouror greatest total run off. _ ._-..,. mfmn 4n_onndkn'AMRRA\PC COA TT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 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. 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. The nuisance water percolation system shall be designed/sized to accommodate nuisance water produced by residential uses and any domestic well sites located within the project area. 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. 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 13.24.110 (Utilities), LQMC. —mno^0TC - PR\R.1n_2004\D'AMBRA\PC COATT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 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 (street type noted in parentheses.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Madison Street (Major Arterial; 120' ' R/W): Widen the west side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Tentative Map boundary to its ultimate width on the west side as specified in the General Plan and the requirements of these conditions. The west curb face shall be located fifty one feet (51') west of the centerline, except at locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate: a) Bus turnout (if required by Sunline Transit) Other required improvements in the Madison Street right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: PAREPORTS - PC\5-10-2004\D'AMBRA\PC COA TT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 b) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. c) 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. d) Establish a benchmark in the Madison Street right of way and file a record of the benchmark with the County of Riverside. 2) Avenue 58 Provide a 48 foot right-of-way from the centerline of Avenue 58 along the Tentative Tract Map boundaries. 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. Other required improvements in the Avenue 58 right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: a) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. b) 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 sidelk shain ll meander into the landscape setback lot and approach feet of the perimeter wall at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. P:\REPORTS - PC\8-10-2004\D'AMBRA\PC COA TT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 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) Private Residential Streets measured at gutter flow line shall have a 36- foot travel width as shown on the Tentative Tract Map. 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. 2) Private Cul-de-sacs shall be constructed according to the lay -out shown on the tentative map with 38-foot curb radius or greater at the similar to the layout shown on the rough grading plan. 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: P:\REPORTS - PC\8-10-2004\D'AMBRA\PC COA TT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 Residential 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. Secondary Arterial 4.0" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. Major Arterial 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. 55. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: Primary Entry (Madison Street): Right turn in and out and Left turn in movements are permitted. Left turn out movement is 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) & n.%nconDTC - PMRA0-2004\D'AMBRA\PC COA TT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 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 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 Ct theinspection construction program, mater materials and methods required by the City, as evidence that employed comply with the plans, specifications and other applicable regulations. 68. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with . ..,--- otan_,n_innA%n'AMBRA\PCCOATT32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 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. 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 73. 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. Fire hydrants are also required every 660 feet on the outside of the perimeter walls. 74. Blue dot retro-ref lectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 75. Any turn or turn -around requires a minimum 38-foot outside turning radius. 76. All structures shall be accessible from an approved roadway to within 150 feet of all ....,..,..�T� or iQ_, n_gnnA%n'AMeRA\PC COA TT 32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 portions of the exterior of the first floor. 77. 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. 78. 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. 79. 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. 80. 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. 81. 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. MISCELLANEOUS 82. 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. 83. Perimeter wall height along east property line shall provide a minimum six feet of exposed height as measured from east side of wall. 84. Proposed street name, with a minimum of two alternative names per street, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval. The street name to be approved prior to recordation of the map. 85. All mitigation measures contained in Environmental Assessment 2004-502 shall be met. oval, the d 86. Prior to final map appreveloper shall submit to the Community copy of the proposed Covenants, Conditions, Development Department for review, a and Restrictions (CC and R's) for the project. _._....,T� Mflio_4n_onnA%n'AMRRA\PCCOATT32225.DOC PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 32117 VINCE D'AMBRA AUGUST 10, 2004 87. 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. 88. 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. 89. Approval of production home designs and landscaping requires approval of a Site Development permit application by the Planning Commission. 90. 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 $64.00 to allow filing of a Notice of Determination for Environmental Assessment 2004-502 as required by State law. 91. 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. .....,"T� or.%a_4n-,)MdUYAMeRA\PC COATT 32225.DOC ATTACHMENT