The URL can be used to link to this page

2003 09 09 PCc&ty/ 4 4 Q" Planning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-quinta.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 SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2003-060 Beginning Minute Motion 2003-013 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 of the regular meeting of August 12, 2003. B. Department Report PC/AGENDA V. PUBLIC HEARING: 0 a C*- 0 Item ................. CONTINUED - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-462, SPECIFIC PLAN 2002-062, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-754 Applicant .......... Jefferson Waring, LLC Location ........... Southwest corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive Request ............ Consideration of: 1) certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; and 2) review of development guidelines and standards for a; and review of a commercial shopping center on a 10.7 acre site. Action .............. Continue to October 14, 2003 Item ................. CONTINUED - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29436 — EXTENSION #2 Applicant .......... Trans -West Housing Location ........... North side of Eisenhower Drive, approximately a mile west of Washington Street Request ............ Consideration of a one year time extension to file a final map for a subdivision of 190 acres into 169 single family lots. Action .............. Continue to September 23, 2003 Item ................. Applicant .......... Location ........... Request ............ Action .............. CONTINUED - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31249 Madison/58th Partners, LLC South side of Avenue 58, approximately a '/2 mile west of Madison Street Consideration of a subdivision of 33 acres into 85 single family lots Resolution 2003- Item ................. CONTINUED - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-478, SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-065, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31379, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-778 — VILLA LA QUINTA Applicant .......... Centex Destination Properties Location ........... West side of Eisenhower Drive at Coachella Drive Request ............ Consideration of certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; review of development guidelines and standards for a residential resort consisting of 280 units on 44.61 acres; a subdivision map for an 18 development and other common lots for streets and retention basins; and review of multiple housing unit plans for one and two story buildings PC/AGENDA ranging in size from 1,300 square feet to 2,090 square feet and a clubhouse building. Action .............. Resolution 2003- Resolution 2003- Resolution 2003-_, Resolution 2003- E. Item ................. Applicant .......... Location ........... Request ............ Action .............. F. Item ................. Applicant .......... Location ........... Request ............ Action .............. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 AND SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066 — THE PAVILIONS Thomas Enterprises Northeast corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street Consideration of: 1) certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; 2) deletion of Specific Plan; 2) review of development principals and guidelines for a 175,200 square foot commercial complex on 17.4 acres; and 3) Amendment to Specific Plan 98-033 eliminating seven gross acres and adding them to Specific Plan 2003-066. Resolution 2003- and Resolution 2003- SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-783 Michael Shovlin North side of Highway 1 1 1, west of Simon Drive, within the One -Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center Consideration of development plans for a 5,150 square foot restaurant building. Resolution 2003- G. Item ................. SIGN APPLICATION 2003-718 Applicant .......... Evergreen Development Company, Inc. Location ........... Northeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 48 Request ............ Consideration of a planned sign program for a 14,560 square foot Walgreens Pharmacy store Action .............. Resolution 2003- H. Item ................. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-079 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-784 Applicant .......... Toll Brothers Location ........... Lot 186 of Tract 30357 within Mountain View Country Club Request ............ Consideration of development plans for 50 two- story condominium units on a 5.0 acre site. Action .............. Resolution 2003- PC/AGENDA LTI I. Item ................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-780 AND SITE DEVELOPENT PERMIT 2003-781 Applicant .......... Kleine Building and Development Location ........... Southwest corner of Corporate Centre Drive and Commerce Way Request ............ Consideration of development plans for two office buildings on 1.13 acres. Action .............. Resolution 2003- J. Item ................. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-080 Applicant .......... WalMart Location ........... 78-950 Highway 1 1 1 Request ............ Consideration of a request to allow 55 metal containers for temporary storage of holiday merchandise from September 15, 2003 to January 15, 2004, on the north and west sides of the existing 135, 693 square foot store. Action .............. Resolution 2003- BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Item ................. PROJECT AREA NO. 2 PLAN AMENDMENT Applicant .......... City of La Quinta Location ........... Generally north of Avenue 50, south of Fred Waring Drive, west of Jefferson Street to the City's westerly City limit. Request ............ Consideration of a preliminary plan for Project Area No. 2 Redevelopment Area Plan Amendment Action .............. Resolution 2003- VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: IX. ADJOURNMENT: This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be held on September 23, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. PC/AGENDA MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA August 12, 2003 I. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Kirk who asked Commissioner Tyler to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Rick Daniels, Robert Tyler, and Chairman Tom Kirk. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to excuse Commissioner Quill. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston, Public Works Director Tim Jonasson, Planning Manager Oscar Orci, Associate Engineer Brian Ching, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed IV. CONSENT ITEMS: 1. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of July 29, 2003. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 4, Item 7, be corrected by spelling the word "sight"; Page 5, Item 8, add to the last sentence, "for compatibility with the apartment complex across the street"; Page 7, Item 7, corrected to read, "Staff stated it was probably going to be moved."; and Item 8.d., change Monroe Street to Avenue 58. There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Daniels to approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved. 2. Department Report: None. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Tentative Tract Map 31239; a request of Madison/581h Partners, LLC for consideration of a subdivision of 33 acres into 85 single family lots located on the south side of Avenue 58, approximately '/2 mile west of Madison Street. Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 2003 1. Planning Manager Oscar Orci informed the Commission the applicant had requested a continuance to the Planning Commission meeting of September 9, 2003. 2. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Daniels to continue the project to September 9, 2003. Unanimously approved. B. Tentative Tract Map 29436 — Extension #2; a request of Trans -West Housing for consideration of a one year time extension to file a final map for a subdivision of 190 acres into 1269 single family lots located on the north side of Eisenhower Drive, approximately %Z mile west of Washington Street 1. Planning Manager Oscar Orci informed the Commission the applicant had requested a continuance to the Planning Commission meeting of September 9, 2003. 2. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Daniels to continue the project to September 9, 2003. Unanimously approved. C. Environmental Assessment 2003-478, Specific Plan 2003-065, Tentative Tract Map 31379, and Site Development Permit 2003-778 — Villa La Quinta; a request of Centex Destination Properties for consideration of certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; review of development guidelines and standards for a residential resort consisting of 280 units on 44.61 acres; a subdivision map for an 18 development and other common lots for streets and retention basins; and review of multiple housing units plans for one and two story buildings ranging in size from 1,300 square feet to 2,090 square feet and a clubhouse building to be located on the west side of Eisenhower Drive at Coachella Drive. 1. Planning Manager Oscar Orci informed the Commission the applicant had requested a continuance to the Planning Commission meeting of September 9, 2003. 2. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Daniels to continue the project to September 9, 2003. Unanimously approved. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\842-03WD.doc Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 2003 D. Site Development Permit 2003-782; a request of Madison Estates, LLC for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for three prototype residential units that range in size from 3,321 square feet to 3,762 square feet for a 76-lot single family subdivision to be located on the north side of Avenue 58, approximately 2,640 feet west of Madison Street. 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked if Avenue 58 was a Major Arterial and if the gatehouse would be located in the setback. Staff stated the street was changed to a Secondary Arterial during the General Plan Update and the gatehouse would not be within the setback as it was more than 20 feet from the street. Commissioner Tyler asked about the parcel that was northeast of the tract. Staff stated the owner, Dr. Baumann, had an approved four lot subdivision, so the two tracts are sharing the private driveway. Commissioner Tyler asked if Condition #10 should be modified to require an upgrade to the concrete due to the soil content in this area. Staff stated the applicant had completed a soils test of the area and a different material would be used, as requested by the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC). 3. Chairman Kirk asked what concern the ALRC had with the stamped concrete. Staff stated the stamped concrete can crack and may not be the best long term material to use. The rubber stamp is consistently a better material. 4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Steve Cameron, South Point Construction, developer for the project, stated they would rather use bands with pavers in between, than the stamped concrete. Their studies show they have a good soil base which would not create a problem with the concrete. 5. There being no other questions of the applicant and no other public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened it to Commission discussion. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\842-03WD.doc Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 2003 6. Commissioner Tyler stated it was a nice project. He would request that the second half of Condition #10 be deleted. 7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Minute Motion 2003-012 approving Site Development Permit 2003-782, as recommended by staff and amended. a. Condition #10: delete second sentence. Unanimously approved. E. Tentative Tract Map 31627 and Site Development Permit 2003-779; a request of MDS Consulting for NADADOR, LLC. for consideration of the subdivision of 21.31 acres into 32 single family and other common lots within PGA West, and review of architectural and landscaping plans for one prototype residential unit and private clubhouse structure to be located on the southeast corner of Avenue 54 and PGA Boulevard. 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Daniels stated he lived outside the 500 foot radius of this project, but due to the proximity of his residence, he thought it best to excused himself due to a potential conflict of interest and left the dias. 3. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler questioned why there were only two floor plans. In addition, this project has golf course accessibility and golf cart parking should be available. He then asked about the street names. Staff stated the applicant would speak to this. Commissioner Tyler asked for an explanation of the access off PGA !Boulevard. Staff stated there are two in lanes and one exit lane. Commissioner Tyler asked if the City standard for a cul-de- sac was 45 feet. Staff stated they are proposing the minimum required, or 35 feet. Commissioner Tyler asked about Condition #40 of the Tract Map regarding walls around the retention basin. He questioned whether it was appropriate as the retention basins were surrounded by homes. He thought there was a conflict between Conditions #42.13.3 and #76. One calls for a minimum of G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\842-03WD.doc Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 2003 a two car stacking and the other states the Fire Department wants a minimum of 35 feet. He also asked that Condition #3.A. of the Site Development Permit be corrected by removing the word "Future". 4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Chris Bergh, IVIDS Consulting, engineers for the project, stated the access off PGA Boulevard is currently being used as an exit for the welcome center. There are two curb cuts at the site and the northerly curb cut will be closed and the southerly cut will be used. 5. Chairman Kirk stated he welcomed the changes that were being proposed and asked why the lake had been removed. Mr. Bergh stated the applicant has wanted a different look and product. Chairman Kirk asked if there are walls in the back yard. Mr. Bergh stated no, they will be open to the retention/landscaped areas. 6. Mr. Mark Bales, representing NADADOR, LLC, explained the concept of the project. He stated there is currently one floor plan with two elevations and they may change as the project evolves. In regard to the lake, they wanted to remove the water feature to create a pedestrian way that could be accessed by all the backyards. It is their intention to use one of the houses for a community center until it is built out and they are able to construct the center at the entrance. It would be converted back to a home later after the project is built out. 7. Chairman Kirk asked if they would agree to a restriction that no more than a certain percentage of the houses can be built with the one elevation. He suggested no more than 25 percent. Mr. Bales stated as long as he had the option to come back to the Commission and request additional units. He agreed the project needs to have different colors, texture, materials, etc. Chairman Kirk stated they would have the opportunity to come back with more elevations or to convince the Commission they did not need additional elevations. Mr. Bales stated they would like to have as much flexibility as possible to use the same floor plan, if it is a success. In regard to street names, they have no preference. 8. Commissioner Tyler asked why they were not providing the third garage for the golf carts. Mr. Bales stated they are buying a Heritage membership that will go along with the sale of each G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\842-03WD.doc Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 2003 house which will give them access to five golf courses. It is their intention to have them use the guest parking area. 9. There being no further questions of the applicant, and no other public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 10. Commissioner Abels suggested staff work with the applicant on the street names. 11. Commissioner Tyler asked about Condition #11 of the Site Development Permit in regard to the ALRC recommendation about the windows. 12. Chairman Kirk stated the Commission does want to promote streetscape diversity. He believes this is a very good redesign of the project. He would want a requirement that no more than 30 percent of the development can be the one plan being approved. 13. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Abets to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-057, approving Tentative Tract Map 31627, as recommended by staff and amended: a. Conditions #52.13.3 and #76 be clarified by the Public Works Department to make them consistent with each other. b. Condition added regarding the applicant working with staff in regard to street names. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Daniels and Quill. ABSTAIN: None. 14. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-058, approving Site Development Permit 2003- 779, as recommended by staff and amended: a. Condition #3.A.: delete the word "Future". b. Condition #1 1: delete the last sentence. C. Condition added: The applicant shall construct a maximum of 30 percent of the homes with the proposed elevations. GAVATDOCSTC Minutes\8-12-03WD.doe Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 2003 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Daniels and Quill. ABSTAIN: None Commissioner Daniels rejoined the Commission. VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. General Plan Consistency Finding 2003-004; a request of the City for a finding of General Plan conformity for the City potential acquisition of property for the widening of Jefferson Street. 1. Chairman Kirk asked for the staff report. Planner Manager Oscar Orci presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked about the ultimate design of the street and what will happen to the extra land that is being acquired. Public Works Director Tim Jonasson stated they are still reviewing the City's options. One idea may be extra landscaping on both sides of the street. They are in need of additional well sites that may be accommodated in this area. Discussion is still taking place regarding potential ideas. 3. Commissioner Daniels asked what the time schedule was for the project. Staff stated they hoped to be in construction by the end of 2004. This time next year the City may be ready to go out to bid. The design work is about to start. The environmental process is going to the City Council next week. Commissioner Daniels asked if this was again a split jurisdiction project. Staff stated that on this segment the majority of the takings are in La Quinta, but again the City of Indio and the County of Riverside are both involved in the entire project. 4. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Daniels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-059, making a finding of General Plan conformity for the potential acquisition of property for the widening of Jefferson Street. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\842-03WD.doc Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 2003 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Quill. ABSTAIN: None IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. X. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: 1. There was no report of the City Council meeting of August 5, 2003. XI. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Daniels to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on September 9, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 7:54 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\842-03WD.doc PH #A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 CASE NOS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-462 SPECIFIC PLAN 2002-062 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-754 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: EDWARD BARKETT/JEFFERSON WARING, LLC REQUESTS: 1) CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; AND 2) REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A 50,000 SQUARE FOOT MARKET, 23,000 SQUARE FOOT DRUG AND RETAIL STORE AND 20,970 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SHOPS ON A 10.7 ACRE SITE LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND FRED WARING DRIVE ENGINEER: DUDEK & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-462; BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT BECAUSE MITIGATION MEASURES HAVE BEEN IMPOSED ON THE PROJECT THAT WILL REDUCE IMPACTS TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS; THEREFORE, A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS RECOMMENDED FOR CERTIFICATION. GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC)/NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (CN) SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: ESPLANADE SUBDIVISION (UNDER CONSTRUCTION) SOUTH: MONTICELLO SUBDIVISION EAST: VACANT LAND (CITY OF INDIO) WEST: MONTICELLO SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EA 2002-462/SDP 2002-754/SP 2002-062 SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 RECOMMENDATION: The applicant requests that this project be continued to the October 14, 2003, Planning Commission meeting to allow staff additional time to review the revised Specific Plan for the project (Attachment 1). Attachment: 1. Letter from Mr. Edward Barkett of Jefferson Waring, LLC, dated August 13, 2003, requesting a continuance. Prepared by: Martin Magana Associate Planner Martin\SDP 02-754-3Jefferson Waring\PCStfrpt 3 ATLAS PROPERTIES August 13, 2003 Jerry Herman City of La Quinta P. O. Box 1504 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Commercial Project Southwest of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street Site Development Permit No. 2002-754 Specific Plan No. 2002-062 Dear Mr. Herman: ATTACH M EN1 Please treat this letter as our formal request to continue our Specific Plan hearing on the above referenced application to October 14, 2003. If you have any questions, please call me. EAB:cq Via Mail and Facsimile Transmission (760) 777-7101 Sincerely, JEFFERSON WARING, LLC By Atlas Properties, Inc., Agent C� Edward A. Barkett, President ATLAS PROPERTIES, INC. • 2800 W. March Lane, Suite #250 • Stockton, CA 95219-8218 • Phone: 209/476-1927 • Fax: 209/957-5279 PH #B STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 CASE NO: TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 — EXTENSION #2 APPLICANT: TRANS -WEST HOUSING PROPERTY OWNER: IVANHOE LA QUINTA COVE, LLC REQUEST: A ONE-YEAR TIME EXTENSION TO FILE A FINAL MAP FOR A SUBDIVISION OF ± 190 ACRES INTO 169 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF EISENHOWER DRIVE, ±'/2 MILE WEST OF WASHINGTON STREET BACKGROUND: Staff is requesting a continuance of this item to the Planning Commission meeting of September 23, 2003. The City Council granted a conditional final map approval for TT 29436 on August 5, 2003, which required that the map be final and ready to record by September 4, 2003. Staff is requesting a second continuance to complete processing of this extension, as the map had not recorded as of end of business on September 4. RECOMMENDATION: Move to continue consideration of Tentative Tract 29436, Extension #2, to the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of September 23, 2003. Prepared by: Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner PH #C STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 CASE NO: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-475 TENTATIVE TRACT 31249 APPLICANT/ OWNER: MADISON / 58T" PARTNERS, L.L.C. REQUEST: 1. RECOMMENDATION TO CERTIFY A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (EA 2003-475), AND; 2. TENTATIVE TRACT 31249, A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION OF ±33 ACRES INTO 85 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF AVENUE 58, ±'/2 MILE WEST OF MADISON STREET (ATTACHMENT 1) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-475, FOR TT 31249. BASED ON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND, ACCORDINGLY, A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LDR (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL — UP TO 4 UNITS PER ACRE) ZONING: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) BACKGROUND: Site Background The site of Tentative Tract 31249 consists of two parcels, which together comprise an area of 33.03 net acres. Previous map applications were filed and approved for each of these parcels in the late 80's — early 90's, which subsequently expired. Until now, no other applications have been filed since that time. The Stone Creek Ranch project (TR 30834), approved for 76 lots and currently under construction, exists immediately north of the site across Avenue 58. Avenue 58 is designated as a Secondary Arterial, with an 88-foot R.O.W. and no raised median island. Project Background The applicant is requesting approval of a single family detached home subdivision with 85 fee simple lots (Attachment 2). The minimum lot size is approximately 10,000, with the largest lot being 16,380 square feet and the average lot size at 1 1,31 1 square feet. The project will have private streets, designed with a central cul-de-sac street encircled by common area landscape/retention areas, and a looped interior street pattern. Two access points are provided off of Avenue 58, which line up across from Stone Creek Way and Coral Mountain Court on the north side of Avenue 58. These are both private, gated street entries that provide access to the Stone Creek Ranch project. Public Notice This case was continued to this meeting from the August 12, 2003 Planning Commission meeting, and was originally advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 22, 2003. All property owners within 500-feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required. Two letters have been received, from Coral Mountain, LLC and Madison 58' Partners, expressing concern over the future use of certain easements (Attachment 3). Any further correspondence received prior to the meeting will be transmitted to the Planning Commission. Public Agency Review Staff transmitted the applicant's request to all responsible and concerned public agencies. All comments received are on file at the Community Development Department, and have been incorporated into the attached Conditions of Approval, where necessary and appropriate. Historic Preservation Commission On August 29, 2003, the City's Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed the property owner's Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey, and the Paleontological Resources Assessment, as prepared by CRM Tech. Based on these reports, additional archaeological deposits may exist, and there is high potential for paleontological resource impacts. The HPC concurred with the recommendations for monitoring of the site, as presented in both assessments. Site monitoring for both cultural and paleontological resources will be required. Regarding the site, proper documentation has occurred and no further action, or mitigation, is required. The HPC concurred with the recommendations presented in both assessments, by adoption of Minute Motions 2003 - 009 and 2003 - 010. STATEMENT OF ISSUES Access — There are 20-foot wide easements around the south, east and west perimeters of the property for access and incidental purposes. These are shown on the tentative map exhibit, in favor of Mr. Norman L. White. The Coral Mountain Specific Plan borders the project site on the south; therefore these easement rights have reverted to Coral Mountain. Two letters on this issue (Attachment 3) have been received, from Coral Mountain, LLC and Madison 581h Partners, expressing concern over the future use of these easements. Staff has reviewed this information, and has determined that 1) the easement is in favor of a third party; 2) the easement area is owned by the applicant, not Coral Mountain, and 3) the Coral Mountain Specific Plan shows no plan for access that would make these easements necessary. Condition 17 provides language to ensure that any concerns in abandonment of these easements are addressed by the applicant, and that alternate access provisions, subject to Coral Mountain's consent, are provided for. Building Heights — While no unit plans have been provided at this time, Condition 85 limits building height to one story/22 feet for any lots within 150 feet of Avenue 58. This, along with perimeter wall improvements, will mitigate traffic noise impacts to interior and exterior CNEL standards set forth in the General Plan and UBC, and will maintain a low -density appearance along Avenue 58. No acoustic analysis was requested, as the project is not located on a Major or Primary Arterial street. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings necessary to approve this proposal can be found in the attached Resolution to be adopted for this case. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003 - , recommending to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 2003-475, subject to findings, and; 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003 - , recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 31249, subject to conditions as recommended by staff. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Proposed TT 31249 3. Letters of August 2 and August 8, 2003 from Madison/58th Partners and Jackson/DeMarco/Peckenpaugh Prepared by: s Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner V:�J RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 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 FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-475, FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31249 CASE NO. EA 2003-475 APPLICANT: MADISON / 58T" PARTNERS, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 9th day of September, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider adoption of a recommendation on Environmental Assessment 2003-475, prepared for Tentative Tract 31249, located on the south side of Avenue 58 approximately '/2 mile west of Madison Street, more particularly described as: PORTION OF THE NE '/a OF THE NW '/a OF SECTION 28, T6S, R7E - S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment complies with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended, City Council Resolution 83-63, in that the Community Development Director has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 2003-475) and has determined that the proposed Tentative Tract 31249 could not have a significant adverse impact on the environment provided that mitigation is required, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; 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 findings to justify their recommendation for certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed Tentative Tract 31249 will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, as the project in question will not be developed in any manner inconsistent with the General Plan and other current City standards when considering the required mitigation measures to be imposed. The project will not have the potential to substantially reduce or cause 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. 2. There is no evidence before the city that the proposed project will have the potential �A � for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. 3. The proposed Tentative Tract 31249 will not have the potential to achieve short term goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the Environmental Assessment. 4. The proposed Tentative Tract 31249 will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, in that development activity in the area has been previously analyzed as part of the project approval process. Cumulative project impacts have been considered and mitigation measures proposed in conjunction with approval of those projects, and development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the proposed project. 5. The proposed Tentative Tract 31249 will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect humans, either directly or indirectly, as the project contemplates land uses that are substantially similar to those already assessed under ultimate development of the La Quinta General Plan. No significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 6. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. 7. The Planning Commission has considered Environmental Assessment 2003-475 and determined that it reflects the independent judgement of the City. 8. The City has, on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d). 9. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the Community Development Department, located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; and 2. That is does hereby recommend certification of Environmental Assessment 2003- 475 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum, attached hereto, and on file in the Community Development Department. G J Resolution No. 2003- Environmental Assessment 2003-475 September 9, 2003 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 9th day of September, 2003, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California C ',il Environmental Checklist Form l . Project title: Tentative Tract Map 31249 2. Lead agency name and address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact person and phone number: Wally Nesbit 760-777-7125 4. Project location: South side of Avenue 58, west of Madison Street. APN: 766-070-001 & 766-070-002 5. Project sponsor's name and address: Madison 58 Partners, LLC 77-899 Wolf Road, Suite 101 Palm Desert, CA 92211 6. General plan designation: Low Density Residential 7. Zoning: Low Density Residential 8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Tentative Tract Map to divide two parcels totaling 33.33 acres into 85 residential lots of at least 10,000 square feet in size and up to 16,380 square feet, as well as a central open space area and streets. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: Vacant, PGA West South: Vacant, Coral Mountain Specific Plan West: Vacant, BOR Levee East: Vacant, Coral Mountain Specific Plan 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 Agriculture Resources Cultural Resources Hydrology / Water Quality Noise Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance Air Quality Geology /Soils Land Use / Planning Population / Housing Transportation/Traffic Systems DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the 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 l) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and Z) 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 Date EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1) A brief explanation is required for all ans�\ cis c , i;t \o Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agc,.c\ tes in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately sL,ppoiled if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to pro;ccts like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" ans�\ cr should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general stand:,r(!� ,�., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. based on a project-speed-iL screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole act r,\ op-ed. including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as \\(2, r direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a pphvsical impact rnav occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the notentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "I'oten( �ii!\ `'i'L� licant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that Lin ettect may be sign,hcre are one or more "Potentially Significant impact" entries when the detcrmina;,o, ill made. an EIR is required 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant V, Vliigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has rcduc.. :rr c0iect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Signitcant Impact." The Icad ry 1 r,!st describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they_ reduce the etTect to a i �: tii,ir significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier /\nalyses," may be cross cicrcn,:cd). 5) Earlier analyses may he ,ised where, pursuant : c, ing. program El R- or other C'EQA process. an effect has 'L)een adequately amilvie: Lu li,�r FIR or negative declaration Section 15063(c)(3)(1)). In this case, a brief discussio1', urntifv the followirt`� a) Earlier Analysis l sed. Identity and, stag ICI'L' the�' are available fi)r review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Idcnti;'v. �,� -Meets from the above checklist were within the scope A'and adequately anai ; . ,m earlier document pursuant to applicable le�al standards. Luui state whether sucl addressed by mitigation measures based on the earl � cr analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For etiects that ai, ss than Significant \.tiith Mitigation Measures Incorporated." describe the mitigation n ",,sires �\'hich were incorporated or refined from the earlier docun-,ent and the extent to , i.. . ihcy address site -specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate i1�, �I1r Coccklist references to information sources for potential impacts general plans. zoni � 'c ,'anccs) Reference to a previously prepared or outside document shouid, where appro iniit: �.,�c reference to the page or pages where the statement is substirntiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source ns, ;c attached, and other sources used or individual, contacted should be cited in the Liis, 8) This is only a sugges :, ,inn, and lead << „"U ditiercn; i",,i mats. however, lead agencies should nornwli.,, address the ques�ion . , :hecklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is �cl 9) The explanation ofeacli issue should idcn'iik a) the significance criteria or threshold. . -L:.! io evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified- it' any ; . c,iucc the impact to less than significance POIU11di_d, Loss Than Less Than No Si�nilic< ;.? tii niticant w/ I Significant Impact 1m11;11,, N1iti�ation Impact I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse cfTect on a X scenic vista`? ((Iene ml Ilan FXhihit ; 0) ! b) Substantially damage scenic resources, X including, but not limited to_ i ees. rock outcroppings, anti historic hinldings within a state scenic highway" ; \crral photograph) c) Substantially degrade the existing ! X visual character or quality of-', ire site and its surroundings'' (:ypplication iu,i�.r als) d) Create a new source of suhstantial X light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime view. ii the area'? (Application matcnals ) I I. a)-c) The project site is vacant desert land anc. lli�; Tlie site is not located on a General Plan Ima,-;e corridor Single family resicicnti!,! L,cncraliv single story and possibly two story,. will be cci tructed on the si,c scenic resources are expected to result from imple »entation of the proii: ui O.Wct I. d) The project will �,enerate minor amour., ,)'i- from outdoor residential lighting on lands which are current [y vacant. Howc\ ci �„ n on the site will be regulated by the City's lighting ordimitIL' _ which ensures ' i�, cls do not spill over onto other properties. This standard, combined :i: ,;\� lighting levels generated by residential land uses, will cit;ure that impacts �.nd ,dare are less than significant. Potential 5i, nil .: 11n p.,L. II. AGRICULTURE RESO[; I-WES: Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland. i:nidue Farmland, or Farmland of Statcwide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the I maps prepared pursuant to the farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. to non- agricultural use" (t ieneral Pkin ' 11: 1' 111-21 b) Conflict with existing zoning fir agricultural use. or a Williamson Act I contract? (/ommMap) c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural usc'� (No ag. land to III ommit\ to h OJCL', I -' ) -- — --T --- Less Than Less Than No I tii�,lilicant w/ Significant Impact Mitigation impact X X X II. a)-c) The project site is vacant desert land ar, is mo in agriculture. Lands surrounding the project site arc limmied, and partialIN cis cio )ec, n1 low density residential and golf development ('here are no Williatltsoi ct uiiiiacts on the properties, nor on properties in the immediate vicinity. No impacts t:- .<<,iIL-ulttirc will result with development of the ;proposed projcc, Prrtrniiu� -, Irt�lwc; III. AIR QUALJTY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (ti('AQ)MI) CFQA I lanolhook) b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation'' ,e'Ac�Mn CEQA IIandbooki c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase oi'anv criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicahlc Icderal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds iirr ozone precursors)? (s(' 1(,)MI) I l,ntolhook-, 2002 PM10 Plan Ina the Coachella \',i lc\ ) d) Expose sensitive receptor-, to substantial pollutant concentrattons'? (Project Description Aerial Photo its• inshcction) e) Create objectionable odor,, �tltecting a substantial numher of people" , 't.)tect I)esenption, Acrtal Photo. site 111�11LctJrntl i .� as 'Phan — — F,evs Than No -11'gJificant w/ Significant Impact Nlitigation Impact X X X i i X i X I III. a) & b) The City's prini�iry source of pollution ; , the automobile. The proposed project will consist of the tic\ clopment of 85 sink,, !'aiml,v rest,iential units and common open space areas. The residential units will �Ucncra, app-ovmately 814 vehicular trips per day at buildout. These trips will generate the ''ullowim-, emissions of criteria pollutants. C,, 1 - IL„ Moving Exhaust Emission Projections at Project Buildout (wounds Der dav) Ave. Trip Total Total No. Vehicle Trips/Day Length (miles) miles/day 814 x 10 = 8,140 PM10 PM10 PM10 Pollutant ROC CO NOX Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Grams at 50 mph 732.60 19,047.60 3,907.20 - 81.40 81 40 Pounds at 50 mph 1.62 42.05 8.63 - 0.18 0.18 SCAQMD Threshold (➢bs./dav) 75 550 100 150 Assumes 85 market rate homes, ITE categories 210. 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 for criteria pollutants. The City and Coachella Valley are a severe non -attainment area for PM 10 (Particulates of 10 microns or less). The Valley's 2002 PM 10 Plan adopted much stricter measures for the control of dust both during the construction process and as an on -going issue. These measures will be integrated into conditions of approval for the proposed project. These include the following control measures. 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 871 pounds per day, for a limited period while grading operations are active. In order to mitigate the potential impacts associated with PM 10 dust generation at the site, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented. The contractor will be required to submit a PM 10 Management Plan prior to initiation of any earth moving activity. In addition, the potential impacts associated with PM 10 can be mitigated by the measures below. 1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. -7- 2. Existing power sources should he utilized where feasible via temporary power poles to a,. old on -site po�ticr �,crcration 3. Constrlletlorl personnel shall he 'Informed A'ridc sharing and transit opportunities. 4. Cut and till quantities will he ha,anced on site. 5. Any portion of the site to In• �_i i_ied shall ;ic pre -watered to a depth of three feet prior to the onset of grading aci pities 6. Watering ofthe site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on- goin, ',oasis after the initiatior o''any gradir�" activity oil the site. Portions of the site that al-c actively being ,_,rauccl shall he \�atered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surlacc and shall ue watered at the end ofeach work day. 7. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. Parkway lanclscaping on A\ enue 58 shall he installed with the first phase ol'cicvelopment. 8. SCAOMD Rule 403 shall he adhered to. insuring the clean up of construction - related dirt on approach routes (o the site 9. All graciin_, activities shall ;)c sL,.pendcd first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds c\cccc� '_5 miles pci hour 10 The project proponent shall not:ly the C itv and SCAQMI) of the start and end of gradin_-, activities in conformai�L L� and NA ithin the time frames established in the 2002 PM I () Management '1t1!! C` _ hotential:N � Signitic:a,t '� Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- I Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, 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 cr U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (xt.istci Environmental Assc"ment. p 73, Il' i b) Have a substantial adverse effect on i any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identifieu in local or regional plans, policies, rquilations or by the California Department ot'Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Envirornnental Assessment, p , ; 11'.) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to. marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) throu��h direct removal, filling, hydrological in;crruption, or other means" ',laster I•:m uonm ciitai Assessment, p 73 11 i 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'' (M�raer Environmental Assn•„inent- 1' e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biolo_,,ical resources, such as a tree presery ation policy or ordinance'' (Mu,�tci I.n\;i�,nmental Assessment, p. 73 11 1 f) Conflict with the provisic;ns of an adopted Habitat Conservation flan, Natural Community Conscr\ anon Plan, or other approval local, rcuional. or state Loss Than Less Than No Sip�titicant vs/ Significant Impact Mitigation Impact I i X X I I I X I I I habitat conservation plan" (masic, T Environmental Assessment. p. 73 IT ( IV. a)-f) The proposed prejcct site is currently vacant desert land. "There are no species of concern identified for this property in the C'ity's CTeneral l'ian The site, which is composed primarily of creosote scrub habitat, has been heavily impacted by illegal dumping, previous use as a shooting range and nursery, and off road \ chicle use. The site is outside the boundary ofthe fringe -toed Lizard Habitat C'onscrvation Plan fee area. The site is likely habitat for common desert flora and fatuta, which \ ill he lost at the time the site develops. However, the C'it} 's requirements for desert tolerant landscaping will result in the planting of materials which will be habitat for these species upon project buildout The impacts associated with biological resources arc expected �o be less than significant. Potentialk, Lev, Than i Less Than No Significant Si�niticant w/ Significant Impact I Impact :liitio<cYion Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would �- - —~ the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of a historical resource as defined in ' 1.5064.5'? ("llistorical/Archaeoiogical Rcsowcc, tiurvc\ Report,' CRM "I'cch. Auguat 2OO ; ) b Cause a substantial adverse change in � X I the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to ' 15004 59 ("Ilistorical/Archaeulk)gical Rcsuwcc, tiur\c\ Report,,, CRM Tech. August 2OO ;) i c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X paleontological resource or site ur unique geologic feature" I'CCUUtCCS Assessment Report. ('RM tech..\u�1i,.2003) d) Disturb any human remains, including X those interred outside of fiii-mal cemeteries? (" list, incal/Arch.ic,6II IL al Resources Sun'eY Rcluirt. CRM I cch \ugust 2003 ) V. a), b) & d) A cultural resource survey was completed for the proposed project site'. The survey, which included hush a records search and a field SL;rvcy. frond that portions of the site had previously heen surveyed. The field survey found no evidence of surficial deposits on the property, and concluded that the site did not contain significant archaeologic or historic artifacts. However. the study recommends that during construction activities, should artifacts be uncovered, the following mitigation 11lcasure shall be implemented: 1 Should ally cultural or historic resource be uncovered during grubbing_ grading, trenchin_.: or other earth moving activity on or offthe project site. all work shall cease and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained to examine the find and determine its significance The archaeologic, shall be empowered to stop or rcdirc�:t earth moving activities File archa. ulogist shall file a report with the ('o171mun(tV Development Department im(, ediately following completion of earth tnovirg activities, on the findings at the site V. c) A paleontologic ;tLldv was prepared for the propn�,;:cl project site'. The study found that the soils at the site are consistent with i ialocene :linlents from ancient Lake Cahuilla, 1 "Historic/Archaeological Resources Survey Report, Tentative Tract No. 31249," prepared by CRM Tech. August 8. 2003. 2 "Paleontological Resources Assessment Report. Tentativr "Tract No 31249," prepared by CRM Tech, August 8, 2003 -12- r which covered the site in prehistoric times. The stud\, included both records search and field survev The field survey identified mollusks o" the property. The study finds that the following miti,Yatiorl measure is required to assure ;hat impacts to paleontologic resources are lowered to a less than si�.;niticant lc\ cl A paleontologic monitor shall be on site during all earth moving activities The monitor shall be empowered to stop or redirect earth movie-, activities on the site. The monitor shall curate all finds using best professional practices. and shall file a report with the Community Dcvclopment Department reporting oi, his/her findings immediately following completion of earth moving activities. 2. PotentialIN Less Than Significant Si-niticant H/ Impact Pei+tit utiun VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, ntjury. or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Xslap issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of �a known fault" (MIA F\hihi( (1 2) ii) Strong seismic ground shakin,-") (Ml.n Exhibit 6.2) iii) Seismic -related ground litilurc, including liquefaction? ((Icncral I'l.m i \hibit 82) -_ riv) Landslides? ((ieneral Ilan i \luiln x z) b) Result in substantial Soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ((Ieneral flan d) Be located on expansi\ (, soil as defined in Table 1 K-1-B of t he t nitorm Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property'? (General Plan Exhibit `c 1) - — -- -- - e) Have soils incapable o1 adc(l.0 tely supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water'' � (;cncr,ii Ilan l:xhihit x. l ) Less Than No Significant Impact Impact X I X X X X X �I X VI. a) i), iv), b)-e) The project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolc 1"arthquake Fault Zone. nor is it subject to landslides or winds. The soil in the area is not expansive, and would support septic tanks. The hr(ip('1sed project will have no impact o ' these geologic hazards VI. a) ii) The City and project site will be subject to significant ground shaking in the event of significant seismic activity. The City Building Department has implemented California Building Codes which are intended to lower the potential impacts associated with -14- groundshaking to less than significant levels. In aciclition, no critical facilities will be built at the site, rather single family residences are the only structures planned. These structures will be required to implement the most recent buildin- codes in place at the time of construction. Impacts associated with groundshaking are expected to be less than significant III. a) iii) The site has the potential to be susceptible to liquefaction, due to young alluvium from the nearby mountains which has been deposited in this area The depth to groundwater, however. is cxpectcd to be more than 30 feet. Tic "itv engineer will require the preparation oC on site geotechnical analysis as pars ol'the grading permit review for the project site 'Phis ;tidy will include site borings to dctcrmine what grading and construction technuiues are required. The standards imposed in the study will include remediation liar liquefaction. should that condition ;ic identified. No further mitigation is required to lower potential impacts to a less than si�-,niticant level Potentialh T Less Than I Less Than No Significant Significant "I Significant Impact Impact Nliii�,ation Impact � + - -- - --4 VII. HAZARDS AND fRI;0 i j MATERIALS --Would the _pro ect: a) Create a significant hazard to the X ! public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials'? (Appho.ituni materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the X ! public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release cf hazardous materials into the environment? (Application nuitcna :i 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 matcrals) d) Be located on a site which IS included X on a list of hazardous tttatcrialS 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" iRiVcr';ldL (()tatl\ ItazardousMaterial, 1 istmv, - — - ---- - --- - - --} e) For a project located v� ithin :ui airport ! X land use plan or, where Such a )lam has I, not been adopted. within tv10 miles ofa public airport or public use airport, would the project result m a safe[\- hazard for j people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan bind Lisc nw;)) f) For a project within the \ icimis ofa X private airstrip, ',tiould the hrujcc, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area" i (Wiici al Plan land use map) g) Impair implementation of of l,,hvsically X interfere with an adopted cnicr,cney response plan or cntergenc \ c\ acuation plan? (General Plan \vll'A p h) Expose people or structures to a- -►o- G- . significant risk of loss, injury or death - - — -�-- -T -- -- X I involving wildland tires. includi I_, where wildlands are adjacent to urhatliied areas or where residences are intenni \ed with wildlands. (ienci; , lan i,w,i ;c i, ;i,) - VII. a)-h) The proposed projcct will result in the construction of 85 single family residences. No concentration of hazardous materials is expected in these homes. The City implements household IlUarCUUS waste programs through its solid waste franchisee. The site is not located I IIC vicinity of an airport or airstrip. uor is it subject to wildland fires -17- VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATFIR UALITY -- Would the project_ a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements"! (ieneral I —T-- I Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ I Significant Impact Impact Nlitil-ation Impact - 4-- X Plan E11k P. Ill-1 h7 11.) b) Substantially deplete ,1round•,ti ater j supplies or interfere suhstantiall`, with groundwater recharge Such that there would be a net deficit in aquitcr \ plume or a lowering of the local ,,rour-1dwater I table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells woulc drop to a level which would not Support existing land uses or planned uses !Or %�hich 1 permits have been granted)'' General Elan EIR p. III-187 tY.) _ c) Substantially alter the cxistinu drainage pattern of the site or area. ,nrlud'nP through the alteration of'tllc co.,rSc ofa stream or river, in a manner \� hich Would result in substantial erosion or siltation I on- or off -site? (l''tlicct (ii,i,lin� `iL { IIvdrologv) d) Substantially alter the c\istirL' drainage pattern of the site ur area. inclucl m, through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of Srnl�rcc runoFFin a manner which would result in hooding on- or off -site? rl',,,icct l Hydrologv') e) Create or contrihute r-011,00'\Niltcr Which would exceed the cal)aritof existing or planned storm atci clraina,e i systems or provide substantial .rddltloiial 1 sources of polluted runoll" (PI(11C: (hilling. Site l lydrologr) f) Place housing \� ithin a ,loud hazard area as mapped on Icdc;-al Flood j Hazard Boundary or Flout I nSW U11Ce X i X X X -Is- U _, Rate Map or other flood ,-1,1iai c, ---_ T --—� delineation map? (mass l I i iIIII! L-111,11 Assessment 1Nhibit c c g) Place within a 100-yeai food Lazard X area structures which Mlc im�nxie or redirect flood flovtis? Assessment E\tiihit (I e VIII. a) & b) The construction o," 85 homes will not significantly impact water supply, nor will it violate water or �\astc�\atcr requirements. The project proponent will be required to implement the C'it_y's �\atcr ci icient landscaping and construction provisions_ which will ensure that the least amount o water is utilized within the homes The applicant will also be required to comply �� ith the C'ity's NPDES standards, requiring that potential pollutants not be allowed to enter ;urtace waters. These City standards will assure that impacts to water quality anC will he less than significant. VIII. c) & d) The proposed project will be responsible for the drainage of on and off site flows. and has been desllfliud to include retention areas within the open spaces proposed for the project The City 1:1111;racer requires that these retention areas retain the 100 year storm on site, which is cyI,,ectcti 'o lower potential impacts to a less than significant level. VIII. e)-g) The construction ot'85 homes will not have an impact on the C'ity's storm drainage system. The site s not located within a FEMA designated 100 year storm area Potentially Le"s Than Significant Significant w/ Impact Mitigation IX. LAND USE AND 111,A KING - Would the project a) Physically divide an esiahlisl,cci community" (Aerial photo) b) Conflict with anv applicahlc land use plan, policy, or regulation Of L,'ency with jurisdiction over the ;project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan. local coasta program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or nuts tin an environmental et cct" ((Yeneral "Ian land J Use Element) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natu1 ail L:on,,11unity jconservation plan'' ( Ma.11ri ..:I\ ii 0„i,11CIIt.(l Assessment p 74 tl' Less Than No Significant Impact Impact X i X X IX. a)-c) The proposcc project is surrounded by vacant or residentially developed land. and will continue I . ninic n ofdevelopment. The land is cics(pnated in the General Plan for Low Density Kc�.c1c1l1ia1 development, and is outside the Ice payment area for the Fringe -toed Lizard liah'ltat ('onscrvation Plan. Potcntialh'I Less Than No j Significant Significant %1/ Significant Impact I - — - j Impact I IVlitigation Impact i X. MINERAL RF.S0 R('F,S -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of aV ailahility of a i— known mineral resource that �v ouXld be of ! value to the region and thu residents of' the state? (Master I Mu0uun,1i 71 tY. ) l b) Result in the loss of av aiiahilit\, oft X locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated ;r�,, a loL'ai ,eneral plan, specific plan or othc anc' .,se Ilan? i (Master Environmental /1ssc�snicni 1' X. a) & b) The proposed prl.rlcct site is within the MRZ-1 Zone. and is therefore not considered to ha\c potcntia; ilv mineral resources. -21 Potentially Lcsa Than Significant Significant ii/ Impact Mitigation XI. NOISE B Wuuld the 11 eject result in. a) Exposure of'pci sons :c) ui _icneration of noise levels in e\cess nCstanclards established in the local _,encral plan or- noise ordinance. 0r applirahlc standards of other agencies" tit! � b) Exposure of persons is cn, �_12neration of excessive grotmdbornc iteration or groundborne noise levels' description) c) A substantial permancn� MCI casc in ambient noise lei cis in ti,(, I�rc►jcct � icmity above levels existingg itiuo, t tl c project'? Prc►lect de,crlption, — - — -- d) A substantial tc mpur�r lnriodic increase in ambien; nuisc 'c\ cls in the project vicinit-v ahOvc lev,2is CVStin(_' without the projcc t'' map) e) For a project Icy, atcc mi ai. part land use plan or. \\ here �r Man itas not been adopted_ withinn•ilcs ut'a i public airport or l)!ihlic u,c LJW 1,)rt- �voctld the project expose iicojllc : si,iin�s nr working in the pruicci a'. c\ccssivc noise levels? (t rii ,i! i'„ 1.,I„ f) For a project x\ illtin the L-inity o!'a private airstrip. N itld ilir c\pose people residinil e) Innr. prnjcct area to excessi\ c guise is 21, I i'lan !and use map Less Than No Significant Impact Impact — -----! X X X X i I X X XI. a), c) & d) The cl ,ii. ojcct is in an area of the City where current ambient noise levels are rel,i \ c \ ' :'c cic\ clopment of housing will not �i'Lniticantly impact these noise levels. 110\\ cvcr I L•,,',cs in traffic and circulation, the ('its s primary source of noise, are likely to cIccttr as i c•sult o!'thc project and other projects in the area. The buildout noise levels fir [lie soLit hcrn portions of the City are expected to r-art,_,e between 62.8 and 67.5 dBA at I OJ ,act !rain centerline. The City's General Plan standard is 65 dBA CNFL for ou, ,�� ai _ as- including back vards -22- The iclth of Avenuc 58 at buildOUt is expected to be 44 feet (Secondary arterial RoadwaN Piisslllcation in the General Plan). The proicct proposes a landscaped setback of i ki sect nip v, ill result in backyards at a distance ol`4 teet trom the centerline In add'Lion- 1111, ;1!;I;c;:t proposes to construct a 6 taut block wall along the entire parl.wav Although it is unlikely that this portion of Avenue 58 '0,01.11d reach 67 5 dBA UM'.l . Lit i)uildout. due to its limited access and limited development potential, the CLw,;1-,1C,LW (- flint wall will provide noise attenuation of approximately 5 dBA at the prig -iic pry,, mce I'Iiis %tiould mean that the ma\in,,i,m noise level potential at buildout oflkc Cium, �Ii ,'Ian would he 62.7 dBA CNEL, WTI, v\ithin the Uity"s standard. \oise imparts at IA, pr.�posed project, therefore, are expected to he less than significant Thy prop, �.:1 ,� ,i�ct .ilc v,ill also generate higher ;has, usual noise level` during con.tructiu! �Wl sties i-hese noise levels will be tc11-11'nrarv. and will occur in an area �� Mere ti er, ,;rL' . urrentiy no other sensitive receptoi s i'hc impacts associated with constructi(r- noise. thcrctore, are expected to be lc,,, titan significant. XI. b), e)-fl Residential gnu use will not generate ground borne vihrations The project is not located \ ici�-v an airport ofairstrip -23- Potentialle Less I han Less Than No Significant Signiliram W Significant Impact Impact NIitit;ati(in Impact XII. POPULATIOti A \ 1) 11Ot !SING ! � j Would the project a) Induce substantial pulnllatic 11 grm\tll X i in an area, either cl i rect l \ ; 1111 L x11111)1 U, hN' proposing new 1willes anc! husinesscs; or indirectly (for example 'Lh Oli, i extension of roads or other ni'ra."tr, ...;rL )'' )( CIW1 dt Plan, p. 9 ff.. aphlic.i', '11 b) Displace substantial nunlhCr'� of X existing housing. nc•Cessit�il111 ' the ! construction of rcniac:nl: It nnusin� elsewhere? (eielli .i I,I1r,i1i, ii cnatenals ) c) Displace substciultial :n,:, ilc s of X people, necessitat111- tll:. „nr.truction of replacement housin'' cl�C ,'IC•-C' i(i1,lL-Ial I Plan. p. 9 tY... , n �,� � • XII. a)-c) "I'lic prop,,ti.•ci pro iect kill result in 85 housing units. hiclt are likely to �-,ererate about I')' ;'CSUL1 ,'', I'1115 111CreaSC ill population is not tilt'I1111CaIlt, anci is Consistent wth pr(• .':tC, '- Ill VIL' City No impacts are expe:lCCl lu llc)pulatlon and housiT1i,' Putentialli Les. I'I,an Significant Significant W Impact NI iti�4;ai(in -- — t XIII. PUBLIC Sk RVIUI`.:ti I t a) Would the prL),L•ct res_,' r �uhstantial adverse physical impacts associated \tiIth the provision of nc\t or p!i.\ siciilly altered governmental facilities. nccd for new or physically altered ,ovcnimcntai facilities, the construction (!'\\hie! :OUiC! cause significant environnicntal 11111)acts, in order to maintain acccptwlc so -vice ratios, response times or ether Less Than No Significant Impact Impact performance ol7jcc;i\ cs 11i any or tlhc public services Fire protection? • .,,, 1, 1 V i, X Police protection'' MIA 1' �7) X Schools? ((;euera'' " 11 v11 iI X Parks? ((icncra: I'arl.. X Uaste* t'ian) i Other public facih:,cs' X 140 tY ) XIII. a) 13ui!dlout ofthc site will have a less than significant impact on public services. The pro!,,oscd project will he served by the County Sheriffand Fire Department. under City cor!�t ct l3,iildlow ofthe proposed project will generate property tax v011ch will offset the cost o, adl�i� �! no�lice andi fire services. The project �v il! he redluired to pav the mandated scti..,l ,,V• 1,acc at ,I1C tune of issuance of buildlin`1 nrmits The impacts on parks w)l) he iL•ss !'ii,i� ";L'niiicant_ since the lots are planned to �)c lar�,e. and the project wil include a larli-c Iir'\ ;tr When space area. Potentially Less than Significant Sigrnilicunt W Impact M Btl2flt illn XIV. RECREA'I IC}� -- �— a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborl%)oc, and iunal pa ks or other recreational facilities such tha: substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or he accelerated? (Application matcrtaI, j b) Does the project include recreational facilities or reyuirL' the construction or - expansion of recreational tacilities which might have an ads crsc physical effect on the environment" .11 Itcu nt nuiirrialsi Less Than No Significant Impact I Impact X X XIV. a) & b) The proposed project has the potential to generate an additional 199 residents. who will ha),c access to the private open space proposed within the project. These facilities will otlset the iced livr other recreation facilities within the City -20- t(�, PotentialIN Less "( han Less Than 10 Significant Sionif-w tnl W Significant Impact Impact Nlitioutiun Impact XV. TRANSPOR !'.'k I'1ONii'R;�FF((' -- Would the project a) Cause an increi,sc in tiaClic hich 'IS X substantial in relation to the existing 1 traffic load and u1'thc street system (i.e., results a Suilstan;jal increase in either :ic nun,ilcr oC\,,ehjcie trips. the volumc i:pi''.,1!\ -:nio on roads, orcongesii; i a: late'_Scctlons)''' I (General Plan HR. r 11 b) Exceed, either ciiv ld,,ili \ or X cumulatively. a Ire .•'I c,!' Scn ice standard established by the , 01011'1 L-,,nL'cStiun management agei• fL,t clCS11_1nitted roads I or highways'' c) Result in a chai,,�c in iii trallic ?� patterns, includjr, :11icr ,i;, hicicasc ill traffic levels or a 'lan"c In location that results in substant,.i; �,ilct\ risi;S? traffic invoked in i,, i d) Substantiall` lilt Ic•i1,L' ,iiaicis due to a X design feature (c __ ";pit 1 1, L Li es of dangerous inters', uses (e.g , farm jcci uetic:nptum J e) Result in ina(P i;ic' ci ,.'rr, l,ry X access? (Pre,tect Li,'.. ,It,1„1, 0 Result in inad„ lilt.' capacity? `4: Trt,tect descr,t,tn,1 g) Conflict with . ,. .0 u, lr;e.,. plans_ X or programs Sup.. 1;1� L 1111127�•IL;t,ve transportation (L - !lL,s `,u no.tts, bic� cle racks)) (Project ,L .. XV. a)-g)II� , cet„ill develop at a density off (, .,;hits per acre, well �tiithin the Low l)� ;cr; iitl limci use parameters I'he 814 trips per da} to be generated will not impaL:t on the circulation systein. S111ce the land use was analvsed in the (;r ;; i111i i L ncl le\ol, ofs.rvice for this area of the Uity are expected to be acceptable !,c ,lrojec' provides Sutficjent access ti,r cMercenc\, vehicles. does not create ,:1 ', 'cl �CIle required to meet the ('jtN s )n-lot parking rcctujrelnetltS when -27- 110111L'ti arc liroposed tiw the site. The project vicinity N� ill he integrated into Sunl-ine I ray pit s rnuics as dev Ldopment warrants. -2x- - ------------- ------------ 1Potentialh, Less Than i Less Than No Significant Significant -tv/ i Significant Impact I Impact Mitigation Impact XVI. UTILITIES .A\D SERVICE SYSTEMS B Would the project: a) Exceed wastevv ater treatment X requirements of thy' applicahlc regional I i I, Water Quality Cortrol Board" ,(iencruf Plan MEA, p 58 tl' , b) Require or result in the construction of new water or treatment facilities or expantiion of existing facilities, the cons,ructior1 of which could cause significant environmental effects? i (General Plan WA. 1, ;8 T c) Require or res„i; i„ the construction of new storm water ;;railal-Ic facilities or expansion of existing [acuities. the 1 I construction of �ti 1,,ich could cause significant envirwiniental ct ects? (Ocneral I. 'Ian MI:A. p 5M 11 d) Have sufficient \t'I;cr ;upplios available to ser\c . ,-c project from existing entitleme!-..� oriel, ,-csoLirces, or i are new or expanCICC; 211titicmcnts needed9 tGenen,l I' ' i. \ 1' iY 1 e) Result in a dctcrnrination hN the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may sery c the project that it has adequate capacity L,, ,cn e tic project s projected demand 111, ild(1itior to the provider=s existin�� rn�n�it�lcnts'% (General Plan MI•./\ iIN it f) Be served by a ,: icllill ,\ ,h ;utficicrit permitted capacli\ ,�) dL'L::iimodatc the project=s solid �\., ,.c ,lis;;L),a; needs'' (General Plan MI g) Comply with I ,;cr rl. ,talc. and local statutes and re,.ii , al, c' to solid waste? ((itineral !'.i X X i X X Y\ i XVI. a)-g) I't�' �iic available at the project site. The land use intensity was included in the analysis of ' cncral flan, and levels of service were found to be acceptable. No impacts to -29- Lit: ", 1! L il-I il rOSILIlt Of the PFL)POsed 11 F 0. 1 L'L: I -30- XVII. MANDAI*,;°R�,' FIXMNGS 01 SIGNIFICANT. -- I a) Does the projcr; iiavc the potential to degrade the qu1111 ironment- substantially reduCc tnc habitat of a fish I or wildlife specie,- cause a fish or wildlife population to drop hclow self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal communitN I ccluc_• the mintier or restrict the range ; C a rare or endangered plant or animal or ;_,11,inatc important examples of the nui;oV periods of California history ;)i �irchlstor-V b) Does the projc.��;� c the ;,utentiai to achieve short -tern lu the ciisadvanta,c of long-term ens i ,)m,icntal t coals? ` i''b) Does the prole.-, i,,<« c i nhacts that are individually litn!,. ;;i , ativel� considerable' ( nu,iatI\ eiv considerable" nic,u•ti (hat the incremental 1 effects of a projec; MV considerable when viewed in connccii�ir with the effects of past projects, thr nF of her current projects, and the ; lets ol,probable future projects)" c) Does the projec, n,.vc environmental effects which x�11' c s.i!�s;,intial adverse effects directly or indireL Potential) Significant Impact i Less Than Less Than No Signilirtnt ms/ Significant Impact j Miti itiiir� Impact � I i I � X X X XVII. a) ThL, �,; njcct site is significantly disturbed vacant desert, and is not habitat for sensitive sl,:iic pi ca The proposed project will not, therefore. degrade existing habitat for XVII.b) T11C ,)rL,poscd project supports the long term goals ofthe General Plan for a variety of hoii�ns;thin the Cit"- XVII. c) 11 1;, ov, „i not hi,\c considerable cumulative ini;)actS. anu will not exceed those inif.; icicn;ilicd in the General Plan EIR for this area of the City, or the City as a whole. XVII. d) The ;,pns,,cl project has the potential to adversely affect hunian beings, due to air quality lie c011•;traction process. Since the iiella Valley is in a non -attainment are: i'', i ��.hich im cause negative health SectiOrI lli)_ above_ includes a nur-1 i �1 1111.1�,Lltion nIcasures to reduce the potential impacts on air quality to a less than sip! , iu; ic\C, -32- I � s I I�� O poi �I i r I Flo Eu - clx of L' vial a W C w �la'V pi • _- Q O:iV�;Gz71Oj aQa,Q� Oi cl C) C) �I iNIE;I 00 M �I I � o l `'3 - 1 o zl Ozvl ; QQQc,� 5 } SE U J � • p v_, _ c V _ c u "J U J ❑ J "J "J v221 J yFy 1 LO a c^ � :J J 'J 'Y RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT 31249, DIVIDING 33.33 ACRES INTO 85 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS CASE NO. TT 31249 APPLICANT: MADISON / 58T" PARTNERS, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 9th day of September, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a recommendation on Tentative Tract 31249, a request to subdivide ± 33.33 acres into 85 single-family residential lots and several lettered lots, located on the south side of Avenue 58 approximately '/2 mile west of Madison Street, more particularly described as: PORTION OF THE NE '/a OF THE NW '/a OF SECTION 28, T6S, R7E — S.B.B.M. 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 findings to justify their recommendation on Tentative Tract 31249: 1. The La Quinta Community Development Department has prepared Environmental Assessment 2003-475. Based on this assessment, the Community Development Department has determined that, although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because mitigation measures incorporated into the project approval will mitigate or reduce any potential impacts to a level of non -significance. 2. The proposed Tentative Tract Map 31249 is consistent with the City's General Plan with the implementation of Conditions of Approval to provide for adequate storm water drainage, and other infrastructure improvements. The project is consistent with the adopted Low Density Residential land use designation of Up to 4 dwelling units per acre, as set forth in the General Plan. 3. The design and improvements of the proposed Tentative Tract Map 31249 are consistent with the City's General Plan, with the implementation of recommended conditions of approval to ensure proper street widths, perimeter walls, parking requirements, and timing of their construction. 61 . J 4. As conditioned, the design of Tentative Tract 31249 and type of improvements, acquired for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision will not conflict with such easements. 5. The design of Tentative Tract 31249 and type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems, in that this issue was considered in Environmental Assessment 2003-475, in which no significant health or safety impacts were identified for the proposed project. 6. The site for Tentative Tract 31249 is physically suitable for the proposal as natural slopes do not exceed 20%, and there are no identified geological constraints on the property that would prevent development pursuant to the geotechnical study prepared for the subdivision. 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 require compliance with those mitigation measures specified by Environmental Assessment 2003-475, prepared for Tentative Tract Map 31249; 3. That it does recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map 31249 to the City Council, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 9th day of September, 2003, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California C. Resolution No. 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 September 9, 2003 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- EXHIBIT „A„ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 31249 MADISON / 58T" PARTNERS, L.L.C. SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 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 the 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 improvement plans for City approval. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 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 five (5) acres or more of land, or that disturbs less than five (5) acres of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than five (5) acres of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). 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 BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. 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 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 - Recommended September 9, 2003 emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. 6. 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. 7. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Avenue 58 (Secondary Arterial, 88' ROW) — No public street right- of-way offers for dedication are required on Avenue 58 for this development. The current General Plan identifies Avenue 58 as a Secondary Arterial that requires 88 feet of right of way (44 feet from centerline). The existing 50-foot right of way from the centerline may be reduced to the current General Plan requirement via vacation of the unneeded right of way on the final map. 8. 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. 9. The private street right-of-ways to be retained for private use required for this development include: A. PRIVATE STREETS 1) All on -site streets, except in the entry drive areas (Lots "D" & "F"), shall have 40-foot right of way as shown on the Tentative Tract Map to accommodate the proposed travel width and approved curb and gutter section. B. CUL DE SACS 1) The cul de sac shall conform to the shape and curb radius at the bulb as shown on the tentative map, using smooth curves instead of angular lines. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 C. KNUCKLE 1) The knuckle shall conform to the shape and curb radius as shown on the tentative tract map except for minor revision as may be required by the City Engineer. Curve radii for curbs at all street intersections shall not be less than 25 feet or similar to the lay out shown on the tentative tract map. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map a ten -foot wide public utility easement contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. Such easement may be reduced to five feet in width with the express written approval of IID. 13. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right- of-ways as follows: A. Avenue 58 (Secondary Arterial/Collector) - 10-foot from the R/W-P/L. The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall design is approved. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on the Final Map. 14. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands and common areas on the Final Map. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 15. Direct vehicular access to Avenue 58 from any portion of the site from frontage along Avenue 58 is restricted, except for those access points identified on the tentative tract map, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final tract map. 16. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. 17. When an applicant proposes the vacation, or abandonment, of any existing right-of-way, or access easement, the recordation of the tract map is subject to the Applicant providing an alternate right-of-way or access easement, to those properties, or notarized letters of consent from the affected property owners. 18. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Tentative Tract Map and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. FINAL MAPS 19. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a standard AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD program. 20. 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. 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 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 berm design in the combined parkway and landscape setback area. B. On -Site Street Plan: 1" = 40' Horizontal, 1''= 4' Vertical C. On -Site Rough Grading Plan: 1" = 40' Horizontal 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 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. In addition to the normal set of improvement plans, a "Site Development" plan is required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official and the City Engineer. 22. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee, established by City Resolution, the applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes from the City. 23. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. .:J Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 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 Citv Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 24. Prior to approval of any Final Map, the applicant shall construct all on and off - site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City. 25. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of guaranteeing the completion of any improvements related to this Tentative Tract Map, shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security). LQMC. 26. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include the removal of any existing structures or other obstructions that are not a part of the proposed improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monumentation. When improvements are phased through a "Phasing Plan," or an administrative approval (e.g., Site Development Permits), all off -site improvements and common on -site improvements (e.g., backbone utilities, retention basins, perimeter walls, landscaping and gates) shall be constructed, or secured through a SIA, prior to the issuance of any permits in the first phase of the development, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations required of each subsequent phase shall either be completed, or secured through a SIA, prior to the completion of homes or the occupancy of permanent buildings within such latter phase, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. In the event the applicant fails to construct the improvements for the development, or fails to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, pursuant to the approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of all permits, and/or final inspections, withhold other Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. 27. 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: Construct certain off -site improvements. A. Construct additional off -site improvements, subject to the reimbursement of its costs by others. B. Reimburse others for those improvements previously constructed that are considered to be an obligation of this tentative tract map. C. Secure the costs for future improvements that are to be made by others. D. 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. 28. 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. G J Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 - Recommended September 9, 2003 Security will not be required for telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V. improvements. 29. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development, or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 30. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 31. 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. 32. To obtain an apprcved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, and C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC. D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance witrl 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 33. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land so as 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. 34. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain and shall conform to the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six (6) of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches 0 8") behind the curb. 35. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 36. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot from the building pads in adjacent developments. 37. 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. 38. 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 - Recommended September 9, 2003 DRAINAGE 39. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 40. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise. 41. 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. 42. 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. 43. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. Additionally, the Homeowners Association (HOA) shall condition that all properties with rear and side property lines abutting internal retention basin/landscaping areas (Lot "P"), be limited to perimeter wall/fences as described in the Section 8.06.040 with wall heights not to exceed three feet (3') topped with two additional feet (2') of wrought iron fence (total 5-foot high) as approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 44. For on -site common retention basins, retention depth shall be according to Engineering Bulletin 97.03, and side slopes shall not exceed 3:1 and shall be planted with maintenance free ground cover. 45. 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 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC. 46. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 47. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. 48. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. UTILITIES 49. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.1 10 (Utilities), LQMC. 50. The applicant shall obtain approval of the City Engineer for 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 practical and aesthetic placement. 51. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. 52. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 53. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access For Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 54. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan: A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Avenue 58 (Secondary Arterial; 88' R/W ): a) Widen the south side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Tentative Map boundary to its ultimate width on the south side as specified in the General Plan and the requirements of these conditions. The south curb face shall be located 32 feet (32') south of the centerline. Other required improvements in the Avenue 58 right of way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: b) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. c) Construct 8-foot wide meandering sidewalk. The meandering sidewalk shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the curb line that touches the back of curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet, and at each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall meander into the landscape setback lot and approach within 5 feet of the perimeter wall at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. d) A Multi -Use Trail - The applicant shall construct a meandering multi -use trail along the Avenue 58 frontage within the back 10- foot portion of the required 22-foot wide combined setback/parkway. The City shall approve the location and design of the trail. A split rail fence shall be constructed to separate the multi -use trail from the pedestrian sidewalk, in accordance with Section 9.140.060 (Item E, 3a) of the Zoning Ordinance. 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. This condition may be void if it is later determined that this trail improvement needs to be relocated to the north side of Avenue 58 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 - Recommended September 9, 2003 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) Lots G, H and J. Construct full 36-foot wide travel width improvements measured from gutter flow line to gutter flow line with an approved curb and gutter section, within the approved right of way where the residential streets are double stacked. C. PRIVATE CUL DE SACS 1) Shall be constructed according to the lay -out and curb radius at the bulb as shown on the tentative map using a smooth curve instead of angular lines similar to the layout shown on the rough grading plan. D. KNUCKLE 1) Construct the knuckle to conform to the layout shown in the tentative tract map, except for minor revisions as may be required by the City Engineer. 55. All gated entries shall provide for a two -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 "U" Turn back 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 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), or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: Residential 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. Secondary Arterial 4.0" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. 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: A. Avenue 58 Primary Entry (approximately 395' east of the westerly boundary, across Stone Creek Way): Full turn in, Full turn out. B. Secondary Entry (at easterly boundary, across Coral Mountain Court): Full turn in, Full turn out. 59. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required street name signs and sidewalks. 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. 61. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements. FIRE MARSHAL 62. For residential areas, approved standard fire hydrants, located at each intersection and spaced 330 feet apart with no portion of any lot frontage more Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 than 165 feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPM for a 2- hour duration at 20 PSI. 63. For any buildings with public access i.e. recreational halls, clubhouses, etc. or buildings with a commercial use i.e. gatehouses, maintenance sheds, etc. Super fire hydrants are to be placed no closer than 25 feet and not more than 165 feet from any portion of the first floor of said building following approved travel ways around the exterior of the building. Minimum fire flow for these areas would be 1500 GPM for a 2-hour duration at 20 PSI. 64. Blue dot retro-reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 65. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all buildings, other than single family, 5,000 sq. ft. or larger to be fully sprinkled. NFPA 13 Standard. If required, sprinkler plans will need to be submitted to the Fire Department. Area separation walls may not be used to reduce the need for sprinklers. 66. Any turn or turn -around requires a minimum 38-foot turning radius. 67. All structures shall be accessible from an approved roadway to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior of the first floor. 68. 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. 69. 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. 70. 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. 71. 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 - Recommended September 9, 2003 72. 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. 73. Fire Department plan check is to run concurrent with the City plan check. CONSTRUCTION 74. 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 75. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC. 76. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, and common lot areas. 77. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit 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. 78. 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. L. � Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 The landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Coachella Valley Water District and Riverside County Agriculture Commissioner prior to submittal of the final plans to the Community Development Department, pursuant to Chapter 8.13 of the Municipal Code. Specific landscape requirements for the project are: A. No more than 50% of any front yard area shall be devoted to turf. Front yard landscaping shall consist at least two trees, each with a minimum 1.5 inch caliper measured three feet up from grade level after planting, ten 5-gallon shrubs, and groundcover. Palm trees may count as a shade tree if the trunk is a minimum six feet tall. Double lodge poles (two-inch diameter) shall be used to stake trees. Bubblers and emitters shall be used to irrigate shrubs and trees. Homebuyers shall be offered a 100% desert landscape option. B. Parkway shade trees shall be provided in the perimeter landscape improvement plans for Avenue 58, to be 24-inch or larger box with a minimum two-inch caliper. Trees shall be a minimum height of ten feet at installation. QUALITY ASSURANCE 79. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 80. 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. 81. 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. 82. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans that 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. C. J Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 MAINTENANCE 83. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 84. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 85. Building heights shall be limited to one-story/22 feet around the perimeter of the tract, for a distance into the site of 150 feet. 86. Revisions to the tentative map during plan check including, but not limited to, lot line alignments, easements, improvement plan revisions, and similar minor changes which do not alter the design (layout, street pattern, etc.) may be administratively approved through the plan check process, with the mutual consent and approval of the Community Development and Public Works Directors. This shall include increases or decreases in number of lots meeting the general criteria above, but involving a change of no more than 5% of the total lot count of the Tentative Map as approved. Any revisions that would exceed the General Plan density standards, based on net area calculations, must be processed as an amended map, as set forth in Title 13, LQMC. 87. Prior to submitting civil plans for any grading or other land disturbance permit(s), the applicant shall have completed a final report of summation and recommendation on the archaeological fieldwork, as completed by CRM Tech for TT 31249. The final report(s) shall be submitted to, reviewed, and accepted by, the Community Development Department and Historic Preservation Commission, prior to issuance of any land disturbance permit or other entitlement. The applicant shall have entered into a contract for archaeological monitoring with a qualified archaeologist, with a copy of that contract/agreement to be submitted with civil plans for any grading or other land disturbance. The contract shall be reviewed and accepted by Community Development prior to any grading permit approval. Should any cultural or historic resource be uncovered during grubbing, grading, trenching or other earth moving activity on or off the project site, all work shall cease and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained to examine the find and determine its significance. The archaeologist shall be empowered to stop or redirect Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Tentative Tract 31249 — Recommended September 9, 2003 earth -moving activities. The archaeologist shall file a report with the Community Development Department immediately following completion of earth moving activities, on the findings at the site. 88. A paleontologic monitor shall be on site during all earth moving activities. The monitor shall be empowered to stop or redirect earth -moving activities on the site. The monitor shall curate all finds using best professional practices, and shall file a report with the Community Development Department reporting on his/her findings immediately following completion of earth moving activities. FEES AND DEPOSITS 89. The applicant shall comply with 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. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect upon application for plan check and permits. 90. Provisions shall be made to comply with terms and requirements of the City's Art in Public Places program, as in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 91. 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). coaengrTT31249 Printed September 5, 2003 Page 20 of 2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, EXCEPT THE SOUTH 180' THEREOF. 547H I AVENUE AIRPORT 8L VD. 0 TT 31249Lw R- 2 LAKE I TE Cr4HUILLA 58TH I AVENUE VICINITY MAP NT$ ATTACHMENT 1 wr lz < IV m Kit 0 1, 0 8 u 0 Z111 11 0 1 e fAg 3 1 il 1 9 XW 0 -1 z 0 0 MW IA; �S� g" , li� � Q I �. r—N WAI M=d) CWM,fA) RUP1925 PENN" H r) cl 11 August 2, 2003 Mr. Steve Speer CITY OF LA QUINTA 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA. 92263-1504 Re: Coral Mountain Specific Plan Amendment #5 Steve: Enclosed please find a blackline copy of Tentative Tract 31249 for reference to a twenty foot (20 ft.) road easement on the easterly, southerly and westerly property lines in the favor of Norman L. White. These easements were for access to a particular piece of property south of the site. The property that these easements were for is incorporated within the Coral Mountain Specific Plan. Please note that the Coral Mountain Specific Plan circulation does not utilize any of these easements. The project has direct access to 58th Avenue and Madison Street. We hereby request at this time, that the City of La Quinta place a condition on the Coral Mountain Specific Plan regarding TKD Desert Development, or any assignees, to vacate these unnecessary easements. The easements are only 20 feet in width and will not serve any purpose or meet existing city standards for roadway purposes. If you have any questions or concerns, please call me at your earliest convenience. MRUSDN 581h PRUNERS Rob McAdams Managing Partner RM:dm Encl. 1 ATTACHMENT 3 (3 PAGES) .Jackson) DeMarcol Peckenpaugh A L A W C 0 R P 0 R A T 1 0 N August 8, 2003 VIA FAX & 0VERNITE EXPRESS Mr. Jerry Herman Director of Community Development City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Direct Dial: 949.851.7401 Email: tpeckenpaugh@jdplaw.com Reply To: Irvine Office File No: 29072 : 500749.1 Re: Proposed Tentative Tract Map Number 31249 Dear Mr. Hermann: �Fp We are advised that Madison 58 Partners, LLC, is the owner of the property to be subdivided by tentative tract map number 31249, and that this owner is subdividing the property for development with single family homes. Our client, Coral Mountain, LLC, owns the property immediately adjacent to the southern border of the Madison 58 Partners property. Our client also owns a twenty -foot -wide easement for road purposes that encumbers the Madison 58 Partners property. This easement is located along the eastern, southern and western sides of the Madison 58 Partners property. Coral Mountain, LLC has no objection to this subdivision. However, our client wishes to be assured that development of the property will not interfere with our client's use and enjoyment of its easement rights in the easement area. Therefore, we are writing to request the City's assistance. The current tentative map properly identifies and illustrates the easement. This information will notify prospective homebuyers that the easement exists. However, the map information does not indicate that the easement is now owned by our client, Coral Mountain, LLC, the adjoining landowner. It would be helpful if information on the map could be expanded to identify our client as the adjoining landowner and the current owner of the easement. We also note on the current tentative map two issues of concern with respect to the proposed grades. First, the grades vary from lot to lot by as much as 1.5 feet vertically. Our client expects that these grades within the easement will be softened to create a smooth continuous road surface. In addition, the proposed grades vary by as much as 3 feet vertically above the native grade. While our client does not object in principal to these grade variances, our client will expect that the applicant will not object to grade variations which will appear on tentative maps which our client submits in the future for its adjacent property. Irvine Office Westlake Village Office 2030 Main Street, Suite 1200 2815 Townsgate Road, Suite 200 www.jdpiaw.com Irvine, California 92614 Westlake Village, California 91361 t:949.752.8585 f:949.752.0597 t:805.230.0023 f:805.230.0087 Mr. Jerry Herman City of La Quinta August 8, 2003 Page 2 Our client does not want to get into arguments with future homeowners who will be their neighbors. To avoid misunderstandings by those future homeowners, we believe it would be appropriate for the City to require every purchaser of a home developed on the property to be given a written disclosure of this easement along with notice that the easement area may not be obstructed or interfered with in any way. We respectfully request that the City require (a) adding information to the map as discussed above; (b) the disclosure and notice requirement as a condition to approving the proposed map; and (c) ensure that any grade variances between lots within the approved plan do not create a material obstruction to use of the easement. Thank you for your consideration and cooperation. Very truly yours Thomas D. Peckenpaugh TDP/kas Enclosures cc: Coral Mountain, LLC Madison 58 Partners, LLC Coachella Valley Engineers, Inc. TDP071 \29072\000\LTR\5 00749.1 . 1 J PH #D STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 (CONTINUED FROM 8-12-03) CASE NUMBERS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-478, SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-065, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31379 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-778 - VILLA LA QUINTA APPLICANT: CENTEX DESTINATION PROPERTIES PROPERTY OWNER: LANDAQ, INCORPORATED REQUESTS: CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION; REVIEW OF THE "VILLA LA QUINTA" SPECIFIC PLAN CREATING DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR A RESIDENTIAL RESORT OF 280 UNITS ON 44.61 ACRES; SUBDIVISION MAP REVIEW FOR 18 DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER COMMON LOTS FOR STREETS AND RETENTION BASINS; AND REVIEW OF MULTIPLE HOUSING UNIT PLANS FOR ONE AND TWO STORY BUILDINGS RANGING IN SIZE FROM 1,300 SQ. FT. TO 2,090 SQ. FT. AND CLUBHOUSE BUILDING LOCATION: NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND COACHELLA DRIVE ARCHITECT: WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ENGINEER: M.D.S. CONSULTING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: FORREST K. HAAG, ASLA, INC. GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS: TOURIST COMMERCIAL AND OPEN SPACE SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: HILLSIDE OPEN SPACE SOUTH: VACANT TOURIST COMMERCIAL PROPERTY EAST: A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF 169 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS UNDER TRACT 29436; TO THE SOUTHEAST (ACROSS EISENHOWER DR.), EXISTING DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES WEST: HILLSIDE OPEN SPACE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-478; BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT; THEREFORE, A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS RECOMMENDED. BACKGROUND: The 44.61-acre site is vacant and located to the northwest of the intersection of Eisenhower Drive and Coachella Drive. The site has been disturbed by off -road vehicle use, illegal dumping and human and pet visitation. Site History In 1998, the Community Development Department started processing a request by Mr. Forrest K. Haag for the KSL Development Corporation to develop a 300-unit timeshare project on this site under Specific Plan 99-041 and other affiliated applications. The Draft EIR (State Clearinghouse #99101024) was completed and circulated for a mandatory 45-day review period that began on May 25, 2000, and concluded on July 10, 2000. The development applications were withdrawn from further processing on September 15, 2000, after the August 22, 2000 Planning Commission meeting, based on receipt of a letter from Mr. David K. Robbins, Senior Vice President for KSL Development Corporation. The Tourist Commercial (TC) land use designation was applied to this property by the City Council on March 20, 2002, during approval of a city-wide General Plan update (Attachment 1). Under the TC provisions, site density is set by the Planning Commission and City Council during review of a development proposal. The Tourist Commercial zoning classification was implemented this year under Zone Change 2003-113 (Ordinance No. 2003-381). Recordation of Lot Line Adjustment 2001-361 on October 23, 2001, established the current boundaries of this development site (i.e., Parcel 1), which is smaller than that proposed in 1998 (Attachment 2). PROJECT REQUEST: Specific Plan Overview The request is for approval of "Villa La Quinta Specific Plan" establishing guidelines and standards for the distribution of land uses, circulation, development standards, and requirements for public improvements (Attachment 3). The Plan proposes development of 280 resort residential units (6.27 units per acre) oriented around private parking and recreational facilities. The Specific Plan identifies four Planning Areas, as follows: Planning Area 1 242 units Planning Area II 38 units Planning Area III Clubhouse facilities Planning Area IV Perimeter open space Housing units will be individually owned; buildings are one and two story (up to 28 feet) high depending on the location within the development. A one story building buffer is being proposed along the east property line within Planning Area 11. Community pools are spread throughout the proposed private development. Under Section 2.7.4 of the Plan, recreational facilities for the site include: "open space, lawn sports, interpretive trail system, swimming pools and spas, passive "fountain court" retreats, water elements, and art work." A 10,300 square foot clubhouse is planned in close proximity to the project entry, and includes a convenience store, administrative offices, fitness center, men and women's locker rooms, and steam and sauna areas. Outside the clubhouse building is a fourteen -space parking lot and recreational amenities. See Section 2.9.1 of the Specific Plan document and the developer's Architectural Booklet. The proposed Architectural Guidelines (Section 2.9.2) state that the development plans will use Spanish Colonial architectural design elements that are exemplified at the La Quinta Resort and Club. Building massing and scale are broken up providing an asymmetrical character with the use of enclosed patios and courtyards; building materials include plaster, wood, clay tile, brick, masonry, wrought iron, carved stone, ceramic the and other decorative materials. The Plan identifies schematic examples of roof forms, walls, doorways, windows, columns, exterior stairways and other pertinent exterior elements. Residential development standards for Planning Areas I and II propose garages and carports setback three feet from the interior parking courts with buildings having varied setbacks depending on site location and/or orientation as prescribed by Section 9.60.320 of the Zoning Code. The Landscape Development (Section 2.9.3) concept proposes to use indigenous and drought resistant plant materials in combination with lush landscaping improvements. A palette of plant materials is provided in Table 11 of Section 2.9.4. illustrations show focal point greenbelts and the use of trees for visual relief. A perimeter trail is proposed within the retention basin areas abutting hillside areas. Project walls are planned for security and privacy. Where partial privacy and/or a view opportunity is available, a combination of solid masonry walls and tubular steel fence panel is proposed to be used. Fencing details begin on page 2.49 in the Specific Plan. The list of allowable uses for the site, as outlined in the Specific Plan document, include semi-public uses (library, scenic tours, and museums), restaurants and bars, live entertainment, indoor or outdoor theaters (live or motion picture) and other uses depending on the planning area. Tentative Tract Map The applicant's land division request proposes 18 development lots and other lettered lots for streets, open space and retention basins. Development lots range in size from 0.9 acres to 2.74 acres. The clubhouse is planned for Lot 1 (1.84 acres), and Lots 2-18 (28.69 acres) are for residential development. Street Lot "A" and a proposed off -site easement provide access to the development from Eisenhower Drive, a Primary Arterial thoroughfare. Street Lot "A" has a 16- foot wide landscape median and connects to Street Lots "B" and "F" (an extension of Full Moon Way to the east in Tract 29436), which connects to Street Lots "C" through "E". Street Lot "G", a cross connection street in the north portion of the development, is for emergency vehicles. Enhanced paving is to be used in front of the clubhouse and at the intersection of Street Lots "A" and "F". Ten -foot wide public utility easements are shown abutting each side of the private on -site streets. As proposed, 804 parking spaces are provided throughout the entire project (Attachment 4). Open parking spaces are spread throughout the project, including the use of parallel spaces along the on -site streets. Site grading has been designed to be consistent with neighboring improvements, including the planned improvements for Tract 29436. Pad heights vary from 56.5' above sea level (rear portion of Lot 10) to 46.5' (Street Lot "A"), a ten -foot difference over a length of approximately 2,000 feet. Grading activities are most intense along the toe of the mountain in order to form the proposed on -site retention basins and open space corridor. The basins will also help to catch rock boulders that become dislodged during ground shaking activities or heavy rains. Regarding site hydrology, Section 2.8.3 of the Specific Plan document includes an overview of the site constraints and on -site stormwater management issues. Site Development Permit Housing units range in size from 1,300 square feet to 2,090 square feet. One element of the Plan is to include "lock -out" capabilities which would allow the house to be divided into sections for rental purposes. An overview of the housing unit types is as follows: Duplex Unit, Type "A" (Lock -out units) Duplex Unit, Type "B" (Lock -out units) Duplex Unit, Type "C" 1,300 to 1637 sq. ft. 1,300 to 1637 sq. ft. 1,300 sq. ft. One Story (6 units) One Story (16 units) One Story (8 units) Fourplex (Plans 1 & 1 Stacked 1,300 sq. ft. Two Story (40 units) Flats w/o Garages, Type "D" (Lock -out units) Type "E" Product (Lock -out units) 1,300 to 1,637 sq. ft. Two Story (12 units) Type "F" Product (Lock -out units) 1,300 to 1,637 sq. ft. Two Story (104 units) Townhouse — Duplex (Plans 3 Plan 3 — 1,748 sq. ft. One Story (46 units)' and 4), Type "G" Plan 4 — 1,835 sq. ft. Townhouse — Duplex (Plans 5 and 6), Type "H" Plan 5 — 1,937 sq. ft. Two Story (48 units) Plan 6 — 2,090 sq. ft. Spanish -style architectural elements are proposed including exterior stucco walls, red clay roofs (barrel S-tile), multi -paned windows, accented building entrances, and other decorative fenestration (e.g., ornamental wrought iron, wood window shutters, French doors, etc.) as outlined in the Specific Plan document. Exterior building colors are white for stucco walls, blue for window frames, black for metal elements, and brown for exposed wood. Roof tiles are a blend of various shades of red. Detailed architectural plans for the clubhouse demonstrates that the building will house a multipurpose room, lounge, reception area, offices, storage, coffee shop, meeting and exercise rooms, and restrooms. A formal building entrance is planned on the south side of the clubhouse building, which bisects the building into two quadrants, and once in the loggia fronts onto a courtyard with outdoor seating and ' Townhouse units have attached two car garages. Resort units have garage and carport parking areas. Open parking spaces are also being proposed. j water fountain. The building incorporates an observation level above the meeting room with two sets of stairways, one inside the building and the other on the south side of building. Architectural materials match the residential housing product, and to add interest to the building, multiple roof heights are proposed. Other architectural upgrades include large arched windows, freestanding columns, cantera stone surrounds, decorative metal grilles, inset windows and mosaic tiles. Gable roofs break up the linear facades. An arbor connects the multipurpose room building to the pavilion gazebo structure and abuts a rectangular rose garden. In some instances, urns are mounted on column elements for visual appeal. Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) Review A Phase 11 Archaeological Site Assessment was completed by Statistical Research, Incorporated on January 17, 2000, revealing that the trash (circa 1920's and 1930's) from the La Quinta Hotel had, for a short time period, been left on the site. Regarding the site, proper documentation has occurred and no further action, or mitigation, is required. However, concerning prehistoric sites, additional subsurface archaeological deposits may exist, requiring monitoring during grading activities. The City's HPC reviewed the report on August 29, 2003, and concurred with the site monitoring recommendation by adoption of Minute Motion 2003-011 on a 5-0 vote. The Commission also required that the milling stations remain undisturbed, and be preserved through the establishment of a conservation easement, or other mechanism approved by the City Attorney. Architecture and Landscape Review Committee (ALRC) The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of August 6, 2003, and on a 3-0 vote adopted Minute Motion 2003-031, recommending approval of the development plans, subject to certain conditions being met during plan check (Attachment 5). Public Notice This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 22, 2003, and mailed to all property owners and residents within 500 feet of the site on July 15 and 17, 2003, for the August 12' Planning Commission meeting, pursuant to Section 13.12.100 of the Subdivision Ordinance and Section 9.200.110 of the Zoning Code. Additionally, a Notice of Intent was filed with the Riverside County Clerk on July 17, 2003, in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines. To date, no comments have been received from adjacent property owners. Any written comments received will be handed out at the meeting. I Public Agency Review A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City Departments on July 14 and 17, 2003. All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. Applicable comments received have been included in the recommended Conditions of Approval. Biological Resources Overview Site documentation under the previously prepared DEIR indicate that: "No sensitive vegetation communities or plant species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special status species were observed on the project site. Therefore, the proposed project in conjunction with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects will not result in a cumulative impact related to the disturbance of vegetation." Mitigation measures for the preservation of the Peninsular bighorn sheep, a protected species that may exist in the surrounding mountains, is addressed in the attached Environmental Assessment. Tourist Commercial (CT) Zoning Designation The purpose and intent of the Tourist Commercial District is to provide a narrow range of specialized commercial uses oriented to tourist and resort activities. Land uses include destination resort hotels, conference -oriented hotels and motels, eating and drinking establishments, accessory retail and personal service shops and recreational uses. Buildings within the CT District shall not exceed 40 feet high, or three stories. Under Section 9.60.320 (Resort Residential) of the Zoning Code, resort residential projects are allowed in a Tourist Commercial area with a Specific Plan, ensuring that the purpose is to establish units that are "individually owned but rented for periods of thirty consecutive days or less, on the basis and oriented to tourist and resort activity as part of a golf/resort country club." In this case, the proposed resort units will be individually owned and marketed with the La Quinta Resort and Club which is a full -service, golf -oriented mixed land use resort to the south of the site. Resort buildings are limited to two stories (28' high), unless otherwise allowed by a Specific Plan document. Without the Specific Plan document, the townhouse units would not be permitted for this property based on Table 9-5 of the Zoning Code. Resort residential projects are required to pay transient occupancy taxes to the City of La Quinta pursuant to Chapter 3.24 of the Municipal Code. Parking Study The developer commissioned a parking study, prepared by Walker Parking Consultants, for the property to determine the number of vehicle parking spaces necessary to service the on -site uses. The study compared the City's requirements to a few valley cities and other Southern California urban areas, concluding that townhouse units should have 212 spaces, lockout units should have 429 spaces, and 32 spaces for the clubhouse for a combined minimum requirement of 673. Under the existing Zoning Code provisions, the project requirements are: 94 Townhouses (2.8 spaces per dwelling unit) = 263 186 Resort Units (one space per bedroom) = 489 Clubhouse Building = 43 to 305 z 795 to 1,057 (total) Because a Specific Plan is proposed, the Planning Commission and City Council shall determine the number of parking spaces for the project. ANALYSIS: Various environmental studies were used to evaluate this project, and it has been determined that there are no issues that cannot be mitigated, including provisions for the protection of the Peninsular bighorn sheep. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the main project entry on Eisenhower Drive. Conditions of Approval in support of the request are contained in Tentative Tract Map 31379. The residential units use varying building designs to create offsets and architectural interest as prescribed by the Zoning Code, and under the recommended development scenario, active development activities will be confined to Planning Area III. As proposed, a one story -building buffer is being implemented on the east side of Planning Area fl to ensure mountain views are retained for the abutting low - density residential property (Condition #22 of SP 2003-065). After reviewing the developer's parking study and consideration of the City's Parking Ordinance provisions for shared parking, staff supports a minimum parking ratio of 2.25 for townhouse units (e.g., similar to attached single family housing units), 1.0/bedroom for resort units, and 1.0/300 square feet for accessory clubhouse buildings. Under this recommendation, the overall parking ratio for residential units is 2.5 with 33 spaces set aside for clubhouse facilities, or 734 parking spaces. Condition #12 of SP 2003-065 addresses this parking Under the Zoning Code, clubs and lodging halls require one parking space for every 35 square feet of building area, or 305 parking spaces. Hotel meeting facilities require one parking space for every 75 square feet of building area, or 143 parking spaces. Using variable ratios for each element of the building yields 43 parking spaces. r; requirement. Based on the tract map exhibit, the project will have 70 extra parking spaces to assist expansion needs and special gatherings. Concerning the various land uses in the development, staff recommends the following deletions from the applicant's development document to be consistent with surrounding low -intensity developments and taking into account the site's close proximity to bighorn sheep habitat areas: Planning Area I PA 11 PA III PA IV Recreation (tennis club Recreation (tennis club Semi -Public (library Recreation (tennis club and live entertainment) and live entertainment) and museums) and health clubs, and Semi -Public (library Semi -Public (library live entertainment) and museums) and museums) Semi -Public (library, Temporary (outdoor Temporary museums and events along the (construction facilities) pools/spas) perimeter of the Office/Health Services Accessory (parking and Dining. Drinking, development) facilities) and Entertainment Temporary (outdoor events) Office/Health Services and Dining. Drinkina, and Entertainment Note: Condition #15 of the Specific Plan addresses a revised land use table for this project. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Site disturbances over the years have been limited to off -road vehicles and other trespassers. The blowsand formed at the base of the hillsides is not large enough to be considered worthy of preservation as no unique plants or animals were observed using the habitat. Environmental findings in support of the development are contained in the attached environmental documents. Public infrastructure improvements exist on Eisenhower Drive to service the development, and traffic signal modifications will be made to accommodate the fourth leg. Therefore, all findings as noted in the attached Resolutions can be made that the proposed Specific Plan, Tentative Tract Map and Site Development are consistent with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan and Zoning Code. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_, recommending to the City Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (Environmental Assessment 2003-478) pursuant to the findings and mitigation measures; and 0 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 2003-065, subject to the attached findings and conditions; and 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 31379, subject to the attached findings and conditions; and 4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit 2003-778, subject to the attached findings and conditions. Attachments: 1. General Plan Map - Excerpt 2. LLA 2001-361 2. Site Plan 3. TTM Map 4. ALRC Minutes of August 6, 2003 (Excerpt) 5. Large Documents (Commission members only) Prepared by: Greg Tr usdell, Associate Planner PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-065, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31379 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-778 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-478 APPLICANT: CENTEX DESTINATION PROPERTIES WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq. ("CEQA Guidelines") collectively for the above -cited applications to develop a 280-unit residential development (Villa La Quinta) on 44.61 acres located on the west side of Eisenhower Drive at Coachella Drive, more particularly described as: Assessor's Parcel Nos. 658-130-003 to -005 Parcel 1 of LLA 2001-361 Portion of Section 36, TSS, R6E, SBBM WHEREAS, the City's Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the property owner's Cultural Resources Assessment on June 17, 1999, for EA 98-367 and Specific Plan 99-041, and determined that testing and site monitoring was required by adoption of Minute Motion 99-017; and WHEREAS, the City's Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the property owner's Phase Il Archaeological Assessment on August 29, 2003, and determined that site monitoring and a conservation easement for milling stations were required by adoption of Minute Motion 2003-01 1; and WHEREAS, the City mailed Notice of its Intention to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration in compliance with Pubic Resources Code (PRC) § 21092 on July 15 and 17, 2003, to landowners and residents within 500 feet of the Project Site and to all public entities entitled to notice under CEQA, which also included a notice of the Public Hearing before the Planning Commission on August 12, 2003; and WHEREAS, the City published a Notice of its Intention to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and associated Initial Study in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 22, 2003, and further caused the notice to be filed with the Riverside County Clerk on July 17, 2003, in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines; and Planning Commission Resolution 2003- EA 2003-478, Villa La Quinta (Centex) Adopted: September 9, 2003 WHEREAS, during the comment period, the City received comment letters on the Mitigated Negative Declaration from local public agencies. The Community Development Department personnel reviewed and considered these comments, and has incorporated them into mitigation measures. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission, as follows: SECTION 1: The above recitations are true and correct and are adopted as the Findings of the Planning Commission. SECTION 2: The Planning Commission finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and processed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the City's implementation procedures. The Planning Commission has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), and finds that it adequately describes and addresses the environmental effects of the Project, and that, based upon the Initial Study, the comments received thereon, and the entire record of proceeding for this Project, there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record that there may be significant adverse environmental effects as a result of the Project. The mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration have been incorporated into the Project and these measures mitigate any potential significant effect to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects will occur as a result of this Project. SECTION 3: 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 2003-478. SECTION 4: 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, in that site mitigation measures are planned. SECTION 5: 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. SECTION 6: The Project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as no Planning Commission Resolution 2003- EA 2003-478, Villa La Quinta (Centex) Adopted: September 9, 2003 significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the Environmental Assessment. SECTION 7: 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. SECTION 8: The Project will not have the environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. SECTION 9: The Planning Commission has fully considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and the comments received thereon. SECTION 10: The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. SECTION 11: The location of the documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission decision is based is the La Quinta City Hall, Community Development Department, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 92253, and the custodian of those records is Jerry Herman, Community Development Director. SECTION 12: A Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A", is hereby adopted pursuant to PRC § 21081.6 in order to assure compliance with the mitigation measures during Project implementation. SECTION 13: 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. SECTION 14: 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). SECTION 15: The Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby recommended to the City Council for final certification. SECTION 16: The Community Development Director shall cause to be filed with the County Clerk a Notice of Determination pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15075(a) once reviewed by the City Council. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- EA 2003-478, Villa La Quinta (Centex) Adopted: September 9, 2003 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 9th day of September 2003, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California :A Environmental Checklist Form Exhibit A Project title: Specific Plan 03-065, Tentative Tract Map 31379 and Site Development Permit 2003-778 (Villa La Quinta) 2. Lead agency name and address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact person and phone number: Greg Trousdell 760-777-7125 4. Project location: To the northwest of the intersection of Eisenhower Drive and Coachella Drive APN: 658-301-003, -004, &-005; Parcel 1 of Lot Line Adjustment 2001-361 5. Project sponsor's name and address: Centex Destination Properties (Mr. Steven Patterson) 1111 Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite 101 Palm Springs, CA 92262 (760-318-2081) 6. General plan designation: Tourist Commercial and 7. Zoning: Tourist Commercial and Open Space Open Space 8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Specific Plan to establish the development standards and guidelines for the development of 280 resort residential units, a clubhouse and associated pool, and open space areas on a 44.61 acre parcel located on the west side of Eisenhower Drive at Coachella Drive. The project will include 94 townhomes and 186 resort condominium units, which can be locked off to result in 489 "rooms" or "keys." The lock -off units will be available for rent through the La Quinta Hotel property, which lies adjacent and south of the proposed project site. Site Development Permit to allow construction of one and two story resort residential units and a clubhouse, pool and ancillary facilities on the 44+ acre site. The proposed style of architecture is Spanish Colonial with structures allowing multiple units per building. The clubhouse is proposed to be one story, with a central courtyard, and including a lounge and restaurant, office space, a meeting room and multi -purpose room, and an exercise area. Tentative Tract Map to divide the property into 18 residential lots and various common lettered lots for streets, retention basins, etc. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -1- South: Vacant Tourist Commercial site, mountainous area, and La Quinta Hotel property North and West: Mountainous areas, Open Space East: Low Density Residential, Tract 29436 project site, currently under construction 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Imperial Irrigation District, Coachella Valley Water District, Verizon, Sunline Transit, Time Warner, Desert Sands Unified School District, So. Calif. Gas, etc. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -2- U 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 X 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. /s/ Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner Community Development Dept. for the City of La Quinta August 21, 2003 Date PAGreg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -3- EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -4- -`- 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a X scenic vista? (General Plan Exhibit 3.6) b) Substantially damage scenic X resources, 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)-c) The project site is generally flat, and occurs at an elevation of 60 to 75 feet above sea level. The site abuts the steep slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains, which surround the property on the west and north sides. The site is located on Eisenhower Drive, which is designated a Primary Image Corridor in the General Plan. The proposed project includes residential and clubhouse land uses in clustered buildings of one and two stories. The visual impacts associated with the proposed project will not significantly detract from the dramatic views of the mountains to the west, which rise steeply from the site, and are much more elevated than the proposed structures. The proposed open space lands along the northern, southern and western property boundary, which are, at a minimum, 50 feet in depth, will assure that the structures are removed from the edge of hillsides. The P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -5- 1 J proposed project will not construct any structures above the toe of slope, nor build two story units along the west, north and east property lines. The overall impacts associated with scenic vistas and resources appear to be limited. The one and two story structures proposed for the site will be dwarfed by the steep hillsides of the Santa Rosa Mountains which occur on the west and north property lines. Single story buildings are proposed along the east property line affording a "view corridor" from Tract 29436. Overall impacts to scenic resources are expected to be less than significant. I. d) The proposed project will generate light from parking lot lighting, lighting on buildings and walkways, and similar facilities. The applicant will be required to present a photometric analysis of the lighting impacts which demonstrates that lighting does not spill over the project property line. All lighting, as required by the Development Code, will be directed downward and shielded. The potential impacts associated with light and glare are expected to be less than significant (also see Biological Resources, below). P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -6- 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. I11-21 ff. ) b) Conflict with existing zoning for X 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? (No ag. land in proximity to project site) II. a)-c) The project site is vacant desert land and has not been in agriculture. Lands surrounding the project site are planned, under construction and developed in low density residential land uses. No impacts to agriculture will result with development of the proposed project. PAGreg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -7- 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 ('EQA Handbook) c) Result in a cumulatively considerable X net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, 2002 PM10 Plan for the Coachella Valley) d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) III. a)-c) The City's primary source of pollution is the automobile. The traffic study prepared for the proposed project estimated that the project will generate approximately 2,518 daily trips'. Assuming this number of trips, and an average speed of 45 miles per hour, the following emissions can be expected on a daily basis. "Villa La Quinta Traffic Impact Analysis," prepared by VRPA "Technologies, February 2000; and follow up Memorandum, dated June 25, 2003, signed Erik Ruehr. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -8- Moving Exhaust Emission Projections at Project Buildout (pounds per day) Ave. Trip Total Total No. Vehicle Trips/Day Length (miles) miles/day 2,518 x 15 37,770 PM10 PM10 PM10 Pollutant ROC CO NO Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Grams at 45 mph 3,777.00 84,227.10 15,108.00 - 377.70 377.70 Pounds at 45 mph 8.34 185.93 33.35 - 0.83 0.83 SCAQMD Threshold (lbs./day) 75 550 100 150 Based on California Air Resources Board's EMFAC7G Emissions Model. Assumes Year 2005 summertime running conditions at 75 F, light duty autos, catalytic. As demonstrated above, the proposed project will not exceed any of SCAQMD's recommended daily thresholds for criteria pollutants. 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 as an on -going issue. These measures will be integrated into conditions of approval for the proposed project. These include the following control measures. 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 1,174 pounds per day, for a limited period while grading operations are active. In order to mitigate the potential impacts associated with PM 10 dust generation at the site, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented. 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. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -9- ,N 0 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. 3. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities. 4. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on 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. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. ®pen space areas along the perimeter of the site shall be re - naturalized with the first phase of construction. 8. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of construction - related dirt on approach routes to the site. 9. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 mph. 10. The project proponent shall notify the City and SCAQMD of the start and end of grading activities in conformance and within the time frames established in the 2002 PM 10 Management Plan. III. d) & e) The proposed project will consist of residential and resort land uses, and will neither expose people to concentrations of pollutant, nor to objectionable odors. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -10- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, X either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) b) Have a substantial adverse effect on X any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on X federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) d) Interfere substantially with the X movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) e) Conflict with any local policies or X ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) f) Conflict with the provisions of an X P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -11- > a.l adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) IV. a)-f) The proposed project site is currently vacant desert land. Multiple biological resource analyses have been prepared for the proposed project'. In addition, the previously prepared but not certified "Draft Environmental Impact Report Villa La Quintal" (EIR) document identified impacts and mitigation measures for biological resources on a site which included the hillsides as well as the lands included in the current project. Finally, comments were received, both in response to the Draft EIR and the current proposal, from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game, respectively. The discussion which follows considers and includes all these documents by reference. The documents are available in their entirety at the Community Development Department. The project site consists primarily of bare alkali sink and saltbush scrub, with creosote bush scrub at the very west end of the site. A stand of mesquite has also resulted in a series of mesquite hummocks in the central and eastern end of the property. The mesquite, however, are not healthy, possibly due to a dropping of the water table. The site is not listed as appropriate habitat for Coachella Valley milk vetch by either the US Fish and Wildlife Service or the California Department of Fish and Game, nor is the plant listed for this area in the California Native Plan Society database. The isolated mesquite hummock, combined with the highly disturbed nature of the site, is not representative of the blowsand habitat needed for the milk vetch. The site has also been significantly disturbed by off -road vehicle use, illegal dumping and human and pet visitation. No sensitive species were observed on the site during previously performed biological surveys. A bighorn bedding area and coyote den were identified in the hillside above the site, as was a bat roost. The current project does not propose to infringe on any of these areas. Although the project site is mapped as critical habitat for the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep, the current project, which includes only the valley floor area of the overall previously studied site, is not habitat for the sheep'. The current project has eliminated development to the toe of slope by including an Open Space area along the project perimeter, adjacent to the toe of slope. This open space area will help to reduce potential conflicts between bighorn sheep and project components. The potential conflicts which could occur as a result of project buildout include access for bighorn sheep, poisonous plants currently included in the project landscaping plan, and conflicts with domestic animals. All these "Biological Survey for La Quinta Resort and Club Real," prepared by Tierra Madre Consultants, Inc., July, 1998; Letter report prepared by Terra :Nova Planning & Research, Inc., July, 1998; and Letter report prepared by PCR Services Corp., January, 2000. PCR Services Corp, May, 2000. Personal communication, Kimberly Nichol, California Department of Fish and Game, July 2003. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -12- ,� ti potential impacts can be mitigated, and mitigation measures have been included below which will reduce potential impacts to biological resources to a less than significant level. 1. A three person committee shall be formed, consisting of a representative of the Homeowners' Association (HOA), a representative of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and the Community Development Director. The purpose of the committee shall be to assess the need for a fence to keep Peninsular bighorn sheep from entering the project site. The committee shall monitor sheep activity through various means, including interviews with residents and visitors, and any available scientific data available and/or funded by the HOA. If bighorn sheep are seen on the project site, the committee shall require that the HOA, at its expense, construct an 8 foot fence along the property line between the project and the hillside. Gaps in the fence should be 11 centimeters or less. At the request of CDFG, temporary fencing may be required between the time that sheep are seen on the site and the time that permanent fencing is required. The committee shall exist for a period of 10 years, unless bighorn sheep are documented to no longer inhabit the Santa Rosa Mountains. At the end of ten (10) years, if any one member of the committee deems it necessary for the committee shall continue, until such time as it is dissolved by a unanimous vote of all its members. 2. The construction area shall be clearly delineated to keep project impacts off of adjacent hillsides. The project proponent shall cause the project boundaries to be staked and roped off or fenced at the edge of the property. 3. Non-native plant species known to be toxic to bighorn sheep (especially Oleander), shall not be used on the project landscaping. The project landscaping plan shall be reviewed by a qualified biologist and approved prior to the installation of any landscaping on the site. The applicant shall furnish the Community Development Department with written proof of biological approval prior to issuance of grading permits. 4. Domestic pets shall be prohibited on -site during construction. 5. The CC&Rs for the project shall prohibit dogs from running loose in the project site. The open space area along the boundary of the project shall be posted as prohibited to dogs. 6. The CC&Rs for the project shall include a provision prohibiting access by either persons or animals to the adjacent hillsides. A signage plan for the property boundary, within the open space area, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval, demonstrating the location and size of signage prohibiting access to the hillsides. 7. Should the project proponent wish to begin construction between January 1 and June 30 of any given year, the project proponent shall confer with the California Department of Fish and Game prior to any ground disturbing activity, to determine whether an active bighorn sheep bedding area occurs immediately above the project site. Should a lambing area be identified, the project proponent shall implement mitigation measures, as required by CDFG. Should the initiation of construction occur between July 1 and December 31 of any given year, no contact with CDFG shall be required. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -13- r t .. 1 8. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit a plan demonstrating that all pesticides, fungicides, herbicides and fertilizers used on the site, during both construction and operations, are not harmful to wildlife. The plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. 9. Planning Area IV shall be landscaped entirely with native and endemic landscaping. 10. The Specific Plan shall be amended to prohibit the construction of any structure or pool in Planning Area IV. 11. All trails within Planning Area IV shall be clearly delineated, and shall not lead to the hillsides adjacent to the property. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -14- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would theproject: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? (" Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report," CRM Tech, August 2003) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? (" Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report," CRM Tech, August 2003) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ("Paleontological Resources Assessment Report," CRM Tech, August 2003) d) Disturb any human remains, including X those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (" Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report," CRM Tech, August 2003) V. a), b) & d) Both Phase I and Phase II studies were conducted on the project site, for the previously proposed projects. The Phase I analysis identified a total of 8 potential sites, 4 historic and 4 prehistoric, which qualified as potentially significant under CEQA. The Phase II site investigation, including shovel survey, determined that the artifacts were superficial, and that there appeared to be no buried deposits on the site. The artifacts located on the surface were properly inventoried and curated, and primarily identified as relating to the construction of the La Quinta Resort in the 1930s. However, the study recommends that during earth moving activities, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: A qualified archaeologist shall be retained and present on site during all on and off site earth moving activities. Proof of retention of a qualified monitor shall be provided to the Community Development Department prior to issuance of the first earth moving permit for the site. The archaeologist shall be empowered to stop or redirect earth moving activities. The archaeologist shall file a report with the "Cultural Resources Reconnaissance for the La Quinta Resort and Club Real..." prepared by RMW Paleo Associates, 1999. Also "Pashe II Archaeological Site Assessment for the Villa La Quints Project," Statistical Research, Inc., January, 2000. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -15- _. J �.b Community Development Department immediately following completion of earth moving activities, on the findings at the site. 2. A conservation easement or a condition shall be placed within the CC&R's for preservation of the historic milling stations. The conservation easement shall be in perpetuity; if a condition is placed within the CC&R's, the City shall have the right to accept or reject any and all amendments to the CC&R's. During grading activities, the milling stations shall be roped off and preserved. The City Attorney shall review the conservation easement and/or CC &R's before being recorded with the County of Riverside. V. c) The site is in a low probability area for paleontologic resources, and no impacts are therefore expected from development of the project site'. Exhibit 6.8, City of la Quinta General Plan. PAGreg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -16- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, X as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (MEA Exhibit 6.2) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (MEA X Exhibit 6.2) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, X including liquefaction? (General Plan Exhibit 8.2) iv) Landslides? (General Plan Exhibit 8.3) X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or X the loss of topsoil? (General Plan Exhibit 8.4) d) Be located on expansive soil, as X defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (General Plan Exhibit 8.1) e) Have soils incapable of adequately X supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (General Plan Exhibit 8.1) VI. a) i), iv), b)-e) The project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it subject to high winds. The soil in the area is not expansive, and would support septic tanks. The proposed project will have no impact on these geologic hazards. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -17- VI. a) ii) The City and project site will be subject to significant ground shaking in the event of seismic activity. The site is located in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The City Building Department has implemented California Building Codes which are intended to lower the potential impacts associated with groundshaking to less than significant levels. The City Engineer requires that site specific geologic investigations be submitted with the submittal of building plans. This investigation, which will include borings of site soils, will include recommendations for soil compaction and excavation, and will identify soils susceptible to settlement, if they occur on site. VI. a) iii) The site is located adjacent to the steep slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains, and to an area designated as highly susceptible to rock fall in the event of a seismic activity. Although the proposed project does not encroach into the hillside, rock fall could be an issue due to this adjacency. Therefore, in order to assure that the potential impacts from rock fall are mitigated to a less than significant level, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1. As part of the site -specific geotechnical analysis required for the project with submittal of building plans, the project geologist shall include an analysis of the surrounding steep hillsides, and shall make recommendations about the stability of these hillsides in his report. The report shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits, and/or during map processing activities. PAGreg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Ckist Centex 2003 - Final.doc -18- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would theproject: a) Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Application materials) c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle X hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Application materials) d) Be located on a site which is included X on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing) e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) 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) P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -19- z �1 v g) Impair implementation of or X physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (General Plan MEA p. 95 ff) h) Expose people or structures to a X significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) VII. a)-h) The proposed project will result in the construction of attached single family residences and resort residential residences. No concentration of hazardous materials is expected in these homes. The City implements household hazardous waste programs through its solid waste franchisee. The site is not located within the vicinity of an airport or airstrip, nor is it subject to wildland fires. PAGreg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -20- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER UALITY -- Would theproject: a) Violate any water quality standards or X waste discharge requirements? (General Plan EIR p. III-187 ff.) b) Substantially deplete groundwater X supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? (General Plan EIR p. I1I-187 ff.) c) Substantially alter the existing X drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? (Project Grading, Site Hydrology) 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? (Project Grading, Site Hydrology) 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? (Project Grading, Site Hydrology) P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -21- �e f) Place housing within a 100-year flood X hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 6.6) 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) The proposed project includes the construction of 94 townhomes for permanent residency, and 186 resort residential units for temporary occupancy. The Coachella Valley Water District has developed factors for water usage, which assign factors for various land uses. The factor for condominiums, which comes closest to the description of the proposed project, is 6.36 acre feet per year per acre. Using this factor, it can be estimated that the proposed project will utilize 283.7 acre feet of water per year. This usage level is consistent with that of residential and resort projects analyzed in the General Plan EIR, as well as the District's Water Management Plan. The Plan includes provisions for conservation and recharge which will assure that the Lower Thermal water basin will cease to be in an overdraft condition in the long term. The project will be required to implement the City's standards for water conserving fixtures, as well as its drought tolerant landscaping standards. These standards will help assure that impacts to water resources are less than significant. VIII. c) & d) The proposed project will be responsible for the drainage of on and off site flows, and has been designed to include retention areas within the open spaces proposed for the project. A hydrology study was completed for the proposed project'. The City Engineer requires that these retention areas retain the 100-year storm on -site, which was identified as being 46.1 acre feet in the study. The retention basins designed for the open space area provide a storage capacity of 47.6 acre feet, which exceeds the flows expected in a 100-year storm. The improvements proposed will assure that the impacts associated with flooding are reduced to a less than significant level. VIII. e)-g) The project site is not located within a FEMA designated I00-year storm area. "Tract 31379 Hydrology and Hydraulics," prepared by MDS Consulting, July 2003. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -22- -, n v 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 site is located north of the existing La Quinta Resort, and west and northwest of low density residential areas. The parcel is designated Tourist Commercial and Open Space on the General Plan Land Use Map. This designation allows resort residential land uses such as those proposed for the project site. The density of the proposed project is consistent with both its land use designation and the surrounding development. The land is outside the fee payment area for the Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -23- , r t 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-3 Zone, and is not known to have resources, especially as the project is proposed only on the alluvial area of the site, not the hillside. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -24- �� t Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XI. NOISE B Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation X of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (MEA p. 111 ff.) b) Exposure of persons to or generation X of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (Project description) c) A substantial permanent increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Project description) d) A substantial temporary or periodic X increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan land use map) e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) XI. a) & c) Two types of noise impacts are possible at the site: the impacts of traffic noise on residents of the project site, and the impacts to surrounding land uses from construction activities. The former is addressed in the following discussion, while the latter is discussed under item XI.d). P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -25- ,r A noise analysis was performed as part of the previously prepared Draft EIR, and updated for the proposed project' The DEIR analysis showed existing noise levels of 69.7 to 70.2 dBA CNEL at locations immediately adjacent to the proposed project. The updated analysis showed that without mitigation, traffic noise generated on Eisenhower Drive would reach 73.7 dBA CNEL at the right of way, and 65.7 dBA CNEL at a distance of 140 feet from the right of way, where the first residential structure is planned. The update memorandum further states that the project design includes a 6 foot wall and landscaping intervening between the roadway and the first residential structure, and that this will reduce the noise level at this structure to 55.5 dBA CNEL The City's standard for sensitive receptors such as residential units is 65 dBA CNEL. The traffic noise impacts to residents of the project will be, therefore, less than significant. XI. d) Although the property immediately north of the project site is not yet complete, it is likely that there will be residents in that subdivision at the time that the proposed project is under construction. These residential land uses will be sensitive receptors, and will be susceptible to noise impacts associated with grading and construction activities. In order to assure that the adjacent residences are not significantly impacted by construction activities, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1. All internal combustion equipment operating on the site shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers and air intake silencers. 2. All stationary construction equipment (e.g. generators and compressors) shall be located in the southwestern quarter of the site, as far away from existing homes and the surrounding hillsides as possible. 3. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the La Quinta Municipal Code. 4. Walls proposed for the south and east property lines shall be constructed with the first phase of development. XI. b), e)-f) Residential land use will not generate ground borne vibrations. The project is not located in the vicinity of either an airport of airstrip. Memorandum dated July 30, 2003, PCR Services Corp. PAGreg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -26- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth X in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) b) Displace substantial numbers of X existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) c) Displace substantial numbers of X people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) XII. a)-c) The 94 permanent homes on the property and 186 resort residential units will not generate substantial growth. The employees generated on the project site will be limited to clubhouse employees, and some housekeeping employees who will be required to clean the rented units. The property is an in -fill vacant parcel which will continue the pattern of development in this area, and will not displace housing of people. PAGreg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -27- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial X adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57) X Police protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57) X Schools? (General Plan MEA, p. 52 ff.) X Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks X Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, X p. 46 ff.) XIII. a) Buildout of the site will have a less than significant impact on public services. The proposed project will be served by the County Sheriff and Fire Department, under City contract. Buildout of the proposed project will generate property tax in its entirety, and transient occupancy tax for the resort residential component, which will offset the costs of added police and fire services. The project will be required to pay the mandated school fees in place at the time of issuance of building permits. The impacts on parks will be less than significant, since the number of permanent residents will be small, open space and recreational facilities will be offered on site, and the visitors will be allowed to use the facilities of the adjacent La Quinta Resort. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -28- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of X existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application materials) b) Does the project include recreational X facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application materials) XIV. a) & b) The proposed project has the potential to generate an additional 220 permanent residents, who will have access to the private open space proposed within the project. These facilities will offset the need for other recreation facilities within the City. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -29- 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)? (Project description) e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? (Project description) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X (Project description) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, X or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Project description) XV. a)-g) The proposed project site is designated Tourist Commercial and Open Space, and was analyzed as such in the General Plan EIR, which found that levels of service would remain at acceptable levels at General Plan buildout. In addition, traffic studies have been P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -30- S prepared for the project site, both for the previous project and for the current proposal'. The traffic impacts associated with the current project represent a 10% reduction in total potential traffic generated at the site, resulting in an average number of daily trips totaling 2,518. The traffic analysis found that the traffic generated by the proposed project, plus surrounding traffic increases, would result in off -site traffic improvement needs as follows: Washington Street/Avenue 50: ■ One right turn lane for northbound movement ■ One left turn lane and one through lane for southbound movement ■ One through lane for eastbound movement ■ One through lane for westbound movement These improvements are included in the City's Development Impact Fee improvement program. The update to the Traffic Impact Analysis further concluded that the mitigation measures previously proposed for the site should be applied to the current project. These mitigation measures are included below. The design of the entry way was reviewed for traffic safety by the City Engineer. In this review, it was found that the entry drive does not provide sufficient stacking to safely allow automobiles to "stack" at the entry, and that the entry drive width was insufficient to allow for safe vehicular movements in and out of the project site. Specifically, in the first instance, the location of Lot F, the drive which provides access to the property immediately to the north, is located too close to the intersection of Eisenhower Drive and Coachella Drive. Should multiple vehicles arrive at the site simultaneously, vehicles could obstruct the public right of way. In order to mitigate this potential hazard, a distance of at least 75 feet must be provided between the intersection and Lot F to provide stacking for four vehicles. Such a mitigation measure is provided below, in order to lower the impacts to a less than significant level. In the second instance, the driveway width must be wide enough to accommodate two lanes of traffic in each direction, also to ensure that there is sufficient stacking space to avoid conflicts with the public right of way. The driveway should be a minimum of 24 feet in width in each direction between Lot F and the Eisenhower Drive intersection, to allow a left/through lane and a right turn only lane in each direction. In conjunction with this requirement, the proposed roundabout shown on the plans must be eliminated, to allow sufficient space to provide the required safety improvements. Such mitigation measures are included below. 1. Prior to issuance of building permits, the project proponent shall contribute the established Development Impact Fee in effect at the time of building permit application. "Villa La Quinta Traffic Impact Analysis," prepared by VRPA 'Technologies, February, 2000; and Memorandum dated June 25, 2003, from Erik Ruehr, also VRPA Technologies. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -31- 2. The project proponent shall coordinate each phase of development with the SunLine Transit Agency, to address the need for an additional bus stop for the project. Should a bus stop be required, the project proponent shall be responsible for its design and construction, after approval by both SunLine and the City. 3. The entry drive shall be redesigned to provide the following: a. A minimum of 75 feet distance from the project boundary at Eisenhower Drive and Lot F (the access driveway to the adjacent property on the north), unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. b. The elimination of the roundabout at Lot A and Lot F. C. Driveway width of 24 feet minimum in each direction for Lot A, from Lot F to the project boundary at Eisenhower Drive, striped and marked to allow a left/through lane and a dedicated right turn lane in each direction, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts associated with both traffic capacity and traffic safety will be reduced to a less than significant level. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -32- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS B 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.) 0 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.) P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -33- r d XVI. a)-g) Utilities are available at the project site. The General Plan land use designation for this property was analyzed in the General Plan EIR, and levels of usage and service were found to be acceptable. The water usage for the project is discussed in detail in section VIII, above. The proposed project is not expected to generate a need for utilities any higher than that previously analyzed either in the General Plan, or in the previous environmental analysis. The City and utility providers continue to implement conservation measures, particularly for water, wastewater and solid waste, which will help in reducing consumption of these resources in the long term. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -34- �J 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 proposed project will implement a number of mitigation measures designed to lower the potential impacts to habitat and specific species to a less than significant level. The site itself is not anticipated to be home to species of concern, but is adjacent to habitat for the Peninsular bighorn sheep. The mitigation measures included in this document will ensure that the potential impacts to this species are eliminated. XVII.b) The proposed project supports the long term goals of the General Plan through the construction of a variety of housing and resort products, which support the General Plan P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -35- goals for diversity in housing and a broad economic base to ensure the long term economic health of the community. XVII. c) The proposed project falls well within the potential densities assigned to this parcel in the General Plan, and analyzed in the General Plan EIR. The proposed project does not intensify land uses over those planned for this area or the City as a whole. No increase in cumulative impacts is expected to result from implementation of the proposed project. XVII. d) The proposed project has the potential to adversely affect human beings in the areas of air quality, noise and traffic and circulation. These items have been addressed individually above, and mitigation measures, including changes to the project design and construction techniques mandated by the City and other responsible agencies, have been proposed under each category which will ensure that the potential impacts to human beings are reduced to a less than significant level. P:\Greg T\tract PC Centex 9-9-2003\EA478 Cklst Centex 2003 - Final.doc -36- r. r c� 0 U b Q a� 0 Lw 0 0 O 0 0 O � M O 00 � N o I O O Q O Wok aQa H dvo � OWa G Yrj daQ � O cl o 0 N cd H > roo-'i+ �a.?Q�000 O�o z z x� A U W d W A d� A awwTv Uv a; En o - r. o o c, o N b N U Q -d r1 co p 0 t3 °" o L�. W am of au vCa Q o vU]oN> rUi� ►r 0-4 bA � � � o Cd Cd cl ° U ram/] ° U Yoo �J0 0 (n O to pq bA on O off^ o b ocd o a a Q a a a a V co bb to to th m w w C, b b b b U Q) N N y m 0 `- ►H.� �' o 0 o N l u 3 to1 U C/] MH.+ U � — O N bA � 0 Cd cd , Cd °' a. N U cacd a o a• v N C 3 b A. 2 a ° o N b rr� � �s �° o n Ciso 0 o 14 > O b a W d A U pq �A OU 41 rn �U a a NFz cn a to a o C U) Ch V) C � ° o m O O o z o o " 0, o o r Cd cl W +95 N C1. •+ tz. O �-.� O �--� O 0 toy o � � � � ¢ � ¢ o •5 0 .5 0 '� .o � O �UxUx a a a a a c a aj aj a o o o o o 0 0 0 Ca Ca' U' U too to 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 Ca o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U Ca CA W U Ca U Ca U m U U Ca U Ca U Ca U Ca z wto o to 0 v 75 .0 y - cd 0.4 0 w o 't a ago -d 0� b b Q u to O p tn U O W iVr 0 �P. N Q N U En EA 1° to .fl Cd O 0' 0 ° Q r0 o U V] O 'AO N Ly" fl� O O > ►-a or. O O �cd . cOd O ° O O cC cd U ° s. w U Ca ch Z U F d A W � d A Ox UU 0 H � o C ho G7 0 F CA .(A O a a a o� w�a �O 0.4 o® � w a U z w 0 0 o 0 W d A W dA A Ox UU w a� u a� v� cis cif � 0 0 0 a � o 0 0 0 0 °U Cd F--1 Cd F a oz w 0 zzCd m Cd a� Q Q Q Q tm b b b GG C� CA W b z Q cr O � v O U ° c N N O r' maj ° o C ¢. uoA 3 a � � ; � �© a � Rb � §V \ § f q § G Q d E \ A 0 > 2 f « q g / 0 EArn �0 0 / / f u § A � d / / U � r k � � u w / /k cl \ � � •� � •ƒ / m PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW A 280 UNIT RESORT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED TO THE NORHTWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF COACHELLA DRIVE AND EISENHOWER DRIVE CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-065 APPLICANT: CENTEX DESTINATION PROPERITES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 91h day of September, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Specific Plan 2003-065, to allow a 280 unit residential project on 44 + acres in Tourist Commercial and Open Space Zoning Districts for property located on the northwest corner of Coachella Drive and Eisenhower Drive, more particularly described as: Assessor's Parcel Numbers 658-130-003 to —005 Parcel 1 of Lot Line Adjustment 2001-361 WHEREAS, on July 14, 2003, 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 City's Architecture and Landscape Review Committee reviewed this project on August 6, 2003, and on a 3-0 vote adopted Minute Motion 2003-031, recommending approval of the development plans, subject to specific landscaping requirements being met during plan check under Site Development Permit 2003-778; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 12th day of August, 2003, continue the Public Hearing to the 9th day of September, 2003, without discussion on 4-0 vote; and WHEREAS, the City's Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the applicant's Phase II Archaeological Assessment on August 29, 2003, determining site monitoring during grading activities and establishment of a conservation easement were necessary pursuant to adoption of Minute Motion 2003-01 1; and I Planning Commission Resolution 2003-, Specific Plan 2003-065, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the Public Hearing notice in the Desert Sun Newspaper on July 22, 2003, for the August 12, 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, the La Quinta Community Development Department has completed Environmental Assessment 2003-478. Based upon this Assessment, the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment; therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office on July 17, 2003, as required by Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act statutes; 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 to the City Council for approval of said Specific Plan 2003-065, pursuant to Section 9.240.010 of the Zoning Code: 1. This project is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan insofar as the creation of townhouses and resort units in the Tourist Commercial and Open Space land use areas will provide another type of housing market for La Quinta, including a rental and amenity use program between the developer and the La Quinta Resort and Club. The project is consistent with Conditions as recommended requiring on- and off -site improvements based on the City's General Plan Circulation Element provisions per the requirements of Tentative Tract Map 31379. 2. The proposed Architectural Guidelines (Section 2.9.2 of Specific Plan 2003- 065) state that the development plans will use Spanish Colonial architectural design elements that are exemplified at the La Quinta Resort and Club. Building massing and scale are broken up providing an asymmetrical character with the use of enclosed patios and courtyards. The building materials include exterior plaster, wood, clay tile, brick, masonry, wrought iron, carved stone, ceramic tile and other decorative materials; building colors are neutral usually off-white and cream colors with brighter colors used for accent. The Plan identifies schematic examples of roof forms, walls, doorways, windows, columns, exterior stairways and other pertinent exterior elements that are defined in the Site Development Permit Architectural Booklet. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-065, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 3. Approval of this Specific Plan will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, nor be incompatible with surrounding resort residential properties, pursuant to the implementation of the development plans (i.e., Site Development Permit 2003-778 and Tentative Tract Map 31379) and the Mitigation Measures contained in Environmental Assessment 2003-478. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; and 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 2003-478 in that no significant effects on the environment were identified, provided mitigation measures are met; and 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 2003-065 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 9th day of September, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-065, CENTEX SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 GENERAL 1. The applicant/property owner agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this application and any other challenge pertaining to this project. This indemnification shall include any award toward attorney's fees. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Minor changes, as determined by the Community Development Director to be consistent with the intent and purpose of the Specific Plan, may be approved. Examples include modifications to landscaping materials and/or design, parking and circulation arrangements not involving reductions in required standards beyond those identified in the Specific Plan, or other revisions necessary due to changes in technical plan aspects such as drainage, street improvements, grading, etc. Such changes may be approved on a staff -level basis and shall not constitute a requirement to amend the Specific Plan. Consideration for any modifications shall be requested in writing to the Director and submitted with appropriate graphic and/or textual documentation in order to make a determination on the request. 3. All plant materials within the perimeter retention basins shall be safe for consumption by the Peninsular bighorn sheep as required by the Department of Fish and Game. The use of oleander shrubs is not permitted. 4. The developer shall comply with all applicable conditions of Tentative Tract Map 31379 and Site Development Permit 2003-778 and Mitigation Measures for EA 2003-478. FIRE DEPARTMENT 5. Final conditions will be addressed when plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time construction plans are submitted. For additional assistance, please contact the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 2003-065, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 MISCELLANEOUS 6. Toe of slope grading activities shall be in compliance with the proposed grading plan, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer during plan check consideration. 7. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or map recordation, the final Conditions of Approval shall be incorporated in the Final Specific Plan document. Applicant shall work with staff to correct internal document inconsistencies prior to final publication of Specific Plan document. A minimum of seven copies of the final document shall be submitted to the Community Development Department. 8. The City Engineer shall approve the width of private streets and on -street parking areas during plan check review of Tentative Tract Map 31379. 9. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking purposes. 10. Parking lot light fixtures for the clubhouse facilities shall be fully shielded and may not exceed an overall height of 10'-0" as measured from adjacent paved surfaces. All other open parking and greenbelt areas shall be lit with bollard light fixtures not exceeding 60-inches tall and 75 watts. Under -canopy lighting is permitted for carport structures. 11. A permit from the Community Development Department is required for any temporary or permanent signs, subject to the provisions of Chapter 9.160 of the Zoning Code. The permanent identification sign for the project on Eisenhower Drive shall be limited to a maximum size of 24 square feet (double sized) and not exceed six feet in height. Accessory signs within the development shall not exceed 12 square feet. Accessory signs may be posted on walls, buildings or freestanding poles not exceeding eight feet in overall height. Internally illuminated signs are not allowed except for use within the clubhouse building. 12. The minimum parking ratio for the project is 2.25 for townhouses, 1.0/bedroom for resort units, and 1.0/300 square feet for clubhouse buildings. The final parking design and number of spaces shall be determined during plan check consideration, subject to final approval by the Community Development Department. Each resort residential unit shall have a designated garage or carport parking space. .J Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 2003-065, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 13. Timeshare units shall require review consideration by the Planning Commission under a Conditional Use Permit application. 14. The developer shall enter into a Development Agreement with the City of La Quinta for the payment of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) for this development. This Agreement must be signed and recorded prior to issuance of any development permits (i.e., infrastructure, grading, building, etc.) being authorized. A contract shall be executed between Centex and the owner of the La Quinta Hotel to allow access to hotel golf course facilities for owners and renters within the boundaries of SP 2003-065. The contract shall be automatically transferable to future owners and renters in perpetuity. A copy of the executed contract shall be delivered to the Community Development Department before issuance of a building permit for a residential dwelling unit. 15. The following land use activities shall be eliminated from the Specific Plan booklet: Planning Area I PA II PA III PA IV Recreation Recreation (tennis club Semi -Public (library Recreation (tennis club (tennis club and and live entertainment) and museums) and health clubs, and live Semi -Public (library live entertainment) entertainment) and museums) Semi -Public (library, Semi -Public Temporary museums and (library and (construction facilities) pools/spas) museums) Office/Health Services Accessory (parking and Dining, Drinking, Temporary facilities) and Entertainment (outdoor events Temporary (outdoor along the events) perimeter of the Office/Health Services and Dining, Drinking, development) and Entertainment 16. Chapter 3.6 (Site Development Permits) of the Specific Plan document shall be amended to only include the last paragraph of Section 3.6.3 which states: "Procedures for review of Site Development Permits shall be in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 9.210 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMITS of the La Quinta Municipal Code." 17. Large outdoor events for residents and guests shall be confined to the proposed clubhouse facilities. A Temporary Use Permit application is required when events exceed 800 people. Fireworks shows (i.e., ground displays only) Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 2003-065, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 are not allowed, unless written permission is obtained from the Fire Marshal and the Department of Fish and Game. 18. The Planning Commission shall approve clubhouse expansion projects greater than 5,000 square feet in size. 19. An eight -foot high masonry wall may be built along the east property line, subject to approval from the property owner of Tract 29436. Project entry gates and wall pilasters may not exceed an overall height of 9'-0". 20. A minimum five -stall bicycle rack shall be installed at the clubhouse. 21. No more than 280 residential units shall be built on the 44.6-acre site. 22. Detached casitas or guesthouse units are not permitted within the boundaries of the project. 23. Residential buildings and carports structures within Planning Area II shall not exceed 19 feet and 10 feet in overall height, respectively. 24. A temporary off -site sales facility is permitted to be established to the south of the project prior to the issuance of a grading permit, subject to approval of the Minor Use Permit by the Community Development Department. 25. Zoning Code requirements of Section 9.60.320 (Resort Residential) shall be met unless otherwise prescribed by the Specific Plan document. The minimum rear yard setback for Planning Areas I and II shall be five feet. Community pool buildings within Planning Areas I and II shall be limited in overall height to 20 feet. 26. Commercial communication facilities shall only be located within Planning Area III. 27. A conservation easement shall be placed over the historic milling stations in perpetuity, until such time as another agency can take over the easement or becomes a conservator. During grading activities, the milling stations shall be roped off and preserved. The City Attorney shall review the conservation easement before being recorded with the County of Riverside if the easement is not placed on final tract map exhibit. S r 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION OF 44.61 ACRES INTO 18 RESIDENTIAL AND OTHER COMMON LOTS LOCATED TO THE NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND COACHELLA DRIVE CASE: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31379 APPLICANT: CENTEX DESINATION PROPERTIES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 9tn day of September, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Centex Destination Properties to create 18 residential and other common lots on 44 f acres located to the northwest of the intersection of Coachella Drive and Eisenhower Drive in Tourist Commercial and Open Space Zoning Districts, more particularly described as: Assessor's Parcel Numbers 658-130-003 to -005 Parcel 1 of Lot Line Adjustment 2001-361 WHEREAS, on July 14, 2003, 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 City's Architecture and Landscape Review Committee reviewed this project on August 6, 2003, and on a 3-0 vote adopted Minute Motion 2003-031, recommended approval of the development plans, subject to specific landscaping requirements being met during plan check; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the Public Hearing notice in the Desert Sun Newspaper on July 22, 2003, for the August 12, 2003 Planning Commission meeting, as prescribed by Section 13.12.100 (Public Notice Procedure) of the Subdivision Ordinance. Public Hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners and residents within 500 feet of the tract map site; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 12" day of August, 2003, continue the Public Hearing to the 9tn day of September, 2003, without discussion on 4-0 vote; and s,y Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 WHEREAS, the City's Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the applicant's Phase II Archaeological Assessment on August 29, 2003, and determined site monitoring and a conservation easement for milling stations were necessary pursuant to adoption of Minute Motion 2003-01 1; and WHEREAS, the La Quinta Community Development Department has completed Environmental Assessment 2003-478. Based upon this Assessment, the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment; therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office on July 17, 2003, as required by Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act statutes; and WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings to justify a recommendation to the City Council for approval of said Map: Finding A - Consistency with General Plan, Zoning Code and any applicable Specific Plans. The property is designated Tourist Commercial and Open Space which allows resort residential activities and conservation of hillside areas. The developer's project proposes residential lots for 280 units on the flat areas of the site with a perimeter retention basin around the project abutting toe -of -slope areas. This project is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan insofar as the creation of large residential lots for resort condominiums (six dwelling units per acre) will provide another type of housing market for La Quinta residents. Conditions are recommended requiring on- and off -site improvements based on the City's General Plan Circulation Element provisions. The property is designated Tourist Commercial and Open Space and is consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Element. One- and two-story houses, using an attached product, are proposed ranging in size from 1,300 square feet to 2,090 square feet under Site Development Permit 2003-778. The houses are plotted on private streets with common open space areas. The development of the project, as conditioned, will be compatible with the surrounding area. Planning Commission Resolution 2003 = Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 Finding B - Site Design and Improvements Infrastructure improvements to serve this project are located in the immediate area and will be extended based on the recommended Conditions of Approval. The private on -site street will provide access to the resort houses in compliance with City requirements, as prepared. The subdivision layout is consistent with the Land Use Vision Statement in the City's General Plan, which focuses on the facilitation and integration of development, through desirable design of residential developments to enhance the City's quality of life. Findings C through E - Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act Various environmental studies were prepared for this project, and after careful evaluations, the Historic Preservation Commission and various City Departments have determined that the proposed Map could not have a significant adverse impact on the environment provided that recommended mitigation is required pursuant to Environmental Assessment 2003-478. Finding F - Public Health Concerns The design of the proposed subdivision map, and its related improvements, are not likely to cause serious public health problems, in that responsible agencies have reviewed the project for these issues with no significant concerns identified. The health, safety and welfare of current and future residents can be assured based on the recommended conditions, which serve to implement mitigation measures for the project. The Fire Department has evaluated the street design layout and recommended approval subject to certain standards being met, including fire hydrant spacing, access gating design parameters, emergency only access connections, etc. Site improvements comply with City requirements, provided on -site water retention is handled in common basin(s). Dust control measures shall be required during any further on -site construction work as required by Chapter 6.16 of the Municipal Code. The site is physically suitable for the proposed land division, as the area is relatively flat and without physical constraints, and the Map design is consistent with other surrounding residential neighborhoods. Under the City's General Plan (Chapter 5) policies, City-wide recreation and park development is required. This project, as conditioned, shall comply with Chapter 13.48 of the Subdivision Ordinance during plan check review. Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 Finding G - Site Design (Public Easements) Public easements will be retained and required in order to construct any houses on the proposed lots, ensuring adequate facilities for future homeowners in compliance with Section 13.24.100 of the Subdivision Ordinance. 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 said Planning Commission in this case; and 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 2003-478 in that no significant effects on the environment were identified, provided mitigation measures are met; and 3. That it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council of the above - described Tentative Tract Map 31379 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 9ih day of September, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOTES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 31379, CENTEX SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 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 the 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 (DSUSD) • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvements plans for City approval. U Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 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 five (5) acres or more of land, or that disturbs less than five (5) acres of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than five (5) acres of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). 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 BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. 5. The map shall be recorded within two years, unless an extension is granted pursuant to the requirements of Subdivision Ordinance. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 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) Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial, Option B 100' ROW) — 50-foot from the centerline of the existing raised median. 2) Additional right of way dedication as needed to implement the realignment of the northwesterly half of the Eisenhower Drive and other improvements as described in Condition No. 55(A). The applicant shall make a good faith effort to acquire said additional right of way dedication from the property owner to the south, KSL Development Corporation. If the applicant is unable to acquire the needed right if way, the applicant shall request the City Council to consider acquiring the right of way via eminent domain at the applicant's expense. 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. Private street right-of-ways to be retained for private use required for this development include: Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 A. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Entry Drive - 76-foot right of way to accommodate improvements as described in Condition No. 55 (131). Additional right of way dedication as needed for the Entry Drive connection (Lot A) to Eisenhower Drive as shown on the Tentative Tract Map 31379. 2) Private Streets: 36-foot travel width measured gutter flow line to gutter flow line with parking allowed on both sides of the streets. 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 makes provisions for ongoing enforcement of the parking restriction. Property line shall be placed at the back of curb similar to the lay out and the typical street section shown in the tentative map. Use of smooth curves instead of angular lines at property lines is recommended. Curve radii for curbs at all street intersections shall not be less than 25 feet except at the entry roads similar to the lay out shown on the rough grading plan. 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. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street right-of-ways shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map are necessary prior to approval of the Final Map dedicating such right-of-ways, the applicant shall grant the necessary right-of-ways within 60 days of a written request by the City. 13. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map a ten -foot wide public utility easement along both sides of all private streets. Such easement may be reduced to five feet in width with the express written approval of IID. (. < 0 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 14. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right- of-ways as follows: A. Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial, Option B) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes and any additional right of way dedicated from KSL Development Corporation. 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, parklands, and common areas on the Final Map. 16. Direct vehicular access to Eisenhower Drive from lots with frontage along Eisenhower 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. 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 grant easement for an access road, identified as Lot F, connecting Tract 29436 to the proposed entry drive prior to recording of Tract 31379. 19. When an applicant proposes the vacation, or abandonment, of any existing right- of-way, or access easement, the recordation of the tract map is subject to the applicant providing an alternate right-of-way or access easement, to those properties, or notarized letters of consent from the affected property owners. 20. 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 Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 approved by the City Engineer. FINAL MAPS 21. 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. 22. 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. 23. 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: 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 C. On -Site Rough Grading Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal D. On -Site Precise Grading Plan: 1 " = 30' Horizontal Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans 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. 24. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee, established by City Resolution, the applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes from the City. 25. 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 26. 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 27. 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. 28. 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. 29. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development, or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 30. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 31. 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. 32. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the foliowing: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect, 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. J Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 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. 33. 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. 34. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the backslope (i.e., the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six (6) of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches 0 8") behind the curb. 35. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 36. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot from the building pads in adjacent developments. 37. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining properties and the lots within this development. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 Building pad elevations on contiguous interior lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots that do not share a common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 38. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 39. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 40. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100-year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. The design storm shall be either the 3-hour, 6-hour or 24-hour event producing the greatest total runoff. 41. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site -specific data indicating otherwise. 42. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leach field approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be designed to contain J Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 surges of up to 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. of landscape area, and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. 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. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 45. For on -site common retention basins, retention depth shall be according to Engineering Bulletin 97.03 and Amendment #1, and side slopes shall not exceed 3:1 and shall be planted with maintenance free ground cover. 46. 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. 47. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 48. 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. 49. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. UTILITIES 50. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.1 10 (Utilities), LQMC. 51. 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, Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 52. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. 53. 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 54. 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. 55. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan. A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial; 100' R/W option): Widen the westerly side of the street to 38-foot half of the ultimate 76-foot street improvement width on the west side as specified in the General Plan and the additional requirements of these conditions. The applicant shall participate in fifty percent (50%) of the cost to design and reconstruct the 12-foot wide landscaped median in a new alignment that is shifted ten and one-half feet (10.5') away from the southeasterly curb of Eisenhower Drive at Coachella Drive to accommodate south -to -north U-turn traffic and improve sight distance at this intersection. The realignment transition shall be r 1 Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 accomplished with a 1,800-foot radius curve coupled with appropriate transitions to be determined during design. Approximately 750' of median adjacent to and south of tract 31376 shall be realigned. The applicant's engineer shall coordinate with the subdivider of Tentative Tract No. 29436 in the design and construction of the Eisenhower Drive realignment specified above. Other required improvements in the Eisenhower Drive right of 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) Class I Off Street Golf Pathway - Construct 12-foot wide meandering pathway within the 32-foot wide parkway/landsacpe set back from Coachella Drive to Avenida Fernando. The design of the pathway shall be as approved by the City Engineer. c) Traffic signal modification of existing traffic signal system at the Eisenhower Drive and Coachella Drive intersection to accommodate the fourth leg. 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) Entry Drive (Lot A) - Construct full improvements within a 56-foot street improvements which shall be divided into one 20-foot traveled way ingress roadway and one 24-foot traveled way egress roadway (one 12-foot left-turn/through lane and one 12- foot right -turn lane) with a 12-foot center landscaped median, and extending at least 75 feet from the nearest point of the Eisenhower Drive/Coachella Drive intersection to provide adequate throat for a four vehicle queue. 1. Planning Commission Resolutuon 2003- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 2) Access Road (Lot F) - Construct 36-foot wide travel width and approved curb and gutter consistent with street improvements of the access road proposed on Tract 29436. The intersection of Lot F with the Entry Drive (Lot A) shall be located at least 75 feet from the nearest point of the Eisenhower Drive/Coachella Drive intersection per requirements of 1) above. 3) Private Residential Streets (Lots B through E) : a) Construct 36-foot wide travel width improvements measured from gutter flow line to gutter flow line and approved curb and gutter as shown on the tentative map where parking is allowed on both sides of the street. b) Construct 32-foot wide travel width as shown on the tentative map provided parking is restricted to one side and there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors, and the applicant makes provisions for perpetual enforcement of the restrictions. c) Construct 28-foot wide travel width improvements. On - street parking shall be prohibited and the applicant shall make provisions for perpetual enforcement of the "No Parking" restrictions. 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" Primary Arterial 4.5" a.c./6.0" or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 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: A. Primary Entry (Eisenhower Drive): Full turn movements at existing signalized intersection of Eisenhower Drive and Coachella Drive. 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 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. 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. 65. 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 66. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer. 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 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 plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. 74. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). The developer shall pay school mitigation fees based on their requirements. Fees shall be paid prior to building permit issuance by the City. 75. The Community Development Director shall cause to be filed with the County Clerk a "Notice of Determination" pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15075(a) once reviewed by the City Council. 76. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.48 (Park Dedications) of the La Quinta Municipal Code prior to final map recordation. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 FIRE DEPARTMENT 77. For residential areas O.e. single family homes►, approved standard fire hydrants shall be 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 1,000 GPM for a two-hour duration at 20 PSI. 78. For any buildings with public access (i.e., recreational halls, clubhouses, etc. or buildings with a commercial use (i.e., gatehouses, condo's, apartments, etc.), super fire hydrants are to be placed no closer than 25 feet and not more than 165 feet from any portion of the first floor of said building following approved travel ways around the exterior of the building. Minimum fire flow for these areas would be 1,500 GPM for a two-hour duration at 20 PSI. 79. Blue dot retro-reflectors shall be placed in the street eight inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 80. All buildings that are 5,000 square feet or larger shall be fully sprinkled (NFPA 13 Standard), unless otherwise allowed by the Fire Marshal. Sprinkler plans shall be approved by the Fire Department. Area separation walls may not be used to reduce the need for sprinklers. 81. Any street turn, or turnaround, requires a minimum 38-foot turning radius. 82. All structures shall be accessible from an approved roadway to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior of the first floor. 83. 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. Roadways may not exceed 1,320 feet without secondary access. This access may be restricted to emergency vehicles only however, public egress must be unrestricted. Any gate providing access from a public roadway to a private entry roadway shall accommodate a minimum two vehicle stacking distance from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road. Where a one-way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 38-foot turning radius shall be used. Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 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. 84. 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. 85. 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. 86. Building plan check (non-residential, if any) is to run concurrent with the City plan check. MISCELLANEOUS 87. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking purposes. 88. All mitigation measures included in Environmental Assessment 2003-478 are hereby included in this approval. A conservation easement shall be placed over the historic milling stations in perpetuity. The City Attorney shall review the conservation easement before being recorded with the County of Riverside. 89. A permit from the Community Development Department is required for any temporary or permanent tract signs. Unlighted tract ID signs are allowed subject to the provisions of Chapter 9.160 of the Zoning Ordinance. 90. The Community Development and Public Works Directors may allow minor design changes to final map applications that include a reduction in the number of buildable lots, changes in lot sizes, relocation of common open space areas or other required public facilities (e.g., CVWD well sites, etc.) and changes in the alignment of street sections, provided the applicant submits a Substantial Compliance Application to the Public Works Department during plan check disclosing the requested changes and how the changes occurred. These changes shall be conveyed to the City Council when the map is presented for Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract Map 31379, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 recordation consideration. 91. Prior to submitted the Final Map for plan check consideration, the following corrections and/or information shall be provided: A. Two copies of the draft Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's). The City Attorney shall approve the document prior to approval of the final map by the City Council. The CC&R's shall contain language reflecting the following provisions: "On -street parking of any recreational vehicles (e.g., boats, motor homes, trailers, buses, campers, mobile homes, inoperable vehicles, or other similar vehicles) shall be prohibited at all times within the residential tract. Parking for such vehicles shall be restricted to storage on the property behind a masonry wall of not less than six feet in height, which is equipped with a solid gate that shields the subject vehicle from view from the street. Temporary parking in designated areas is permitted for a maximum of 24 hours as RV's are prepared for use or storage." Bighorn sheep mitigation measures addressed in EA 2003-478 shall also be enclosed in the CC&R's. B. Street Lot "A" shall be designated Coachella Drive and Street Lot "F" shall be designated Full Moon Bay as required by Chapter 3 (Program 2.14) of the General Plan. C. A minimum of three street names shall be submitted for each private street shown on the Map exhibit. A list of the street names, in desired ranking order, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval during final map processing. ..i PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ONE- AND TWO-STORY RESORT RESIDENTIAL HOUSING UNITS THAT RANGE IN SIZE FROM 1,300 SQ. FT. TO 2,900 SQ. FT. ON A 44.61 ACRE SITE LOCATED TO THE NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND COACHELLA DRIVE CASE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-778 APPLICANT: CENTEX DESINATION PROPERTIES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 9`h day of September, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Centex Destination Properties to develop one- and two-story townhouses and resort units ranging in size from 1,300 square feet to 2,900 square feet on 44± acres in conjunction with Specific Plan 2003-065 and Tentative Tract Map 31379 for property located to the northwest of the intersection of Coachella Drive and Eisenhower Drive in Tourist Commercial and Open Space Zoning Districts, more particularly described as: Assessor's Parcel Numbers 658-130-003 to —005 Parcel 1 of Lot Line Adjustment 2001-361 WHEREAS, on July 17, 2003, 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 La Quinta Community Development Department has completed Environmental Assessment 2003-478. Based upon this Assessment, the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment; therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office on July 17, 2003, as required by Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act statutes; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the Public Hearing notice in the Desert Sun Newspaper on July 22, 2003, for the August 12, 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 Planning Commission Resolution 2003 Site Development Permit 2003-778, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 WHEREAS, the City's Architecture and Landscape Review Committee reviewed this project on August 6, 2003, and on a 3-0 vote adopted Minute Motion 2003-031, recommended approval of the development plans, subject to specific landscaping requirements being met during plan check; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 121h day of August, 2003, continue the Public Hearing to the 9th day of September, 2003, without discussion on 4-0 vote; and WHEREAS, the City's Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the applicant's Phase If Archaeology Assessment on August 29, 2003, determining site monitoring and a conservation easement for milling stations were necessary pursuant to adoption of Minute Motion 2003-01 1; and WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings to justify a recommendation to the City Council for approval of said Site Development Permit: Findings A and B - Consistency with General Plan, Zoning Code and any applicable Specific Plans. The developer's project proposes 280 resort residential units on the flat areas of the site with perimeter retention basins along toe -of -slope areas. This project is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan (Tourist Commercial and Open Space) insofar as the creation of condominium units (six dwelling units per acre) will provide another type of housing market for La Quinta residents. Conditions are recommended requiring on- and off -site improvements based on the City's General Plan Circulation Element provisions per the requirements of Tentative Tract Map 31379. The property is designated Tourist Commercial and Open Space and is consistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Element. One- and two-story houses, using an attached product, are proposed ranging in size from 1,300 square feet to 2,090 square feet under Site Development Permit 2003-778. The houses are plotted on private streets with common open space areas. The development of the project, as conditioned, will be compatible with the surrounding area. Infrastructure improvements to serve this project are located in the immediate area and will be extended based on the recommended Conditions of Approval for Planning Commission Resolution 2003 Site Development Permit 2003-778, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 Tentative Tract Map 31379. The private on -site street will provide access to the resort houses in compliance with City requirements, as prepared. Improvements on Eisenhower Drive will be guaranteed as required by the City's General Plan Circulation Element at the time the final map is considered pursuant to Section 13.20.100 of the Subdivision Ordinance. Access gating provisions will be allowed subject to adequate vehicle stacking and turnaround areas being established. Finding C - Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act It has been determined that the proposed project could not have a significant adverse impact on the environment provided that recommended mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 2003-478 are met. Finding D — Architectural and Site Plan Design Spanish Colonial architectural design elements are being used (e.g., exterior plaster, wood, clay tile, brick, masonry, wrought iron, carved stone, ceramic tile and other decorative materials) in compliance with the graphic details of Specific Plan 2003- 065. Parking for the project will consist of garages, carports and open spaces spread throughout the 280-unit development. The Fire Department has evaluated the street design layout and recommended approval subject to certain standards being met, including fire hydrant spacing, access gating design parameters, emergency access connections, etc. Finding E — Landscape Design The landscape development (Section 2.9.3 of Specific Plan 2003-065) concept proposes to reinforce the Early California thematic image with the use of indigenous and drought resistant plant materials in combination with lush landscaping improvements. A palette of plant materials is provided in Table 11 of Section 2.9.4. Illustrations are proposed which show focal point greenbelts and the use of trees for visual relief. A perimeter trail is proposed within the retention basin areas abutting hillside areas. The development of the project, as conditioned, will be compatible with the surrounding area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California as follows: Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Site Development Permit 2003-778, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of said Planning Commission in this case; and 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 2003-478 in that no significant effects on the environment were identified, provided mitigation measures are met; and 3. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described Site Development Permit 2003-778 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 9' day of September, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-778, CENTEX SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 GENERAL 1. The applicant/property owner agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this application and any other challenge pertaining to this project. This indemnification shall include any award toward attorney's fees. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Minor amendments to the development plans shall be subject to approval by the Community Development Director. 3. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Coachella Valley Water District and Riverside County Agriculture Commissioner prior to submittal of the final plans to the Community Development Department, pursuant to Chapter 8.13 of the Municipal Code. Specific landscape requirements for the project are: A. To encourage water conservation, no more than 50% of the front yard areas shall be devoted to turf. Front and rear yard landscaping shall consist of two trees (i.e., a minimum 1.5 inch caliper measured three feet up from grade level after planting), ten 5-gallon shrubs, and groundcover. Palm trees may count as a shade tree if the trunk is a minimum six feet tall. Double lodge poles (two-inch diameter) shall be used to stake trees. Bubblers and emitters shall be used to irrigate shrubs and trees. Homebuyers shall be offered an option to have no turf areas in their front yard through the use of desertscape materials. B. Parkway shade trees shall be delivered to the site in 24-inches or larger boxes with minimum two-inch calipers for Lots A, J, H and I of TTM 31379. Trees shall be a minimum height of ten feet once installed. C. All plant materials within the perimeter retention basins shall be approved by the Department of Fish and Game to insure the safety and welfare of the Peninsular bighorn sheep. D. The developer, and subsequent property owner(s), shall continuously maintain all required front yard and parkway landscaping in a healthy and viable condition as required by Section 9.60.240(E3) of the Zoning Code. J Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2003-778, Centex Adopted: September 9, 2003 E. Due to maintenance and leaf litter problems, the following trees shall not be used for this project: Bottle (Brachychiton populneus), Evergreen Ash (Fraxinus Uhdei 'Majestic Beauty'), Elm (Ulmus parvifolia), Olive (Olea europaea) and Crape Myrtle (Lagerstroemia indica). Fruitless olive trees can be used within the development. 4. Walls within 150 feet of Eisenhower Drive shall be clad in stucco and capped in brick or concrete. Pilasters shall be included at intervals of not less than 80' on center. 5. A centralized mailbox delivery system shall be used for the project pursuant to any requirements of the U.S. Postal Service, unless individual mailboxes are allowed. PUBLIC SAFETY 6. Install wide -angled peepholes into front doors. 7. Graffiti resistant paint should be applied to parkway walls. 8. Landscaping shall be of the type and situated in locations to maximize observation while providing the desired degree of aesthetics. Security planting materials are encouraged along fence and property lines, and under vulnerable windows. Additional public safety information may be obtained by contacting Senior Deputy Andy Gerrard at (760) 863-8950. FIRE DEPARTMENT 9. Final conditions will be addressed when plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time construction plans are submitted. For additional assistance, please contact the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. MISCELLANEOUS 10. The developer shall comply with all applicable conditions of Specific Plan 2003-065, Tentative Tract Map 31379 and mitigation measures of EA 2003- 478. G:\Tr 31379 Centex 2003\Cond PCSDP778CentexFina12.doc ATTACHMENTS XHIBIT "BY 0 SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS T LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 2001-361 R. OF EAST HALF, SEC. 363 5S., R. 6E., S.B.M. N 89'25'03"W 1589.25' PARCEL 3 51.630 AC. I t 73 72 71 I j �j ^76 75 nop 47 4(454: o 80 78 Lgri 61 53' ° 51 I �' U- 62 31 ,1 N 79 52 60 1 81 7 1 r J V r. �1 59 58 82 57 ss 54 �o I LJ T 1 /o I �i7 0 85 55 Lei a' 0 83 86 = 8 c�� z 87 89 PARCEL I L� 44.612 AC. 1r 91 vI 92 I � P I.y\8.h'QD I p B 93 iD I pqR ? �j�l7Y 44 10 N 89'59'13"WY 03 24 506.30' 25 VL AVENIDA FERNANDO 2s �Np1 LAND J. rc� 3D L.S. 6588 * --- Exp. 12-31-03OF / �P 1 CA0� RED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF: tb 3 o l J. BER , L.S. 6 Al E ?/31/0 PARCEL 2 / 10.648 AC. 3�v� ATTACHMENT 2 NOTE: SEE DATA TABLES ON SHEEP 2 1 WR \ � L 1 M Q i3 Nts' -b P.O.1 ° W PAR. 2 O W co w a o o W > ��-- SCALE 1" =500' ED z .. Dy /La e� C/L AVENIDA FERNANDO cL- 29 —� 10 1 10 10 N W 1 DETAIL "A" —SCALE: 1" = 250' r LEGEND 10 3 2t 22 - - - - - - - - EXISTING LOT LINE TO BE ADJUSTED EXISTING LOT LINE TO REMAIN SEE DETAIL "A" NEW LOT LINE OLD LOT N0. ® RIGHT HEREON B NEW LOT NO. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 2001-361 CITY OF LA QUINTA 1A4133(A MAPPINMIIn1-361\FxHRnWr in/t/m M D S C C N S U L T i N G vcwy nIw � Its mroxau I TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 31379 IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, REVISION #1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ATTACHMENT 4 s/q f a/q v ave TlflCp ♦ ua L 2 . , 6 P'7VA1E eV�.L i , omw c i Y/a ~� PW _ _ GIUPHIC SCAIE •Dense �-' r TvprA arm .... a 30M A. A�1.�iIPB91Sa�T 1►m I new 10 rmmm[ mm mm m1 a' metyelam u o'�cimi n. m1 a .gntuYrn iaeMI a as qa vuoos wve®r mum. ate. ere-M� vYa� _ mvm mgmna ORIW gtmK qM ,mml mama woam aamK w. _ ,auve. mrmm.. troy. uw ueE a Paaoo gLuav 12 5! IN.1 >amu�ly qm AYim e Y[KUaq 1� aa9 W W ue In- C 1i -Lila w w rK. : lom�ilw l.lwRs v w91°'m a w ei r`e w vam�OYsilq u�'as w v.m I�a1N yC �� I�f bTYa{ lFinaL q qY 3fi1 c � Ymmu1. trm M 6AZ3 Ida C fA C aq 1Mp ql a IaMll fma¢mi Ia a ew K Iraq iRt Dull 1� ml�u � X awlr eKr. Yv.O �t IW/ qma a�.r! lall I�al Y • t bwOlm�i 9Me�.gaYyW/greUpp. vtl 101 Y IW < �IOI avN�Op 91Yi M � K Ypp�uY Ya O 6 o�staa ro Ittlom Im wpm .mc qul !sn!® Wq ra6 - mramt.. Yqt. qaa meal Ial Na.. • Wla .uo staa - mYxiu Ywn alm nrwn - eglllpM W.Ie.. aJ mY.la' .Oi\®I. - IYa rtauG mnaul Loy le O maa nw a l� .. amvK Y.m ae q rl„� t� aaq t rmmv a qw a M Mc oal .xr mall a M .om. mw® ivaurc rovm nw nac wen Oal gmunq a tl,�� 4 aka w�Iam 6m�CfD 1��uYAai q ISM 0 e�0. �a glE(d Ya li Ipi ppa 1. q¢ ]li. Yi a Midrs ] a®mIR � rM a M rlac qo nams rmoaa oomo meta, Kau® emYm a OVDIa IN NC ai a mOmu I.I1L. aaa �161. ima$r lYClm4 ae1Lr mleel Y.M aaair. M Plni N.aa aq Wort a Mf. RMl[ rKomtls xo wen a ar w eow waa¢ maas xq tamrs ow agtt YWl A eOrRs M IOd LLStm® 1aIfP11. ObaE 101 M aee+R a IeifE elD � IeW m0 INf6 a lfi a plp MlY6 ela mu M tl®a5[ a taxi ruaus •m salsa wa m au mlol lnm a rule o swt wr 116 awes rlo wens � val�i na nisi mien �mw�ii aim wewu°Ata'tit.: aoa m, wa wl a arena amen. Ola nmraG LANDAQ. INC 50905 AVENIDA BERMUDAS LA QUINTA. CA 92253 (760) 564-8000 AmsLam CENTEX DESTINATION PROPERTIES 1111 TANQUITZ CANYON NAY, SUITE 101 PALM SPRINGS. CA 92262 (760) 318-2081 �O�O.Aml y a�u w.0 u�vw TENT. TRACT No. 31379 rs�gwns swclgnvs ve,+a1vs ATTACHMENT 5 MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA August 6, 2003 10:00 a.m. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee was called to order at 10:06 a.m. by Planning Manager Oscar Orci who led the flag salute. B. Committee Members present: Bill Bobbitt, Dennis Cunningham, and David Thoms. C. Staff present: Planning Manager Oscar Orci, A-9sociate Planners Greg Trousdell and Martin Magana, and Executive. -Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Staff asked if there were- any changes to the Minutes of July 2, 2003. There being no corrections, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Thoms to approve the Minutes as sxibmitted. V.-.—gt#SINESS ITEMS: A. 'Site Development Permit 2003-778; a request of Centex Destination Properties for review of prototype resort residential housing units which range in size from 1,300 square feet to over 2,000 square feet in one and two story designs for a 280-unit development on 44.61 acres located west of Eisenhower Drive at Coachella Drive. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced Forrest Haag, representing the applicant, who introduced Steve Mudge of Centex Destination Properties, and William Hezmalhalch and Diane Hesse architects for the project, who gave a presentation on the project. Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee August 6, 2003 2. Committee Member Cunningham complimented the applicant on the presentation and project. 3. Committee Member Thoms asked if the units were rentals or for purchase. Ms. Hesse explained all the units were for purchase, similar to the La Quinta Hotel Resort units. The units in the center of the project can also be rented out by the owners, or put in the pool for rentals at the La Quinta Hotel. Committee Member Thoms asked the applicant to explain how a "lockout" unit. Ms. Hesse explained that each unit is owned by one owner, but there is a section of the unit that is able to be locked off from the other section. The owner is then able to rent either section separate from the other and ultimately have two renters, if they want. 4. Committee Member Thoms asked what edge treatment would be used to the north of the project. Mr. Haag stated there is a block wall and Mr. Hezmalhalch explained there is a 150 foot setback on the east and in some cases there is landscaping, maybe a garage access, or a roadway. There is a 60-foot setback from the mountain edge and transitions with landscaping. There is an area -wide trails system that follows along the mountain edge as well. Committee Member Thoms asked what was proposed for the property to the south. Mr. Haag stated currently there will be a wall until the owner develops the site. Depending on what the La Quinta Hotel, the owner, chooses to do with the site, it may have some recreational uses that will be used by both developments. 5. Committee Member Thoms asked how many units would not have garages. Mr. Mudger stated all units have garages. The townhouse all have two car garages, all other units have one car attached, or detached garages, or covered carports. In addition, a portion of the additional parking areas will be covered. They will be constructed to be architecturally compatible with the units. Committee Member Thoms was concerned as to who would be responsible for maintaining the landscaping. Mr. Mudge stated it would be maintained by the homeowners' association. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt noted some trees that should be eliminated from the plant list due to the large amount of tree litter and the maintenance. G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\8-6-03 WD.doc - - 2 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee August 6, 2003 7. There being no further questions, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2003-031 approving Site Development Permit 2003- 778, as recommended by staff and amended as follows: a. Condition added: The following trees shall be eliminated from the plant list: Fraxinus Uhdei (Evergreen Ash), Lagerstroemia indica (Crape Myrtle), Olea europaea (Olive), Ulmus parvifolia (Elm), and Brachychiton populneus (Bottle Tree). Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2003-779;,a'request of M.D.S. Consulting for Nadador, LLC, for review of oj)6 prototype single story house plan, private clubhouse building and, -common area landscaping for a 32 unit residential development oh approximately 21.3 acres located southeast corner of PGA Boulevard and Avenue 54. i 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of., -which is on file in the Community Development Department.' Staff introduced Mr. Forrest Haag, representing the applicant, who introduced Mr. Frank Stoltz, South Coast Architects, who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Cunningham noted the comment rding individual window panes where they will use the 0 ! -on" style. He would prefer they not use the ",snap -on grid" windows. Planning Manager Oscar sugges it state true divided light. Committee Member Cunnin am asked that the roof be composed of a single, one piece, udded tile. 3. Corfimittee Member Bobbin asked that the same trees eliminated from the prior project -'be eliminated from this project. He also asked if the welcome center would be removed. Nor. II Haag stated yes. Committee Member Bobbitt asked ififhey would be required to have another well site. Mr. Haag stated the well site was dedicated a long time ago, but has not been used. Committee -Member Bobbitt asked if t water retention would be on tKe interior of the project. Ulf. Haag stated that was correct. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if there would r3:\WPD0CS\ARLC\8-6-03 WD.doc - - 3 PH #E PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 CASE NOS.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 AND SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066 APPLICANT: THOMAS ENTERPRISES ENGINEER: THE KEITH COMPANIES (TKC) LOCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND ADAMS STREET REQUEST: 1.) REVIEW OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; 2.) REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPALS AND GUIDELINES FOR A 175,200 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL COMPLEX ON 17.48 ACRES; AND 3.) AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC PLAN 98-033 ELIMINATING SEVEN GROSS ACRES AND ADDING THEM TO SPECIFIC PLAN 2003- 066 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 WAS PREPARED FOR THIS SPECIFIC PLAN IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND THEREFORE, RECOMMENDS THAT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BE RECOMMENDED FOR CERTIFICATION. ZONING: CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: M/RC (MIXED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL) P:\stan\sp 03-066 thomas\sp 03-066 ea 03-481 pc rpt.doc SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES: NORTH: CP / MINI STORAGE FACILITY AND CR / VACANT (FUTURE POST OFFICE) AND GYM SOUTH: CR / AUTO CENTER EAST: CR/VACANT WEST: CR / ONE -ELEVEN LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER BACKGROUND: The 17.48-acre property is along the Highway 111 commercial corridor (Attachment 1). Across Adams Street to the west is the Shell gasoline station and Jiffy Lube. To the north is Storage USA, Gold's Gym, and the future Post Office site, with the three auto dealers to the south across Highway 1 1 1. To the east of the subject property is vacant commercial land that is not approved for any development. The property consists of land that was previously approved for other projects. The portion adjacent to Adams Street was approved as Specific Plan 98-033 in March, 1999, and permitted a hotel, and two restaurants on seven acres. That project has not begun construction. The eastern 7 + acres of this project site is a portion of Specific Plan 99-036 (La Quinta Corporate Center) approved in September, 1999. SP 99-036 includes the land to the north, and a detached piece of land at the northwest corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Dune Palms Road. Construction has begun on the Corporate Center project to the north and on the detached piece to the east. The existing Specific Plans on the subject property will be superseded by this application for a new Specific Plan if it is approved by the City Council. This new Specific Plan, therefore, is not bound by any of the provisions of the previous Specific Plans. The prior two Specific Plans together permitted a total of 155,800 square feet of retail/commercial and office uses and a 150-160 room multi -story hotel. This is comparable to the current proposal in size and scale. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The project proposes construction of a 175,200 square foot shopping center in five structures with four detached pads, varying from 3,500 to 9,000 square feet, adjacent to Highway 1 1 1 and one large pad for a "super -building" (building area 5). The majority of the floor space (154,800 square feet) will be in building area 5, which will be a multi -tenant building consisting of five major -size users and two tenant shop areas. The Specific Plan states all grading and parking lot improvements will be done in one phase with all buildings constructed in one phase. Three of the four pads are shown with drive -through lanes. p \stan\sp 2002-058 pc rpt.wpd Proposed access to Highway 111 is shown at three locations, including a signalized driveway that is on the adjacent vacant land to the east and will be shared with that property when it develops. The driveway aligns with La Quinta Drive on the south side of Highway 111 and provides access to the auto dealers and the under - construction Center at La Quinta. The two other Highway 111 accesses are to the west of the signalized driveway and will be right turn in and out only. One driveway is provided on Adams Street, across from the Jiffy Lube entry. Two access driveways are provided on Corporate Center Drive on the north side of the project. It is anticipated that the easterly drive will used as a large truck exit, since the rear of building area 5 is designed to have one-way loading docks. As planned when World Gym was constructed, an emergency access will be installed at the southwest corner of the gym site. The required parking has been calculated based on 170,000 square feet of retail uses (5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor space) and 5,000 square feet as drive -through and fast food restaurant (10 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor space). This requires a total of 901 spaces. The remaining 200 square feet is not addressed in the calculation. The plan provides 913 to 915 spaces, which exceeds the required 901 spaces. The majority of the parking spaces are provided between building area 5 and Highway 1 1 1. The major landscaping feature will be the 50-foot deep perimeter setback area along Highway 111. It will be designed to comply with the City's Highway 111 Design Guidelines. Screening of the parking lot surface along Highway 111 is shown by using a three foot high retaining wall at the interface between the parking lot surface and perimeter landscaping, with the perimeter bermed up to the top of the retaining wall. A 20-foot deep landscaped setback is provided on Adams Street with a 10-foot deep landscaped setback on Corporate Center Drive. Drive - through lanes will be screened by three-foot high mounds and screen plants. A masonry wall is proposed along the northern boundary of the property. Decorative paving surfaces are proposed for both vehicular and pedestrian areas. The conceptual design of the buildings as described by the Specific Plan is "traditional Mediterranean Tuscany village and inspired themes found in La Quinta. Although a site development permit has not yet been submitted, the Plan includes most of the exterior building elevations. Exterior materials on front and exterior sides include smooth exterior plaster, stone veneer on tower faces and columns. Architectural accents include ceramic tile, wrought iron grilles, and decorative lighting. Vine covered wood trellis' with stone columns and a public area with a water feature and shaded seating is also provided. Roofs will consist of a combination of flat and combinations of hip, shed and pitched roofs. To provide interest and shade non -flat roofs will use a decorative Spanish roof tile. The pad buildings are one story in height with main building areas lower than 22-feet and p \stan\sp 2002-058 pc rpt.wpd tower elements varying up to 30-feet. Building area 5's main building height will be 25 or 28-feet high with tower elements up to 35-feet. The rear and interior facing building elevations of the large building 5 consist primarily of flat roofs with smooth exterior plaster and loading docks for the major users. This dictates that redesign to these elevations be incorporated into the future Site Development Permit review. The recommended draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project requires this mitigation to address aesthetic impacts of the rear of building area 5. Parking lot lighting will consist of lights with flush lenses on a 24-foot high light pole. Specific locations and style will be submitted at a later date along with a photometrics study to ensure compliance with the City lighting requirements.. The project has been designed to comply with applicable CR (Regional Commercial) zoning development requirements. PUBLIC NOTICE: This map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 29, 2003. 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. FINDINGS: The Environmental Assessment and Specific Plan findings needed for a positive recommendation to the City Council, as required by CEQA and Chapter 9.240 of the Zoning Ordinance, can be made as noted in the attached Resolutions with the recommended mitigation measures and Conditions of Approval. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Resolution 2003- recommending to the City Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, subject to the attached Mitigation Monitoring provisions. 2. Adopt Resolution 2003- , recommending to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 2003-066, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. p \stan\sp 2002-058 pc rpt.wpd Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Specific Plan Document Prepared by: vv " Arw Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner p \stan\sp 2002-058 pc rpt.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- 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 FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 APPLICANT: THOMAS ENTERPRISES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 9th day of September, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 2003-481 for Specific Plan 2003- 066 which allows construction of a 175,200 square foot shopping center located at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street, more particularly described as: APN's: 649-020-043, -063, -064, and -065, WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment 2003-481 has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2003-481) and has determined that although the proposed project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the assessment and therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be certified; and, WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following findings to justify recommending certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no significant unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment 2003- 481. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 - THOMAS ENTERPRISES ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 2. The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends in that mitigation measures are imposed on the project that will reduce impacts to less than significant levels. 4. The proposed project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the Environmental Assessment. 5. The proposed project will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the proposed project. 6. The proposed project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment in that mitigation measures are imposed on the project that will reduce impacts to a less than significant level. 8. The Planning Commission has considered Environmental Assessment 2003- 481 and said Assessment reflects the independent judgment of the City. 9. The City has, on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d). C P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 pc res.doc 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 - THOMAS ENTERPRISES ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 10. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California, 92253. 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 Environmental Assessment 2003-481 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. 3. That Environmental Assessment 2003-481 reflects the independent judgment of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 91h day of September, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 pc res.doc EXHIBIT "A" Environmental Checklist Form Environmental Assessment 2003-481 Project title: Specific Plan 03-066 2. Lead agency name and address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact person and phone number: Stan Sawa 760-777-7125 4. Project location: Northeast corner of Adams Street and Highway 111 APN: 649-020-043, 649-020-063, -064, -065 5. Project sponsor's name and address: Thomas Enterprises 73-333 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 100 Palm Desert, CA 92260 6. General plan designation: Regional Commercial 7. Zoning: Regional Commercial 8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Specific Plan to establish the design standards and guidelines for a commercial center to include up to 175,200 square feet of retail and restaurant space, located within one central building and 4 smaller building pads. The smaller building pads are to be adjacent to Highway 111, and range from 3,500 to 9,000 square feet. The primary structure, to be located along the northern boundary of the site, totals 154,800 square feet, and is envisioned to contain both anchor stores and in -line shops. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: Vacant, World Gym and Future post office, Coachella Valley Channel South: Highway 111, Auto Center West: Regional Commercial, including gas station and Wal-Mart East: Vacant, Regional Commercial 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Coachella Valley Water District CalTrans G J PASTAWavilioMEA Checklist481.DOC -1- ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Biological Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Mineral Resources Public Services Utilities / Service Agriculture Resources Cultural Resources Hydrology / Water Quality Noise Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance Air Quality Geology /Soils Land Use / Planning Population / Housing Transportation/Traffic Systems DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the 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. es - September 2, 2003 Signature Date C J \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -2- EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except No Impact answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact. The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead st481.DOC -3- \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checkli_ :- 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 X resources, 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) & b) The project site is located within the Highway 111 Image Corridor. The project's landscaping along Highway 111 will be required to include the specific design standards included in the "Highway I I I Design Theme," including its plant palette and design standards, particularly for setbacks. The current plant palette provided in the Specific Plan does not include these standards. This design reduction will not provide the high level of aesthetics mandated in the General Plan for this primary corridor through the City, and will result in a "choppy" or inconsistent approach to landscaping within the Highway 111 corridor. In order to assure that the project provides the level of aesthetic amenities expected in the General Plan for the Highway 111 corridor, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1. The plant palette (Table 2) in the Specific Plan shall be amended to include only those plant materials prescribed in the "Highway 111 Design Theme." The project proponent may, at his/her discretion, provide a second plant palette for plant materials outside the landscaped setback on Highway 111. \\CLOADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -4- 2. The landscaping along the entire frontage of Highway 111 shall be installed with the first phase of project development. I. c) The proposed project includes a very large main building or buildings (attached) totaling over 154,000 square feet, and potentially as long as 720 feet. The Specific Plan depicts the north elevations for this building with no articulation or architectural detail, and with a number of loading docks (see Figure #7), which will have a potentially significant aesthetic impact on both commercial buildings and residential land uses to the north. Of particular concern is both the lack of aesthetic applied to this side of the project, and the need to assure that in the long term, this side of the project will not become visually blighted. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: The Specific Plan shall be amended as follows: a. Architectural elevations shown in Figures 16 to 21 shall be amended to reflect improvements to the north side elevations consistent with the architectural style of the facades of the building(s). b. The text of the Specific Plan, under Section "Architectural Guidelines" shall be amended to include a discussion of the importance of architectural details on all building elevations, and particularly on the "back of house" elevations on the north side of the site. C. The Specific Plan shall be amended to include, under Section "Architectural Guidelines," a requirement for screened and/or sunken loading docks, to assure that the visual impacts of these facilities is minimized. The implementation of these mitigation measures will assure that aesthetic impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. I. d) The project will generate light from parking lot and security lighting. The project will be required, however, through the Site Development Permit process, to demonstrate that the lighting on the site will remain contained to the site, in conformance with the City's lighting ordinance. In addition, this ordinance requires that all lighting be directed downwards, and be shielded, to assure that the security lighting on the north side of the site does not impact the adjacent land uses. The implementation of these standards will assure that the impacts associated with light and glare will be less than significant. C. \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -5- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would theproject: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique X Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? (General Plan EIR p. III-21 ff.) X b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) c) Involve other changes in the existing X environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (No ag. land in proximity to project site) II. a)-c) The project site is vacant desert land and is not in agriculture. Lands surrounding the project site are planned, and partially developed in regional commercial land uses. There are no Williamson Act contracts on the properties, nor on properties in the immediate vicinity. No impacts to agriculture will result with development of the proposed project. \\CLOAD MFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -6- C � Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct X implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any air quality standard or X contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) c) Result in a cumulatively considerable X net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, 2002 PM 10 Plan for the Coachella Valley) d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) III. a), b) & c) The City's primary source of pollution is the automobile. The proposed project includes the development of up to 175,200 square feet of commercial retail space which will generate approximately 12,895 daily trips at the site'. Based on this traffic generation, and an average trip length of 15 miles, the following emissions can be expected to be generated from the project site. 1 Based on Table IV-1, of "La Quinta Corporate Centre Traffic Impact Study," prepared by Endo Engineering, May 1999, and assuming 158.4 thousand s.f. commercial retail and 9.0 thousand s.f. restaurant, categories 820 and 832. \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -7- ' '� Moving Exhaust Emission Projections at Project Buildout (pounds per day) Ave. Trip Total Total No. Vehicle Trips/Day Length (miles) miles/day 12,895 x 15 = 193,425 PM10 PM10 PM10 Pollutant ROC CO NOX Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Grams at 50 mph 17,408.25 452,614.50 92,844.00 - 1,934.25 1,934.25 Pounds at 50 mph 38.43 999.15 204.95 - 4.27 4.27 SCAQMD Threshold (lbs /day) 75 550 100 150 Assumes 12,895 ADT. Based on California Air Resources Board's EMFAC7G Emissions Model. Assumes Year 2005 summertime running conditions at 75 F, light duty autos, catalytic. As demonstrated above, the proposed project will exceed SCAQMD's recommended daily thresholds for both carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxides. The potential impacts of the proposed project were analysed in the General Plan EIR, as the land use proposed is consistent with the Regional Commercial land use designation. The City found at that time that although the potential impacts associated with air quality in the City could be considerable, the potential benefits of buildout of the General Plan outweighed these potential impacts, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations was prepared and adopted in conjunction with the certification of the General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR included a number of mitigation measures to assist the City and project developers in reducing potential impacts associated with air quality. In order to lower the potential impacts associated with air quality emissions, mitigation measures have been provided below. 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 measures will be integrated into conditions of approval for the proposed project. These include the following control measures. 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 c,J \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -8- The proposed project will generate dust during construction. Under mass grading conditions, this could result in the generation of 461.5 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. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities. 4. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site. 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 hydroseeded on the affected portion of the site. 8. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. Parkway landscaping on both Adams Street and Highway 111 shall be installed immediately following mass grading of the site. 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 11. The project proponent shall notify the City and SCAQMD of the start and end of grading activities in conformance and within the time frames established in the 2002 PM10 Management Plan. 12. Any business on the proposed project site which employs 100 or more persons shall be required to implement the standards and conditions of the City's Transportation Demand Management Ordinance. U. \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -9- 13. The project proponent shall coordinate the location of a bus stop adjacent to the project site with Sunline Transit, and shall construct the bus stop and amenities (shelter, trash cans, benches, etc.) to Sunline and City standards. 14. All applicable mitigation measures contained in the General Plan EIR shall be applied to the proposed project during both construction and operation. n C... L \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -10- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the ro'ect: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, X either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) b) Have a substantial adverse effect on X any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on X federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) d) Interfere substantially with the x movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) e) Conflict with any local policies or X ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) f) Conflict with the provisions of an X adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -11- C J or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) IV. a)-f) The proposed project site is currently vacant desert land. Biological resource analyses have been conducted in the past for portions of the project site'. There are no species of concern identified for this property in the City's General Plan. The project site is within the mitigation fee area for the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard. The site has been impacted by off -site construction and dumping in the past, and is isolated due to surrounding development. The site is likely habitat for common desert flora and fauna, which will be lost at the time the site develops. However, the City's requirements for desert tolerant landscaping will result in the planting of materials which will be habitat for these species upon project buildout. The impacts associated with biological resources are expected to be less than significant. 2 James Cornett, "Giant Sand Treader Cricket Survey and Habitat Analysis," July 15, 1999 r. \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNIMSTAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -12- 0 J Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would theproject: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of a historical resource as defined in ' 15064.5? ("Interim Cultural Resources Report, Hotel I I I Project Site," CRM Tech, December, 1998 and "Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation at La Quinta Corporate Centre," CRM Tech, August 2, 1999.) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to ' 15064.5? ("interim Cultural Resources Report, Hotel I I I Project Site," CRM Tech, December, 1998 and "Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation at La Quinta Corporate Centre," CRM Tech, August 2, 1999.) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ("General Plan Exhibit 6.8) d) Disturb any human remains, including X those interred outside of formal cemeteries? "Interim Cultural Resources Report, I lotel 111 Project Site," CRM Tech, December, 1998 and "Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation at La Quinta Corporate Centre," CRM Tech, August 2, 1999.) V. a), b) & d) Cultural resource surveys have previously been completed for the proposed project site'. The surveys and site investigations identified significant resources on portions of the project site. Site CA-RIV-6190 was found not to constitute a significant resource, and no further action is required on this site. A portion of Site CA-RIV-2936, however, was found to be significant. Two potential mitigation measures were offered for the historic site: to either fully excavate the site, or to cover the site and protect it from further disturbance. The City determined that, in conformance with CEQA. Section 15126.4(b)(3), preservation in place is the preferred mitigation measure (also see Staff Report and Minutes, Historic Preservation Commission, August 19, 1999). However, the Historic Preservation Commission determined that excavation of the site should occur as recommended by the archaeological testing and evaluation report prepared by CRM TECH. An interim Phase III data recovery report was completed in December, 1999, and 3 "Interim Cultural Resources Report, Hotel 11 I Project Site," CRM Tech, December, 1998 and "Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation at La Quinta Corporate Centre," CRM Tech, August 2, 1999. \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -13- r accepted by the HPC in January, 2000, subject to submission of a final report. The site is also to be monitored during earth moving activities to ensure that any additional resources potentially uncovered are appropriately studied. The following mitigation measures shall therefore be implemented: The final report for the Phase III data Recovery for the Historic Site on CA-RIV- 2936, including artifact laboratory analysis shall be submitted to and be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) prior to issuance of first building permit for project (Required by HPC on January 6, 2000). 2. An archaeological monitor shall be present during grubbing, grading, trenching or other earth moving activity on or off the project site. The archaeologist shall be empowered to stop or redirect earth moving activities. The archaeologist shall file a report with the Community Development Department immediately following completion of earth moving activities, on the findings at the site. V. c) The site is outside the historic lakebed for ancient Lake Cahuilla, and is therefore not expected to contain resources. G.. L, \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNIWSTAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -14- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, X as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (MEA Exhibit 6.2) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (MEA X Exhibit 6.2) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, X including liquefaction? (General Plan Exhibit 8.2) iv) Landslides? (General Plan Exhibit 8.3) X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or X the loss of topsoil? (General Plan Exhibit 8.4) d) Be located on expansive soil, as X defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (General Plan Exhibit 8.1) e) Have soils incapable of adequately X supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (General Plan Exhibit 8.1) VI. a) i), iii), iv), b)-e) The project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it subject to landslides or liquefaction. The soil in the area is not expansive, and would support septic tanks. The proposed project will have no impact on these geologic hazards. VI. a) ii) The City and project site will be subject to significant ground shaking in the event of significant seismic activity. The City Building Department has implemented California \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -15- r, Building Codes which is intended to lower the potential impacts associated with groundshaking to less than significant levels. In addition, no critical facilities will be built at the site. The structures will be required to implement the most recent building codes in place at the time of construction. Site specific studies prepared for the subject property, and reviewed for the proposed project, include construction standards which will be implemented by the City Engineer during review of the project grading and building plans 4 Impacts associated with groundshaking are expected to be less than significant. 4 Letter report, Sladden Engineering, dated August 19, 2003. \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -16- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would the ro'ect: a) Create a significant hazard to the X X public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Application materials) c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle X hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Application materials) d) Be located on a site which is included X on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing) e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) g) Impair implementation of or X physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -17- � \J J evacuation plan? (General Plan MEA p. 95 ff) h) Expose people or structures to a X significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) VII. a)-h) The proposed project will result in the construction of commercial and retail space. Should any of these businesses store or transport hazardous substances, they will be heavily regulated by regional and state agencies. These agencies will impose conditions of approval and monitor the businesses to assure that the applicable standards are implemented. Impacts associated with hazardous materials are therefore expected to be less than significant. The site is not located within the vicinity of an airport or airstrip, nor is it subject to wildland fires. \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- 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? (Project Grading, Site Hydrology) 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? (Project Grading, Site Hydrology) 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? (Project Grading, Site Hydrology) f) Place housing within a 100-year flood X \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -19- 1 hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 6.6) 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) The construction of commercial space will not significantly impact water supply, nor will it violate water or wastewater requirements. The project proponent will 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 buildings. The Coachella Valley Water District will impose conditions of approval for the treatment of wastewater from the facilities constructed on the project site. 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 proposed project will be responsible for the drainage of on and off site flows, and has been designed to include retention areas within the project. The City Engineer requires that these retention areas retain the 100 year storm on site, which is expected to lower potential impacts to a less than significant level. VIII. e)-g) The construction of the proposed project will not have an impact on the City's storm drainage system. The site is not located within a FEMA designated 100 year storm area. \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -20- 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 surrounded by vacant or commercially developed land, and will continue this pattern of development. The land is designated in the General Plan for Regional Commercial, and will not include the development of residential property. The site is within the fee payment area of the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan, and will be required to pay the fee in effect at the time of building permit issuance. r .. \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -21- 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. C \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -22- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XI. NOISE B Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation X of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (MEA p. 111 ff.) b) Exposure of persons to or generation X of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (Project description) c) A substantial permanent increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Project description) d) A substantial temporary or periodic X increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan land use map) e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) XI. a)-f) The proposed project will result in the development of commercial and retail land uses, which are not considered sensitive receptors. Although persons visiting the center will be subject to higher noise levels, due to the project's location adjacent to Highway 111, this exposure will be temporary and periodic, and will not result in any significant impacts. The proposed project will generate elevated noise levels during construction, but there are \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -23- no sensitive receptors located adjacent to the project site (residential and school uses), and therefore, there is expected to be no impact to adjacent land uses as a result of project construction or operation. Commercial and retail land uses are not expected to generate ground borne vibrations. The project is not located in the vicinity of either an airport of airstrip. \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -24- 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 will result in the construction of commercial land uses which will generate a need for employees. However, the project is well within the development potential assessed in the General Plan EIR, and is likely to have jobs filled by new City residents and residents new to adjacent communities. No impacts are expected to population and housing. \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNINMSTAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -25- J Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57) X Police protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57) X Schools? (General Plan MEA, p. 52 ff.) X Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks X Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, X p. 46 ff.) XIII. a) Buildout of the site will have a less than significant impact on public services. The proposed project will be served by the County Sheriff and Fire Department, under City contract. Buildout of the proposed project will generate property and sales tax which will offset the costs of added police and fire services. The project will be required to pay the mandated school fees in place at the time of issuance of building permits. There will be no impact to City parks due to the construction of commercial facilities. \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -26- C. ' i Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of X existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application materials) b) Does the project include recreational X facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application materials) XIV. a) & b) The construction of retail commercial development will not impact the City's recreational resources. t. J \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -27- 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)? (Project description) e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? (Project description) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X (Project description) X g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Project description) \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -28- �� XV. a)-g) Several traffic impact analyses have been conducted for portions of the project sites. These analyses included a number of mitigation measures, which will be applied to the proposed project as applicable. In addition, the project site and the construction of regional commercial development were included in the City's General Plan EIR. The EIR found that traffic in this area of Highway 111 will operate at acceptable levels of service at General Plan buildout. The driveway proposed on Adams Street, midway between Corporate Drive and Highway 111, may pose a traffic hazard if full turn movements are permitted, primarily due to the short distance between it and the Highway 111 intersection, and the high number of trips from the adjacent commercial development to the west. The City Engineer, however, will condition the permitted turning movements from each driveway, including this one, as part of his review of the proposed project. With imposition of these conditions of approval, impacts to safety hazards are expected to be less than significant. The mitigation measures previously applied to the project site shall apply, as follows: 1. All internal drives and streets shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer during the Design Review process to ensure compliance with City standards. 2. Off-street parking shall be provided in conformance with the requirements of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 3. All internal street shall be fully constructed to their ultimate cross -sections as adjacent on -site development occurs. 4. Sidewalks and streetlights shall be installed on -site in conformance with the Municipal Code. All internal street intersections shall provide clear, unobstructed sight distance. 6. All site driveways exiting the project site shall include a STOP sign and clear unobstructed sight distances. 7. The lane geometrics shown in Figures VI-2 and VI-3 of the traffic impact analysis shall be installed adjacent to the project site. Phasing of the intersection improvements shall be in conformance with the conditions of approval provided by the City Engineer. 8. The project proponent shall participate in the City's traffic mitigation fee program. 9. Turning movements permitted on Adams Street and the project driveway, midway between Corporate Way and Highway 111 shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits for the site. Should the City Engineer require "Traffic Impacts Associated with the Adams Street Hotel and Restaurants" and "Adams Street Hotel Access Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis," Endo Engineering, November 30, 1998 and January 8, 1999, respectively. Also "La Quinta Corporate Centre Traffic Impact Study," Endo Engineering, May 10, 1999. \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\PavilioMEA Checklist481.DOC -29- r' additional study of the potential turning movement hazards at this location, the project proponent shall provide this analysis for review and approval. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts to the City's circulation system should be less than significant. \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -30- Potentially Significant Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS B Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, P. 58 ff.) c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) d) Have sufficient water supplies 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 wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project=s projected demand in addition to the provider=s existing commitments? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project=s solid waste disposal needs? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) Less Than Less Than No Significant w/ Significant Impact Mitigation Impact X KI /0 /1 X X X \\C LQADM FS 1 \PLAN NINMSTAN\PavilioMEA Checklist481.DOC -31- LJ � XVI. a)-g) Utilities are available at the project site. The land use intensity was included in the analysis of the General Plan, and levels of service were found to be acceptable. No impacts to utilities are expected as a result of the proposed project. i \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -32- 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 project site is disturbed vacant desert, and is not habitat for sensitive species in the area. The proposed project will not, therefore, degrade existing habitat for fish and wildlife. The site has been identified as having potentially significant cultural resources. However, mitigation measures included above will assure that these potential resources are protected, and that potential impacts are reduced to less than significant levels. XVII.b) The proposed project supports the long term goals of the General Plan by adding to the economic base of the City. (7, �. \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -33- XVII. c) The project will not have considerable cumulative impacts, and will not exceed those impacts identified in the General Plan EIR for this area of the City, or the City as a whole. XVII. d) The proposed project has the potential to adversely affect human beings, due to air quality impacts. Since the Coachella Valley is in a non -attainment area for PM10, and the site will generate a high level of criteria pollutants, which can cause negative health effects, Section III), above, includes a number of mitigation measures to reduce the potential impacts on air quality. The impacts are not expected to be any more than those identified in the General Plan EIR, which included analysis of regional commercial development at the project site. \\CLQADMFS1\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -34- XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSIS. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. Environmental Assessments 98-373 and 99-383 were utilized in preparation of this Environmental Assessment. 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. \\CLQADMFSI\PLANNING\STAN\Pavilion\EA Checklist481.DOC -35- E. I 1 I I I F d A U pq �A U W OV 0 o o o 0 � O V U rA U O o o +`A a o o o 0 aCd a um U A um n UA, o � +2 CEl d -0 9 cd ,~ c VI W y� Ried E O .cl o o ., F ACd U CCd 0 �, o v a 0 avi avi o -+ Ln cn CA bA 0 r..� p O O ` �U a� Uto U W a-+ aO� a0� id ate+ .. O +V ..04 O Y O b�q 9 9 bq O O a ir++ a a A O a O a O V o a a, a a. a a, a a, bo a� a a R a W a o � o 0 > � 0 O�. p A �� A a°i A A A A �� A A o •� ,� o �`��`� o 8 o a¢i o a¢i u u U W U A A A v A U A um z rs o oN ;rn F rn 1-4 cd� too o Ao °' - y 5¢. o 3 s 0 o to 3 A o � o W d44 a ' o a o -,o a 0 �° U p o A cx� rACd N U"~ N 0 A O .o i^ J F d A U pq �A U W O� o i7 `n U +� dq c� bA a�'i a o� w o 0 Cd O a¢i O 0 u u z v, o o0 �un ° v� a o V O bA O O O O y U o a J•r.� F d A U pq �A a�x U W OV o _ bA bA dp bA bA bA bq bA bA o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 pL' C vL•' U U U U U U .�. rn W asp. as P. as aa,aaaa A4 A4 a i o� W �o o � r W W W W W U A U pG1 U U U U U ^s G > U :E! �U v� -15 orA 4' "'" yC QU 00 U 3 0 4. a � U 05 a w o PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A 175,200 SQUARE FOOT SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND ADAMS STREET CASE: SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066 APPLICANT: THOMAS ENTERPRISES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 9th day of September, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by THOMAS ENTERPRISES for approval of a specific plan to allow a 175,200 square foot shopping center on 17.4 t acres located at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street in the CR (Regional Commercial) zone district, more particularly described as: APN's: 649-020-043, -063, -064, and -065 WHEREAS, on July 31, 2003, the Community Development Department mailed case file materials to all affected agencies for their review and comment on the proposed project. 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 August 29, 2003, for the September 9, 2003, Planning Commission meeting as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site; and WHEREAS, the La Quinta Community Development Department has completed Environmental Assessment 2003-481. Based upon this Assessment, the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment; therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is recommended. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office on August 26, 2003, as required by Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes; and WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings to justify a recommendation to the City Council for approval of said Specific Plan: C: P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\sp 03-066 pc res.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Adopted: September 9, 2003 Page 2 Finding A - Consistency with General Plan The property is designated Mixed Regional Commercial (M/RC) for large scale commercial projects consisting of major department and specialty stores, supermarkets, and other retail and restaurant uses. The proposed project will provides these types of uses. Additionally, the project provides adequate perimeter landscaping and acceptable architectural design pursuant to primary and secondary image corridor policies. Finding B — Public Welfare Enhancement The project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare in that the project is designed in compliance with the City General Plan, Zoning and design standard requirements and other County and State standards, such as CEQA. Findings C and D — Land Use Compatibility and Property Suitability The project is in a commercially designated and zoned area which is proposed for and, therefore, suitable for commercial development. The project provides adequate buffering through landscaping and walls to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses. 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 said Planning Commission in this case; and 2. That it does hereby acknowledge that Environmental Assessment 2003- 481 has determined that no significant effects on the environment have been identified and mitigation measures are being imposed; and 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 2003-066, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. 4. That upon approval of Specific Plan 2003-066, Specific Plans 99-033 and 99-036 (for the easterly portion of this property) shall be void and of no effect on the subject property. J P:\stan\sp 03-066 thomas\sp 03-066 pc res.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Adopted: September 9, 2003 Page 3 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 9th day of September, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOTES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\stan\sp 03-066 thomas\sp 03-066 pc res.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066 - THOMAS ENTERPRISES CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 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 Specific Plan, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. This Specific Plan, 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 the 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 • CalTrans 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 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. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs five (5) acres or more of land, or that disturbs less than five (5) acres of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than five (5) acres of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). 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. 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 5. 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, n. sp 03-066 pc coa Page 2 of 15 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. 6. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map or other development applicatinon 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. 7. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Highway 111 (Major Arterial, 140' ROW) — No additional right of way dedication is required except for an additional right of way dedication at the primary entry to accommodate improvements conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS. 2) Adams Street (Secondary Arterial, 88' ROW) — No additional right of way dedication is required. 3) Corporate Centre Drive (Collector, 64' ROW Option) — No additional right of way dedication is required. 8. 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. 9. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street right-of- ways shown on the approved Tentative 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. 10. 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, if applicable. Such easement may be reduced to five feet in width with the express written approval of IID. 11. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of- ways as follows: A. Highway 111 (State - Major Arterial) - 50-foot from the R/W-P/L. sp 03-066 pc coa Page 3 of 15 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 B. Adams Street and Corporate Centre Drive (Secondary Arterial/Collector) - 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. 12. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, and common areas on the Final Map. 13. Direct vehicular access to Highway 1 1 1 from lots with frontage along Highway 1 1 1 is restricted, except for those access points identified on the Specific Plan, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final map. 14. 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. 15. When an applicant proposes the vacation, or abandonment, of any existing right-of- way, or access easement, the recordation of the tract map is subject to the applicant providing an alternate right-of-way or access easement, to those properties, or notarized letters of consent from the affected property owners. 16. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Specific Plan and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. FINAL MAPS 17. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a standard AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD program. sp 03-066 pc coa Page 4 of 15 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 Where a Final Map was not produced in an AutoCAD format, or produced in a file that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept a raster - image file of such Final Map. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 18. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC. 19. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. 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. A. Site Development Plan B. Traffic Signal Plan 1 " = 30' Horizontal 1 " = 20' 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 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. 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 _ ... sp 03-066 pc coa Page 5 of 15 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 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. "Site Development" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements. 20. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee, established by City Resolution, the applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes from the City. 21. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order to reflect the as -built conditions. Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 22. Prior to approval of any Final Map, the applicant shall construct all on and off -site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City. 23. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of guaranteeing the completion of any improvements related to this Tentative Tract Map, shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC. 24. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include the removal of any existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the proposed improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monumentation. sp 03-066 pc coa {f f Page 6 of 15 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 25. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development, or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 26. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 27. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 28. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect, 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. 29. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion sp 03-066 pc coa Page 7 of 15 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 30. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six (6) of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches 0 8") behind the curb. 31. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 32. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot from the building pads in adjacent developments. 33. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining properties and the lots within this development. Building pad elevations on contiguous interior lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots that do not share a common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. 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. 34. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the approved Tentative Map, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 35. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. sp 03-066 pc coa Page 8 of 15 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 nRAINAGE 36. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. 37. 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. 38. 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. 39. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 40. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 41. The applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge into the Coachella Valley Strom Water Channel 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 specific plan 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. UTILITIES 42. 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. sp 03-066 pc coa Page 9 of 15 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 43. 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. 44. 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 45. 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. 46. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Highway 111 (Major Arterial - State; 140' R/W): No widening of the north side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Specific Plan is required for its ultimate width as specified in the General Plan and the requirements of these conditions except at locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate: a) Bus turnout (if required by Sunline Transit) Other required improvements in the right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: a) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. sp 03-066 pc coa Page 10 of 15 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 b) 8-foot wide meandering sidewalk. The meandering sidewalk shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the curb line that either touches the back of curb or approaches within five feet of the curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet, and at each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall meander into the landscape setback lot and approach within 5 feet of the perimeter wall at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. 2) Adams Street (Secondary Arterial — 88' R/W): No widening of the east side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Specific Plan is required for its ultimate width as specified in the General Plan and the requirements of these conditions. B. PARKING LOT AND CIRCULATION — The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150. Contingent on development concepts of the property to the east, the applicant shall provide an additional connection to the parking area from the shared entry drive off of Highway 111 at La Quinta Drive. The connection shall be located approximately 300 feet north of Highway 111 and aligned with the east/west circulation road south of Building Area 5. Drive thru access to the southerly east/west circulation road from Building Area 4 at the southeast corner of the property shall be at least 100 feet from the west curb face of the shared entry drive to the east. C. TRAFFIC SIGNAL - Traffic signal at the intersection of Adams Street and Commerce Centre Drive when warrants are met. Applicant is responsible for the cost to design and install the traffic signal. Applicant shall enter into an improvement agreement and post security for full cost to design and construct the traffic signal prior to issuance of an onsite grading permit; the security shall remain in effect until the signal is constructed by the applicant. 47. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Highway 111 sp 03-066 pc coa Page 11 of 15 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 1) Primary Entry (Highway 1 1 1, 800 feet east of Adams Street): Right turn in, Right turn out. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. 2) Secondary Entry (Highway 111, 420 feet east of Adams Street): Right turn in, Right turn our. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. 3) Shared Entry (Highway 1 1 1, east of the easterly property line: Full turn movements are allowed at the existing signalized intersection of Highway 1 1 1 and La Quinta Drive. B. Adams Street — Limited to single access point as described below: 11 Primary Entry (Adams Street, 400 feet north of Highway 1 1 1): Full turn movements are allowed. C. Corporate Centre Drive — Limited to single access point as described below: 1) Primary Entry (Corporate Centre Drive, 300' east of Adams Street): Full turn movements are allowed. 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). 48. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: Parking Areas Collector Secondary Arterial Major Arterial 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. 4.0" a.c /5.0" c.a.b. 4.0" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. 5.5" a.c./6.5" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 49. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not sp 03-066 pc coa Page 12 of 15 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. A. 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. 50. 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 51. 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 building within the development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPING 52. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC. 53. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, and common lots. 54. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention and basins, shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 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. 55. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn.{ . sp 03-066 pc coa Page 13 of 15 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. PUBLIC SERVICES 56. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 57. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 58. 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. 59. 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. 60. 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 61. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 62. 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 63. 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 sp 03-066 pc coa Page 14 of 15 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: September 9, 2003 effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. 64. 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 65. A minimum three-foot high screening of the parking lot surfaces shall be provided adjacent to Adams Street and Corporate Center Drive by the use of screen shrubs, short walls and/or berming. 66. All mitigation measures contained in Environmental Assessment 2003-481 are required to be complied with, as noted. 67. All masonry walls where determined by the Community Development Department to be readily visible from public streets shall be decorative in material and color. 68. The exterior elevations of all buildings contained in the specific plan text are conceptual only and subject to approval of a site development permit by the Planning Commission. 69. A sign program for the shopping center shall be approved by the Planning Commission prior to approval of a grading permit. 70. Comments received from the Police Department shall be considered and incorporated into the Site Development Permit project design where feasible. 71. Fire Marshal requirements shall be determined during review of Site Development Permits for the project. sp 03-066 pc coa Page 15 of 15 PH #F PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-783 APPLICANT: MICHAEL J. SHOVLIN REQUEST: REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A 5,150 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT BUILDING LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 1 1 1, EAST OF SIMON DRIVE WITHIN THE ONE -ELEVEN LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THE REQUEST HAS BEEN ASSESSED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 89- 150 (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 90020162), PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 89-014, WHICH WAS CERTIFIED ON APRIL 17, 1990. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS ARE PROPOSED, OR NEW INFORMATION HAS BEEN SUBMITTED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. BACKGROUND: The vacant project site is located along Highway 111, between PFF Bank and Auto Zone in the One -Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center (Attachment 1). The parking lot has been installed to the north and west of the proposed site. To the east of the site is a driveway to Highway 111. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The applicants are proposing a 5,150 square foot building to be used for a pizza restaurant and microbrewery. The building is primarily one story except for a small mezzanine area for access to the microbrewery tanks. The architecture of the building is similar to the existing freestanding shop buildings in the Center. The building has a flat roof with varying heights from 23 feet (for most of the building) to 25 feet at the tower at the southeast corner of the building. A the roofed arcade is provided around pccup96032 portions on all sides of the building. Architectural features from existing buildings include a detailed cornice, the roof arcade and matching tile and plaster colors. Exterior colors consist of similar light earth tones used in adjacent buildings. Adjacent to the east and west sides of the building are outdoor patio areas. A unique feature proposed near the southeast corner of the building is a stainless steel grain silo approximately 20-feet high. It will not be used, but is provided because the pizza restaurant features a microbrewery. The landscaping plans proposed for this project have been submitted and include planting similar and compatible with the existing planting in the Center. The plan notes that existing planting adjacent to the Highway 1 1 1 sidewalk will be retained. As a restaurant use, 68 parking spaces (1 /75 square feet) are required. The project provides 18 new spaces on the north and west sides of the building. A large parking area exists to the north of the site which is allocated for use of development in this portion of the site. There is additional parking between the site and bank to the west which can be used by both businesses. With this project, they will comply with parking required by the Specific Plan. There is a sign program for the Center. Wall signs are shown for the new building on the north and south sides of the building. No specific information is given for the signs. Signs will be reviewed when submitted, and processed accordingly. ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC): The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of September 3, 2003, and recommended approval of the project by adoption of Minute Motion 2003-037, subject to conditions (Attachment 3). PUBLIC NOTICE: This application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 29, 2003. 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. FINDINGS: The findings, as required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the Zoning Ordinance, can be made as noted in the attached Resolution provided the recommended Conditions of Approval are imposed. Note, the current Zoning Code requries buildings within 150 feet of State Highway 1 1 1 to have a roof height of not more than 22'- 0". This Code provision was enacted in 1996 to insure low profile buildings adjoining Image Corridors and Major/Primary Arterial thoroughfares. However, the Code permits architectural projections to exceed this height based on the P:\STAN\sdp 2003-783 pc rpt.wpd following statement:"... architectural features not containing usable floor space, such as chimneys, towers, gables and spires, are permitted to extend fifteen feet above the maximum structure height set forth in Table 9-6 if approved as part of the site development or other permit (Section 9.90.020)." Therefore, a condition is recommended to allow the roof line for the project to vary to approximately 25-feet for the tower to retain the architectural integrity of the shopping center. The main roof is conditioned to not exceed 22-feet high. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_, approving the development plans for Site Development Permit 2003-783, subject to the attached conditions. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Plan exhibits 3. Draft minutes of the September 3, 2003, Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee meeting Prepared by: Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner P:ISTAN1sdp 2003-783 pc rpt.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,150± SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT BUILDING IN THE ONE -ELEVEN LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-783 APPLICANT: MICHAEL SHOVLIN WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 9th day of September, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing, to consider the request of Michael Shovlin to approve the development plans for a 5,150 ± square foot commercial restaurant building in the One -Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center, located on the north side of Highway 111 east of Simon Drive, more particularly described as: APN 643-080-037 WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee did on the 3rd day of September, 2003, at a regular meeting, adopted Minute Motion 2003- 037, recommending approval of the architectural plans for the new building, subject to conditions; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of said Site Development Permit: 1. The General Plan designates the project area as Regional Commercial. The proposed commercial building is consistent with this land use designation. 2. The proposed commercial building is designed to comply with the Zoning Code and Specific Plan requirements, including, but not limited to, height limits, parking, lot coverage, and signs. 3. The La Quinta Community Development Department has determined that the request has been assessed in conjunction with Environmental Assessment 89- 150 (State Clearinghouse Number 90020162), prepared for Specific Plan 89- 014, which was certified on April 17, 1990. No changed circumstances or conditions are proposed, or new information has been submitted which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental review. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Site Development Permit 2003-783 Michael Shovlin Adopted: September 9, 2003 4. The architectural design of the project, including, but not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements are compatible with the surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the city. The project uses architectural features, colors, and materials to match the surrounding existing buildings. 5. The site design of the project, including, but not limited to project entries, interior circulation, pedestrian and bicycle access, pedestrian amenities, screening of equipment and trash enclosures, exterior lighting, and other site design elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City. The proposed building is located on an area that is designated for a commercial restaurant building. 6. Project landscaping, including, but not limited to the location, type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant materials has been designed so as to provide relief, compliment buildings, visually emphasize prominent design elements and vistas, screen undesirable views, provide a harmonious transition between adjacent land uses and between development and open space, provide an overall unifying influence, enhance the visual continuity of the project, and compliment the surrounding project area, ensuring lower maintenance and water use. 7. The building signs will have to comply and be consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and Center's approved sign program. 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 approve Site Development Permit 2003-783 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 9th day of June, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: P:\STAN\sdp 2003-783 pc reso.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Site Development Permit 2003-783 Michael Shovlin Adopted: September 9, 2003 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\STAN\sdp 2003-783 pc reso.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-783 MICHAEL SHOVLIN ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this site development plan. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. 3. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water), LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08- DWQ. 4. 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). PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-783 - MICHAEL SHOVLIN ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of essential improvements. 6. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. ii. Right of way dedications required of this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Highway 1 1 1 (Major Arterial — State Highway, 140' Right of Way) — No additional street right of way is required to comply with the General Plan street widths. 8. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as follows (listed setback depth is the average depth if meandering wall design is approved): A. Highway 111 (Major Arterial — State Highway) — 50-foot from the R/W — P/L. The setback requirement applies 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 dedicate blanket easements for those purposes. 9. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 10. Direct vehicular access to and from Highway 1 1 1 from lots with frontage along said street is restricted, except for those existing access points identified on the approved Parcel Map. 11. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur. sdp 2003-783 pc coa Page 2 of 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-783 - MICHAEL SHOVLIN ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 12. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property owners. 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. 113. "Site Development Plans" shall normally include all surface improvements, including but not limited to: parking lot improvements, finish grades, curbs & gutters, ADA requirements, retaining and perimeter walls, etc. Site Development Plan: 1 " = 30' Horizontal Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 14. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City Resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 15. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions. If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 16. In the event that any of the improvements required herein are constructed by the City, the applicant shall, at the time of approval of the development or building permit, reimburse the City for the cost of those improvements. sdp 2003-783 pc coa Page 3 of 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-783 - MICHAEL SHOVLIN ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 GRADING 17. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 18. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 19. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. The certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. [DRAINAGE 20. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan for ONE ELEVEN/LA QUINTA CENTER. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer. 21. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or building permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this Site Development Permit excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. UTILITIES 22. 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, sdp 2003-783 pc coa Page 4 of 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-783 - MICHAEL SHOVLIN ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 23. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. PARKING LOTS and ACCESS POINTS 24. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking). Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, ADA accessibility route to public streets and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths and other improvements as may be determined by the City Engineer. A. General access points and turning movements of traffic to off site public streets are limited to the access locations approved in Specific Plan 89- 014. 25. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. LANDSCAPING 26. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. 27. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit plans for approval by the Community Development Department prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking is complete, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for signature by the sdp 2003-783 pc coa Page 5 of 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-783 - MICHAEL SHOWN ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 2.8. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. QUALITY ASSURANCE 29. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 30. 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. 31. 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. 32. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. MAINTENANCE 33. 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 34. 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. sdp 2003-783 pc coa Page 6 of 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-783 - MICHAEL SHOWN ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 35. 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 MARSHAL 36. Approved super fire hydrants shall be located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the buildings as measured along vehicular travel ways. 37. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 38. Fire Department connections shall be not less than 25 feet nor more than 50 feet from a fire hydrant and shall be located on the street side of the buildings. 39. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run concurrent with the City plan check. 40. Water plans for the fire protection system (fire hydrants, fdc, etc.) shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 41. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all commercial buildings 5,000 sq. ft. or larger to be fully sprinkled. NFPA 13 Standard. Sprinkler plans will need to be submitted to the Fire Department. 42. 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. 43. Fire Department street access shall come to within 150 feet of all portions of the 15t floor of all buildings, by path of exterior travel. 44. Any commercial operation that produces grease -laden vapors will require a Hood/duct system for fire protection. (Restaurants, drive-thru's, etc.) 45. 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. Streets shall be a minimum 20 feet wide with a height of 13"6" clear and unobstructed. sdp 2003-783 pc coa Page 7 of 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-783 - MICHAEL SHOVLIN ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 46. Install a KNOX key box on the building. (Contact the fire department for an application) 47. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code. MISCELLANEOUS 48. Applicant shall comply with the approved Conditions of Approval for Specific Plan 89-014. 49. Prior to issuance of a building permit, final working drawings shall be approved by the Community Development Department. 50. All roof -mounted mechanical equipment must be screened and installed using compatible architectural materials and treatments, in a manner so as not to be visible from surrounding properties and streets. Working drawings showing all such equipment and locations shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department along with construction plan submittal for building permits. Method and design of screening must be approved by the Community Development Department prior to any issuance of building permits related to structures requiring such screening. 51. Roof elements shall be limited to a height of 22'-0", excluding the roof structure over the southeast corner of the building, which is allowed to be up to 25' high. The area allowed to be 25' high shall be minimized to the smallest height needed to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. 52. Signs shall comply with the approved sign program. 53. New parking lot planter islands around the new building shall not exceed 15-feet in length, measured from the front end of the adjacent parking space to improve access in and out of the adjacent parking space. 54. Palm trees shall be skinned when planted. sdp 2003-783 pc coa Page 8 of 8 CASE MAP CASE No. ORTH SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ,SCALE: 2003-783 1 NTS ATTACHMENT #3 MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA September 3, 2003 10:00 a.m. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee was called to order at 10:06 a.m. by Planning Manager Oscar Orci who led the flag salute. B. Committee Members present: Bill Bobbitt, Dennis Cunningham, and David Thoms. C. Staff present: Planning Manager Oscar Orci, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. Ill. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Staff asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of August 6, 2003. ,,''here being no corrections, it was moved and seconded by Comrriittee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to approve the Minutes as su,f`nitted. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: _.. A. Site Development Permit 2003-783; a request of Michael Shovlin for __..._ review of development plans for a 5,150 square foot restaurant ` building located on the north side of Highway 1 1 1, west of Simon Drive, within the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the landscaping was approved under a specific plan. Staff stated yes, it is a matter Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee September 3, 2003 of reviewing the overall elevations. Committee Member Cunninham stated he has no objections. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt questioned the grain silo to be facing the Highway 111 frontage. Mr. Ken Bell, representing Lamppost Pizza, stated it is a trademark for the brewery. 4. Committee Member Thorns asked that the islands projecting into the existing parking area be no more than 15 feet from the curb face of the walk going north and south. The stamped concrete on the patio should be "Bomachron" which has a better pattern. Mr. Bell stated they were open to any suggestions. Mr. Dave Smalley, representing the Center's developer, stated there was an interior designer involved with the interior of the building to give an upscale look. 5. There being no further questions, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2003-036 approving Site Development Permit 2003- 783, as recommended by staff and amended as follows: a. Condition added: the islands projecting into the existing parking area shall be no more than 15 feet from the curb face of the walk. b. There shall be no stamped concrete on the patio. It is suggested that a Bomachron material be used. C. All Washingtonia palms shall be skinned. Unanimously approved. B. Si Development Permit 2003-775; a request of Trans West Housing, Inc. r review of architectural plans for six new prototype residential plans `gcated on the north side of Eisenhower Drive, west of Washington Street. 1. Principal-, Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained 'in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community velopment Department. Staff introduced Geoff McComic, repre nting Trans West who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Tho"rRs asked the sizes of the homes. Mr. McComic stated 2400-35quare feet. AA9-3-03 WD.doc - - 2 PH #G STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 CASE NO: SIGN APPLICATION 2003-718 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC. REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO APPROVE A PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM FOR A 14,560 SQURE FOOT WALGREENS STORE LOCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND AVENUE 48 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15311 (CLASS 1 1) IN THAT ON -PREMISE SIGNS ARE ACCESSORY TO COMMERCIAL FACILITIES. GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC)/COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) BACKGROUND: The site is located at the northeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 48 (Attachment 1). The Planning Commission approved Site Development Permit 2002-753 for a ± 14,560 square foot commercial retail building on January 28, 2003, by adopting Resolution No. 2003-004. While the elevations showed locations of the signs, no details were provided and the Planning Commission conditioned the applicant to submit a Planned Sign Program to be brought back before them for consideration. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval of a Planned Sign Program for a Walgreens store, which consists of one monument sign, two wall signs, and two directional signs (Attachment 2). All proposed signs are to be internally illuminated. The monument sign will consist of a double-faced aluminum cabinet with '/z-inch push through clear acrylic with red vinyl letters and blue pharmacy logo applied to the sign face. The base of the proposed monument sign is to be constructed of concrete masonry with a the veneer and cornice ledge. Columns are proposed to support the sign with decorative medallions consistent with those on the building. The cabinet and columns will be painted to match the building color. The two wall mounted signs will be identical and consist of 25-1 /2 inches high by 20 feet-8-1/2 inches long with channel letters, eight inch deep aluminum returns and red acrylic faces, bolted to the wall. The "drive-thru" sign will be wall mounted and consist of channel letters ten inches high by 15 feet -two inches in length with 5 inch returns. The "exit" sign will also be wall mounted and consist of channel letters ten inches high by two feet -six inches in length with 5 inch returns. The applicant is proposing 12.08 square feet for the „ s Drive-thru Pharmacy" sign and 2.0q square feet for the "Exit" sign. The maximum area allowed for these types of signs is 3.0 square feet each. All returns will be painted to match the building color. The following table shows the proposed signs and applicable Sign Code requirements. Number Proposed Number Allowed Sign Area Proposed Sign Area Allowed Max. Height Proposed Max. Height Allowed Sign Type 1 24.75 sq. ft. each side 50 sq. ft. each side 5 ft. 8 ft. Monument Sign (double- 1 faced) 2 (but no more than 1 per each side of 122.00 sq. ft. (61.00 sq. ft. each sign) 1 sq. ft. per lineal ft. of bldg. frontage along a street up 14 ft. from top of sign to ground Top of Wall "Walgreens Pharmacy Wall Signs (South and West elev) 2 building) to max. of 50 sq. ft. 1 12.08 sq. ft. 3.0 sq. ft. N/A N/A "Drive-thru Pharmacy" 1 Sign (South elev) "Exit" Sign 1 N/A 2.0 3.0 sq. ft. N/A N/A Staff recommends that the monument sign be approved as proposed. The monument sign is proposed at five (5) feet in height, three feet below the maximum height allowed, and ten (10) feet in length. The sign area as proposed meets Sign Code requirements. Staff recommends that the applicant reduce the wall mounted sign sizes to meet Code requirements. The Sign Code allows fifty (50) square feet per each sign. The applicant is proposing 61 square feet per sign, exceeding the requirement by 11 square feet per side. In terms of the wall sign heights and locations, staff recommends that they be approved as proposed. The building will be constructed at 22 feet in height and the wall signs are proposed at 15 feet in height, seven (7) feet below the "top of the wall" allowance. The Sign Code considers the "Drive-thru" and "Exit" signs directional signs, which are exempt from sign permits per Section 9.160.020 of the Zoning Code. However, they still have to meet the sign standards and the maximum area allowed for these types of signs which is three (3) square feet each. The applicant is proposing 12.08 square feet for the "Drive-thru Pharmacy" sign and 2.0 square feet for the "Exit" sign. Staff recommends that the word "Pharmacy" be eliminated from the "Drive-thru" sign because it is not considered a directional sign to the proposed "Walgreens Pharmacy wall signs, which currently exceed Zoning Code requirements as proposed. Staff recommends that the "Drive-thru" sign be limited to three (3) square feet per Zoning Code requirements. The "Exit" sign meets Zoning Code requirements as proposed. In addition, these signs are proposed to be wall mounted and Staff recommends that they be mounted at 15 feet in height, which is the same height as the Walgreens Pharmacy signs. Public Notice: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 29, 2003, and mailed to all property owners within 500-feet of the site. To date, five letters have been received (Attachment 3). Any additional written comments received will be handed out at the meeting. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings to approve this request per Section 9.160.090.D.3 (Planned Sign Programs) of the City of La Quinta Zoning Code can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003- , approving Sign Application 2003-718, subject to findings and the attached Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. Site Location Map 2. Planned Sign Program 3. Letters from surrounding property owners Prepared by: Martin Maga=� a Associate Planner PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM FOR WALGREENS CASE NO.: SIGN APPLICATION 2003-718 APPLICANT: EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 91" day of September, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Evergreen Devco, Inc. for a Planned Sign Program for Walgreens located at the northeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 48, more particularly described as follows: APN: 643-200-001, WHEREAS, said Sign Application 2003-718 is Categorically Exempt from environmental review pursuant to provisions of Section 15311 (Class 1 1) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in that on -premise signs are accessory to commercial facilities; and WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to Section 9.210.020 of the Zoning Code to approve said Planned Sign Program: 1. Consistency with the Zoning Code: The proposed Planned Sign Program, as conditioned, is consistent with the development standards outlined in Section 9.160 (Signs) of the Zoning Code. The property is zoned Community Commercial where signs are allowed to be installed on commercial buildings for business identification. 2. Harmony with, and visually related to: a. All signs within the Planned Sign Program. The Planned Sign Program is in harmony with, and visually related to all proposed signs in that common design elements, including but not limited to, materials, letter style, colors, illumination, sign type, or sign shape, have been incorporated into the signs. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Sign Application 2003-718 Walgreens September 9, 2003 b. Buildings they identify. The Planned Sign Program is in harmony with, and visually related to the building it identifies by utilizing materials, colors, and a design motif that complement the building being identified. c. Surrounding development. The Planned Sign Program is in harmony with, and visually related to surrounding development in that the signs complement the building and are set back far enough so as to reduce light glare on public and private property in the surrounding area. 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 Planned Sign Program; 2. That it does hereby approve Sign Application 2003-718 for a Planned Sign Program for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 91h day of September, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Sign Application 2003-718 Walgreens September 9, 2003 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM 2003-718 WALGREENS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 GENERAL 1. The signs shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits contained in Sign Application 2003-718, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. 2. Obtain a building permit from the Building & Safety Department prior to installation of each sign. 3. The signs shall conform to the requirements of Section 1.60 of the Sign Code. 4. The signs shall be limited to the following standards: 11 Sign Number Sign Area Max. Height Type Proposed Allowed Allowed Monument Sign (double- 1 50 sq. ft. 5 ft. each side faced) 2 50 sq. ft. 14 ft. from top of sign "Walgreens Pharmacy" Wall Signs (South and West elev) each sign to ground "Drive-thru " Sign 1 3.0 sq. ft. N/A (South elev) 1 3.0 sq. ft. N/A "Exit" Sign (North elev) 5. The returns on the signs shall be painted to match the building colors. 6. The sign permit shall expire one year from the effective date, unless a Building Permit is issued for the installation of the signs. 7. The applicant/property owner agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. This indemnification shall include any award toward attorney's fees. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion. ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT #1 i I► ATTACHMENT WILLIAM HAVEY 78665 DESCANSO LANE LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 (760) 7 7 1 - 4 2 8 4 FAX (760) 771-3565 September 3, 2003 Mr. Tom Kirk, Chairman And Members of the Planning Commission City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253-1504 Re: Walgreen's Signage Program Gentlemen: We appreciate you taking the time to consider our concerns about Walgreen's proposed building and monument sign program and their impact on our residential neighborhood. Building Signs According to the plans, the Walgreen facility will be about 22 feet high and will sit upon an elevated building pad of several feet above the curb on Avenue 48 making the net height of the building about 25 feet. Evergreen is proposing that the signs be about 15 feet high, however, when you add in the elevated building pad height, their signs will actually be about 18 feet high. The residents living on Descanso Lane in Rancho La Quinta Country Club will be looking directly into these elevated night lighted signs that will be on until 10:00 PM daily. This is not what the City Council intended when they requested Evergreen to relocate the Walgreen's facility to the northwest corner of the 4- acre site to mitigate the neighbors concerns of lighting, traffic, noise, etc. In addition, because the Walgreen's facility has been relocated away from the residential neighborhood and toward Washington Street, their orientation has changed considerably. It would seem reasonable, then, to request the developer to eliminate the proposed south facing building signs altogether and relocate them on the north facing side of the building. Please remember this is a neighborhood commercial retail site surrounded by predominately residential uses, except for the commercial retail area adjacent and north of the property. Walgreen's building signs that face west toward Washington Street and its elevated building size of 14, 560 SF is ample advertising for their use in our small neighborhood community. Monument Sign Evergreen is proposing a large monument sign of (5'x 10') for the corner of Washington Street and Avenue 48. We believe that this sign is excessive in size and should be reduced to (3'x 5') or smaller and relocated to their Washington Street entryway. It makes much more sense to have a low impact sign at the entryway than a large sign on the southwest corner when the building orientation has changed to the northwest corner of the site. Also, we feel that it is very important to maintain the appearance and integrity of the existing quality of homes in the neighborhood. The large proposed commercial looking Walgreen's sign detracts from the image we wish to maintain. Landscape Set Back The landscape set back area along Avenue 48 is now proposed at 30' instead of 40' to accommodate the revised site plan. However, we recommend that this area be heavily landscaped with mature trees that will grow in height to exceed the Walgreen's facility and the three buildings proposed along Avenue 48. We would recommend that numerous mature broad leaf trees, with a minimum box size of 36," be planted to block the view of these buildings from those of us living across Avenue 48 street on Descanso Lane. We have no assurance that the additional buildings will be built although we're told that they are being designed. Several homes at the end of Descanso Lane will be exposed to the Walgreen's facility because no additional buildings are proposed for the corner of Washington and Avenue 48. It is essential that this area be given additional coverage. Thank you for listing to our concerns about Walgreen's signage program and their impact on our residential neighborhood. We know you will want to consider what is in the best interest of our community and fair to all parties. Syncerely, "�%ilIi °�1n/ ✓H: Ivey>f i Resident Cc: Members of City Council 9/04/2003 14:10 FAX 13138820140 James W. Duff 0002 September 4, 2003 RE:Walgreeds Mr. Tom Kirk, Chairman Planning Commission City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253-1504 Dear Mr. Kirk and Members of the Planning Commission, I am writing concerning the placement of the signage for the Walgreen project located on the parcel at Avenue 48 and Washington. Their proposal essentially abrogates all of the work that went into the many discussions and meetings that considered the impact of the project on the surrounding neighborhood. The purpose of the relocation of the building and the attendant changes to the layout were for the sole purpose of protecting the immediate neighborhood to the south and east. The signage proposal before you will create an in your face situation for the neighboring residential area. I request that the building signs be moved to the north (commercial) side of the building and that the monument sign be moved from the corner of 48m and Washington to their entyway on Washington. That placement will be in tune with the purpose of all of our work in protecting the neighborhood, The project will still provide very significant signage exposure to customers but not at the expense of the quiet enjoyment of the neighbors. Respectfully, �& Yar:s W. Duff 78-625 Descanso Lane La Quinta,CA 92253-2288 A,) i 1,6A p L_ zv�7 09/04/2003 12:05 7G05G42371 ROBDAWSON PAGE 02 R.D. CONSULTANTS, INC. 79-770 Rancho LaQuinta Dr. LaQuinta, CA 92253 P 760-564-1362/F 760.564-2371 E robdawsonl @earthlink.net Torn Kirk, Chair September 4, 2003 City of LaQuinta Planning Commission Subject: Walgreen's Store Proposal Washington & 48th St We understand the SIGNAGE and LIGkiTING for the above will be reviewed at your September 9th Planning Commission meeting. We respectfully request the following concerns be considered: l . LANDSCAPE SETBACK ---The proposal is to change to 30' from 40'. The key here is the landscape be placed on, the highest part of the setback since the land pad is higher than the street. Full, high trees and shrubs placed there will obscure the lighting from residential neighbors. 2. BUILDING ILLUMINATED SIGNS --The proposed signage be moved to the west side of the building toward Washington street. This change gives the store good exposure to the primary north/south traffic and minimizes nighttime visual intrusion into neighbors to the south. 3. MONUMENT SIGN --Here again this sign should face west and be smaller in size. This orientation still enables the store to attract attention of vehicles using the main north/south artery. While the property is clearly zoned commercial, we ask consideration on the above issues since three sides of the site face land zoned residential. We trust your decisions will be judged fair and accommodating to the interests of all parties. Respectfully, Rob Dawson City resident Ralph C. Baggs 78-705 Descanso Lane La Quinta, CA. 92253 August 28, 2003 031 0-4f M 0 Mr. Tom Kirk, Chairman Planning Commission Qlz City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta CA. 92253-1504 ',Aja�qreens food and pruq Store Signage Program Dear Mr. Kirk, As residents of La Quinta, my wife and I have followed this Site Development process closely and have attended most of the public meetings, which ultimately led to approval of the permit. This approval, as you know, included some modifications, which benefited the neighboring residents of Rancho La Quinta located on the south side of Avenue 48 directly across from the planned development. We would hate to see these gains nullified by the inclusion of three lighted signs, which we understand, will be elevated to a height of 15 feet from the site level which is already above street level. We would suggest these signs be placed on the north side of the property facing the planned Commercial development rather than the existing residential community. If for any reason this is not possible, we would recommend the Developer agree to reimburse Rancho La Quinta for the cost of planting suitable trees along our property line to protect those homes adversely affected. In addition, we understand the Developer plans to erect a Walgreens monument sign on a diagonal at the northeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 48. The building itself should afford adequate advertising but if it is felt a monument sign is needed than it should be reduced in size from the planned 10 foot wide and 5 foot high structure or placed further north along Washington Street and not on the corner of Avenue 48. Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to attending the forthcoming Planning Commission meeting. I/ Sinde),ely, Ralph C. Baggs" cc.- Mayor Don Adolph and City Council Members i ■ STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 CASE NO: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-079 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-784 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: TOLL BROTHERS, INC. REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR FIFTY (50), TWO-STORY CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON A 5.0 ACRE SITE. LOCATION: LOT 185 OF TRACT MAP 30357, ALONG VIA TESORO WITHIN THE MOUNTAIN VIEW COUNTRY CLUB SPECIFIC PLAN AREA ENGINEER: MORSE-DOKICH-SCHULTZ CONSULTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-437 WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL UNDER RESOLUTION NO. 2002-14 FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-081, ZONE CHANGE 2001-104, SPECIFIC PLAN 90-016, AMENDMENT NO. 1 AND TENTATIVE TRACT 30357. THERE ARE NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES, CONDITIONS, OR NEW INFORMATION WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166. GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) AND GOLF COURSE (G)/ LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) AND GOLF COURSE (G) BACKGROUND: The site is located within the Mountain View Country Club Specific Plan area on a five (5) acre parcel along Via Tesoro (Attachment 1). The Specific Plan, which was approved in 1999 by the City Council under Resolution 99-1 1 1, allows the following uses: 1. An 18-hole golf course with a private clubhouse and spa facility and associated maintenance facilities, 2. 490 single-family residential lots and, 3. 60 residential villas/condos. Tentative Tract Map 30357, which included the northern portion of the site, was approved by the City Council on February 2, 2002 under Resolution No. 2002-17 and included the 18-hole golf course and associated recreational facilities (club house, spa, tennis courts), the subject five acre condominium site, 178 single- family lots and associated private roadways. The remaining portion of the site was processed under a separate Tract Map (TTM 31349), which was approved by the City Council on August 19, 2003. This map included the 198 single-family lots. The total single-family lots for the tract is 376, 114 lots less than the approved 490 lots. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit to allow the construction of 50 condominium units on a five (5) acre parcel (Attachment 2). The Specific Plan requires that the condominiums be subject to the requirements of Section 9.60.320 of the Zoning Code relating to Resort Residential units. The purpose of this section is to allow for the development and regulation of residential uses that are individually owned but rented for periods of thirty consecutive days or less, on a regular basis and oriented to tourist and resort activity as part of golf/resort country club. The proposed condominium buildings consist of two stories with ground level and upper level units. There are eight, six -unit clusters and one, two -unit cluster. Garden areas are proposed between the clusters which provide the units with open spaces. The rear of the clusters face the existing golf course of the country club. As part of this project, a common swimming pool area will provide recreational amenities to residents and guests. The tennis courts immediately east of the site will be constructed in the future. The club house and spa facility are currently under construction immediately east of the tennis courts. Vacant residential lots exist immediately west of the site. Access/Circulation: Access to the site is via an east -west private street within the country club that bisects the parcel. This street is proposed to have a 24-foot roadway travel width measured from gutter flow line to gutter flow line with additional width for the parallel parking bays as shown on the site plan. The street width is proposed to narrow down as one approaches the condominium site from either side and have a circular landscaped feature in the middle of the roadway. Traffic will still be able to maneuver around the landscaped feature. The purpose of the circulation feature is to provide a warning for people to slow down as they pass through the site in vehicles. Parking: The units have an enclosed two -car garage. Each cluster shares a common driveway leading to the garages. Other driveways are specifically designated to provide access to single car garages because of the unit layouts (See Site Plan). An additional 33 open parking spaces are provided along the private street as parallel parking and angle parking from the circular feature in the street. The angle parking spaces are ten feet wide minimum and 20 feet long. The parallel parking bays are seven feet wide by 20 feet long. The parking provided complies with the approved Specific Plan. Landscaping: The conceptual landscape plan for the site consists of a wide variety of trees, shrubs and ground covers that are consistent with what was approved for the single-family lots and the club house area. The landscaped areas will provide visual relief and act as a buffer between the clusters and the private street and parking areas. Arnhitacti irP- The proposed building architecture is a Tuscan theme with buildings approximately 28 feet in height. Architectural features include a range of desert tone colors, stucco, decorative wrought iron, the roofs, wood trim, and composite shutters (See Elevations). The proposed architecture complies with the Specific Plan in that it matches the architecture of the single-family homes approved for the project. Architecture & Landscape Review Committee: This project was presented to the Architecture & Landscape Review Committee (ALRC) at their August 6, 2003 meeting, and they recommended approval of the project as conditioned. The minutes from the August 6, 2003 ALRC meeting are attached (Attachment 3). Public Notice: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 29, 2003, and mailed to all property owners within 500-feet of the site. To date, no letters have been received. Any written comments received will be handed out at the meeting. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings to approve the Site Development Permit and Conditional Use Permit, per §9.210.010 & 020 of the La Quinta Zoning Code can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_, approving SDP 2003-784 and CUP 2003-079, subject to the attached findings and conditions. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Plan Set 3. August 6, 2003, Architecture & Landscape Review Committee Meeting Minutes Prepared by: Martin Magana Associate Planner PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR FIFTY, TWO-STORY CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON A 5.0 ACRE SITE CASE NOS.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-079 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-784 APPLICANT: TOLL BROTHERS, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 91h day of September, 2003 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Toll Brothers, Inc., for approval of fifty, two-story condominium units on a 5.0 acre site, generally located along Via Tesoro within Mountain View Country Club, more particularly described as follows: APN: Lot 186 of Tract Map 30357, WHEREAS, said Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit applications have complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that an Environmental Impact Report was prepared and certified by the City Council under Resolution No. 91-102 for Specific Plan 90-016. There are no changed circumstances, conditions, or new information, which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental analysis pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166. WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to Section 9.210.010 & 020 of the Zoning Code to approve said Site Development Permit and Conditional Use Permit: 1. Consistency with the General Plan: The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan in that residential uses are allowed in the Low Density Residential Land Use designation. 2. Consistency with the Zoning Code: The proposed projects are consistent with the development standards of the Specific Plan and the Low Density Residential Zoning District, including but not limited to, setbacks, building heights, building mass, exterior materials, parking, circulation, open space and landscaping. Planning Commission Resolution 2003- CUP 2003-079 & SDP 2003-784 September 9, 2003 3. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): The proposed projects are consistent with the requirements of CEQA, in that an Environmental Impact Report was prepared and certified by the City Council under Resolution No. 91-102 for Specific Plan 90-016. There are no changed circumstances, conditions, or new information, which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental analysis pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166. 4. Architectural Design: The architectural design of the proposed units, including but not limited to, architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements are compatible with surrounding developments in the immediate area in that the design is compatible to the existing architecture of the single-family residential units. 5. Site Design: The site design of the proposed project, including but not limited to, project entries, vehicular and pedestrian circulation, screening of equipment, trash enclosures, and other site design elements such as scale, mass, appearance, and amount of landscaping are compatible with surrounding developments and the quality of design prevalent in the City in that the proposed project is consistent with the development standards of the Specific Plan and the City's Zoning Code. 6. Landscape Design: The landscaping plan for the proposed project, including but not limited to, the location, type, size, and coverage of plant materials, has been designed to provide visual relief, complement the building, screen undesirable views and provide an overall unifying influence to enhance the visual appearance of the project. The proposed landscaping is compatible with the surrounding area in that the variety of trees, shrubs and ground covers are consistent with existing landscaping which, are water efficient and provide an aesthetically pleasing use of landscaping space. 7. Surrounding Uses: Approval of the project will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare or, injurious to, or incompatible with, other properties or land uses in the vicinity in that there are other residential uses approved in the immediate area that are compatible with the proposed project. P:\Martin\SDP 03-784 Toll Bros\PC RESO SDP 03 784-Toll Bros Planning Commission Resolution 2003- CUP 2003-079 & SDP 2003-784 September 9, 2003 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for the Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit; 2. That it does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit 2003-079 and Site Development Permit 2003-784 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto; PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED a Quinta Planning Commission held on this 9`h day following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: t a regular meeting of the La of September, 2003, by the TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\Martin\SDP 03-784 Toll Bros\PC RESO SDP 03 784-Toll Bros PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CUP 03-079 & SDP 03-784/TOLL BROTHERS, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 GENERAL 1. The use of this site shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits contained in Conditional Use Permit 2003-079 and Site Development Permit 2003-784, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. 2. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking processes. 3. The approved Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit shall be inaugurated or commenced within two years of approval, otherwise, they shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. 4. 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 developer of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 5. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. P:\Martin\PC COA CUP 03 079 & SDP 03 784.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CUP 03-079 & SDP 03-784/TOLL BROTHERS, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 6). 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. 7. 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 8. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. 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. 9. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. 10. Right of way dedications required of this development include: A. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Via Tesoro — Private residential street: 28-foot roadway travel width measured from gutter flow line to gutter flow line with on -street parking prohibited except for parallel parking bays as shown on the approved site plan provided there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors and the applicant makes provisions for perpetual enforcement of the No Parking restrictions. 11. The applicant shall dedicate ten -foot public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. The easements may be reduced to five feet with the express concurrence of IID. 12. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. P:\Martin\PC COA CUP 03 079 & SDP 03 784.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CUP 03-079 & SDP 03-784/TOLL BROTHERS, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 13. "Site Development Plans" shall normally include all surface improvements, including but not limited to: parking lot improvements, finish grades, curbs & gutters, ADA requirements, retaining and perimeter walls, etc. Site Development Plan: 1 " = 30' Horizontal Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 14. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City Resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 15. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions. If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 16. In the event that any of the improvements required herein are constructed by the City, the applicant shall, at the time of approval of the development or building permit, reimburse the City for the cost of those improvements. P:\Martin\PC COA CUP 03 079 & SDP 03 784.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- C;UP 03-079 & SDP 03-784/TOLL BROTHERS, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 GRADING 117. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. '18. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 19. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. The certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. DRAINAGE 20. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan for Tentative Tract 30357. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer. 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. UTILITIES 21. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within the right of way and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 22. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. P:\Martin\PC COA CUP 03 079 & SDP 03 784.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- C:UP 03-079 & SDP 03-784/TOLL BROTHERS, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 23. 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; and Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed. 24. 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. 25. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan: A. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Via Tesoro - The applicant shall incorporate traffic calming techniques for the portion of Via Tesoro passing through the site plan area as approved by the City Engineer. As a minimum, the applicant shall reduce the travel way width to a 28-foot roadway travel width measured gutter flow -line to gutter flow -line with on -street parking prohibited except for parallel parking bays as shown on the approved site plan provided there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors and the applicant makes provisions for perpetual enforcement of the No Parking restrictions. 2) Circle - The traffic circle located mid parcel shall be have a minimum 20 feet of travel width improvements. 26. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking). Parking stalls having direct access to Via Tesoro shall be designed so vehicles do not back into the street. 27. 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 P:\Martin\PC COA CUP 03 079 & SDP 03 784.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CUP 03-079 & SDP 03-7841TOLL BROTHERS, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. LANDSCAPING 28. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. 29. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Coachella Valley Water District and Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submittal of the final plans to the Community Development Department, pursuant to Chapter 8.13 of the Municipal Code. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. Specific landscape requirements for the project are: A. To encourage water conservation, no more than 50% of the front yard areas shall be devoted to turf. Front and rear yard landscaping shall consist of trees with a minimum of a 1.5 inch caliper measured three feet up from grade level after planting, 5-gallon shrubs, and ground cover. Palm trees may count as a shade tree if the trunk ins minimum six feet tall. Double lodge poles (two inches in diameter) shall be used to stake trees. 30. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. QUALITY ASSURANCE 31. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 32. 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. P:\Martin\PC COA CUP 03 079 & SDP 03 784.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CUP 03-079 & SDP 03-784/TOLL BROTHERS, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 33. 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. 34. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. MAINTENANCE 35. 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 36. 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. 37. 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). COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 38. The site shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 55 and 82 of the district for sanitation service. 39. Grading, landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Water District for review to ensure efficient water management techniques. 40. Appropriate fees, if any, shall be paid to the Coachella Valley Water District in accordance with their current regulations for service to the site. P:\Martin\PC COA CUP 03 079 & SDP 03 784.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- C;UP 03-079 & SDP 03-784/TOLL BROTHERS, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 41. Approved super fire hydrants, shall be spaced every 330 feet along the roadways and at each intersection and additional fire hydrants shall also be located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the buildings as measured along vehicular travel ways. 42. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 43. Fire Department connections (if any) shall be not less than 25 feet nor more than 50 feet from a fire hydrant and shall be located on the street side of the buildings. On 13R systems the FDC may be permitted to be mounted on the building, contact the Fire Department at (760) 863-8886 for information. 44. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run concurrent with the City plan check. 45. Water plans for the fire protection system (fire hydrants, fdc, etc.) shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 46. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all buildings 5,000 sq. ft. or larger to be fully sprinkled, NFPA 13 Standard. Sprinkler plans (if required) will need to be submitted to the Fire Department for approval. 47. 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. 48. Fire Department street access shall come to within 150 feet of all portions of the 1 s`. floor of all buildings, by path of exterior travel. 49. 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. Streets shall be a minimum 20 feet wide with a height of 13"6" clear and unobstructed. 50. An illuminated diagrammatic board, not less than 4 feet by 4 feet shall be provided at the entrance showing the location of the buildings, fire hydrants and roadways. P:\Martin\PC COA CUP 03 079 & SDP 03 784.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CUP 03-079 & SDP 03-784/TOLL BROTHERS, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 51. Install portable fire extinguishers as• required by the California Fire Code. DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 52. The applicant will be required to pay a school mitigation fee at the time a building permit is issued. MITIGATION MONITORING 53. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures within Environmental Assessment 2001-437 for Tract 30357. P:\Martin\PC COA CUP 03 079 & SDP 03 784.doc ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT J Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee August 6, 2003 4. Committee Member Thorns asked that the cobble stone ;be eliminated from the triangular planters and they be ,a more simple design. 5. Committee Member Cunningham stated that when you float the columns, the area under the columns becomes a nuisance. Mr. Kleine explained how they would be zonstructed. 6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Thoms to adopt Minute Motions ,2003-034 and 2003-035 approving Site Development Permit``2003-780 and Site Development Permit 2003-781, respectively, as recommended by staff and amended: a. Cpndition added: The two major colors shall be changed to a more conservative color scheme. b. Condition added: The triangular islands in front of the building shall have a more simple design. Unanimously approved. E. Site Development Permit 2003-784; a request of Toll Brothers, Inc./RNM Architects for review of architectural and landscaping plans for 50, two story condominium units located on the east side of Jefferson Street, south of Pomelo, within Mountain View Country Club. 1. Associate Planner Martin Magana presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department Department and introduced Mr. Gary Lemon of Mountain View and Rick Blackshere, RNM Architects. 2. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if these units were included in the original Specific Plan. Staff stated yes. Committee Member Bobbitt stated they need to be sensitive to not block any views and decrease the property values from the single- family homes in proximity. Mr. Gary Lemon stated the CC&R's discloses the condos to the homeowners. Rick Blackshere, RNM Architects, gave a presentation on the architecture. G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\8-6-03 WD.doc - 6 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee August 6, 2003 3. Committee Member Thorns asked staff to explain the circulation of the project, which they did. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the material on the windows was a composite. Mr. Blackshere stated they were. 5. Committee Member Cunningham asked what material would be used on the courtyards. Mr. Blackshere stated it would be pavers. 6. There being no further questions, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2003-036 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2003-784, as recommended. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: VIII. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Thoms to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee to a regular meeting to be held on September 3, 2003. This meeting was adjourned at 1 1:48 a.m. on August 6, 2003. Respectfully submitted, BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\8-6-03 WD.doc - - 7 PH #1 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 CASE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-780 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-781 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: NEIL KLEINE REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR TWO OFFICE BUILDINGS; ONE IS 8,050 SQUARE FEET ON A 0.68 ACRE SITE AND THE OTHER IS 5,882 SQUARE FEET ON A 0.45 ACRE SITE. LOCATION: 79-215 CORPORATE CENTRE DRIVE 79-245 CORPORATE CENTRE DRIVE ENGINEER: MAINIERO SMITH & ASSOCIATES ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WAS PREPARED AND WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL UNDER RESOLUTION NO. 99-110 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 99-036. THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT BECAUSE THERE ARE MITIGATION MEASURES IMPOSED ON THE PROJECT THAT WOULD REDUCE IMPACTS TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL. THERE ARE NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES, CONDITIONS, OR NEW INFORMATION, WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166. GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (CR)/ COMMERCIAL PARK (CP) Planning Commission Staff Report SDP 03-780/Kleine September 9, 2003 BACKGROUND: The sites are currently vacant and located at the southeast corner of Corporate Centre Drive and Commerce Court within the La Quinta Corporate Centre Specific Plan Area (Attachment 1). This Specific Plan (SP 99-036) was approved by the City Council in 1999 under Resolution 99-1 11 and involves ± 36 acres of non- contiguous property generally located north of Highway 1 1 1, between Adams Street and Dune Palms Road. The Specific Plan area is zoned Regional Commercial on the southern part, and Commercial Park on the northern part of the Specific Plan Area. The Regional Commercial and Commercial Park designations were designed to encourage more intense commercial uses along Highway 1 1 1 and business park type uses along the storm -water channel, respectively. The Specific Plan is broken up into four Planning Areas (Attachment 2). The area has changed ownership several times and various changes have been made in terms of re -subdividing the property to accommodate development of the area. [n June, 2002, and again in March 2003, the City Council adopted changes to the development standards and design guidelines of the Specific Plan to revise land use allocations and Floor Area Ratios (FAR) in support of development in the area. Specifically, general office and limited medical uses were added to Planning Area No. 1 and the FAR was changed for all uses to a maximum of 0.35. The following table lists the Planning Areas and the land uses associated with each. Planning Acres/ Sq. Ft. FAR Base Zoning Land Uses Area PA1 12.22 ac. 0.35 Commercial auto body & services, RV & 532,303 sq. ft. Park self storage, hardware & supply, fitness center, general office, and limited medical PA2 7.30 ac. 0.35 Regional general retail, food service, 317,988 sq. ft. Commercial support service & financial PA3 3.00 ac. 0.35 Regional general office 130,680 sq. ft. Commercial PA4 11.41 ac. 0.35 Regional general office 144,600 sq. ft. Commercial Planning Commission Staff Report SDP 03-780/Kleine September 9, 2003 Currently, a self -storage facility (Storage USA), fitness center (World Gym), offices (J. Paul) and a gas station (USA Gas) have been constructed. The Planning Commission has also approved additional office (Kleine & Sky West Corp.) and auto (Radio Active) uses that have yet to be constructed. The approved projects do not exceed the FAR requirement as amended in the Specific Plan. Parking is still sufficient for each parcel and even provides opportunities for reciprocal parking agreements between uses. The following table lists the uses approved under the La Quinta Corporate Centre Specific Plan, uses approved under Site Development Permits and the FAR for each land use category. Table 1: Land Uses Approved Under La Quinta Corporate Centre Specific Plan Approved Approved Under Site Development Permits Req. Actual Land Use FAR FAR Multi -tenant RV/SS - 3.78 ac. site/54,925 sq. ft. bldg. 0.35* 0.50 Industrial/ J. Paul - 1.03 ac. site/39,626 sq. ft. bldg. 0.29 Office N. Kleine - 6.0 ac. site/63,550 sq. ft. 0.24 Radio Active - 1.0 ac. site/15,248 sq.ft. 0.35 Sky West - 2.25 ac. site/34,270 sq. ft. bldg. 0.31 Retail 0 - sq. ft. 0.35 -- Mid-rise 0 - sq. ft. 0.35 -- office Financial 0 - sq. ft. 0.35 -- Office Fitness World Gym - 1.16 ac. site/15,500 sq. ft. 0.35 0.31 Center Service USA Gas - 1.31 ac. site/2,940 sq. ft. 0.35 0.05 Station * - The RV/self-storage facility has an t-AK or U.OU -- - No projects of these type of land uses have been proposed Note that the Specific Plan will be amended under a separate Specific Plan application to remove Planning Areas 2 and 3 from the La Quinta Corporate Centre. The provisions of the existing Specific Plan will be valid for the balance of the Planning Areas within the La Quinta Corporate Centre. The new Specific Plan will provide alternative development standards and design guidelines for a separate project. Planning Commission Staff Report SDP 03-780/Kleine September 9, 2003 With this being the case, there are only four remaining parcels for development under the La Quinta Corporate Centre Specific Plan, two of which are before the Planning Commission tonight. Of the remaining two parcels, one is a future well site east of the RV/self-storage facility, and the other is the proposed site for the future Post Office at southwest corner of Corporate Centre Drive and Commerce Court. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval of two Site Development Permits to construct two office buildings (Buildings 1 & 2), one on each parcel. One building is proposed to be 8,050 square feet and the other at 5,882 square feet (Attachment 3). Each of these buildings maintains less than the 0.35 floor area ratio (FAR) requirement in the Specific Plan with Buildings 1 at 0.26 FAR and Building 2 at 0.29 FAR. Land uses surrounding the site include a self -storage facility, vacant land and the storm channel to the north, vacant land to the east and west, and a fitness center and vacant land to the south. Access/Circulation: Proposed vehicular access is from Corporate Centre Drive for both sites. Each parcel will have it's own driveway approach measuring twenty-six (26) feet in width, providing two-way access. The Zoning Code requires a minimum of twenty- eight (28) feet for two-way access ways. The applicant will have to meet this requirement. The lots share a twenty-six (26) foot wide common two-way drive aisle within the parking lot between the two buildings. Parking: The Zoning Code requires one space for every five -hundred (500) square feet of gross floor area. Based on the gross floor area proposed for each building, the required parking spaces is sixteen (16) for Building 1 and twelve (12) for Building 2 with a handicap space assigned to each building. The applicant is proposing to provide thirty-six spaces for Building 1 and twenty spaces for Building 2. The applicant is also providing covered parking in the area between the two buildings. The covered parking will consist of prefabricated metal structure. Staff recommends that these be painted to match the building colors. Planning Commission Staff Report SDP 03-780/Kleine September 9, 2003 Parking Lot Lighting: The proposed parking lot lighting consists of a durable carbon steel base with a 4- inch square metal pole. The lighting fixture is a one-piece square fabricated steel lighting standard. The fixtures are not to exceed twenty (20) feet in height. The applicant will be required to meet the City's "Dark Sky" Ordinance and prevent light glare from projecting onto adjacent properties and the public right-of-way by shielding the lighting fixtures. Landscaping: The conceptual landscape plan for the site consists of a variety of trees, shrubs and ground covers that are prevalent throughout the City. The landscaped planters along the property's edge will provide visual relief between the roadway and parking lot. The applicant will be required to provide a low block wall and additional landscaping along the property frontage to screen the parking lot from public view. The applicant will also be required to obtain landscape plan approval from the Coachella Valley Water District and the Agricultural Commissioner to ensure that water conservation methods are being used including drought tolerant plants and a drip irrigation system. Grading & Drainage: The sites for Buildings 1 and 2 are proposed to be graded and have pad elevations of 67 and 68 feet above sea level, respectively. Runoff would drain toward the northern center of the parking lot into a proposed nine (9) square foot surface storm drain inlet which would be connected to a proposed underground twenty-four (24) inch storm drain pipe. This pipe would drain north toward an existing underground storm drainpipe on Corporate Centre Drive. Signage: There is no proposal for signs at this time. Per the Conditions of Approval of the Specific Plan, any signs proposed for multi -tenant buildings will require a Planned Sign Program application for review and approval by the Planning Commission. A Planned Sign Program will be brought back before the Planning Commission at a future date when tenants are identified for the buildings. Planning Commission Staff Report SDP 03-780/Kleine September 9, 2003 Architecture The desired architectural style specified in the Specific Plan is contemporary desert based on California Mission, Spanish, and Southwest themes found in La Quinta. The proposed building architecture is a modern contemporary theme with a combination of flat and concrete tile roofs (5:12 pitch). The flat portions of the buildings are proposed to have a metal standing seam roof with a parapet. Other features include a painted exterior stucco finish, columns supporting a covered walkway, and stained glass storefronts with dark brown anodized aluminum frames. The proposed buildings are to be approximately thirty-one (31) feet in height at the towers and twenty-two (22) to twenty-four (24) feet elsewhere along the building roof lines. Architecture & Landscape Review Committee: This project was presented to the Architecture & Landscape Review Committee (ALRC) at their August 6, 2003 meeting, and they recommended approval of the project with modifications. The minutes from the August 6, 2003, ALRC meeting is attached (Attachment 4). The modifications included the following: 1. Changing the two main building colors to a more conservative color and, 2. Eliminating the cobblestone in the triangular landscape areas on the site and replace with decomposed granite and additional landscaping. These conditions have been added to the Site Development Permits (Conditions 57 & 58). Public Notice: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 29, 2003, and mailed to all property owners within 500-feet of the site. To date, no letters have been received. Any written comments received will be handed out at the meeting. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings to approve the Site Development Permits, per §9.210.010 of the City of La Quinta Zoning Code can be made and are contained in the attached Resolutions. C ' kJ Planning Commission Staff Report SDP 03-780/Kleine September 9, 2003 RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_, approving SDP 2003-780, subject to findings and conditions. 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_, approving SDP 2003-781, subject to findings and conditions. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Planning Areas 3. Plan Set 4. August 6, 2003, Architecture & Landscape Review Committee meeting minutes Prepared by: Martin Magana Associate Planner r� 0 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR AN ± 8,050 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON A 0.68 ACRE SITE CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-780 APPLICANT: KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 91" day of September, 2003 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Kleine Building & Development, Inc., for approval of an ± 8,050 square foot commercial building on a 0.68 acre site, generally located at the southeast corner of Corporate Centre Drive and Commerce Court, more particularly described as follows: APN: 649-020-060, WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit application has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact was prepared and certified by the City Council under Resolution No. 99-111 for Specific Plan 99-036. There are no changed circumstances, conditions, or new information, which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental analysis pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166. WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code to approve said Site Development Permit: 1. Consistency with the General Plan: The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan in that the use is allowed in the Commercial Park Land Use designation. 2. Consistency with the Zoning Code and Specific Plan: The proposed project is consistent with the development standards of the Commercial Park Zoning District and Specific Plan, including but not limited to, setbacks, building heights, building mass, exterior materials, parking, circulation, open space and landscaping. 3. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): The proposed project is consistent with the requirements of CEQA, in that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact was prepared and 0 Planning Commission Resolution 2003- SDP 2003-780/Kleine September 9, 2003 certified by the City Council under Resolution No. 99-1 1 1 for Specific Plan 99- 036. There are no changed circumstances, conditions, or new information, which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental analysis pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166. 4. Architectural Design: The architectural design of the proposed building, including but not limited to, architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements are compatible with surrounding developments in the immediate area in that other buildings have similar architectural treatments. The proposed building is adequately set back so as to minimize the appearance of a large structural mass. 5. Site Design: The site design of the proposed project, including but not limited to, project entries, vehicular and pedestrian circulation, screening of equipment, trash enclosures, and other site design elements such as scale, mass, appearance, and amount of landscaping are compatible with surrounding developments and the quality of design prevalent in the City in that the proposed project is consistent with the overall Specific Plan for the area and meets the development standards of the City's Zoning Code. 6. Landscape Design: The landscaping plan for the proposed project, including but not limited to, the location, type, size, and coverage of plant materials, has been designed to provide visual relief, complement the building, screen undesirable views and provide an overall unifying influence to enhance the visual appearance of the project. The proposed landscaping is compatible with the surrounding area in that the variety of trees, shrubs and ground covers are drought tolerant and provide an aesthetically pleasing and well functioning use of landscaping space. 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 Site Development Permit; 2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2003-780 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto; P:\Martin\SDP 03-780\PC RESO SDP 03 780-Kleine C '� Planning Commission Resolution 2003- SDP 2003-780/Kleine September 9, 2003 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 9" day of September, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\Martin\SDP 03-780\PC RESO SDP 03 780-Kleine e10 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-780/KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 GENERAL The use of this site shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits contained in Site Development Permit 2003-780, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. 2. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking processes. 3. These approved Site Development Permits shall be "used" within two years of approval, otherwise, they shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Used" means the issuance of a building permit. A time extension may be requested as permitted in Municipal Code Section 9.200.080 (D). 4. 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 developer of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 5. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • 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 any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. PAMartin\PC COA SDP 03 780.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-780/KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 6. 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. 7. 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 8. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. 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. 9. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. 10. Right of way dedications required of this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 11 Corporate Centre Drive (Collector, 64-foot ROW Option) - No additional right of way dedication is required. 2) Commerce Court (Cul-de-sac, 64-foot ROW) - No additional right of way dedication is required. 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. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of- ways as follows: A. Corporate Centre Drive (Collector) - 10-foot from the ROW-P/L. B. Commerce Court (Cul De Sac) - 10-foot from the ROW-P/L. PAMartin\PC COA SDP 03 780.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-780/KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall design is approved. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 13. "Site Development Plans" shall normally include all surface improvements, including but not limited to: parking lot improvements, finish grades, curbs & gutters, ADA requirements, retaining and perimeter walls, etc. Site Development Plan: 1 " = 30' Horizontal Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 14. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City Resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 15. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions. If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 16. In the event that any of the improvements required herein are constructed by the City, the applicant shall, at the time of approval of the development or building permit, reimburse the City for the cost of those improvements. P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 780.wpd J PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-780/KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 GRADING 17. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 18. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 19. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. The certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. nRAINAC;F 20. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan for Tentative Parcel Map 29351. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer. 21. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge which maybe required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or building permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this Site Development Permit excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 780.wpd " 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-780/KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 UTILITIES 22. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within the right of way and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 23. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. PARKING LOTS AND LIGHTING 24. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking). Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, ADA accessibility route to public streets and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths and other improvements as may be determined by the City Engineer. 25. The applicant shall maintain a reciprocal parking agreement for shared driveways across property lines. 26. The applicant will be required to meet the City's "Dark Sky" Ordinance and prevent light glare from projecting onto adjacent properties and the public right-of- way by shielding the lighting fixtures. 27. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. LANDSCAPING 28. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, common lots, and P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 780.wpd , J PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-780/KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 park areas. In addition, the applicant shall provide a low block wall, three feet in height and additional landscaping along the site frontage to screen the parking lot from public view. 29. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit plans for approval by the Community Development Department prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking is complete, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for signature by the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 30. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. QUALITY ASSURANCE 31. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures, which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 32. 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. 33. 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. 34. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 780.wpd C , Cl PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-780/KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 MAINTENANCE 35. 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 36. 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. 37. 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). COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 38. The site shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 55 and 82 of the district for sanitation service. 39. Grading, landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Water District for review to ensure efficient water management techniques. 40. Appropriate fees, if any, shall be paid to the Coachella Valley Water District in accordance with their current regulations for service to the site. RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 41. Approved super fire hydrants, shall be spaced every 330 feet and shall be located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the buildings as measured along vehicular travel ways. 42. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 43. Fire Department connections shall be not less than 25 feet nor more than 50 feet from a fire hydrant and shall be located on the street side of the buildings. P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 780.wpd V � � PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-780/KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDVTIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 44. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run concurrent with the City plan check. 45. Water plans for the fire protection system (fire hydrants, fdc, etc.) shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 46. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all commercial buildings 5,000 sq. ft. or larger to be fully sprinkled, NFPA 13 Standard. Sprinkler plans will need to be submitted to the Fire Department for approval. 47. 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. 48. Fire Department street access shall come to within 150 feet of all portions of the 15t. floor of all buildings, by path of exterior travel. 49. Any commercial operation that produces grease -laden vapors will require a Hood/duct system for fire protection. (Restaurants, drive-thru's, etc.) 50. 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. Streets shall be a minimum 20 feet wide with a height of 13"6" clear and unobstructed. 51. Install a KNOX key box on each commercial suite. (Contact the Fire Department for an application) 52. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code. DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 53. The applicant will be required to pay a school mitigation fee at the time a building permit is issued. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 54. The applicant shall submit a Planned Sign Program for any signs associated with the buildings to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 780.wpd C.:__6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-780/KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 55. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program in connection to the certified Mitigated Negative Declaration for Specific Plan 99-036 (La Quinta Corporate Centre). 56. The prefabricated metal structures for the covered parking areas shall be painted to match the building colors. 57. The applicant shall change the two main building colors to a more conservative color. 58. The applicant shall eliminate the cobblestone in the triangular landscaped areas near the building frontages and replace them with additional decomposed granite and landscaping. P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 780.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A 5,882 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON A 0.45 ACRE SITE CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-781 APPLICANT: KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 91" day of September, 2003 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Kleine Building & Development, Inc. for approval of a 5,882 square foot commercial building on a 0.45 acre site, generally located at the southeast corner of Corporate Centre Drive and Commerce Court, more particularly described as follows: APN: 649-020-059, WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit application has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact was prepared and certified by the City Council under Resolution No. 99-111 for Specific Plan 99-036. There are no changed circumstances, conditions, or new information, which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental analysis pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166. WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code to approve said Site Development Permit: 1. Consistency with the General Plan: The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan in that the use is allowed in the Commercial Park Land Use designation. 2. Consistency with the Zoning Code and Specific Plan: The proposed project is consistent with the development standards of the Commercial Park Zoning District and Specific Plan, including but not limited to, setbacks, building heights, building mass, exterior materials, parking, circulation, open space and landscaping. C J Planning Commission Resolution 2003- SDP 2003-781 /Kleine September 9, 2003 3. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): The proposed project is consistent with the requirements of CEQA, in that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact was prepared and certified by the City Council under Resolution No. 99-1 1 1 for Specific Plan 99- 036. There are no changed circumstances, conditions, or new information, which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental analysis pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166. 4. Architectural Design: The architectural design of the proposed building, including but not limited to, architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements are compatible with surrounding developments in the immediate area in that other buildings have similar architectural treatments. The proposed building is adequately set back so as to minimize the appearance of a large structural mass. 5. Site Design: The site design of the proposed project, including but not limited to, project entries, vehicular and pedestrian circulation, screening of equipment, trash enclosures, and other site design elements such as scale, mass, appearance, and amount of landscaping are compatible with surrounding developments and the quality of design prevalent in the City in that the proposed project is consistent with the overall Specific Plan for the area and meets the development standards of the City's Zoning Code. 6. Landscape Design: The landscaping plan for the proposed project, including but not limited to, the location, type, size, and coverage of plant materials, has been designed to provide visual relief, complement the building, screen undesirable views and provide an overall unifying influence to enhance the visual appearance of the project. The proposed landscaping is compatible with the surrounding area in that the variety of trees, shrubs and ground covers are drought tolerant and provide an aesthetically pleasing and well functioning use of landscaping space. 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 Site Development Permit; P:\Martin\SDP 03-781\PC RESO SDP 03 781-Kleine Planning Commission Resolution 2003- SDP 2003-781 /Kleine September 9, 2003 2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2003-781 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto; PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 91h day of September, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\Martin\SDP 03-781\PC RESO SDP 03 781-Kleine C; r a.. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-781 /KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 GENERAL 1. The use of this site shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits contained in Site Development Permit 2003-780 & 2003-781, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. 2. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking processes. 3. These approved Site Development Permits shall be "used" within two years of approval, otherwise, they shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Used" means the issuance of a building permit. A time extension may be requested as permitted in Municipal Code Section 9.200.080 (D). 4. 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 developer of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 5. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • 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 from those jurisdictions. If plans, applicant shall furnis h PAMartin\PC COA SDP 03 781.wpd r) _ r! �_7 - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-781 /KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 6. 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. 7. 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 8. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. 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. 9. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. 10. Right of way dedications required of this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Corporate Centre Drive (Collector, 64-foot ROW Option) - No additional right of way dedication is required. 2) Commerce Court (Cul-de-sac, 64-foot ROW) - No additional right of way dedication is required. 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. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of- ways as follows: A. Corporate Centre Drive (Collector) - 10-foot from the ROW-P/L. B. Commerce Court (Cul De Sac) - 10-foot from the ROW-P/L. P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 781.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-781 /KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall design is approved. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 13. "Site Development Plans" shall normally include all surface improvements, including but not limited to: parking lot improvements, finish grades, curbs & gutters, ADA requirements, retaining and perimeter walls, etc. Site Development Plan: 1 " = 30' Horizontal Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 14. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City Resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 15. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions. If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 16. In the event that any of the improvements required herein are constructed by the City, the applicant shall, at the time of approval of the development or building permit, reimburse the City for the cost of those improvements. PAMartin\PC COA SDP 03 781.wpd C .-" 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-781 /KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 GRADING 17. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 18. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 19. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. The certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. DRAINAGE 20. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan for Tentative Parcel Map 29351. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer. 21. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or building permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this Site Development Permit excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 781.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-781 /KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 UTILITIES 22. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within the right of way and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 23. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. PARKING LOTS AND LIGHTING 24. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking). Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, ADA accessibility route to public streets and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths and other improvements as may be determined by the City Engineer. 25. The applicant shall maintain a reciprocal parking agreement for shared driveways across property lines. 26. The applicant will be required to meet the City's "Dark Sky" Ordinance and prevent light glare from projecting onto adjacent properties and the public right-of- way by shielding the lighting fixtures. 27. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 781.wpd r , PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-781 /KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 LANDSCAPING 28. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, common lots, and park areas. In addition, the applicant shall provide a low block wall, three feet in height and additional landscaping along the site frontage to screen the parking lot from public view. 29. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall.be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit plans for approval by the Community Development Department prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking is complete, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for signature by the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 30. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. QUALITY ASSURANCE 31. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 32. 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. 33. 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. 34. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 781.wpd U PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-781 /KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. MAINTENANCE 35. 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 36. 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. 37. 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). COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 38. The site shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 55 and 82 of the district for sanitation service. 39. Grading, landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Water District for review to ensure efficient water management techniques. 40. Appropriate fees, if any, shall be paid to the Coachella Valley Water District in accordance with their current regulations for service to the site. RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 41. Approved super fire hydrants, shall be spaced every 330 feet and shall be located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the buildings as measured along vehicular travel ways. 42. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 43. Fire Department connections shall be not less than 25 feet nor more than 50 feet from a fire hydrant and shall be located on the street side of the buildings. P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 781.wpd C PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-781 /KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 44. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run concurrent with the City plan check. 45. Water plans for the fire protection system (fire hydrants, fdc, etc.) shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 46. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all commercial buildings 5,000 sq. ft. or larger to be fully sprinkled, NFPA 13 Standard. Sprinkler plans will need to be submitted to the Fire Department for approval. 47. 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. 48. Fire Department street access shall come to within 150 feet of all portions of the 1 ". floor of all buildings, by path of exterior travel. 49. Any commercial operation that produces grease -laden vapors will require a Hood/duct system for fire protection. (Restaurants, drive-thru's, etc.) 50. 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. Streets shall be a minimum 20 feet wide with a height of 13"6" clear and unobstructed. 51. Install a KNOX key box on each commercial suite. (Contact the Fire Department for an application) 52. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code. DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 53. The applicant will be required to pay a school mitigation fee at the time a building permit is issued. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 54. The applicant shall submit a Planned Sign Program for any signs associated with the buildings to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 781.wpd r� r... O PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- SDP 03-781 /KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 55. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program in connection to the certified Mitigated Negative Declaration for Specific Plan 99-036 (La Quinta Corporate Centre). 56. The prefabricated metal structures for the covered parking areas shall be painted to match the building colors. 57. The applicant shall change the two main building colors to a more conservative color. 58. The applicant shall eliminate the cobblestone in the triangular landscaped areas near the building frontages and replace them with additional decomposed granite and landscaping. P:\Martin\PC COA SDP 03 781.wpd r N i. ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT #1 a mQG P o Mom. _ NNW Its, I NNW Al ryp �o Mldffill � �r ATTACHMENT #2 - - ,. -- _ I -- - - Z �MAINIERO, SMITH AND ASSOCIATES, INC. PfMI!lRNO / clue wwMARsro / LUVD suR7R7Rw 777 Z. 7AROUM C&WON IA}; su178 soi PALM SFMG4. CAZMJ NLI 02M-0784 M"HONs (700) s2o-Psi/ / FAX W3-7093 Plannincl Areas La Ouinta Corporate Centre Specific Plat SECTION 29, T. 5 S.. R. 7 E. ATTACHMENT I Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee August 6, 2003 4. Committee Member Bobbitt commented that they pay a lot of attention to the vapor barriers on their slabs as well as the sand bases. In regard to the cement, he would recommend they use the 3,000 pound or better. They have had a lot of problems duo to the salty RIM 01 one 5011. Mr, ON On �191991"y ore doing a lot of testing to ensure no problems. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the materials to be used on the trellis. Mr. Cameron stated they are doing the same as what has been done by Toll Brothers. They will also be using the cedar garage doors with a pretreated finish material, so there will be no warping. For the trellis they are using Douglas fir, but they want the Stone Creek look with the cracks and twisting of the wood. 5. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Thoms/Cunningham to adopt Minute"Motion Motion 2003-033 approving Site Development Permit 2003'782, as recommended by staff and as amended: a. Condition added: Stamped concrete shall not be used for /the driveways. ur-'animously approved. D. Site Development Permit 2003-780 and 2003-781; a request of Code = Murphy, LLC/Kleine Building and Development for review of architectural and landscaping plans for two, single story office buildings within the La Quinta Corporate Centre located southeast of the corner of Corporate Centre Drive and Commerce Court. 1. Assistant Planner Martin Magana presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff introduced Neil Kleine, developer, who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Thoms stated he would prefer a different color be used on the buildings. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt concurred as he thought the color would date the building. J n•%1A1Pnnrc\nRl r\R-B-03 WD.doc - - 5 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee August 6, 2003 4. Committee Member Thorns asked that the cobble stone be eliminated from the triangular planters and they be a more simple design. 5. Committee Member Cunningham stated that when you float the columns, the area under the columns becomes a nuisance. Mr. Kleine explained how they would be constructed. 6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Thoms to adopt Minute Motions 2003-034 and 2003-035 approving Site Development Permit 2003-780 and Site Development Permit 2003-781, respectively, as recommended by staff and amended: a. Condition added: The two major colors shall be changed to a more conservative color scheme. b. Condition added: The triangular islands in front of the building shall have a more simple design. Unanimously approved. E. Site Development Permit 2003-784; a request of Toll Brothers, Inc./RNM Architects for review of architectural and landscaping plans for 50, two story condominium units located on the east side of Jefferson Street, south of Pomelo, within Mountain View Country Club. 1. Associate Panner Martin Magana presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community bevelopment Department Department and introduced Mr. Gary Lemon of Mountain View and Rick Blackshere, RNM Ncchitects. 2. Committee Member Babbitt asked if these units were included in the original Specific Plan. Staff stated yes. Committee Member Bobbitt stated th y need to be sensitive to not block any views and decrease tl property values from the single- family homes in proximity. M(. Gary Lemon stated the CC&R's discloses the condos to the homeowners. Rick Blackshere, RNM Architects, gave a presents � on the architecture. n , I G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\8-6-03 WD.doc 6 PH #J STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 CASE NO: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-080 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: WAL-MART STORE #1805 REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO ALLOW 55 METAL CONTAINERS FOR THE TEMPORARY STORAGE OF HOLIDAY MERCHANDISE FROM SEPTEMBER 15, 2003 THROUGH JANUARY 15, 2004, ON THE NORTH AND WEST SIDES OF THE EXISTING 135,693 SQUARE FOOT STORE. LOCATION: 78-950 HIGHWAY 1 1 1, WITHIN THE ONE -ELEVEN LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-080 IS WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN 89-014 FOR WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 89-150 WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON APRIL 17, 1990. THEREFORE, NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS AND NO NEW INFORMATION HAS BEEN PROVIDED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) STATUTES GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)/REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (CR) BACKGROUND: The site is located within the One -Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center at 78-950 Highway 111 (Attachment 1). The Planning Commission has approved Conditional Use Permits in the past three years for the applicant, during approximately the same time period between 2000 through 2002 as follows: Date CUP # Permit Time # of # of Resolution # Period Containers Containers Requested Approved 1 1 /28/00 CUP 2000-052 09/01 /00 to 35 35 Resolution 2000-085 01 /15/01 08/28/01 CUP 2001-065 09/01 /01 to 43 43 Resolution 2001-107 01 /15/02 09/03/02 CUP 2002-071 09/05/02 to 55 43 Resolution 2002-084 01 /15/03 During the 2002 review, the Planning Commission expressed concerns about the potential increase in the number of containers each year and therefore, limited the number to 43 instead of the 55 requested. With regard to the approvals mentioned above, there have been no complaints from adjacent business owners concerning the use, location, or the number of storage containers. PROJECT PROPOSAL: This year, the applicant is once again requesting the placement of 55 temporary metal storage containers at the same location to store holiday merchandise from September 15, 2003 through January 15, 2004 (Attachment 2). Each container measures 10 feet wide, by 48 feet long, by ten feet high. The proposed outdoor storage containers will be located on a vacant area to the north and west of the store and designated truck delivery area. Access will still be provided for delivery trucks. The applicant stated last year that January 4, 2004, was the anticipated opening date for the new Super Wal-Mart, to be located south of the current site across State Highway 1 1 1. The new Super Wal-Mart is still under construction, therefore, the applicant is requesting approval for the existing location. Staff recommends that the Conditional Use Permit be approved consistent with last year's Conditions of Approval allowing 43 metal storage containers, instead of the 55 requested due to the Planning Commission concerns stated earlier in this report. If the Planning Commission approves the proposed Conditional Use Permit, there is a 15 day appeal period. Therefore, the permit will not be considered final until the appeal period has lapsed which is September 24, 2003. Should an appeal on this project be filed within the appeal period, it will require a public hearing by the City Council at a future date. Public Notice: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 29, 2003, and mailed to all property owners within 500-feet of the site. To date, no letters have been received. Any written comments received will be handed out at the meeting. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings to approve this request per Section 9.210.020 (Conditional Use Permit) of the City of La Quinta Zoning Code can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_, approving Conditional Use Permit 2003-080, subject to findings and the attached Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. Site Location Map 2. Storage Bin Location Map Prepared by: Martin Magana Associate Planner PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ALLOWING 43 TEMPORARY OUTDOOR METAL STORAGE CONTAINERS FROM SEPTEMBER 15, 2003 THROUGH JANUARY 15, 2004, ON THE NORTH AND WEST SIDES OF THE EXISTING WAL- MART STORE CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-080 APPLICANT: WAL-MART STORE #1805 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 91h day of September, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Wal-Mart store #1805 to allow 43 temporary outdoor metal storage containers from September 15, 2003 through January 15, 2004, on the north and west sides of the existing Wal- Mart store for the storage of holiday merchandise at 78-950 Highway 1 1 1, more particularly described as follows: APN: 643-080-004, WHEREAS, said Conditional Use Permit 2003-080 is within Specific Plan 89-014 for which Environmental Assessment 89-150 was certified by the City Council on April 17, 1990. Therefore, no changed circumstances or conditions and no new information has been provided which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent Environmental Assessment pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes; and WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to Section 9.210.020 of the Zoning Code to justify approval of said Conditional Use Permit: 1. Consistency with the General Plan: The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan in that the property is designated Regional Commercial which permits the temporary use proposed by this application. 2. Consistency with the Zoning Code: The proposed project is consistent with the development standards outlined in Section 9.100.120 (Outdoor Storage and Display) of the Zoning Code because Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Conditional Use Permit 2003-080 - WalMart September 9, 2003 merchandise will be stored in enclosed metal containers placed immediately outside on the north and west sides of the existing business. 3. Compliance with CEQA: The proposed project is in compliance with CEQA in that the project area lies within Specific Plan 89-014 for which Environmental Assessment 89-150 was certified by the City Council on April 17, 1990. Therefore, no changed circumstances or conditions and no new information has been provided which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent Environmental Assessment pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes. 4. Surrounding Uses: Approval of the Conditional Use Permit will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare or be injurious to, or incompatible with, other properties or land uses in the vicinity in that they are placed in areas away from customer traffic and public view. The adjacent properties are designated and zoned for commercial use and within the One - Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center. 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 Conditional Use Permit; 2. That it does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit 2003-080 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 9" day of September, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AXES: NOES: ABSENT: Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Conditional Use Permit 2003-080 - WalMart September 9, 2003 ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-080 WAL-MART CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 GENERAL 1. The use of this site shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits contained in Conditional Use Permit 2003-080, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. 2. This Conditional Use Permit allows a total of 43 temporary metal storage containers to be located on the site to be used for the storage of holiday merchandise between September 15, 2003 and January 15, 2004. The storage containers shall be removed by January 16, 2004. 3. A minimum 20 foot wide aisle for emergency/fire access shall be maintained at all times to the rear of all buildings/stores. Any storage containers that block a required fire access lane to existing commercial buildings/stores shall be relocated within 24 hours of a written notice from the Fire Marshal. 4. Recycled cardboard and excess shopping carts shall be stored in the trailer storage area abutting the west side of the building. The outdoor storage area shall be cleaned daily of debris and litter. 5. The use of makeshift temporary storage shelves within the store, above the standard shelving currently used, is prohibited. 6. Nothing shall be stored on top of the storage containers. All storage shall be within the enclosed metal storage containers. 7. Aisle widths shall be a minimum of 12 feet wide between the rows of containers. 8. The applicant/property owner agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. This indemnification shall include any award toward attorney's fees. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion. ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT C c ATTACHMEN ell 000, 0000, 000 100, k4l GardeC ' ' ntCT 2B, 00, 60' GARDEN Cr,-�JTF-T� tz of > 0 .1 u o `GEC \ ;� C'4 "Co CIA 50, 61 LLI c ca rTl c ly �7 7- 4 %n ui a �-.�'r"^.'..'�. ,"^' .4j: S '' ..-.) f � 1. oloo Lj Ul c CIO Ln C'A 1100 C: kn cz co 110 -,:: c EF * 100 'i o V) u Cd i. V) V) Z ---1 a- 0 CA LO 29ujo1s OBIJOIS U') V) N I ou Out'ORA Xiluovniji ....... STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 CASE NO.: LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA NO. 2 REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAN TO AMEND THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 2 TO INCREASE THE TAX INCREMENT REVENUE LIMIT. LOCATION: LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA NO. 2. APPLICANT: LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: NO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED FOR THIS ACTION. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PROCESSED FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT BACKGROUND: In March 2003, the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency Board reviewed an affordable housing strategy that identified new housing initiatives that move the Agency towards achieving its affordable housing production mandate. One recommendation contained in the strategy entailed issuing new housing bonds (secured by Project Area No. 1 and Project Area No. 2 Housing Fund revenue) to underwrite land acquisition and affordable housing development activities. The Agency's Bond Team subsequently reviewed the capacity to issue additional housing bonds and identified that the $400,000,000 limit on the amount of tax increment revenue the Agency may receive from Project Area No. 2 precludes the issuance of new housing bonds. Further, this limit impairs the Agency's ability to retire existing bond debt and City General Fund loan obligations. This is because growth in Project Area No. 2 exceeded initial projections, and the existing tax increment limit will be achieved by fiscal 2020-21, 18 years prior to the date Project Area No. 2 expires in 2039. In order to address this circumstance, the Bond Team recommended that the Project Area No. 2 Redevelopment Plan be amended to increase the tax increment limit from $400,000,000 to $1,500,000,000. The Agency reviewed this recommendation on July 22, 2003 and directed staff to initiate the Redevelopment Plan Amendment process. In 1989, the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency adopted La Quinta Redevelopment Project Area No. 2, which generally encompasses properties between Washington Street and Jefferson Street, from Avenue 50 to the north City limits. The purpose was to stimulate economic development through primarily funding street and drainage improvements, and to assist the City of La Quinta with achieving its housing mandates through funding affordable housing projects and programs. When Project Area No. 2 was established the California Community Redevelopment Law required that a limit be included in on the total amount of tax increment revenue the Agency may receive from Project Area No. 2. Financial projections were prepared that assumed average annual property value growth of 5% during the 50-year term of the Redevelopment Plan. Based upon these projections, a $400,000,000 tax increment revenue limit was established. During the initial years annual property value growth In Project Area No. 2 was at, or below 5%. During the latter half of the 1990s and through this fiscal year, annual growth has exceeded 10%, with some year's annual growth being in excess of 26%. This has accelerated the amount of tax increment revenue the Agency has received from Project Area No. 2 and conservative forecasts (3% annual property value growth increases) indicate that the adjusted tax increment limit will be achieved by fiscal year 2020-21, or earlier if annual growth exceeds 3%. Reaching the tax increment limit impacts Project Area No. 2 in three ways as follows: • The term of the Redevelopment Plan runs to May 2039. If the tax increment limit is reached before then the Agency must cease all non -housing redevelopment activities in Project Area No. 2, including repaying outstanding General Fund loans. • Project Area No. 2 has two outstanding bond debt obligations: the 1995 Housing Bonds of which it is scheduled to fund 21.3% of annual debt service payments until fiscal year 2025-26, and the 1998 non -housing bonds of which it is scheduled to fund 100% of annual debt service payments until 2033. These bonds must be repaid and if the tax increment limit is not increased, then the Agency must establish a sinking fund starting in 2010 to retire these bonds. All non -housing revenue would be encumbered for this purpose leaving no funds to repay City General Fund loan obligations. • The Agency cannot issue new housing bonds that pledge Project Area No. 2 housing fund revenue. This would severely impair the Agency's ability to meet its affordable housing obligations. Project Area No. 2 has the projected capacity to support an additional $57.0 million of housing bonds during the remaining term of the Redevelopment Plan. The California Community Redevelopment Law classifies increasing the tax increment limit as a major Redevelopment Plan Amendment. This requires that a Preliminary Plan be prepared that identifies the scope of the Amendment, and that the Preliminary Plan be reviewed and adopted by both the Planning Commission and Agency Board. If both bodies approve the attached Preliminary Plan the Amendment process will be initiated. During this process, the Planning Commission will be requested to consider whether or not the tax increment limit increase conforms to the General Plan, and whether or not the Commission desires to make any other recommendations regarding the Amendment. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003- approving the Preliminary Plan for the Redevelopment Project Area No. 2 Amendment. Attachments: 1. Preliminary Plan PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003-, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA NO. 2 AMENDMENT AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAN CASE: LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA NO. 2 REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICANT: LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY WHEREAS, the California Community Redevelopment Law provides that increasing the tax increment limit contained in a Redevelopment Plan constitutes a Major Redevelopment Plan Amendment.; and WHEREAS, the Law provides that the community's Planning Commission, in cooperation with the Redevelopment Agency, shall formulate and consider a Preliminary Plan for the major Redevelopment Plan Amendments; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 9th day of September 2003, review the Preliminary Plan for the La Quinta Redevelopment Project Area No. 2 Amendment, wherein said Amendment is proposed to increase the tax increment limit contained in the Redevelopment Plan for La Quinta Redevelopment Project No. 2. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. The Commission hereby approves and submits to the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency the Preliminary Plan for the La Quinta Redevelopment Project Area No. 2 Amendment as submitted herewith and attached hereto as Exhibit A. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 91h day of September 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California Planning Commission Resolution 2003- Redevelopment Project Area No. 2 Plan Amendment Adopted: September 9, 2003 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\ProjArea2PrelimPlanW.doc La Quinta Redevelopment Project No. 2 Amendment �rwinkmry Plan September 2, 2003 La Quinta Redevelopment Agency 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, Califomia 92253 Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. 217 North Main Street, Suite 300 Santa Ana, California 92701-4822 Phone: (714) 541-4585 Fax: (714) 836-1748 E-Mail: info@webrsg.com Preliminary Plan La Quinta Redevelopment Project No. 2 Amendment Introduction...............................................................................I Project Area Location and Description.....................................2 General Statement of Planning Elements.................................2 LandUses........................................................................................................2 General Statement of Proposed Layout of Principal Streets.....................3 General Statement of Proposed Population Densities...............................3 General Statement of Proposed Building Intensities.................................3 General Statement of Proposed Building Standards.................................4 Attainment of the Purposes of the Redevelopment Law ..........4 Consistency with the General Plan of the City .........................4 General Impact of the Proposed Project upon the Residents of the Project Area and Surrounding Neighborhoods ....................4 Exhibit A - Project Area Map.....................................................5 CAWINDOWS\TEMPORARY INTERNET FILESYOLK62641PRELIMINARYPLAN.DOC Preliminary Plan La Quints Redevelopment Project No. 2 Amendment This document is the Preliminary Plan ("Plan") for the proposed amendment to the La Quinta Redevelopment Project No. 2 Redevelopment Plan ("Redevelopment Plan"). Its purpose is to provide a general description of the amendment the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") in contemplating. If this Plan is approved by the City of La Quinta Planning Commission ("Planning Commission") and the Agency, the process would commence to amend the Redevelopment Plan for La Quinta Redevelopment Project No. 2 ("Redevelopment Plan") to increase the limit on the cumulative tax increment revenue from $400,000,000 to $1,500,000,000. This increase is being proposed in order to continue with projects and programs that eliminate blight, to fund new affordable housing programs and projects, and to accommodate repayment of existing bond and other debt obligations. The Redevelopment Plan was adopted in 1989 and subsequently amended in 1994 to incorporate modifications required by AB 1290. Since 1989, the Agency has been actively implementing redevelopment projects and programs that address blight, correct infrastructure deficiencies, increase and improve the supply of affordable housing, and stimulate economic development. In accordance with Section 33324 of the California Community Redevelopment Law ("Law"), this Plan must: • Describe the boundaries of the La Quinta Redevelopment Project Area No. 2 ("Project Area"); • Contain a general statement of land uses and of the layout of principal streets, population densities, building intensities and standards for the Project Area; • Show how the purposes of the Law would be attained by redevelopment of the Project Area; • Show how redevelopment within Project Area is consistent with the community's general plan; and ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. PAGE 1 AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAN LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.2 AMENDMENT • Describe, generally, the impact of the project upon residents of the Project Area and surrounding neighborhoods. The Project Area is located in the city of La Quinta, County of Riverside, California. The Project Area includes commercial residential and institutional land uses and is approximately 3,116 acres in size. Encompassing the northern area of the City, the Project Area is bounded by Avenue 50 to the south, Fred Waring Drive (Avenue 44) to the north, Washington Street to the west, and Jefferson Street to the east. The Project Area also includes property west of Washington Street, north of the prolongation of the future alignment of Avenue 48; property surrounding Point Happy, north of Highway 111 and west of Washington Street; and property easterly of Jefferson Street and north of Highway 111. The Amendment will not modify the planning elements that guide implementation activities. The planning elements contained in the Redevelopment Plan mirror the applicable provisions of the General Plan and all other state and local codes and guidelines, as they may be amended from time to time. Land Uses The Amendment will not modify permitted land uses. Permitted land uses will continue to be those allowed by the General Plan, as it is constituted today or is hereafter amended. Current permitted General Plan land uses are as follows: Low Density Residential (LDR) [2-4 du/ac] Medium Density Residential (MDR) [4-8 du/ac] High Density Residential (HDR) [8-16 du/ac] Regional Commercial (RC) Community Commercial (CC) Neighborhood Commercial (NC) ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. PAGE 2 AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAN LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.2 AMENDMENT Tourist Commercial (TC) Office Commercial (0) Major Community Facilities (MC) Commercial Park (CP) Parks and Recreation (P) Open Space (OS) Water (W) General Statement of Proposed Layout of Principal Streets The Amendment will not change the layout of principal streets. Exhibit A presents a map of the Project Area that identifies the principal streets. These include: Highway 111, Avenue 50, Avenue 48, Avenue 46, Fred Waring Drive (Avenue 44), Jefferson Street, Dune Palms Road, Adams Street, and Washington Street. The layout of principal streets, and those that may be developed in the future shall conform to the General Plan as currently adopted or is hereafter amended. General Statement of Proposed Population Densities The Amendment will not change population densities. As provided in the Redevelopment Plan, population densities will conform to the General Plan and zoning code, as currently adopted or as hereafter amended, and other applicable codes and ordinances. General Statement of Proposed Building Intensities The Amendment will not change building intensity, which shall continue to be controlled by limits on the: Percentage of the building site covered by the building (land coverage); Size and location of the buildable area on the building site; and Height of the building. These limits shall be in accordance with the General Plan and zoning code, as it now exists or is hereafter amended. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. PAGE 3 AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAN LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.2 AMENDMENT General Statement of Proposed Building Standards The Amendment will not change building standards. Building standards shall continue to conform to applicable codes and ordinances. The Project Area was previously selected because it was determined to be a blighted area as then defined by the Law. The Redevelopment Plan contains a $400,000,000 tax increment revenue limit; revenue projections indicated that would be achieved in fiscal year 2020-21, 19 years prior to the year the Redevelopment Plan expires. If the existing tax increment limit is not increased, then the Agency must cease all redevelopment and affordable housing activities by 2010 and reserve fund to retire the Project No. 2 tax Allocation Bonds, Series 1998, and repay outstanding City General Fund loans. This would impair the Agency's ability to address the remaining blighting conditions within the Project Area, and significantly limit the Agency's ability to fund new affordable housing initiatives. Addressing remaining blight and the provision of affordable housing attain the purposes of the Redevelopment Law. Because land uses, transportation, and other development standards incorporate existing General Plan policies, this Plan is consistent with the General Plan. This Plan does not propose to institute additional land use policies not otherwise permitted by the General Plan. The Amendment will improve economic and physical conditions, and expand affordable housing opportunitities. By amending the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency will gain additional financial capacity to facilitate additional infrastructure improvements, enhance economic development activities, improve community facilities, and improve existing and provide new affordable housing opportunities. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. PAGE 4 Preliminary Plan La Quinta Redevelopment Project No. 2 Amendment ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. PAGE 5 08/07/2003 10:53 7602009358 DEPT FISH AND GAME PAGE 01 STATE OF CALIFORNIA • THE RESOURCES AGENCY GRAY DAVIS, Dove DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME Eastern Sierra & Inland Deserts Region 4775 Bird Farm Rd_ Chino Hills, CA 91709 (909)597-5043 Mr. Greg Trousdell Associate Planner Community Development Department City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mr. Trousdell, August 7, 2003 .ENT The California Department of Fish and Game (Department) has reviewed the Villa La Quinta Specific Plan 2003-065 and Tentative Tract Map 31379. The project consists of the construction of 280 resort residential units on 44.6 acres on the west side of Eisenhower Drii at Coachella Drive in the City of La Quinta. The project is adjacent to Peninsular bighorn sheep (Ovis canedensis) habitat. The bighorn sheep is a state listed Threatened and federally listed Endangered species. The Department requests that yellow oleander (Thevetia peruviana) be removed from the plant pallet in Table 11, page 2.54. Oleander is toxic to wildlife, especially the bighorn sheep In addition, the City's Conditions of Approval should include a condition that if sheep are demonstrated to be utilizing the developed area, a perimeter fence will be constructed aroun the developed area that meets sheep exclusion fence requirements. The Department accept: deferring construction of a perimeter fence until use is demonstrated under the following conditions which are to be included in the Conditions of Approval: 1. The funding for the fence has been assured and is deposited in a dedicated account. 2. The Right -of -Way easements have been secured. 3. The entity responsible for construction of the fence has been identified. A biological assessment was conducted on the site for a previous project, the KSL La Quinta Resort and Club Real. After review of this biological assessment the Department is satisfied that the avian surveys were sufficient to determine that burrowing owls (Athene cunicularra hypugaea), a California Species of Special Concern, do not occupy the site. The Department recommends that for future projects that may occur on native lands, and fallow and active agricultural lands, focused surveys be conducted for burrowing owls and Coachella Valley round-talied ground squirrels, the latter are known to construct burrows utilized by burrowing Owls_ 08/07/2003 10:53 7602009358 DEPT FISH AND GAME PAGE 02 The Department appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Questions regardii this letter should be directed to Mr. Eddie Konno, Associate Biologist at (760) 200-9174. Sincerely, Z&-C'1z Glenn Black Senior Environmental Scientist Eastern Sierra/Inland Desert Region cc: E. Konno T-iht 4 4 QuAro MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING ITEM #E, SPECIFIC PLAN 03-066 (THOMAS ENTERPRISES) Attached are recommended Conditions of Approval for Specific Plan 2003- 066, received from the Fire Marshal on September 8, 2003. Any action recommending approval of this application should include these conditions. Attachment: 1. Letter from Fire Marshal received September 8, 2003 ffi l 1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT In cooperation with the F California Department of horestry and Dire Protection West210 an Jacinto venue • ems, Ca 1 omla 0 • ) • Fax ) August 21, 2003 '� V E To: Stan Sawa, Prinicpal Planner E4. J Tisdale� o Qu Chief COJNITY �jAEVE N"PM ENT From: Dale A. Evenson, Fire Safety Specialist pEPARTMEN� y serving the rporated The following conditions are requested for SP2003-066 f Riverside and the ,f Approved super fire hydrants, shall be spaced every 330 feet and shall be located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the buildings as measured along vehicular travel ways. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to Font identify fire hydrant locations. na Fire Department connections shall be not less than 25 feet nor more than 50 feet from a fire hydrant and shall be a Lake located on the street side of the buildings. :lla The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 4000 gpm and the actual fire flow from any two adjacent hydrants shall be 2000 gpm for a 4-hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure. The fire Hot Springs flow is based on all buildings having a full NFPA 13 sprinkler system. Wells Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run concurrent with the City plan check. ;lsinore Water plans for the fire protection system (fire hydrants, fdc, etc.) shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. iota City of La Quinta ordinance requires all commercial buildings 5,000 sq. ft. or larger to be fully sprinkled NFPA to Valley 13 Standard. Sprinkler plans will need to be submitted to the Fire Department )esert 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. o Mirage Fire Department street access shall come to within 150 feet of all portions of the 1'. floor of all buildings, by path of exterior travel. zinto Any commercial operation that produces grease -laden vapors will require a Hood/duct system for fire protection. ,ula (Restaurants, drive-thru's, etc.) The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating of supervisors required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs. Streets shall be a minimum 20 feet wide with a height of 13" 6" clear and unobstructed. aster, District 1 Install a KNOX key box on each commercial suite. (Contact the fire department for an application) avaglione, District 2 Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code. ;sable, District 3 riles District 4 2 Ashley District 5 EMERGENCY SERVICES DIVISION • PLANNING SECTION • INDIO OFFICE 82-675 Highway 111, 2nd R., Indio, CA 92201 • (760) 863-8886 • Fax (760) $63-7072 Proposed revision to the second paragraph of Condition 14: Centex and the owner of the La Quinta Hotel and/or its affiliates (collectively, "KSL") shall enter into one or more contracts which will allow the purchasers of residences within the boundaries of SP 2003-065 the opportunity to purchase golf club and/or social memberships issued by KSL In addition, Centex and KSL shall enter into one or more contracts pursuant to which the purchasers of residential units within the boundaries of SP 2003-065 shall have the right to make their residential units available to KSL for the purpose of allowing KSL to rent and manage the same on behalf of such purchasers. Renters under such KSL managed rental program shall have access to La Quinta Hotel facilities and amenities. A copy of the executed contracts shall be delivered to the Community Development Department before issuance of a building permit for a residential dwelling unit. E�'V7=71 ) CITY OOF `AQUINTA S OMMUNITY REVEL?PMENT 4 DEPARTMENT