2001 11 27 PCT,itlt 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
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 2001-143
Beginning Minute Motion 2001-022
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 on November 13,
2001.
B. Department Report
V. PRESENTATIONS: None
PC/AGENDA
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Item ................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-717
Applicant........... KSL Development Corporation
Location............ Southeast corner of PGA Boulevard and Avenue 54
at the entrance of PGA West
Request ............. Review of architectural and landscaping plans for a
Merchant Builder Welcome Center in PGA West.
Action ............... Resolution 2001-
B. Item .................
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-718
Applicant ..........
Sedona Homes, Inc.
Location ...........
Southeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue
50 in Tract 30125
Request ............
Review of architectural and landscaping plans for
three new prototype residential units with three
facades each.
Action ..............
Resolution 2001-
C. Item .................
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-013
Applicant ..........
La Quinta Grill
Location ...........
East side of Avenida Bermudas, between Calle
Cadiz and Calle Barcelona
Request ............
Review to allow the use and review of
development plans for three office buildings
adjacent to an existing restaurant site
Action ..............
Resolution 2001-
D. Item ................. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-435 AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331
Applicant .......... Santa Properties and Development, LLC
Location ........... North side of Avenue 50 and west of Jefferson
Street.
Request ............ Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact for Environmental
Assessment and review of a request to subdivide
5.1 acres into seven residential lots.
Action .............. Resolution 2001- and Resolution 2001-
E. Item ................. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-387,
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 99-063, ZONE
CHANGE 99-091, SPECIFIC PLAN 99-039, AND
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-659
Applicant .......... Point Happy Ranch, LLC
Location ........... West side of Washington Street, south of Highway
111
Request ............ 1) Certification of an Environmental Impact
Report;
PC/AGENDA
2) Change of General Plan Land Use Designation
from Medium Density Residential to Office
Commercial for five acres of the 43 + acre site
and from Low Density Residential to Medium
Density Residential for 11.55 acres for 62
villas;
3) Change of Zone Designation from Medium
Density to Office Commercial for five acres of
the 43 + acre site and from Low Density
Residential to Medium Density Residential;
4) Specific Plan for design guidelines and
development standards for a senior care
residential project and two commercial
buildings on the 43 + acre site; and
5) Review of architectural and landscaping plans
for senior care units consisting of 62 one story
high independent living villa units in duplex to
4-plex configurations with a two story club
building, and 310 rooms for assisted living,
independent living and continuing care in two 2
to 3 story high buildings, a one story high
maintenance building, two commercial office
buildings (two stories high) with a total of
44,000 square feet of floor area and a 9,500
square foot one story high project
administration building.
Action .............. Resolution 2001-, Resolution 2001- ,
Resolution 2001-, Resolution 2001- , and
Resolution 2001-
VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: None.
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Reminder of the Joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting of
December 5, 2001.
B. Report on the City Council meeting of November 20, 2001
X. ADJOURNMENT
PC/AGENDA
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
November 13, 2001 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by Chairman Abels who asked Commissioner Tyler to lead the flag
salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Steve Robbins, Robert
Tyler, and Chairman Jacques Abels.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City
Attorney Kathy Jenson, Interim City Engineer Steve Speer, Principal
Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
IL PUBLIC COMMENT:
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed
IV. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Abels asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of
October 23, 2001. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 4, Item 5, be
corrected to read, "....wail on the east side..."; Page 7, Item 5, corrected
to read, "...he stated..."; Page 10, add a statement that Commissioner
Tyler was in favor of the park, but was voting no due to the inadequacy
of the restroom facilities proposed. Commissioner Kirk asked that Page
11, Item 29, the recommendation should be amended to show the
Commission was making a recommendation to the City Council that staff
should work with the High School to determine if the High School could
provide additional parking as a conjunctive use. There being no further
corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to
approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved.
B. Department Report:
1 . Staff reminded the Commission of the Joint meeting between the
City Council and Planning Commission on November 14, 2001,
regarding the General Plan Update.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC11-13-01.wpd 1
Planning Commission Minutes
November 13, 2001
V. PRESENTATIONS: None.
VI. PUBLIC HEARING:
A. Environmental Assessment 2001-415, Tentative Tract Map 29963 and
Street Name Change 2001-013; a request of La Quinta Construction for
Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact; subdivision of approximately 13.4 acres into six estate single
family lots that are 2.16 acres in size and larger; and initiation of a street
name change from Kirk Court to Coral Mountain Drive, for the property
located at the northwest corner of Kirk Court and Avenue 58.
1. Staff informed the Commission the applicant had requested this
item be continued to December 11, 2001.
2. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Butler to continue Environmental Assessment
2001-415, Tentative Tract Map 29963 and Street Name Change
2001-013, to December 11, 2001. Unanimously approved.
B. Street Name Change 2001-012; a request of Lake La Quinta
Communities to change the name of a portion of Via Trieste to Via
Livorno within Lake La Quinta.
1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Community Development Director Jerry Herman presented
the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on
file in the Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler asked if the residents were in agreement with
the name change. Staff stated all were informed and had
submitted letters requesting the change.
3. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. The applicant was not present and there being no
one else who wished to speak on this project, the public
participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for
Commission discussion.
4. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Tyler/Butler to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-138, recommending approval of Street Name
Change 2001-012, subject to the findings as recommended.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC11-13-01.wpd 2
Planning Commission Minutes
November 13, 2001
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and
Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN:
None.
C. Site Development Permit 2001-716; a request of First Community Bank
for review of site plan and signs for the conversion of an existing
residence to a temporary bank for the property located at the southeast
corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52.
1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Community Development Director Jerry Herman presented
the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on
file in the Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler asked about the access for this parcel on a
temporary basis. Interim City Engineer Steve Speer explained
there is a double -double yellow line and the striping would have to
be revised to allow a full turn movement on a temporary basis.
Commissioner Tyler asked if it met City standards for the distance
from the corner. Staff stated that if the Specific Plan for the site
is approved it would be a right turn in and out with a median.
Commissioner Tyler asked why the project was conditioned so
heavily for a temporary bank building. Interim City Engineer Steve
Speer stated the items that are needed will not be required of the
applicant. Commissioner Tyler asked why this was being
considered before the specific plan. Community Development
Director Jerry Herman stated because the applicant is requesting
to be in operation before the specific plan is processed. It has a
two year expiration date.
3. Commissioner Butler stated his concern that if there is not
adequate staff, the Commission is not getting adequate
information. He is concerned and asked what the Commission
could do to support staff. Staff stated it is in the process and the
City will be hiring consultants to help in the interim.
4. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Lou Bishop, speaking for the applicant, gave a
presentation on the project. He stated that as they do not
anticipate a large amount of traffic, the driveway is not expected
to be an issue.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC11-13-01.wpd 3
Planning Commission Minutes
November 13, 2001
5. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the
applicant. Commissioner Tyler asked if the site would meet the
ADA requirements. Mr. Bishop stated they would meet all
requirements.
6. Commissioner Butler asked if they could meet the parking
requirements. Mr. Bishop stated they meet all the requirements.
7. Commissioner Tyler asked if the existing trees would remain on
the permanent site. Mr. Bishop stated it was unknown at this
time.
8. Commissioner Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to
speak regarding this project. There being no further discussion,
the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open
for Commission discussion.
9. Commissioner Tyler questioned the need to allow a two year
approval. Staff explained the reasoning for the two year approval.
10. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-139, approving Site Development Permit 2001-
716, as amended:
A. Condition #36: The City Engineer is given the authority to
remove conditions that are unwarranted.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners
Chairman Abels. NOES:
None.
Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and
None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN:
D. Village Use Permit 2001-010, Amendment #1; a request of Edwin G.
Cosek for Andrew's Bar and Grill for review of design changes for an
existing one story commercial building located at 78-121 Avenida La
Fonda.
1. Commissioner Kirk excused himself due to a possible conflict of
interest due to his residency being within 500 feet of the project,
and withdrew from the dias.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC11-13-01.wpd 4
Planning Commission Minutes
November 13, 2001
2. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler asked if the addition would abut the building
to the west. Community Development Director Jerry Herman
stated it would not.
3. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Edwin Cosek, gave a presentation on the
project.
4. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the
applicant. There being no questions of the applicant, Chairman
Abels asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this
project. There being no further discussion, the public participation
portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission
discussion.
5. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Robbins/Butler to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-140, approving Village Use Permit 2001-010,
Amendment #1, as submitted.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman
Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk.
ABSTAIN: None.
Commissioner Kirk rejoined the Commission.
E. Site Development Permit 2001-720; a request of Rancho Capistrano
Development Corporation for review of architectural and landscaping
plans for a new casitas prototype residential plan for the property located
north of Avenue 54 and east of Jefferson Street.
1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 11- 1 3-01.wpd 5
Planning Commission Minutes
November 13, 2001
2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Butler asked if either property owner could purchase
the casita room. It appears for this to be possible, the floor plan
would have to be flipped. Staff stated the applicant could explain
this without flipping the casita room.
3. Commissioner Tyler stated he did not understand the marketing
behind this plan. In addition, what was staff asking for in regard
to the lot lines adjustments. Staff stated the lot lines will depend
on which property owner purchases the casitas unit.
Commissioner Tyler asked how many parking spaces were
provided. Staff explained there would be 42 carport spaces and
showed their location on the site plan.
4. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Robert Wilkinson, representing the applicant,
explained the proposed entrances to the casitas unit and how the
unit was being marketed.
5. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the
applicant. Commissioner Tyler asked if any of the units would be
built without the casita. Mr. Wilkinson stated it is possible.
6. Commissioner Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to
speak regarding this project. There being no further discussion,
the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open
for Commission discussion.
7. Commissioner Kirk stated he thought the elevations for Plan A
were somewhat plain.
8. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-141, approving Site Development Permit 2001-
720, as submitted.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners
Chairman Abels. NOES:
None.
Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and
None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN:
F. Conditional Use Permit 2001-063; a request of Sprint PCS to change
Condition #8 of Planning Commission Resolution 2001-127, substituting
two required 40-foot high palm trees adjacent to an approved 68-foot
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC11-13-01.wpd 6
Planning Commission Minutes
November 13, 2001
high monopalm wireless antenna camouflaged as a palm tree with six 60-
foot high date palm trees along the street frontage for the property
located at 46-600 Adams Street within Storage USA.
1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. There
being no questions of staff, Chairman Abels asked if the applicant
would like to address the Commission. Ms. Linda Ennaba,
representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the project.
She stated they are having a lot of resistance from the property
owner in regard to trenching the site for the water and irrigation
lines. They had laid the electrical lines for the tower before the
storage site was constructed and therefore did not need to trench
for the installation of the tower. They did not put the irrigation
lines in at that time as they did not know they would need them.
3. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the
applicant. Commissioner Kirk asked if trenching was done before
approval. Ms. Ennaba stated it was not trenched, the utilities
were installed before the storage expansion was built.
4. Commissioner Butler asked what trenching would be needed. Ms.
Ennaba stated it was needed to bring water lines to the site for the
palm trees. Commissioner Butler asked if they delayed the
trenching until a later date would the landlord be more favorable.
Ms. Ennaba stated the landlord has denied any trenching.
Commissioner Butler stated he could not support the applicant's
request.
5. Commissioner Tyler asked how far the monopalm was from
Adams Street. Staff stated it was approximately 600 feet.
6. Commissioner Robbins stated he has a problem with the view from
the north looking south and the height of the palm trees and their
potential short life span. He understands the problem, but is not
satisfied with their solution. Ms. Ennaba asked if they would
prefer the six trees be placed on the CVWD property on the north
side. Discussion followed regarding alternatives.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC11-13-01.wpd 7
Planning Commission Minutes
November 13, 2001
7. Commissioner Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to
speak regarding this project. There being no further discussion,
the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open
for Commission discussion.
8. Chairman Abels suggested the applicant work with staff to find an
alternative location for the monopalm.
9. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-142, denying Conditional Use Permit 2001-063,
Amendment #1, as recommended by staff.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and
Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN:
None.
VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: None
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Discussion regarding the Planning Commission meeting of December 25,
2001. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Tyler/Robbins to
go dark on December 25, 2001. Unanimously approved.
B. Commissioner Tyler gave a report on the City Council meeting of October
6, 2001.
X. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Butler/ Robbins to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next
regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held November 27, 2001, at 7:00
p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:23 p.m. on
November 13, 2001.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC11-13-01.wpd 8
PH A
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: NOVEMBER 27, 2001
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-717
APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
PROPERTY OWNER: KSL HOTEL LAND
LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PGA BOULEVARD AND AVENUE
54 AT THE ENTRANCE OF PGA WEST
LEGAL: TRACT 29878
ARCHITECT: DAVID NEAULT ASSOCIATES, INC.
REQUEST: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS
FOR A MERCHANT BUILDER WELCOME CENTER IN PGA
WEST
ZONING AND GENERAL
PLAN DESIGNATION:
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS:
BACKGROUND:
ON SITE: RM (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
ALL SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: RL (LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PROJECT IS
EXEMPT PER SECTION 15303 (NEW CONSTRUCTION OF
SMALL STRUCTURES) OF THE GUIDELINES FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF HE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT (CEQA).
Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment No. 4 was approved by the La Quinta City Council on
October 3, 2000 by Resolution 00-130. This Amendment along with a Zone Change and
General Plan Amendment allowed a change from Zoning and General Plan designations
of Community Commercial to Medium Density Residential.
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
The applicant is proposing a new merchant builder welcome center to house the sales
offices of builders within PGA West. The proposed 48' X 50', 2400 square foot modular
building will consist of a flat roof with stucco plaster walls (Attachment 1).
G:\WPDOCS\PC Stf Rpt\KSLCtrSDP717.wpd
The elevations feature a combination of single -pane and multi -pane windows and doors.
A decorative light fixture is proposed for the front elevation as well as a decorative entry
with a pitched tile gable roof supported by wood posts with concrete bases.
The conceptual landscaping plan for the site proposes landscaping on only the north and
west elevations. This plan consists of a wide variety of trees and shrubs, including Queen
Palms, Fan Palms, Date Palms, Mesquite, Day Lily, Hibiscus, Bird of Paradise, and
Oleander among others. Date Palms are proposed to line the front walkway of the a
building to provide for an appealing entrance statement. Included on this plan are fences
surrounding the property. One is proposed to be a painted wood fence along the rear
property line, while the others are proposed as chainlink with screening material along the
side property lines.
The proposed sign will require reusing the existing sign currently identifying PGA West.
The sign copy will be replaced with the "Welcome Center" sign. Eight foot high light poles
are proposed in the parking lot. The light fixture is not specified.
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee: The ALRC at its meeting of
November 7, 2001, unanimously recommended approval of the design guidelines and
landscaping plans, subject to conditions (Attachment 2).
MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Findings necessary to approve this request can be made subject to the following
conditions:
Landscape Design. The proposed project includes a variety of landscaping which
is sufficient to soften the appearance of the building and provide visual interest.
However, the use of chainlink fencing along the side property lines is inconsistent
with the landscape design found in the immediately surrounding area. Therefore,
staff recommends in Condition No. 2 that the chainlink be replaced with a more
permanent and visually attractive material such as steel pickets or wrought iron.
Although landscaping is proposed for the north and west elevations of the building,
the south and east elevations are left unlandscaped. Due to the curvature of PGA
Boulevard, the south elevation of the proposed building will also be visible from the
street. Therefore, staff recommends in Condition No. 4 that landscaping be
included on the south elevation of the building.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001- approving Site Development Permit
2001-717, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Stf Rpt\KSLCtrSDP717.wpd
Attachments:
Plan exhibits (including site/landscape plans and elevations)
ALRC Minutes of November 7. 2001
Prepared and Submitted by:
wzt4-�
rry He an
C mmunity Development director
G:\WPDCCS\PC Stf Rpt\KSLCtrSDP717.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING
DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A MERCHANT BUILDER
WELCOME CENTER LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF PGA BOULEVARD AND AVENUE 54, AT THE
ENTRANCE OF PGA WEST
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-717
APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the, 27th day of November, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing, to review
building elevations, site, landscape, and sign plans for a Merchant Builder Welcome
Center generally located at the southeast corner of PGA Boulevard and Avenue 54 and
more particularly described as:
TRACT 29878
WHEREAS, the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC)
of the City of La Quinta, California did on the 7th day of November, 2001 hold a
public meeting to review building elevations, site, landscape and sign plans, for a
Merchant Builder Welcome Center and unanimously recommended approval; and
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63). The La Quinta Community Development
Department has determined that this project is exempt per Section 15303 (new
construction of Small Structures) of the Guidelines for Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify approval of
said Site Development Permit 2001-717.
1. The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the General Plan
goals, policies and programs relating to the Low Density Residential land use
designation, and supports the development of a mix of residential land uses
within an established Specific Plan.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Reso1utions\KSLCtrSDP717.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Site Development Permit 2001-717
KSL Welcome Center
Adopted: November 27, 2001
2. The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the standards of the
City's Zoning Ordinance and is consistent with the La Quinta Resort Specific
Plan, as conditioned, which establishes development standards for the project.
The project, as conditioned, meets the City's standards for height, landscaping
and land use.
3. The proposed Site Development Permit will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety and welfare, as it has been designed to be compatible with the
surrounding development, and conform with the City's standards and
requirements, as conditioned.
4. As designed and conditioned, the proposed building architecture does conform
to the architecture of the existing residences located in the vicinity. The
proposed design, scale, and place will lend itself to the surrounding environment
by providing for an attractive streetscape and entry statement into PGA West.
The window and door openings are proportionate to the building and allow
maximum light, and the combination of single -pane and multi -pane windows and
doors lend visual interest. The building has been designed with appropriate
architectural variation and detailing to break up the elevations with the
windows, light fixture, and entryway.
5. Staff is recommending exterior light sources be adequately shielded to prevent
glare.
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
Commission in this case; and
2. That it does approve Site Development Permit 2001-717 for the reasons set
forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on this the 27th day of November, 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
G:\WPDOCS\PC Reso1utions\KSLCtrSDP717.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Site Development Permit 2001-717
KSL Welcome Center
Adopted: November 27, 2001
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Reso1utions\KSLCtrSDP717.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-717
KSL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - WELCOME CENTER
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
1. The subdivider 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 tentative
map amendment or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion
in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits, the landscape plan shall be redrawn to
indicate that the fencing along the side property lines be changed from chainlink
with screening to a more permanent and visually attractive material to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Department.
3. Prior to issuance of building permits, the landscape plan shall indicate that the
proposed Date Palms shall be inspected by a landscape architect to assure
suitability for the area. If not they shall be replaced with the same size and
height.
4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the landscape plan shall be redrawn to
indicate landscaping along the south elevation of the building to the satisfaction
of the Community Development Department.
5. Prior to issuance of an electrical/building permit, the lighting plan shall be
revised to include a light source that is shielded to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Department.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\ KSLCtrSDP717COA.wpd
ATTACHMENT #d
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
November 7, 2001
9. Committee Member Cunningham stated they should look at a
wood composite material for the roll -up doors.
10. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion
2001-046 recommending approval of Site Development Permit
2001-720, subject to the conditions as recommended.
--- C. Site Development Permit 2001-718; a request of Sedona Homes for
review of architectural and landscaping plans for three new prototype
residential units with three facades each located at the southeast corner
of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50.
1. Associate Planner Michele Rambo presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like
to address the Committee. Mr. Lance Alacano, representing
Sedona Homes, gave a presentation on the project.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the material to be used
on the gates and suggested metal be used on both gates. Mr.
Alacano stated they had decided to use metal on all gates.
4. Committee Member Thorns stated he is not a favor of this type of
architecture and asked if they would be using clay roofs. Mr.
Alacano stated it was the smooth stucco with clay tile roofs.
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Bobbitt/Cunningham to adopt Minute Motion
2001-047 recommending approval of Site Development Permit
2001-719, as amended.
A. Side yard gates shall be wrought iron.
D. Site Development Permit 2001-717; a request of KSL Development
Corporation for review of architectural and landscaping plans for a
merchant builder welcome center in PGA West to be located at the
southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 54
1. Associate Planner Michele Rambo presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
G:\WPDCICS\ARLC\Min 11-7-01.wpd 4
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
November 7, 2001
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant had any
comments. Mr. Bill Dodds, representing KSL Development
Corporation, gave a presentation on the project. He agreed with
staff's recommendation but was looking at a plaster or other
material for the wall that would be removable.
3. Committee Member Cunningham asked if this was temporary and
how long it would be there. Mr. Dodds stated two years and have
support from two HOA's.
4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if vines or some other plant
material would be used on the south side of the building. Mr.
Dodds explained what was proposed.
5. Committee Member Cunningham stated that with a temporary
building it is hard to dress it up architecturally. As proposed it
should work, but he is hesitant because of the temporary use.
6. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the trees at the old
location. Mr. Dodds stated some of the trees would be relocated
to this site. Committee Member Bobbitt stated his only objection
is that the building looks like a box and the more you can hide it
with landscaping the better it will be.
7. Committee Member Thorns asked why the Date Palms were not
proposed at the entrance. Committee Member Bobbitt stated this
has been a concern of his because of the potential for a crown to
drop if the older palms are used. Committee Thorns stated the
Washingtonia Robusta does not carry the strength needed at the
entrance and suggested using a Phoenix Dactifilera of a decent
size.
8. Committee Member Thorns stated he does not like to see a box
without a roof on it and suggested a hip roof be used for the
building.
9. Committee Member Cunningham stated it is a temporary modular
which should be considered. The applicant could spend more on
the landscaping and remove the attraction from the building.
Discussion followed regarding the look of the building and
landscaping alternatives to dress it up.
G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\Min 11-7-01.wpd 5
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
November 7, 2001
10. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Bobbitt/Cunningham to adopt Minute Motion
2001-048 recommending approval of Site Development Permit
2001-717, as revised.
A. Condition #2: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the
landscape plan shall indicate that the proposed Date Palms
shall be inspected by a landscape architect to assure
suitability of the area and the trees shall be of the same size
and height.
E. Village Use Permit 2001-013; a request of La Quinta Grill for review of
architectural and landscaping plans for three office buildings on an
existing restaurant site to be located on the east side of Avenida
Bermudas between Calle Cadiz and Calle Barcelona.
1. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like
to address the Commission. Mr. Steward Woodward gave a
presentation on the project.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he liked the project and asked
about the Olive Tree as to whether it was new and asked that it
be fruitless variety.
4. Committee Member Thoms stated he also concurred with the
design comments. His concern was the design of the parking lot
he would like to see a material other than plant material that could
be walked on in the planters. At the island end the planter shall
be no more than 15 feet in length.
5. Committee Member Cunningham stated he also liked the project.
6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Cunningham/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion
2001-049 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2001-013
as amended:
a. Condition #2: Use Olen Europaea "Wilson Olive"
(fruitless) tree. Use rock or Palm
Springs Gold that can be within the
Parking lot planter.
G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\Min 11-7-01.wpd 6
a a
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: NOVEMBER 27, 2001
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-718
APPLICANT/
PROPERTY OWNER: SEDONA HOMES, INC.
ARCHITECT: PEKAREK-CRAN DELL, INC.
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT: FORREST K. HAAG, ASLA, INC.
REQUEST: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS
FOR THREE NEW PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH
THREE FACADES EACH
LOCATION:
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND
AVENUE 50 IN TRACT 30125
ZONING AND
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
ON SITE:
RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
NORTH:
RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
SOUTH
RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
WEST:
RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
EAST:
RM (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: AN AMENDMENT TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
NO. 41 WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT 30125 UNDER RESOLUTION 2001-87.
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.
BACKGROUND:
Tentative Tract Map 30125 was approved by the City Council on June 19, 2001 by
Resolution 2001-87. Amendment No. 1 of Tentative Tract Map 30125 was approved
by the City Council on September 18, 2001 by Resolution 2001-1 15. Site
GAWPDOCS\PC Stf Rpt\SedonaSDP718.wpd
Development Permit 2001-703 for prototypical houses was reviewed by the
Architecture and Landscape Review Committee on May 8, 2001, the Planning
Commission recommended approval on May 22, 2001 per Resolution 2001-084, and
was approved by the City Council on June 19, 2001 per Resolution 2001-86. The
approval of this current application would supercede the previous Site Developmetn
Permit approval.
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes three prototype single family residential unit plans for a 66-lot
subdivision on approximately 28 acres located at the southeast corner of Eisenhower
Drive and Avenue 50 (Attachment 1). The proposed floor plans vary from 2,236 to
2,629 square feet of livable space on lots generally measuring 50+ feet wide by
125 + feet in depth. Proposed architectural design themes are California -
Mediterranean, relying heavily on stuccoed exterior surfaces and concrete S-tile
roofing. Each plan type has three facade design treatments that include variation in
window sizes and shapes, decorative wood elements, and other distinct but unifying
features such as either exposed rafter tails, stucco fascias, wood shutters, decorative
vents and eave ends, etc. Gable roofs (4:12 pitch), in varied heights up to 22 feet
high, include enhanced tower features over front door entrances highlighted by 12-inch
and deeper eave overhangs (Attachment 2).
Building color schemes are primarily variations of white and brown plaster with dark
accent colors in shades of green, blue, and brown. An exterior material and color
sample board will be available at the meeting.
A front yard production landscaping plan has been submitted consisting of two street
trees per lot accented by vines and a variety of shrubs. Trees used for the project are
Bottle tree, Chilean Mesquite, and Olive. Plant materials are appropriate for this
climate.
Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee: The ALRC reviewed this project at
its meeting of November 7, 2001, and determined that the design was acceptable as
presented, with minor modifications. The Committee unanimously approved Minute
Motion 2001-047 recommending approval to the Planning Commission subject to
conditions (Attachment 3).
Public Notice: This request was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 30,
2001, and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the project site. To date,
no correspondence has been received regarding this project.
MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Findings necessary to approve this request can be made, with the implementation of
Conditions of Approval, as follows:
G:\WPDOCS\PC Stf Rpt\SedonaSDP718.wpd
1. Landscape Design. The plans provide design and planting information for the
front yards that comply with City Zoning Code requirements. The plant pallette
is varied and blends with the proposed houses and is compatible with the
surrounding area. Final review by staff for these plans is recommended in
Condition 2.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ approving Site Development Permit
2001-718, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval contained in the
attached Resolution.
Attachments:
1. Site Plan
2. Floor Plans (1, 2, 3)
3. ALRC Minutes of November 7, 2001
Prepared and Submitted by:
Jerry Herman
Community Development Director
G:\WPDOCS\PC Stf Rpt\SedonaSDP718.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING BUILDING
ELEVATIONS, SITE AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR
THREE NEW PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH
THREE FACADES EACH, FOR TRACT 30125 LOCATED AT
THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND
AVENUE 50
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-718
APPLICANT: SEDONA HOMES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the, 27th day of November, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing, to review
building elevations, site and landscape plans for three new prototype residential units
with three facades each within Tract 30125 generally located at the southeast corner
of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50 and more particularly described as:
NORTHEAST 1 /4, SECTION 1, T.6 S., R.6 E., S.B.B.&M.
WHEREAS, the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC)
of the City of La Quinta, California did on the 7th day of November, 2001 hold a
public meeting to review building elevations and landscape plans, for three new
prototype residential units with three facades each; and
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63). An Amendment to Environmental Impact
Report No. 41 was certified by the City Council for Tentative Tract 30125 under
Resolution 2001-87. 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 21 166; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify approval of
said Site Development Permit 2001-718:
1. The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the General Plan
goals, policies and programs relating to the Low Density Residential land use
designation, and supports the development of a mix of residential land uses
within an established Specific Plan.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Reso1utions\SedonaSDP718.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Site Development Permit 2001-718
November 27, 2001
2. 'The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the standards of the
City's Zoning Ordinance and is consistent with the La Quinta Resort Specific
Plan, as conditioned, which establishes development standards for the project.
The project, as conditioned, meets the City's standards for height, landscaping
and land use.
3. The proposed Site Development Permit will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety and welfare, as it has been designed to be compatible with the
surrounding development, and conform with the City's standards and
requirements, as conditioned.
4. The proposed Site Development Permit as conditioned, complies with the
architectural design standards for the La Quinta Specific Plan (121-E,
Amendment No. 5), and implements the development standards and design
guidelines included in that document.
5. The proposed Site Development Permit as conditioned, is consistent with the
landscaping standards and palette in the La Quinta Resort Specific Plan and
implements the standards for landscaping and aesthetics established in the
General Plan.
6. The Zoning Code (Section 9.60.330) design guidelines require a minimum of
two different front elevations, varied roof heights, and window and door
surrounds for flat elevation planes. The proposed units comply with these
requirements in that three facades per plan are proposed, roof heights are varied
with the combination of different roof designs, and plaster surrounds are
provided where required. The applicant's plans, including architectural themes,
are in compliance with City design requirements.
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
Commission in this case; and
2. That it does approve Site Development Permit 2001-718 for the reasons set
forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on this the 27th day of November, 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\SedonaSDP718.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Site Development Permit 2001-718
November 27, 2001
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
GAWPDOCS\PC Resolutions\SedonaSDP718.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-718
SEDONA HOMES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
1. The subdivider 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 tentative
map amendment or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion
in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits for any of the units authorized by this
approval, final working drawings shall be approved by the Community
Development Department including the following:
A. Final front yard landscaping plan shall be submitted for review and
approval by the Community Development Department after receiving
approval from the Coachella Valley Water District and Riverside County
Agricultural Commission.
B. Landscaping plans shall indicate tree sizes of at least 24 inch box and
shrubs of at least 5 gallons in size.
3. The prototype plans approved under Site Development Permit 2001-703 are null
and void
G:\WPDOCS\PC Reso1utions\Sedona718C0A.wpd
ATTACHMENT #3
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
November 7, 2001
9. Committee Member Cunningham stated they should look at a
wood composite material for the roll -up doors.
10. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion
2001-046 recommending approval of Site Development Permit
2001-720, subject to the conditions as recommended.
C. Site Development Permit 2001-718; a request of Sedona Homes for
review of architectural and landscaping plans for three new prototype
residential units with three facades each located at the southeast corner
of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50.
1. Associate Planner Michele Rambo presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like
to address the Committee. Mr. Lance Alacano, representing
Sedona Homes, gave a presentation on the project.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the material to be used
on the gates and suggested metal be used on both gates. Mr.
Alacano stated they had decided to use metal on all gates.
4. Committee Member Thorns stated he is not a favor of this type of
architecture and asked if they would be using clay roofs. Mr.
Alacano stated it was the smooth stucco with clay tile roofs.
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Bobbitt/Cunningham to adopt Minute Motion
2001-047 recommending approval of Site Development Permit
2001-719, as amended.
A. Side yard gates shall be wrought iron.
D. Site Development Permit 2001-717; a request of KSL Development
Corporation for review of architectural and landscaping plans for a
merchant builder welcome center in PGA West to be located at the
southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 54
1. Associate Planner Michele Rambo presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
G:\WPDOCS\ARI.C\Min 11-7-0I.wpd 4
PH C
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: NOVEMBER 27, 2001
CASE NO.: VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-013
REQUEST: REVIEW OF A VILLAGE USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF THREE OFFICE BUILDINGS ON THE SITE OF THE EXISTING LA
QUINTA GRILL
LOCATION: THE EAST SIDE OF AVENIDA BERMUDAS, BETWEEN CALLE
CADIZ AND CALLE BARCELONA.
APPLICANT: LA QUINTA GRILL
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PROJECT IS EXEMPT PER
SECTION 15301 OF THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
GENERAL PLAN/
ZONING/
DESIGNATIONS: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL/VILLAGE COMMERCIAL
BACKGROUND:
Site Background
The La Quinta Grill has been in operation as a restaurant for several years in what was
originally a single family residence. The existing restaurant is 9,938 square feet. The
Grill occurs on the north half of the lot, with access from Calle Cadiz. The south and
east sides of the lot are occupied by an existing un-striped and sub -standard parking
area which accommodates approximately 50 cars, and landscaping.
Project Request
The Village Use Permit is being requested to allow the construction of three office
structures, a one-story and two two-story structures. The two story structures will be
the eastern most, and will be further set back from Avenida Bermudas. Altogether, the
three buildings will provide 8,235 square feet of office space. No specific tenants are
proposed at this time, but the office use is permitted under the Village Commercial
designation.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Stf Rpt\LQGriIIVUP013.WPD
The buildings are proposed to be consistent with the existing La Quinta Grill building,
in the California Ranch style, using white board and batten for exterior walls. The roof
will be covered with grey concrete shingles. A balcony will occur on all sides of
buildings 2 and 3, with a connecting span at the center of the buildings. Balcony
construction is also proposed to be wood, with wooden railings and posts. Multi -paned
metal trimmed windows and french doors will be provided throughout.
Landscaping for the project focuses on drought tolerant plantings, and proposes to
preserve a number of the existing trees on the site. The new plantings will reflect
those already in place, and focus on palms and olives as primary trees for the site.
Patio areas are enhanced with brick banding, and walkways are surrounded by planter
areas.
The parking lot will be located on the east and south sides of the site. The parking
area will be striped and landscaped, and will provide space for 80 vehicles. The
primary entrance for the restaurant will be relocated to the parking lot side of the site,
off of Calle Barcelona. The restaurant currently uses Calle Cadiz as its primary entry.
Public Notice
This application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on November 17, 2001.
All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public
hearing notice as required by the Zoning Ordinance of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
To date, no comments have been received.
Public Agency Review
All written comments received are on file with the Community Development
Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made part of the
Conditions of Approval for this case.
Architecture and Landscape Review Committee Recommendations
The Architecture and Landscape Review Committee reviewed the Village Use Permit
at its meeting of November 7, 2001, and recommended conditions of approval, which
have been incorporated into the attached conditions.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
The findings necessary to recommend approval of the Village Use Permit can be made,
as noted in the attached resolution with the following exceptions:
Finding #6 - Site Design:
The project proponent proposes to vary from the City's parking standards for the site,
and provide a total of 80 parking spaces. The proposed total is below what the Code
G:\WPDOCS\PC Stf Rpt\LQGriIIVUP013.WPD
would normally require for office and restaurant uses, based on the assumption that
the land uses in the office building will not conflict with the restaurant use. The project
proponent prepared a parking analysis, which explains the rationale for the proposed
reduction. The analysis shows that the restaurant's operating hours are sufficiently
different from those associated with the office uses to warrant the use of shared
parking. That, coupled with the allowance for on -street parking in the Cove, and the
use of a valet service at the restaurant, are sufficient to support the conclusion of the
analysis. A condition of approval has been added which requires that the project
proponent re-evaluate the parking should the restaurant open for lunch in the future.
The ALRC required that the landscaping plan for the parking lot be submitted prior to
Planning Commission (please see materials attached). The landscaping plan has been
reviewed, and shows that it remains consistent with the other landscaping themes of
the site. The condition has therefore been fulfilled.
No master signage program has yet been submitted for the project site. A condition
of approval is included which requires the approval of both a master signage program,
and a conforming signage permit for the businesses as they occupy the site.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-, approving Village Use Permit
2001-013, subject to the findings and conditions.
Attachments:
1. Elevations, Site Plan and Floor Plans
2. Landscaping Plans
3. ALRC Minutes of November 7, 2001
Prepared by:
Nicole Sauviat Criste
Planning Consultant
Submitted by:
Jerry Herman
Community Development Director
G:\WPDOCS\PC Stf Rpt\LQGriIIVUP013.WPD
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, APPROVING
DEVELOPMENT OF THREE OFFICE BUILDINGS
TOTALING 8,235 SQUARE FEET ON AN EXISTING
RESTAURANT SITE ON THE EAST SIDE OF
AVENIDA BERMUDAS, BETWEEN CALLE CADIZ
AND CALLE BARCELONA.
CASE NO.: VILLAGE US PERMIT 2001-013
APPLICANT: LA QUINTA GRILL
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 27th day of November, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for the La
Quinta Grill project for review of a Village Use Permit to allow construction of three
office buildings totaling 8,235 square feet on the site of the La Quinta Grill restaurant,
on the east side of Avenida Bermudas, between Calle Cadiz and Calle Barcelona, more
particularly described as:
APN 770-153-001, 770-183-002
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for the
City of La Quinta did, on the 7th day of November, 2001 recommend approval of the
proposed project, by adoption of Minute Motion 2001-049, subject to Conditions of
Approval;
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 recommending
approval of said Village Use Permit:
1. The proposed Village Use Permit is consistent with the General Plan goals,
policies and programs relating to the Village Commercial land use designation,
and supports a mix of commercial uses within the Cove.
2. The proposed Village Use Permit is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance, and
implements the standards of Village Commercial, as conditioned.
3. This project is exempt from CEQA per Section 15301 of the Guidelines for
Implementation of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
G:\WPDOCS\PC ResolutionsWUP013LOGri MM
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Village Use Permit 2001-013
La Quinta Grill
Adopted November 27, 2001
4. The proposed Village Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety and welfare, as it has been designed to be compatible with surrounding
development, and conform with the City's standards and requirements, as
conditioned.
5. The proposed Village Use Permit complies with the architectural design
guidelines of the Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines, and implements the
high quality standards called for in that document.
6. The site design of the proposed Village Use Permit is compatible with
surrounding development, and creates an integrated multi -use site with the
existing restaurant, as conditioned.
7. The proposed Village Use Permit is consistent with the landscaping standards
and palette in the Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines..
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case; and
2. That it does hereby approve Village Use Permit 2001-013, for the reasons set
forth in this Resolution, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached
hereto; and
3. That it does hereby confirm that this Village Use Permit is exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act under Section 15301.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27th day of November, 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
G:\WPDOCS\PC ResolutionsWUP013LQGril.WPD
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\VUP013LQGriI.WPD
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-013
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
GENERAL:
1. Olen Europaea "Wilson Olive" (fruitless) trees shall be utilized as the preferred
type of olive tree in the landscaping plan. Palm Springs Gold, or an equivalent
ground cover shall be used between plantings in the parking lot planters.
2. Landscape planters at the end stalls shall be no more than 15 feet in length.
3. Should the restaurant open for lunch at any time in the future, the project
proponent shall be required to provide additional parking, either on or off site,
to accommodate the additional need.
4. No signage is approved with this permit. A master signage program shall be
submitted for the entire site prior to approval of individual sign permits for the
businesses on the site.
5. The applicant shall ensure that all working drawings are reviewed and approved
by the Coachella Valley Water District, Riverside County Fire Marshall, prior to
the issuance of building permits. Any conditions of approval imposed by these
agencies shall be met prior to the issuance of building permits.
6. The applicant shall pay the required school fees to Desert Sands Unified School
District prior to the issuance of building permits.
7. Upon conditional approval by the City Council of this development application,
the City Clerk shall prepare and record, with the Riverside County Recorder, a
memorandum noting that conditions of approval for the development of this
property exist and are available for review at City Hall.
8. 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 Village Use
Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\LQGriIIVUPCOA.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-013
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
9. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant
shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances
from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement
plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City
approval of the plans.
10. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES storm
water discharge permit Sections 8.70.010 et. Seq., LQMC. For projects
requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall submit
a copy of the CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior
to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure
that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP") is available
for inspection at the project site.
The Permitee shall be governed by the provisions of U.B.C. § 3316
A. 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.
B. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following
Best Management Practices (BMPs):
i. Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control).
ii. Temporary Sediment Control.
iii. Wind Erosion Control.
iv. Track Out Control.
V. Non -Storm Water Management.
vi. Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\LQGriIIVUPCOA.wpd 2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-013
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
C. All of applicant's erosiorl and sediment control BMPs shall be approved
by the City Engineer prior to any on or off site grading being done in
relation to this project.
D. All approved project BMPs shall be maintained throughout the course of
construction, and until all public improvements have been accepted by
the City.
11. 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).
12. The applicant shall comply with all ADA standards.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
13. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets and
properties from all frontage along the streets and properties except access
points shown on the approved Site Development Plan.
14. 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.
15. When an applicant proposes the vacation, or abandonment, of any existing
right-of-way, or access easement, which will diminish the access rights to any
properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate right-
of-way, or access easements to those properties, or shall notarized letters of
consent from the affected 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.
16. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of
qualified engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Improvement
plans shall be submitted on a 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Grading,"
"Street," "Landscape" and "Site Development" plans. "Site Development"
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\LQGriIIVUPCOA.wpd 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-013
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director, the
Building Official and the City Engineer. "Landscape" plans shall have signature
blocks for the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. All
other plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Improvement
plans are not approved for construction until they are signed.
"Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls. "Street" plans shall
normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, entry drives and gates.
"Landscaping" plans shall normally include irrigation improvements, landscape
lighting and entry monuments. And "Site Development" plans shall normally
include all on -site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to
drainage, finish grade for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot
improvements and ADA requirements.
When directed by the City Engineer, an additional "Site Utility" plan shall be
prepared. "Site Utility" plans shall normally include all sub -surface
improvements including but not necessarily limited to sewer, water fire
protection and storm drainage. The "Site Utility" plan shall have signature
blocks for the Building Official and the City Engineer.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the
City Engineer.
17. The City maintains 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.
18. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCAD files of the completed approved plans on a storage media acceptable
to the City Engineer. Such files shall utilize standard AutoCAD menu items so
they may be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD program. At the completion
of construction, and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant
shall update the AutoCAD files to reflect the as -built conditions.
If the plans were not produced by an AutoCAD application, or a file format that
can be converted to an AutoCAD application format, the City Engineer will
accept raster -image files of the plans.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
19. The applicant shall either construct improvements, and/or satisfy the
obligations, or furnish a fully secured and executed Subdivision Improvement
Agreement ("SIA") to construct such improvements, and/or satisfy its
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\LQGriIIVUPCOA.wpd 4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-013
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
obligations as required by the City, prior to the issuance of any building
permit(s). All secured SIAs, the security provided therefor, and the release
thereof, shall comply with Chapter 13, LQMC.
Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include removal of any
existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed
improvements.
In the event that any of the improvements required herein are constructed by
the City, the applicant shall, at the time of approval of a map or other
development or building permit, reimburse the City for the cost of those
improvements.
20. Where improvements are to be secured through a SIA, the applicant shall
provide detailed construction cost estimates of all on -site and off -site
improvements, including survey monumentation, for checking and approval by
the City Engineer. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs
adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's
schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be
approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V.
cable improvements. However, development -wide improvements shall not be
agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the
telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone
service to lots within the development.
21. When an applicant fails to construct the improvements for the development, or
fails to satisfy its obligations in a timely manner, for the development, the City
shall have the right to halt issuance of all 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
22. Prior to its occupancy of the project site for any construction or other purposes,
the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer.
23. In order to obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and
obtain approval of all of the following:
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\LQGriIIVUPCOA.wpd 5
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-013
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer,
B. A preliminary geo-technical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified
engineer, and
C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16,
LQMC.
The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report
and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist.
A statement shall appear on all final maps that a soils report has been prepared
pursuant to Health and 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 of its grading permit.
24. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape
areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
25. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall provide building
pad certifications stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor.
Each pad certification shall list the elevation shown on the approved grading
plan, the actual elevation and the difference between the two, if any. The data
shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at
different times.
DRAINAGE
26. During construction, and until such time as the improvements are accepted by
the City, the applicant shall comply with the City's NPDES Ordinance, Sections
8.70.010 et seq., LQMC.
UTILITIES
27. Existing aerial 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.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\LQGriIIVUPCOA.wpd 6
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-013
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
28. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities
in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration
requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall
provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
29. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development
boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g.,
grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or
dimensions of streets and sidewalks).
30. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC,
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved
by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking
areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
31. The applicant shall comply with the City's Parking Ordinance, Chapter 9.150,
LQMC, except as shown on applicant's Parking Site Plan, and the space
allocations pursuant to the applicant's Parking Study prepared on October 26,
2001.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
32. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
33. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, and such other
appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to
prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate
construction supervision.
34. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements,
sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program,
but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction
materials and methods employed comply with plans, specifications and other
applicable regulations.
35. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City
reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by
the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\LQGriIIVUPCOA.wpd 7
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-013
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
"As -Constructed and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer, certifying
to the accuracy of the record drawings. The applicant shall have all AutoCAD
or raster -image files previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -
built conditions.
MAINTENANCE
36. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of
all on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks.
37. The applicant shall maintain required public improvements until expressly
released from this responsibility by the appropriate public agency.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
38. 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.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\LQGriIIVUPCOA.wpd 8
ATTACHMENT #3
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
November 7, 2001
There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Bobbitt/Cunningham to adopt Minute Motion
2001-048 recommending approval of Site Development Permit
2001-717, as revised.
10.
A. Condition #2: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the
landscape plan -shall indicate that the proposed Date Palms
shall be inspected by a landscape architect to assure
suitability of the area and the trees shall be of the same size
andheight.
E. Village Use Permit 2001-013; a request of La Quinta Grill for review of
architectural and landscaping plans for three office buildings on an
existing restaurant site to be located on the east side of Avenida
Bermudas between Calle Cadiz and Calle Barcelona.
1. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like
to address the Commission. Mr. Steward Woodward gave a
presentation on the project.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he liked the project and asked
about the Olive Tree as to whether it was new and asked that it
be fruitless variety.
4. Committee Member Thoms stated he also concurred with the
design comments. His concern was the design of the parking lot
he would like to see a material other than plant material that could
be walked on in the planters. At the island end the planter shall
be no more than 15 feet in length.
5. Committee Member Cunningham stated he also liked the project.
6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Cunningham/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion
2001-049 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2001-013
as amended:
a. Condition #2: Use Olen Europaea "Wilson Olive"
(fruitless) tree. Use rock or Palm
Springs Gold that can be within the
Parking lot planter.
G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\Minl 1-7-01.wpd 6
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
November 7, 2001
b. Condition #3: Landscape planters at the end stalls
shall be no more than 15 feet in length.
F. Site Development Permit 2001-71 1; a request of RLF Development for
review of architectural and landscaping plans for a neighborhood
commercial shopping center consisting of a supermarket and multiple
ancillary buildings located at the southeast corner of Avenue 52 and
Jefferson Street.
1. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like
to address the Committee. Mr. Tim Bartlett, representing the
applicant, gave a presentation on the project. He corrected the
staff report in that the material on the archway would be a racked
stucco.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he liked the raked look and
asked if it would be a different color. Mr. Bartlett stated yes to
give it a wood look. Committee Member Bobbitt asked the
distance between the columns and the store front. Mr. Bartlett
stated 12 to 16 feet. They agree with the wrought iron detail as
requested by staff. In regard to the drug store, there have an
issue the store entry design as requested by staff. They would
suggest squaring off the entry.
4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked staff what their objection was.
Staff explained the center is a symmetrical design which does not
lend itself to this design. Therefore, staff did not think this would
blend in with the rest of the arcade.
5. Committee Member Cunningham stated there may be some issues
on the overall architecture but he would not concentrate on one
site. He believes that architecture done well works, therefore, he
does not have a set standard for architecture he prefers for the
City. This project is clean, contemporary and nothing should be
added to it.
6. Committee Member Thorns stated he agreed that it should be kept
simple. He would however, like to see the drugstore redesigned.
G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\Min 11-7-01.wpd 7
-,
tz.. 'I,- - , , .-
" I ,
- -:
4
umwomo�(W-
PH
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: NOVEMBER 27, 2001
CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-435 AND TENTATIVE
TRACT 30331
REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION FOR CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND
APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION OF 5.1 ACRES INTO 7 SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 6 LETTERED LOTS
LOCATION: ON THE NORTH SIDE OF AVENUE 50, WEST OF JEFFERSON
STREET.
APPLICANT: SANTA PROPERTIES
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-435 WAS PREPARED FOR
PROPOSED TENTATIVE TRACT 30331 IN COMPLIANCE WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED. THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS RECOMMENDED THAT A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT BE CERTIFIED.
GENERAL PLAN/
ZONING/
DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
BACKGROUND:
Site Background
The proposed tract map will divide a 5.1 acre parcel into 7 single family lots and 6
lettered lots to create private roads and landscaping and retention areas. Access will
be taken from the Avenue 50, on a single cul-de-sac. The property is bordered on the
east and west by single family residential tracts which have been previously approved
and are under development.
G:\WPDOCS\PC SO Rpt\TTM30331.wpd
Protect Request
The tentative tract creates 7 very large single family residential lots, ranging in size
from 18,498 square feet to 27,874 square feet. Access will occur on a single cul-de-
sac which borders the east side of the property. The private street will be 33 feet in
width, and has been conditioned to restrict parking to only one side. Pad elevations
have been created to be compatible with adjacent, previously approved tracts on the
east and west side. The proposed tract will therefore blend in well with its neighbors.
The application does not include prototypical house designs at this time. Should the
developer wish to construct models, separate approvals will be required. The
application also does not include permitting for project signage, which will also require
separate permitting.
A gate is proposed approximately 100 feet north of the project's connection to
Avenue 50. This will provide adequate stacking for vehicles. A turn -around area is also
included in the plans, approximately 50 feet north of Avenue 50.
Public Notice
This map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on November 5,
2001. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public
hearing notice as required by the Subdivision Ordinance of the La Quinta Municipal
Code. To date, no comments have been received.
Public Agency Review
All written comments received are on file with the Community Development
Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made part of the
Conditions of Approval for this case.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
Based on the provisions of the General Plan, Zoning Code and the Subdivision
Ordinance, the following overview of the project is provided:
Issue 1 - General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Consistency
The City's General Plan designates this parcel as Low Density Residential, allowing
single family housing. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan
designation.
The proposed project's Zoning designation is also Low Density Residential, requiring
lots no smaller than 7,200. The proposed subdivision meets this development
standard.
G:\WPDCICS\PC Stf Rpt\TTM30331.wpd
Issue 2 - Tract Design/Improvements
The proposed project includes considerable landscaped areas in the front of the
property, on both sides of the entry drive. This landscaped area was necessitated by
noise mitigation requirements, and will result in an attractive view area from Avenue
50. The areas will provide for both retention (on Lot D) and creating a slope to
compensate for the grade differential between the street (at 36.7 feet) and the Lot 1
pad (at 42.0 feet). Sufficient distance exists to create a gradual slope in this area. No
landscaping plans have been submitted for these areas, however. A condition of
approval has been added which requires the submittal and approval of landscaping and
irrigation plans.
The project site will be gated and walled. The project proponent has stated that the
gate will be solid rather than open. This has become necessary to mitigate noise
impacts on Lot 1. No plans have been submitted for the entry wall and gates. A
condition of approval has been added which requires that these designs be submitted
with landscaping and irrigation plans to the Community Development Department.
Issue 3 - Health and Safety
Potential noise impacts to residents on Lot 1 along the Avenue 50 frontage were
addressed in the project Noise Study (see discussion under EA 2001-435, attached
to this staff report). The impacts to those residents can be mitigated through the
construction of walls and solid gates, as discussed above.
The proposed project has been conditioned to connect to all required services and
utilities. This includes water, sewer, streets, and other necessary improvements. All
electric services must be installed in underground piping. The health, safety and
welfare of residents is ensured based on recommended conditions.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed tract map is a logical extension of development in the area. The tract
map creates single family lots which exceed the City's minimum standard in the Low
Density Residential designation. Findings for a recommendation for approval, as noted
in the attached Resolution, can be made.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-, recommending to the City
Council Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-435.
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-, recommending to the City
Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 30331, subject to findings and
conditions. I `J J
G:\WPDOCS\PC Stf Rpt\TTM30331.wpd
Attachments:
1. Tentative Tract Map 30331
Prepared by:
Nicole Criste Planning Consultant
Submitted by:
joe
ry g'��Zman
mmunity Development Director
bj 4.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PREPARED
FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-435
APPLICANT: SANTA PROPERTIES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did, on the 27th day of November, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
Environmental Assessment 2001-435 for Tentative Tract Map 30331, located on the
north side of Avenue 50, west of Jefferson Street, more particularly described as
follows:
APNs: 649-520-010, 649-520-012, 649-520-013
WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that
the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2001-435)
and has determined that although the proposed Tentative Tract Map 30331 could have
a significant adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant
effect in this case because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the
assessment and included in the conditions of approval and a Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and,
WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments,
if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find
the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify recommending certification of said
Environmental Assessment:
1. The proposed Tentative Tract Map 30331 will not be detrimental to the health,
safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that
no significant unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment
2001-435.
2. The proposed Tentative Tract Map 30331 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.
`) 5
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\EA-435Santampd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Environmental Assessment 2001-435 - Santa Properties
Adopted: November 27, 2001
3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the
potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the
wildlife depends.
4. The proposed Tentative Tract Map 30331 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.
4. The proposed Tentative Tract Map 30331 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.
5. The proposed Tentative Tract Map 30331 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.
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 the Environmental Assessment 2001-
435 and the Environmental Assessment 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 correct and constitutes the findings of
the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment.
2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-435 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.
)C
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\EA-435Santampd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Environmental Assessment 2001-435 - Santa Properties
Adopted: November 27, 2001
3. That Environmental Assessment 2001-435 reflects the independent judgement
of the City.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 27th day of November, 2001, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Reso1utions\EA-435Santa.wpd
Environmental Checklist Form
1. Project Title: Tentative Tract Map 30331
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Christine di lorio, 760-777-7125
4. Project Location: North side of Avenue 50, West of Jefferson Street
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Santa Properties
49105 Casa del Oro
La Quinta, CA 92253
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 subdivide 5.1 acres into 7 single family lots, two
street lots and two landscaping or retention lots.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings.
North: Low Density Residential
South: Avenue 50, Low Density Residential
West: Low Density Residential
East: Low Density Residential
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
Not applicable
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EACkIstTT30331.WPD
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this
project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as
indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Hazards and Hazardous Public Services
Materials
Agriculture Resources Hydrology and Water Quality Recreation
Air Quality Land Use Planning Transportation/Traffic
Biological Resources Mineral Resources Utilities and Service Systems
Cultural Resources Noise Mandatory Findings
Geology and Soils Population and Housing
Determination
(To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will
be prepared.
nn
L�
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets.
An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects
that remain to be addressed. 11
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier
EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project,
nothing further is required.
I ❑
01
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EACk1stTT30331.WPD
1)9
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following
each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources
show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls
outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on
project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well
as on- site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well
as operational impacts.
3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the
determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated"
applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially
Significant Impact" to a "Less Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation
measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation
measures from Section XVIII, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other
CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analysis are discussed in Section XVIII at the end of the checklist.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to
information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page
or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources
used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) The analysis of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than
significance
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EACkIstTT30331.WPD
. i0
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving:
AESTHETICS: Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (General Plan
Exhibit CIR-5)
b) Darnage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
(General Plan EIR, page 5-12 ff.)
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the
site and its surroundings? (Application materials)
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application
materials)
[I. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES:. In determining whether impacts
to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and
Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Dept. Of
Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (Master
Environmental Assessment 5-29, 5-32)
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract? (Zoning Map)
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in
loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (Aerial photographs)
III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established
by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air
Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? (SCAQMD
CEQA Handbook)
b) Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA
Handbook)
c) Result in a net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA
Handbook)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
(Project Description)
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
(Project Description)
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
X
X
X
X
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
V. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, Exhibit 5-1)
b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game
or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment,
p. 5-2 ff.)
c) Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Either individually or in
combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means`(Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.)
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery
sites? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (La Quinta
Municipal Code; General Plan)
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Master Environmental
Assessment 5-5)
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource which is either listed or eligible for listing on the National
Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic
Resources, or a local register of historic resources? ("Cultural
Resources Assessment for Tentative Tract 30331," Archaeological
Advisory Group, September 2001)
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique
archaeological resources (i.e., an artifact, object, or site about which it
can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current
body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it contains
information needed to answer important scientific research questions,
has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest or best
available example of its type, or is directly associated with a
scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or
person)? ("Cultural Resources Assessment for Tentative Tract 30331,"
Archaeological Advisory Group, September 2001)
c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site?
(Lakebed Delineation Map)
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries? ("Cultural Resources Assessment for Tentative
Tract 30331," Archaeological Advisory Group, September 2001)
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:
X
1M
X
X
X
X
91
K4
X
i) Rupture ofa known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? (General Plan EIR, Exhibit 4.2-3, page 4-35)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ("Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed 7 Lot Residential Subdivision...," Sladden Engineering,
August 2001)
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?
("Geotechnical Investigation Proposed 7 Lot Residential
Subdivision...," Sladden Engineering, August 2001)
iv) Landslides? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (General Plan
EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
c) Be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on -
or off -site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or
collapse? ("Geotechnical Investigation Proposed 7 Lot Residential
Subdivision...," Sladden Engineering, August 2001)
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks
or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste water? (Master Environmental
Assessment 5-32)
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the
project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
(Application Materials)
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
likely release of hazardous materials into the environment?
(Application Materials)
c) Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous materials, substances,
or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
(Application Materials)
d) Is the project located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials
Listing)
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip; would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the
project area? (General Plan land use map)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
6
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Master
Environmental Assessment p. 6-11)
h) Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildlands fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
(General Plan land use map)
1III. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project:
a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements? (Master Environmental
Assessment 6-26, 6-27)
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e.,
the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted? (General Plan EIR, page 4-57 ff.)
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a
manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -
site? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or off -site? (General Plan EIR, page
4-30 ff'.)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control?
(General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
f) Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal
Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood
hazard delineation map? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-13)
g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or
redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-13)
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? (Specific Plan Project
Description)
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of
an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited
to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect? (Master Environmental Assessment 2-11)
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
communities conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-
5)
KI
F
X
R9
X
X
X
X
X
X
MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project. -
a) Resu'at in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state? (Master Enviromnental
Assessment 5-29)
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29)
CI. NOISE: Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies? ("Noise Study for Construction
and Operation of Residential Land Uses on Tentative Tract 30331...,"
October 2001)
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels? ("Noise Study for Construction
and Operation of Residential Land Uses on Tentative Tract 30331...,"
October 2001)
c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?("Noise
Study for Construction and Operation of Residential Land Uses on
Tentative Tract 30331...," October 2001)
d) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Master Environmental
Assessment)
e) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive levels? (General Plan map)
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) ? (General
Plan, page 2-14)
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application
Materials)
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application
Materials)
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
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:
X
94
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
r'
Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. )
Police protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. )
Schools? (General Plan MEA, page 4-9 ff. )
Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan)
Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, page 4-14 ff. )
(IV. RECREATION:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
(Application Materials)
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application Materials)
KV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a
substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (General Plan
EIR, page 4-126 ff.)
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.)
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase
in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety
risks? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.)
d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.)
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Application Materials)
0 Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Application Materials)
g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Application Materials)
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan
MEA, page 4-24 )
X
x
X
X
X
0
X
91
X
0
X
X
1. 6
c) Require or result in the construction ofnew storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA,
page 4-27)
d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, page 4-20)
e) Has the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
(General Plan MEA, page 4-20)
f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (General Plan
MEA, page 4-28)
(VII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that
the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
project, and the effects of probable future projects)?
d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
XVIII EARLIER ANALYSIS.
i.9
X
X
X
X
►91
P
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects
have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a
discussion should identify the following on attached sheets.
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analysis and state where they are available for review.
No earlier analysis were used in this review.
10
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
Not applicable.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the
mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address
site -specific conditions for the project.
See attached Addendum.
SOURCES:
Master Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 1992.
SCAQMD CEQA Handbook.
General Plan, City of La Quinta, 1992.
City of La Quinta Municipal Code
Cultural Resources Assessment for Tentative Tract 30331, Archaeological Advisory Group,
September & October, 2001.
Noise Study for Construction and Operation of Residential Land Uses on Tentative Tract 30331
in the City of La Quinta, CA, Synectecology, October, 2001.
Geotechnical Investigation Proposed 7 Lot Residential Subdivision Avenue 50 West of Jefferson
Street, Sladden Engineering, August 2001.
Addendum for Environmental Assessment 2001-435
III. c) The proposed project will generate air pollution primarily from the operation
of motor vehicles. The 7 single family residential units will generate
approximately 67 trips per day'. Based on this trip generation, the project at
buildout will generate the following pollutants.
Running Exhaust Emissions
(pounds/day)
PM10 PM10 PM10
CO
ROC
NOx
Exhaust Brakes
Tires
50 mph 1.73
0.07
0.35
-- 0.01
0.01
Daily
Threshold 550 75 100 150
Based on 67 trips/day and average trip length of 5 miles, using EMFAC7G
Model provided by California Air Resources Board. Assumes catalytic light
autos at 75°F. * Operational thresholds provided by SCAQMD for assistance
in determining the significance of a project.
As demonstrated in the Table above, the proposed project will not exceed any
threshold for the generation of moving emissions, as established by the South
Coast Air Quality Management District.
The Coachella Valley is a non -attainment area for PM 10 (particulate matter of
10 microns or smaller). The construction of the proposed project has the
potential to generate dust, which could contribute to the PM 10 problem in the
area. In order to control PM10, the City has imposed standards and
requirements on development to control dust. The applicant will be required to
submit such a plan prior to initiation of any earth moving activity at the site. In
addition, the potential impacts associated with PM 10 can be mitigated by the
mitigation measures below.
1. No earth moving activity shall be undertaken without the review and
approval of a PM 10 Management Plan.
2. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to
minimize exhaust emissions.
Institute of Transportation Engineers, "Trip Generation, 6th Edition." Rate calculated for single family
residential, at 9.57 trips per day.
ie�
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAAddTT30331.WPD 1
3. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary
power poles to avoid on -site power generation.
4. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit
opportunities.
5. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site.
6. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of
three feet prior to the onset of grading activities.
7. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed
on an on -going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the
site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered
regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall
be watered at the end of each work day.
8. All disturbed areas shall be treated to prevent erosion until the site is
constructed upon. Pad sites which are to remain undeveloped shall be
seeded with either a desert wildflower mix or grass seed.
9. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the
potential for wind erosion.
10. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of
construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site.
11. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage
ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour.
12. All buildings on the project site shall conform to energy use guidelines in
Title 24 of the California Administrative Code.
With the implementation of these mitigation measures, the impacts to air quality
from buildout will not be significant.
V. b) A cultural resource survey and resource recovery were conducted for the
subject property2. The assessment recommended the completion of trenching
on the site, to quantify resources below ground. The trenching was completed,
and results submitted to the Historic Preservation Commission for review and
approval. The resulting report found that all potential impacts had been
2
" Cultural Resources Assessment for Tentative Tract 30331,"" Archaeology Advisory Group,
September 2001. > 0
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAAddTT30331.WPD 2
mitigated, and that no further mitigation measures were required. The impacts
to cultural resources from development of the proposed property will be less
than significant.
VI. a) i) & ii)
The proposed project lies in a- Zone IV groundshaking zone. The property, as
with the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the
event of a major earthquake. Structures on the site will be required to meet the
City's standards for construction, which include Uniform Building Code
requirements for seismic zones. The City Engineer will require the preparation
of site -specific geotechnical analysis in conjunction with the submittal of
grading plans (please see below). This requirement will ensure that impacts from
ground failure are reduced to a less than significant level.
VI. b) The subject property is subject to soil erosion due to wind. The City will
implement requirements for a PM 10 management plan, which will control this
hazard (please see Air Quality, above). These requirements will reduce potential
impacts to a less than significant level.
VIII. b)
Domestic water is provided by the Coachella Valley Water District, which
extracts groundwater from a number of wells in the Lower Thermal sub -basin.
The development of the project site will require domestic water. The project
proponent will be required to implement the City's standards for water
conserving plumbing fixtures and on -site retention, which both aid in reducing
the potential impacts associated with groundwater. The proposed project will
also meet the requirements of the City's water -conserving landscaping
ordinance. These standards will reduce potential impacts to a less than
significant level.
VIII. c►-e)
The City requires that all construction projects retain the 100 year 24 hour
storm on -site. This will control the amount of runoff which exits the site during
a storm. The park's drainage plan will be reviewed and approved by the City
Engineer prior to the issuance of grading permits. The creation of areas which
are mostly sod will encourage percolation of water into the soil. The design of
the park includes depressions where the fields are located, to assure adequate
detention of storm water. This will ensure that impacts to the City's flood
control system are reduced to a less than significant level.
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAAddTT30331.WPD 3
XI. a) & c1
A noise analysis was prepared for the proposed park project3. The study found
that the existing noise environment generates noise levels at a distance of 50
feet from the centerline of Avenue 50 were 68.5 dBA CNEL. At buildout of the
General Plan, this same noise level will reach 73.3 dBA CNEL without
mitigation. The City's standard for useable back yard areas on residential lots
is 60 dBA CNEL. Several designs for front entry walls were further discussed
with the noise engineer following completion of the noise study'. In order to
mitigate the potential impacts associated with traffic noise, the following
mitigation measures will be implemented.
1. A 6 foot wall on top of a one foot berm shall be constructed on the
southern property line of lot 1. This wall will extend along the eastern
property line of lot 1 northerly, to intersect with the entry gates for the
proposed project. Said entry gates shall be made of a solid material.
2. On the east side of the entry drive, the project proponent shall place a 6
foot wall on a one foot berm from the entry gate northerly to the
northernmost point of Lot D, and extend the wall easterly to the eastern
property line, to connect with the wall required in mitigation measure #3,
below.
3. A 6 foot wall on a 1 foot berm shall be constructed along the eastern and
western property lines, from the walls on the southern frontage of the
property northerly to the northern property boundary.
The study also found that the project's construction could impact residential
units located adjacent to the subject property. In order to mitigate these
potential impacts, the study imposes the following mitigation measures:
1. All internal combustion equipment operating within 500 feet of any
existing occupied residential unit shall be fitted with properly operating
mufflers and air intake silencers.
2. All stationary equipment (e.g. generators and compressors) shall be
located as far as practical from adjacent, occupied residential units.
These mitigation measures will reduce the potential impacts associated with noise at
the subject property to a less than significant level.
4
"Noise Study for Construction and Operation of Residential Land Uses on Tentative Tract 30331..."
Synectecology, October, 2001.
Personal communication, Todd Brody, November 15, 2001.
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAAddTT30331.WPD 4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 TO
DIVIDE A 5.1 ACRE PARCEL INTO 7 SINGLE FAMILY
LOTS AND 6 LETTERED LOTS.
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331
APPLICANT: SANTA PROPERTIES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 27th day of November, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for Santa
Properties, in order to subdivide a 5.1 acre parcel into 7 numbered lots and 6 lettered
lots, generally located on the north side of Avenue 50, west of Jefferson Street, more
particularly described as:
APN's: 649-520-010, 649-520-012, 649-520-013
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 recommending
approval of said Tentative Tract Map 30331:
Finding Number 1 - Consistency with General Plan:
A. The property is designated Low Density Residential. The Land Use Element of
the General Plan encourages differing residential developments throughout the
City. The project is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La
Quinta General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2) insofar as low density
residential development fits the character of the City's residential community.
Finding Number 2 - Consistency with City Zoning Ordinance:
A. The proposed development is consistent with the land uses specified in the
Zoning Ordinance, as conditioned.
Finding Number 3 - Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act:
A. Tentative Tract Map 30331 is subject to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act per Public Resources Code Section 65457(a). A
Mitigated Negative Declaration (EA 2001-435) has been prepared.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331Santampd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Tentative Tract Map 30125
KSL Development Corp.
Adopted November 27, 2001
Finding Number 4 - Site Design:
A. The proposed design of the subdivision conforms with the development
standards found in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance by creating large
single family lots.
B. The site is physically suitable for the proposed land division, as the area is
generally flat and without physical constraints, and the Tentative Tract Map is
consistent with the low density residential character of the community.
Finding Number 5 - Site Improvements:
A. Infrastructure improvements such as gas, electric, sewer and water will service
the site in underground facilities as required. No adverse impacts have been
identified based on letters of response from affected public agencies.
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 confirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment
2001-435 assessed the environmental concerns of this Tentative Tract Map;
and,
4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Tentative Tract Map
30331 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached
conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27th day of November, 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
G:\WPDOCS\PC Reso1utions\TT30331Santa.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Tentative Tract Map 30125
KSL Development Corp.
Adopted November 27, 2001
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
GENERAL
1. Upon the City Council's conditional approval of this tentative tract map, the City
Clerk shall prepare and record with the Riverside County Recorder, a
memorandum noting that the conditions of approval for the development of this
property exist and are available for review at the City Hall.
2. 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 tract map 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.
3. This tentative tract map, and any final tract map 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").
4. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction, or building permit by the City,
the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from the
following public agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances
from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement
plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City
approval of the plans.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSanta.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
5. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES storm
water discharge permit Sections 8.70.010 et seq., LQMC. For projects requiring
project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy
of the CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to
issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that
the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP") is available for
inspection at the project site.
For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land, which
disturbs less than 5 acres, the Permitee shall be governed by the provisions of
U.B.C. § 3316, A.
For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land, which
disturbs 5 acres or more, the Permitee shall be governed by the provisions of
U.B.C. § 3316, B.
A. 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.
B. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best
Management Practices (BMPs):
1. Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control).
2. Temporary Sediment Control.
3. Wind Erosion Control.
4. Track Out Control.
5. Non -Storm Water Management.
6. Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control.
C. All of applicant's erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be approved by
the City Engineer prior to any on or off site grading being done in relation
to this project.
D. All approved project BMPs shall be maintained throughout the course of
construction, and until all public improvements have been accepted by the
City.
6. 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).
27
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSanta.wpd 2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-___
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
PROPERTY RIGHTS
7. Prior to the issuance of any pgrmit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer
easements and other property rights required of the tentative map or otherwise
necessary for construction or proper functioning of the proposed development.
Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access
easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction,
and reconstruction of essential improvements.
8. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right-of-ways and
utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code,
applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer.
9. Right of way dedications required of this development include:
A. PUBLIC STREETS
1. Avenue 50 (Lot "A") - 50-foot half of the 100-foot right-of-way half.
B. PRIVATE STREETS
1. Residential (Street Lot "B"): 36-Foot width. Width may be reduced to
32-foot with parking restricted to one side.
2. Private Gated Entry: 82-foot, or as required to provide adequate turn-
around and egress for non -admitted visitors, and approved by the City
Engineer.
C. CUL DE SACS
1. Private: Use Riverside County Standard 800A to provide a traveled
radius of 40-foot measured gutter flow -line to gutter flow -line.
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. If the City Engineer determines that access rights to proposed street right-of-
ways shown on the tentative map are necessary prior to approval of final maps
dedicating the rights of way, the applicant shall grant the necessary rights of
way within 60 days of written request by the City. .�
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSantampd 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
12. 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.
13. 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. Avenue 50 - The applicant shall provide a minimum of 20 foot perimeter
setback along Avenue 50.
The setback requirement applies to all frontage 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.
14. The applicant shall dedicate those easements necessary for the placement of,
and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park
lands, and common areas.
15. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets and
properties from all frontage along the streets and properties except access points
shown on the approved tentative map.
16. 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.
17. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any
portion of this property between the date of approval of this tentative map by the
City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s) covering the same
portion of the property unless such easements are approved by the City Engineer.
FINAL MAP(S)
18. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files
of the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, 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.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSanta.wpd 4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-__
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
If the map was not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted
to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the 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.
19. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of
qualified engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be
submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Grading," "Street" and
"Landscaping" plans. "Landscaping" plans shall have signature blocks for the
Community Development Director and the City Engineer. All other plans shall
have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for
construction until they are signed.
"Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls. "Street" plans shall
normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, entry drives, gates, and parking
lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include irrigation improvements,
landscape lighting and entry monuments.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
20. The City maintains 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.
21. 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.
Raster -image files of those plans not produced in AutoCAD, or a file format
which can be converted to AutoCAD, shall be submitted to the City Engineer.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
22. The applicant shall either construct improvements, and/or satisfy the obligations,
or furnish a fully secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement j
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSanta.wpd 5
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
("SIA") to construct such improvements, and/or satisfy its obligations as required
by the City, prior to the issuance of any building permit(s). All secured SIAs, the
security provided therefor, and the release thereof, shall comply with Chapter 13,
LQMC.
Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include removaB of any
existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed
improvements.
Where improvements are phased through approval of a Phasing Map for multiple
final maps, or other administrative approvals (e.g., Site Development Permits),
all off -site improvements and common improvements (e.g., retention basins,
perimeter walls & landscaping, gates) shall be constructed or secured prior to
approval of the first phase unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and
satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings
within the phase and subsequent phases unless a construction phasing plan is
approved by the City Engineer.
23. Depending on the timing of development of the lots or parcels created by this
map and the status of off -site improvements at that time, the applicant may be
required to construct improvements, to construct additional improvements
subject to reimbursement by others, or reimburse others who construct
improvements that are obligations of this map, or secure the cost of the
improvements for future construction by others, or a combination of these
methods.
In the event that any of the improvements required herein are constructed by the
City, the applicant shall, at the time of approval of a map or other development
or building permit, reimburse the City for the cost of those improvements.
24. Where improvements are to be secured through a SIA, the applicant shall provide
detailed construction cost estimates of all on -site and off -site improvements,
including survey monumentation, for checking and approval by the City Engineer.
Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution
or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be
approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V.
cable improvements. However, development -wide improvements shall not be
31
G:\WPDDCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSanta.wpd 6
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the
telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone
service to lots within the development.
25. When an applicant fails to construct the improvements for the development, or
fails to satisfy its obligations in a timely manner, for the development, or as may
be specified in an approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right to halt
issuance of all 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. Prior to its occupancy of the project site for any construction or other purposes,
the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer.
27. In order to obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and
obtain approval of all of the following:
A. grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer,
B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer,
and
C. Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16,
LQMC.
The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and
be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist.
A statement shall appear on all final maps that a soils report has been prepared
pursuant to Health and 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 of its grading permit.
28. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape
areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
29. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall provide building
pad certifications stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSanta.wpd 7
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
Each pad certification shall list the elevation shown on the approved grading plan,
the actual elevation and the difference between the two, if any. The data shall
be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different
times.
DRAINAGE
30. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03
and the following:
A. Storm water falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year
storm (the design 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.
B. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins.
C. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a
designated, unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route.
D. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained
on site or passed through to the overflow outlet.
E. Retention facility design shall be based on site -specific percolation data
which shall be submitted for checking with the retention facility plans.
F. Maximum depth of retention basin, measured at any overflow weir location,
shall be six feet for common basins.
G. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments,
nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leachfield
approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leachfield shall be
designed to contain surges of 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. of landscape area, and
infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft.
H. The tract 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.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSanta.wpd 8
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_ _
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
31. In developments for which security will be provided by public safety entities
(e.g., the La Quinta Safety Department or the Riverside County Sheriff's
Department), retention basins shall be visible from adjacent street(s). No fence
or wall shall be constructed around basins unless approved by the Community
Development Director and the City Engineer.
UTILITIES
32. 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.
33. Existing aerial 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 undergound.
34. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities
in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration
requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall
provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
35. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with
the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements
shall conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.)
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1. Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial "A") (Lot "A") - Construct - 38 foot half
width improvement plus 6-foot wide meandering sidewalk. Construct
necessary pavement transitions.
B. PRIVATE STREETS
2. Residential (Street Lot "B" ): 33-foot travel width with parking
restricted to one side, and the applicant shall provide for the perpetual
enforcement of the parking restrictions by the homeowners
association.
34
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSanta.wpd 9
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-__
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
3. 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 -entry vehicles.
The applicant shall submit a detailed exhibit at a 1 " =10' scale
demonstrating that those passenger vehicles that do not gain entry,
can safely make a "U" Turn back out onto Avenue 50 from the gated
entry.
Two lanes of traffic shall be provided on the entry side, one lane for
the homeowners, and one lane for visitors.
C. CUL DE SACS
1. Use Riverside County Standard 800 for symmetrical Cul de Sacs, or
RC Standard 800A for offset Cul de Sacs with a 38-foot curb radius,
measured gutter flow -line to gutter flow -line.
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, turn knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus
turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved
construction plans may warrant additional street widths as determined by the
City Engineer.
36. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
following:
A. A right in/right out entrance from or onto Avenue 50.
37. 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.
38. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development
boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g.,
grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or
dimensions of streets and sidewalks).
39. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC,
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved
by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking
areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSanta.wpd 10
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
40. Standard knuckles and corner cut -backs shall conform to La Quinta Standard
Drawings, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
STREET DESIGN
41. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations which
convey water without ponding and provide lateral containment of dust and
residue for street sweeping. Where wedge or rolled curb designs are approved,
the lip at the flowline shall be vertical (1/8" batter) and a minimum of 0.1' in
height. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to normal curbing prior to
final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot.
42. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design
procedure for 20-year pavement life, utilizing 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./4.50" c.a.b.
Collector 4.0"/5.00"
Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00"
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50"
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
CONSTRUCTION
43. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the
time of construction) for base, asphaltic 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 the
most recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate
gradation test results confirming that the design gradations can be achieved in
current production.
The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until the mix designs
have been approved by the City Engineer.
44. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings
only when the buildings have improved street, and (where required), sidewalk
access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include all
required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on-
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSanta.wpd 11
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
site streets 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 tract or when directed by the City, whichever comes first.
LANDSCAPING
45. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots, and park areas.
46. 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.
47. 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
48. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
49. 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.
50. 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.
51. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with
reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by
�t
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSanta.wpd 12
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or
"As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer, certifying to
the accuracy of the record drawings. The applicant shall have all AutoCAD or
raster -image files previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built
conditions.
MAINTENANCE
52. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all
on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks.
53. The applicant shall maintain all required public improvements until expressly
released from this responsibility by the appropriate public agency.
54. The applicant shall provide for weekly street sweeping operations during
construction, and until such time as all improvements have been accepted by the
City.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
55. 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.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
56. Landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of a
grading permit for the proposed project site. The landscaping plans shall include
the design of the entry walls and gates. Both walls and gates shall not exceed
6 feet in height, and shall be placed on berms if required by mitigation measures
in Environmental Assessment 2001-435.
57. Prototypical housing plans are not a part of this approval, and will require
separate permitting if required.
58. Signage is not included in this approval. A separate signage permit shall be
submitted for entry or monument signage at the project site.
59. All mitigation measures included in Environmental Assessment 2001-435 are
hereby included in this approval.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSantampd 13
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30331 - SANTA PROPERTIES
NOVEMBER 27, 2001
60. The applicant shall pay school fees as required by law. School fees shall have
been paid prior to the issuance of building permits.
COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT CONDITIONS
61. The project site shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 55 and 82 of the
district for sanitation service.
62. Plans for grading, landscaping and irrigation systems shall be submitted to the
district for review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management.
FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
63. Approved standard fire hydrants, located at each intersection and spaced 330 feet
apart.
64. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side
that the fire hydrant is on.
65. any turn -around requires a minimum 38-foot turning radius.
66. Gate entrances shall be at least two feet wider than the width of the travel lanes
serving that gate. Any gate providing access from a road to a driveway 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.
67. Gates may be automatic or manual 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.
68. The minimum dimension for access roads is 20 feet clear and unobstructed width
and a minimum clearance of 13 feet 6 inches in height.
69. 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.
G:\WPDDCS\PC Resolutions\TT30331-coaSanta.wpd 14
PH E
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: NOVEMBER 27, 2001
CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-387, GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT 99-063, ZONE CHANGE 99-091, SPECIFIC
PLAN 99-035, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-659
APPLICANT:
POINT HAPPY RANCH, LLC
ARCHITECT/PLANNER: THE GALLOWAY GROUP
LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF WASHINGTON STREET, APPROXIMATELY
350
FEET SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 111 (POINT HAPPY
RANCH)
REQUESTS: 1.)
CERTIFICATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT AS DESCRIBED BELOW FOR THE PROJECT
2.)
CHANGE OF GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL (MDR) TO OFFICE COMMERCIAL (OC)
FOR 5 ACRES OF THE 43 + ACRE SITE AND FROM
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO MEDIUM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR) FOR 11.55 ACRES
FOR THE 62 VILLAS .
3.)
CHANGE OF ZONE DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM
DENSITY (RM) TO OFFICE COMMERCIAL (CO) FOR
5 ACRES OF THE 43+ ACRE SITE AND FROM LOW
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) TO MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL(RM).
4.)
SPECIFIC PLAN FOR DESIGN GUIDELINES AND
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SENIOR CARE
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT AND TWO COMMERCIAL
BUILDINGS ON THE 43+ ACRE SITE.
5.)
REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING
PLANS FOR SENIOR CARE UNITS CONSISTING OF
62 ONE STORY HIGH INDEPENDENT LIVING VILLA
UNITS IN DUPLEX TO 4-PLEX CONFIGURATIONS
WITH A TWO STORY CLUB BUILDING, AND 310
ROOMS FOR ASSISTED LIVING, INDEPENDENT
LIVING AND CONTINUING CARE IN TWO 2 TO 3
STORY HIGH BUILDINGS, A ONE STORY HIGH
p\stars\sp 99-039 et al pc rpt.wpd
MAINTENANCE BUILDING, TWO COMMERCIAL
OFFICE BUILDINGS (TWO STORIES HIGH) WITH A
TOTAL OF 44,000 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA
AND A 9,500 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY HIGH
PROJECT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING.
ZONING OF SITE: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL), RM (MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL), AND OS (OPEN SPACE)
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION OF SITE: LDR (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL), MDR (MEDIUM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL), AND OS (OPEN SPACE)
SURROUNDING ZONING/
LAND USES: NORTH:
SOUTH:
EAST:
WEST:
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS:
CC (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL) / PLAZA LA
QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER
RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) / SINGLE
FAMILY HOMES AND OS (OPEN SPACE) /
VACANT HILLSIDES
M/RC (MIXED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL) /
SHOPPING CENTER UNDER CONSTRUCTION
AND VACANT LAND
RESIDENTIAL IN THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS
/ VACANT HILLSIDES AND SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCES
The La Quinta Community Development Department has completed Environmental
Assessment 99-387. A Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse
#2001021037) has been prepared for the proposed project. The Draft EIR was
distributed on September 28, 2001, with the formal public review period ending
November 12, 2001. Written responses to comments received on the Draft EIR have
been included in the Final EIR (Attachment 1). It has been determined that with
mitigation measures, the project will not have a significant environmental impact and
the EIR should be certified.
BACKGROUND:
The 43+ acre project site is on the west boundary of the City, just of south of the
Plaza La Quinta shopping center on Washington Street and Highway 111 (Attachment
2). The western portion of the site are hillsides which are part of the northern end
of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The property is basically "L" shaped with primary
frontage on Washington Street, and minor frontage of hillside land on Highway 111,
and Highland Palms Drive.
p\stan\sp 99-039 et al pc rpt.wpd
The property is the location of a ranch known as "Point Happy Ranch", a
development which began in the early 20TH Century. The ranch has over the years
been used for raising Arabian horses, and growing dates and citrus. A number of
residences and ranch related structures still exist, along with a number of tall date
palm and citrus trees. Most of the structures are in a state of disrepair. One well
kept single story residence exists on the hillside near the northwest corner of the
property. The road leading up to this residence is partially within the City of Indian
Wells but is part of this applicants land holdings. With the exception of this
residence and some palm trees which will be relocated, improvements will be
removed to allow the proposed project.
The property's primary frontage is on Washington Street (594 feet frontage), with
Highland Palms Drive dead ending into the south property boundary, and 200 t feet
of hillside frontage on Highway 111, west of Plaza La Quinta.
GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposed development will be a senior residential care living facility (no minimum
age specified) consisting of a number of components (Attachment 3). Sixty-two
single story independent living villas with 1,600 to 2,000 square feet of floor area,
in duplex and four-plex configurations, will be provided in the southern flat portion of
the project. Related to these units will be a 15,500 square foot "club" building at the
north end of the units providing administrative, recreational, medical office, and
congregate dining facilities.
A multi -family component with a maximum of 310 resident rooms, adjacent to Plaza
La Quinta Shopping Center, will consist of two, three story high buildings, each
providing operational areas for recreation/offices, administration, kitchen and dining
facilities, medical and physical therapy. These facilities will provide for assisted and
congregate care, and possibly continuing care for seniors. A small one story 2,675
square foot maintenance building for the entire project will be provided near the
northwest corner of these buildings.
The two commercial buildings with 44,000 square feet of floor area will include
professional and medical offices, accessory service uses such as a mail center, beauty
and hair salon, physical and medical therapy, primarily supporting the project.
Adjacent to these buildings is a one story high administrative/sales building with
9,500 square feet of floor area for operation of the entire project. Total floor space
in this area will be 53,500 square feet.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST:
Presently, the hillside property on the west side of the site is designated by the
General Plan as Open Space, with the northern flat portion designated Medium
p\stan\sp 99-039 et al pc rpt.wpd
Density Residential (4-8 dwellings per acre) and the southern flat portion designated
Low Density Residential (2-4 dwellings per acre).
In order to allow the commercial portion of the project, the request includes a change
of land use designation of 5.01 acres adjacent to Washington Street from Medium
Density Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Office Commercial.
To accommodate the 62 villa units, the Low Density Residential land use designation
in the southeast corner of the project is proposed to be changed to Medium Density
Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), the same as the northern portion. This
change will result in the 11.55 acre area having a density of 5.19 dwelling units per
acre.
ZONE CHANGE REQUEST:
In conjunction with the General Plan Amendment, a zone change is requested to
change the 5.01 acre commercial site from RM (Medium Density Residential) to CO
(Office Commercial) and the 11.55 acre Villas area from RL (Low Density Residential)
to RM (Medium Density Residential).
SPECIFIC PLAN REQUEST:
The Specific Plan provides principals, guidelines and standards for development of the
proposed project pertaining to land use, circulation, access, infrastructure, and
development regulations, etc (Attachment 2).
The Specific Plan divides the project area into four development areas, as follows:
Development Area I - 5.01 acres for the commercial development adjacent to
Washington Street
Development Area II - 7.32 acres for the multi -family development adjacent to the
south of Plaza La Quinta.
Development Area III - 11.55 acres for the villas unit development adjacent to the
southeast corner of the property.
Development Area IV - 19.33 acres comprising the hillside areas adjacent to the west
property boundary and containing an existing single family residence.
Pertinent Zoning Code deviations for the multi -family area requested as part of the
Specific Plan approval include the following:
p\stan\sp 99-039 et al pc rpt.wpd
1. Minimum lot size is proposed at 10,000 square feet rather than 5,000 square
feet.
2. Maximum building height is restricted to 40 feet rather than 50 feet.
3. Number of stories is allowed to be three stories rather than two stories.
4. Minimum living area per unit is allowed to be 420 square feet rather than
1,400 square feet.
5. Front yard building setback is allowed to be eight feet rather than 20 feet.
6. Minimum building setback along the rear abutting nonresidential is required to
be 20 feet rather than 15 feet.
7. Allows the senior citizen housing as proposed as a permitted use. Zoning Code
only allows it in the Medium -High and High Density Residential districts with
a Conditional Use Permit.
8. .5 parking spaces per unit (room) plus .2 visitor spaces per unit are proposed
rather than .5 covered resident space per unit plus .5 visitor space per unit.
Pertinent Zoning Code deviations for the Villas (two and four-plex) area requested as
part of the Specific Plan approval include the following:
1. Minimum lot size is proposed at 1,500 square feet rather than 5,000 square
feet.
2. Number of stories is limited to one story rather than two stories.
3. Minimum living area including garages and carports is required to be 1,650
square feet rather than 1,400 square feet for the living area only.
4. Front setback is allowed to be eight feet rather than 20 feet
5. Allows the senior citizen housing as proposed as a permitted use. Zoning Code
only allows it in the Medium -High and High Density Residential districts with
a Conditional Use Permit.
6. .5 parking spaces per unit (room) plus .2 visitor spaces per unit is proposed
rather than .5 covered resident spaces per unit plus .5 visitor spaces per unit.
7. Garage/carport front setback is proposed at five feet rather than 25 feet.
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT:
General
The various components of the project have been designed in the same architectural
style described by the applicant as Spanish Castilian. These feature heavy use of
ledger stone accents, smooth stucco finish, timber brackets, and trellis work with a
"S" or barrel clay or concrete the roof. These features, along with other special
treatments have been incorporated into the proposed project. These treatments, as
described by the applicant, include one or more prominent arches placed above a door
or principal window, or beneath a veranda. Most of the entries are emphasized
through the use of pilasters, columns, ledger stone facades, or patterned tiles,
p\stan\sp 99-039 et al pc rpt.wpd -1 J'
smooth stucco finish, timber brackets, with doors made of heavy wood panels. A
color and material sample board will be available at the meeting.
Villas
The guard gate secured villas are spread out over a 11.55 acre area adjacent to the
southeast corner of the site. A drive access runs parallel to the east property line
from the commercial area. Its southern terminus is at Highland Palms Drive, where
it will be an emergency access only to the public street. It may also be needed to be
used for moving van access. The main access entry will be located at a round -a -bout
just west of the commercial complex. The minimum residential building setback from
the east property line is 60 feet, 50. feet from the south property line, and 15 feet
from each other.
Thirty-two detached garage spaces in three buildings been provided for use by Villas'
tenants along the drive access along the east side of the property. These garages are
setback 15 feet from the east property line which abuts existing single family
residences outside the project. Due to the layout of the units and lack of attached
garages, the streetscape varies with the possibility of any of the four sides of the
structure facing a particular way.
Each unit will have a garage space for an electric cart which is proposed as a primary
mode of transportation within the various development areas. Paths between units.
will be sufficient in size and design for cart use. Guests will park adjacent to the Club
building and either walk or be shuttled in electric carts to their destination.
The villa units are one story high (24' f maximum) in a duplex or four-plex
configuration. One prototypical plan has been submitted for these units. The units
use a concrete barrel tile roof with a mixture of interlocking hip and gable elements.
An entry turret or tower element is provided for each unit, with a single electric cart
"carriage" style garage.
The "club" building for the villas is a 15,500 square foot, multi -story building
consisting of one and two story elements with a maximum height of 40 feet over the
rotunda located at the northeast corner of the villas area. The building uses concrete
barrel tile roof with a mixture of interlocking hip and gable elements. Features include
multi -paned windows, arched second story windows, a rotunda over the lobby, and
a covered porte cochere. 34 open parking spaces are shown adjacent to the "club"
building for employees, guests and others.
Multi -family Complex
The two multi -family buildings is located near the northwest corner of the flat portion
of the site and may provide assisted living, independent living, Alzheimers, nursing,
p\stan\sp 99-039 et al pc rpt.wpd
and dementia units for seniors. The buildings will consist of two and three story
elements, with a maximum height of approximately 32 feet. The buildings will be
architecturally similar to the other buildings in the project, and incorporate dormer
vents along the hip roof areas. For all multi -story buildings in the project roof
equipment will be placed in wells behind hip roof parapets. Tower elements are
interspersed around the buildings.
The maintenance building will be located adjacent to the base of the mountains in the
northwest corner of the site just south of the road leading to the existing hillside
residence. The structure will be one story in height and is designed in a style similar
to the other buildings. The building incorporates a gable roof, arched multi -paned
windows, ledger stone veneer on the facade, and smooth stucco finish.
This area will be guard gate secured with the main entry also on the round -a -bout.
A second non -visitor gated access will be provided near the north property line. A
fire access only road is shown between the hillsides and "west" building for
emergency access. Parking access is from Washington Street via through the
commercial complex parking lot. 165 parking spaces are provided for this area, with
most of them located adjacent to Plaza La Quinta and east of the "east" building.
Commercial Complex
The two commercial buildings, with a total of 44,000 square feet of floor area, will
be constructed near Washington Street and be similar in design. Access is from
Washington Street in approximately the same location as existing entry. The "south"
building is setback 100 feet from the south property line, adjacent to existing
residences, with only a one story element for each building within 150 feet of
Washington Street. The setback from the north property line will be 110 feet for the
"north" commercial building.
The buildings will be two stories in height (approximately 32 feet high maximum with
40 feet in height at the rotunda) and incorporate a rotunda in the center of each
building. The architecture and materials are the same as those used in the other
multi -story buildings in the project. The elevation of the building facing Washington
Street incorporates a large amount of stone veneer.
A one story (24 feet high) 9,500 square foot administrative and sales building is
proposed east of the club building and will be similar in design and materials to the
other buildings in the project. This building is shown setback 35 feet from the south
property line, west of the "south" commercial building.
Parking has been provided at a ratio of one space per 250 square feet. For the
53,500 square feet of floor space, the required 214 spaces is being provided. The
spaces are spread out around all sides of the buildings.
p\stan\sp 99-039 et al pc rpt.wpd
Landscaping
A conceptual landscaping site plan has been submitted showing general tree locations
and types, along with planted areas. Included is a plant pallette indicating tree,
shrub, vines, and ground cover species to be used. Most of the plant material
proposed are low water users. Preliminary water use calculations show compliance
with the Municipal Code water efficiency ordinance.
Trees proposed include reuse of some of the younger existing date palms and citrus
to retain the historic connection to its early use. Many of the date palm trees are
shown ringing the project along the east and north boundaries of the site. They are
also used extensively in the commercial area and around the "Village green." A small
lake is proposed in the "Village Green" area between the multi -family buildings.
Throughout the project, formal and informal gardens of various types including a small
community garden, senior outdoor games, pavilions, and walkways will be provided.
These elements for the most are not shown in detail.
The Washington Street driveway entry is proposed to be enhanced with decorative
paving, a planted center median, theme entry structure on each side of the driveway,
short decorative screen walls, meandering sidewalks, and a minimum 20 foot
landscaped setback.
Hillside Areas
Approximately 20 acres or 45% of the western Specific Plan area is comprised of the
Santa Rosa Mountains. Within this area is a single family residence built with a road
leading up to it. As a environmental mitigation measure, it is recommended an
easement be recorded preserving the hillsides, with the exception of the residence
and road leading to it, be prior to issuance of a grading permit. The applicant is
proposing a 4.5 to 5.5 foot high masonry/wrought iron wall adjacent to the base of
the hillsides for protection of residents as well as the wildlife. The hillside residence
is proposed to be retained in private ownership for residential purposes.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This request was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on November 16, 2001,
and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet around the project boundaries. To
date, no correspondence has been received. Any comments received after this
writing will be handed out at the meeting.
PUBLIC AGENCY REVIEW:
The request was sent out for comment, and any pertinent comments received have
been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval.
p\stan\sp 99-039 et al pc rpt.wpd
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) ACTION:
A Draft Environmental Impact Report has been prepared pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act requirements. As a part of the Environmental Assessment,
Phase I and II cultural resource reports were reviewed by the HPC on October 18,
2001, The Commission unanimously accepted the report including the
recommendation to monitor grading for cultural resources and prepare an oral history
program of the property (Attachment 4).
ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) reviewed this request
at its meeting of October 3, 2001, and adopted Minute Motion 2001-044, subject to
conditions, recommending approval of the architectural plans and landscaping plans
proposed by Site Development Permit 99-659 (Attachment 5).
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
The required findings for the Environmental Assessment per Municipal Code Section
9.250.020, General Plan Amendment per Section 9.230.020, Zone Change per
Section 9.220.020, Specific Plan per Section 9.240.010, and Site Development
Permit per Section 9.210.010 to recommend approval of these applications to the
City Council can be made as noted in the attached resolutions. Conditions of
approval are recommended for the Specific Plan and Site Development Permit to
ensure the required findings can be made.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council certification of an Environmental Impact Report (EA 99-387) for
General Plan Amendment 99-039, Zone Change 99-091, Specific Plan 99-039,
and Site Development permit 99-659, subject to all mitigation measures.
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of General Plan Amendment 99-039.
3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Zone Change 99-091.
4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Specific Plan 99-039, subject to conditions.
p\stan\sp 99-039 et al pc rpt.wpd
5. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Site Development Permit 99-659, subject to conditions.
Attachments:
1. Final and Draft Environmental Impact Report (Planning Commissioners only)
2. Location Map
3. Specific Plan 99-039 text (Planning Commissioners only)
4. Historic Preservation Commission minutes for the meeting of October 18, 2001
5. Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee minutes for the meeting of
October 3, 2001
Prepared by:
Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner
Submitted by:
JeFfy He ,man, Community Development
Director
plstanlsp 99-039 et al pc rpt.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING
CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 99-
063, A ZONE CHANGE 99-091, SPECIFIC PLAN 99-039,
AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-659, AS BEING
ADEQUATE AND COMPLETE; RECOGNIZING THE
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS TO CERTAIN ADVERSE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS; AND RECOGNIZING THE
SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED, BUT WHICH CAN BE
REASONABLE MITIGATED, OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
IS IMPLEMENTED
CASE NOS.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-387
POINT HAPPY RANCH, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 27th day of November 2001, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider
the request of Point Happy Ranch, LLC for approval of a General Plan Amendment, a
Zone Change, Specific Plan, and Site Development Permit (hereinafter "the Entitlement
Approvals") to allow construction of a 43-acre senior retirement village consisting of
62 independent living villa units, a maximum of 310 rooms in two buildings for
assisted and independent living congregate care for seniors, as well as a five acre
office center with approximately 53,500 square feet of building space and 19 acres
of open space (hereinafter "the Project"). The Project site is more particularly
described as:
SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 1 1 1, AND WEST OF WASHINGTON STREET; and
WHEREAS, Point Happy Ranch, LLC has proposed a Specific Plan on the
43-acre senior retirement village consisting of 62 independent living villa units, a
maximum of 310 rooms in two buildings for assisted and independent living
congregate care for seniors, as well as a five acre office center with approximately
53,500 square feet of building space and 19 acres of open space; and
WHEREAS, an EIR has been prepared and circulated, pursuant to the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (herein "CEQA"), as
amended (Public Resources Code §21000, et seq.); and
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\PtHappyEAReso.wpd
11.
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Environmental Assessment 99-387 - Point Happy Ranch, LLC
Adopted: November 27, 2001
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the State of California and the City of La
Quinta, in accordance with the provisions of CEQA, that the City shall not approve a
project unless there is no feasible way to lessen or avoid significant adverse
environmental impacts, which means that all adverse environmental impacts have been
avoided to the extent feasible or substantially lessened, and any remaining unavoidable
significant adverse environmental impacts are accepted based upon the City's findings
and determinations consistent with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the State of California and the City of La
Quinta, in accordance with the provisions of CEQA, that the City shall balance the
benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable adverse environmental impacts
prior to project approval; which means that if the benefits of a proposed project
outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, the adverse environmental
impacts may be considered legally acceptable by the City of La Quinta; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta has read
and considered all documentation comprising the EIR, and has found that the EIR
considers all potential significant adverse environmental impacts which may be caused
by the proposed project, is complete and adequate, fully complies with all
requirements of CEQA and reflects the Planning Commission's independent judgement;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered certain
overriding considerations to any potentially significant adverse environmental impacts
which cannot be reasonably mitigated to less than significant levels and has reviewed
and considered the CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts prepared in connection
with its consideration of the Project and the Entitlement Approvals; and
WHEREAS, prior to action on the Project and the Entitlement Approvals,
the Planning Commission considered all significant adverse environmental impacts,
mitigation measures, and proposed project alternatives identified in the EIR, and has
found that all potentially significant adverse environmental impacts which may be
caused by the Project and implementation of the Entitlement Approvals have been
lessened or avoided to the extent feasible, and the Planning Commission has
determined that the proposed alternatives to the Project do not: 1) meet the City's
and/or Point Happy Ranch, LLC's objectives for the Project Site; and/or 2) are not
feasible; and/or 3) are not environmentally superior; and
WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(b) recognizes that the La
Quinta Planning Commission may proceed to recommend approval of the Project and
the Entitlement Approvals, despite the fact that certain potentially significant adverse
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\PtHappyEAReso.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Environmental Assessment 99-387 - Point Happy Ranch, LLC
Adopted: November 27, 2001
environmental impacts are identified in the EIR which are not mitigated to a less than
significant level, where the City has stated in writing the reasons to support its action
based upon the EIR and other information in the public record; and
WHEREAS, CEQA provides that no public agency shall approve or carry
out a project for which an EIR has been completed and which identifies one or more
significant adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project unless the public
agency makes written factual findings for each of the potentially significant adverse
environmental impacts identified in the EIR.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of
the City of La Quinta, California, does hereby certify the Final Environmental Impact
Report (hereinafter "FEIR") for a General Plan Amendment 99-063, a Zone Change 99-
091, Specific Plan 99-039, and Site Development Permit 99-659, as adequate and
complete and in compliance with the requirements of CEQA.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission for the City of
La Quinta, California, in addition to the findings made in the body of the FEIR, finds
that the Statement of Overriding Considerations as shown on attached Exhibit A,
entitled "Statement of Overriding Considerations", is necessary, and is adopted and
incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission for the City of
La Quinta, California, adopts the CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts as shown on
attached Exhibit B, entitled "CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts", which is
incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission for the City of
La Quinta, California, adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Plan as shown on attached
Exhibit C, entitled "Mitigation Monitoring Plan", which is incorporated herein by this
reference as though fully set forth.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27th day of November 2001, by the
foUlowing vote, to wit:
AXES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\PtHappyEAReso.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Environmental Assessment 99-387 - Point Happy Ranch, LLC
Adopted: November 27, 2001
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
14
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\PtHappyEAReso.wpd
EXHIBIT "A"
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The Final Environmental Impact Report for the Pointe at Point Happy Ranch, General
Plan Amendment 99-063, a Zone Change 99-091, Specific Plan 99-039, and Site
Development Permit 99-659, which would guide the development of a senior
retirement village in the City of La Quinta on approximately 43 acres, (hereinafter "the
Project"), recognizes that certain specified adverse environmental impacts may be
caused by the approval and construction of the Project, which may not be mitigated
to a less than significant level by the application of reasonable mitigation measures.
Despite the recognition and finding in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
Project that such unavoidable adverse environmental impacts may be caused by the
Project, nevertheless, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta expressly
finds and declares, after a thorough review and consideration of such potentially
adverse environmental impacts, that the benefits of the Project outweigh the
unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, and are therefore deemed to be
acceptable by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission of the City of La
Quinta bases its determination on the following grounds:
1. Implementation of the project is consistent with the City's goals and objectives
for development of the Project Site, as set forth in the City's General Plan Land
Use Element; and
2. Implementation of the Project will enhance the City's economic base from
revenues derived from increased sales taxes, business licenses and other fees,
taxes and exactions, which will flow from the development of the Project; and
3. Implementation of the Project will result in the elimination of certain negative
aesthetic impacts associated with the current property condition, including but
not limited to the development of landscaped setbacks that include pedestrian
amenities along the internal roadways; and
4. The potential adverse environmental impacts identified with the construction
and operation of the project are generally associated with normal growth, and
progress in a developing community; and
5. The Specific Plan Project implementation will ultimately result in the creation of
new jobs for construction and for the operations of businesses associated with
the Project; and
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\PtHappyExA.wpd
1 r-
-1 W1
6. The Specific Plan Project implementation will ultimately result in the creation of
new housing opportunities within the City of La Quinta that are consistent with
regional forecasts; and
Consequently, the Planning Commission finds that the Project is a preferred and
appropriate balance between environmental concerns and the need for economic and
residential development within the City of La Quinta.
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\PtHappyExA.wpd
( i
EXHIBIT "B"
CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF FACTS
BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURE
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Section 15091 of
the State CEQA Guidelines provide that: "No public agency shall approve
or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report (EIR) has
been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental
effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written
findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief
explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the final EIR.
2. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible
the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
Because approval and implementation of a General Plan Amendment 99-
063, a Zone Change 99-091, Specific Plan 99-039, and Site Development
Permit 99-659, constitute a project under CEQA and the CEQA
Guidelines, the City of La Quinta has required that an EIR be prepared.
This EIR has identified certain significant effects that may occur as a
result of the Project, or on a cumulative basis in conjunction with this
Project and other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future
projects. Further, the Planning Commission recommends approval of this
project and, after determining that the EIR is complete and has been
prepared in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the
findings set forth herein are made as follows:
IMPACTS EVALUATED IN THE DRAFT EIR
In accordance with Sections 15060(c) and 15081 of the CEQA Guidelines, the
City completed a preliminary review of the project and the decision was made
that further evaluation of the Project's potential environmental impacts was
needed in the form of an EIR. The topics evaluated in the EIR include all of the
topics listed below:
• Land Use Planning & Agriculture Resources
• Aesthetics
• Biological Resources
1�
1
• Traffic and Circulation
• Air Quality
• Noise
• Cultural Resources
• Public Services
• Utilities
The analysis in the EIR resulted in the following findings concerning the
project's impacts and feasibility/desirability of alternatives.
�_ v
I. DIRECT PROJECT IMPACTS
A. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
Land Use Planning & Agriculture Resources
Aesthetics
The project proposes to develop 62 independent residential villas, a
congregate care facility with 310 rooms within as well as 53,500 sq. ft.
office uses within the 43t acre project site. As proposed, approval of the
specific plan would require a General Plan Amendment that would convert
the Medium Density Residential designation within these two development
areas to Office. No significant impacts would occur as a result of project
implementation.
The proposed project is consistent with all of the applicable policies from
the General Plan and would not result in significant impacts.
Development of the proposed project would convert all of the agricultural
soils on the site, to residential and office uses. However, as the existing
dates and citrus trees have past their agriculturally productive period, no
significant impacts would occur as a result of removing the agricultural
soils
The Draft Specific Plan limits the height of the proposed structures. These
heights are not sufficient to block the existing views of the Santa Rosa
Mountains from areas around the project site as the existing trees are of
equal or greater height and currently provide screening of the base of the
Santa Rosa Mountains. The project has also been designed so residents
of the project site and guests to the clubhouse would have views of these
mountains. As a result, no significant impacts associated with views of the
Santa Rosa Mountains would occur as a result of project implementation.
The proposed project would not degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the project site or its surroundings. Conversely, development of
the proposed project would increase the aesthetic value of the site and
surrounding environment. No significant impacts resulting from degrading
the existing visual quality of the site would occur as a result of project
implementation.
Development of the proposed project would increase the extent of
nighttime light and glare on the project site and surrounding vicinity, but
would be subject to the City's "Dark Sky" Ordinance which requires that
light standards within parking lots, and exterior lights on buildings be
3 `�
directed downward without the light source visible and appropriate
shielded to prevent light spillage and glare to adjacent properties.
Therefore, no significant impacts resulting from night lighting would occur
as a result of project implementation.
Biological Resources
Mixed Citrus and Date Palm Orchard
There would be a loss of 15.9 acres (100 percent) of the orchards on site
that are only of low to moderate biological value. Although plant
assemblage does provide limited roosting, forage, and nesting habitat for
several locally occurring birds, it is not considered necessary or critical to
the survival of any local or regional populations. Removal would not result
in any significant impacts.
Disturbed Creosote Bush Scrub
The proposed development of the project area would result in the
conversion of 0.3 acre (100 percent) of existing disturbed creosote bush
scrub. Although plant assemblage does provide limited roosting, forage,
and nesting habitat for several locally occurring birds, it is not considered
necessary or critical to the survival of any local or regional populations.
Removal would not result in any significant impacts.
Mesquite Scrub
The proposed development of the project area would result in the
conversion of 0.2 acre (100 percent) of existing mesquite scrub. Although
plant assemblage does provide limited roosting, forage, and nesting
habitat for several locally occurring birds, it is not considered necessary or
critical to the survival of any local or regional populations. Removal would
not result in any significant impacts.
Saltbush Scrub
The development of the project would eliminate 0.2 acre (100 percent) of
existing saltbush scrub habitat. Although plant assemblage does provide
limited roosting, forage, and nesting habitat for several locally occurring
birds, it is not considered necessary or critical to the survival of any local
or regional populations. Removal would not result in any significant
impacts.
Ornamental Landscaping
The development of the project would result in the loss of 0.4 acre (67
percent) of existing ornamental landscaping. Although plant assemblage
does provide limited roosting, forage, and nesting habitat for several
locally occurring birds, it is not considered necessary or critical to the
survival of any local or regional populations. Removal would not result in
any significant impacts.
4
Noise
Localized carbon monoxide (CO) levels near intersections would be well
below state and federal standards. As a result, the proposed project would
not interfere with state or federal CO attainment goals and would not
result in a significant impact.
The proposed project would not generate, or be subject to, objectionable
odors. No significant impacts would occur with regards to objectionable
odors generated from the proposed project at build out.
Toxic air pollutants are not expected to occur in any meaningful amounts
in conjunction with operation of the proposed land uses. Only common
forms of hazardous or toxic substances typically used, stored, or sold in
conjunction with golf course maintenance and household activities would
be present in small quantities. This would be expected of any residential
project and would not result in any significant impacts.
The project would meet the SCAQMD's assumption for a one percent
reduction in annual emissions for new projects. No significant impacts
resulting from exceeding the SCAQMD's emission reduction goals would
occur.
The proposed project consists of four development areas. None of the
uses proposed in Development Area I will generate noise impacts that will
exceed the maximum exterior CNEL level mandated by the City standard
for the adjacent residential uses. Additionally, all residential units are
substantially set back from Washington Street, the only off -site noise
generator associated with the project. None of the on -site uses would be
impacted by mobile noise generated from Washington Street. Therefore,
no significant impacts from either mobile or stationary sources would
occur to on -site uses.
The increase in noise levels attributable to project -generated traffic at off -
site locations would not exceed adopted City noise thresholds. No
significant noise impacts to off -site uses would result from the proposed
project.
Cultural Resources
The cultural survey identified on resource within the project site as a
recorded resource. This resource was listed as a road along the base of
the Santa Rosa Mountains. The segment of the on -site road identified
within the project area has been recorded, but because of impacts to the
road, the integrity has been compromised. This road is not considered a
significant cultural resource with respect to State criteria, however, it does
6
maintain some local importance. The documentation and recording
provided within the cultural study fulfills all requirements under CEQA with
regards to documenting a local resource. No further studies are
warranted with respect to this resource. Therefore, no significant impacts
would occur as a result of removing this road.
Public Services
The proposed project would increase the demand for new Neighborhood
and Community Park land. However, as the project would be developed
as an assisted senior care facility, the need for recreational space is
limited. Additionally, the project would dedicate approximately 19 acres of
land as Open Space with walkways throughout the project area. No
significant impacts to parkland would occur as a result of project
implementation.
Utilities and Service Systems
The increased growth throughout the Coachella Valley will require the
CVWD to treat additional volumes of wastewater on a daily basis.
However, the CVWD has indicated that the Mid -Valley Water Reclamation
Plant would be expanded in the future to serve additional demand,
including demand from the City of La Quinta. This expansion is expected
to accommodate up to 9.9 mgd. As a result, no significant impacts
associated with waste water would occur from project implementation.
The proposed project would generate wastewater on a daily basis.
According to CVWD staff, the existing wastewater mains and treatment
plant adequate capacity to serve the proposed project. As a result, no
significant impacts associated with wastewater transportation would occur
from project implementation.
The Imperial Irrigation District (IID) has determined that the proposed
project would require the installation of an underground conduit and vault
system (including any required street lighting system) to be installed at the
expense of the applicant. The system would be designed and installed
according to the specifications of the IID and has been incorporated into
the project design. No significant impacts associated with power supply
would occur as a result of project implementation.
B. IMPACTS THAT COULD BE SIGNIFICANT, BUT ARE MITIGATED TO LESS
THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
Biological Resources
7
A number of common bird species could also be adversely affected as a
result of construction or other site -preparation activities. Depending on
the number and extent of bird nests on the site that may be disturbed or
removed, the loss of active bird nests would be a potentially significant
impact. In addition, most bird nests with eggs or young are protected
under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the California Fish and Game
Code. As such, impacts to active nests could be in violation of federal
and state laws. The following measures mitigate the potential impact to
bird species to a level that is less than significant.
The project developer shall implement the following program if site
grading and/or construction will occur during the nesting/breeding
season (typically February through July) of native bird species
potentially nesting on the site:
a) Prior to construction or site preparation activities, a field survey shall
be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if active nests of
bird species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and/or the
California Fish and Game Code, are present in the construction zone
or within 50 feet of the construction zone. If active nests are found, a
minimum 50-foot (this distance may be greater depending on the bird
species and construction activity, as determined by the bird species
and the biologist) fenced buffer shall be established around the nest
site. No construction activities will be permitted within this nest zone
until the young birds have fledged, as determined by the project
biologist.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Project Applicant shall
submit a plan demonstrating that all pesticides, fungicides, herbicides
and fertilizers to be used during the construction and operation of the
project site would not be harmful to wildlife. This plan shall be subject
to the approval of the Community Development Department.
Loggerhead shrike
This species was not observed on the project site during the site survey.
However, suitable nesting and foraging habitat is present on site. The
loss of potential foraging and nesting habitat due to construction of the
proposed project is not considered a substantial loss of habitat for this
species because of the non-native character and relatively low quality of
existing on -site habitat. Therefore, with respect to habitat loss, potential
adverse impacts to loggerhead shrike are not significant. However, bird
nests with eggs or young are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act and the California Fish and Game Code. The loss of active nests as a
result of construction or other site -preparation activities may be in conflict
with these regulations. The measures listed above for common bird
species mitigate the potential impact to Loggerhead shrikes to a level that
is less than significant.
8
The included measures above are adequate to address potential
impacts to the Loggerhead shrike.
Peninsular bighorn sheep
As previously stated, though this species is considered unlikely to occur,
both federal and state regulatory agencies consider all the rocky hillsides
in the project region as sheep habitat. Although no development would
occur on the rocky hillside portion of the project site, development of the
remaining portions of the site have the potential to result in disturbances
such as increased lighting, noise, and human and domestic animal
presence on the hillside. The following measures mitigate the potential
impact to the Peninsular bighorn sheep to a level that is less than
significant.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall
provide an easement to be recorded for all hillside areas to remain
undeveloped open space or be dedicated to a public or private entity
approved by the City. The easement shall be approved by the City
Attorney prior to recordation.
No species know to be toxic to sheep, including Oleander, shall be
used in project landscaping. Prior to issuance of building permits, the
project applicant shall submit landscape plans indicating that all
landscape plants shall be species that are non -toxic to the Peninsular
bighorn sheep. Plant species adjacent to the hillsides shall include,
but not be limited to, indigenous palo verde (Cercidium floridum),
catclaw (Acacia greggii), smoke tree (Psorothamnus spinosus),
indigobush (Pchotti), creosote bush, desert lavender (Hyptis emoryi),
and desert willow (Chilopsis linearis). All exotic plants known to invade
or degrade Peninsular bighorn sheep habitat, such as tamarisk and
fountain grass, shall be prohibited. These plans shall be subject to the
approval of the Community Development Department.
To assess the need for a buffer fence between the development of the
toe of the slope of the hillside to keep Peninsular bighorn sheep off the
project site on an ongoing basis, a three -person committee shall be
formed to monitor the Peninsular bighorn sheep activity in the area.
The committee shall consist of a member from the Home Owners
Association (HOA), an official of CDFG, and the Community
Development Director. The committee shall monitor sheep activity
through various means including interviews with residents and staff
and available scientific information or studies to be funded by the
HOA. If the bighorn sheep are entering the project site, the committee
shall require the HOA, at its expense, to construct an eight -foot fence
(or functional equivalent) between the development and the hillside.
The applicant shall submit a bond, funds or other form of financial
security in a form acceptable to the City in an amount sufficient to
construct a sheep exclusion fence if determined necessary at a later
date. A cost estimate for construction of this fence shall be submitted
to determine the amount of security required. The fence shall not
contain gaps in which bighorn sheep can be entangled. The gaps
should be 11 centimeters (4.3 inches) or less. The Committee shall
then solicit fence designs and only approve a design after a meeting
with residents. If a fence is constructed, it must comply with the
requirement of the City's Hillside Conservation Overlay district. If
fencing is required, and the HOA is requested to do so by the CDFG,
the HOA shall, at its expense, construct temporary fencing to the
specifications of the CDFG to prevent Peninsular bighorn sheep from
entering the project site pending construction of the permanent fence.
The committee shall exist for at least ten years, unless the Peninsular
bighorn sheep are de -listed as threatened or endangered, or no longer
inhabit the Santa Rosa Mountains. If at the end of the ten-year period,
any member of the committee deems it appropriate to keep the
committee in existence, the committee shall continue to function until it
is unanimously agrees by its members that it is no longer necessary.
All swimming pools shall be fenced.
The development of the proposed project would increase the extent of
nighttime light and glare on the natural areas surrounding the proposed
project. As mentioned earlier, the proposed project would be subject to
the City's "Dark Sky" Ordinance which requires that light standards within
parking lots, and exterior lights on buildings be directed downward without
the light source visible and appropriate shielded to prevent light spillage
and glare to adjacent properties. The following measures mitigate the
potential impact of light spillage to wildlife species to a level that is less
than significant.
In the final project design, the project applicant shall ensure that the
roads and driveways within the development are designed to minimize
headlight shine from vehicles onto the hillsides.
In the final project design, the project applicant shall ensure the
following: the design of the units and other structures shall incorporate
the use of non -glare glass; exterior building lighting shall be kept at a
minimum and shall be aimed away from the hillside; and exterior
lighting of pathways and signage shall be kept at the safest possible
minimum intensity and aimed away from the hillside.
The project applicant shall submit a construction plan, which provides
that excessively loud construction activities (i.e., blasting, pile -driving),
near the hillsides will not occur during the lambing period from January
1, through June 30.
10
Implementation of the proposed project would increase human population
and domestic animal presence in the area surrounding the project.
Increased human recreational activities such as hiking, climbing, and
cycling in open space areas near to the project site, such as the Coral
Reef Mountains, could deter animals, especially larger mammal species
including mountain lion and bighorn sheep, from utilizing these areas.
However, because human activity associated with previous commercial
and residential development in the area has already established some
level of disturbance on adjacent lands, and because the incremental
increase in disturbance due to the proposed project is not likely to be
large, the increased human disturbance on adjacent natural areas that
can be attributed to this project is adverse. The following measures
mitigate the potential impact of increased human presence and non-native
wildlife to a level that is less than significant.
• The CC&Rs shall include a provision that will require that no dogs shall
be allowed to run loose within the development. As a further measure,
dogs shall be kept away from areas adjacent to the hillside.
• The CC&Rs shall include a provision that no human access shall be
allowed to the hillside portion of the project site.
The CC&Rs shall include a provision that will require that the residents
in the development shall be subject to the City's noise standards such
that excessive noise from outdoor activities near the hillside is
restricted.
Increased use of adjacent native plant communities by domestic animals
could disturb animal nesting or resting areas, and disrupt the normal
foraging activities of native wildlife. Over a long period of time, these
disturbances can have a long-term effect on the behavior of animals and
can result in their displacement from the area. The incremental increase
in disturbance from increased human and domestic animal use due to the
proposed project is not likely to be large. However, these increases may
substantially affect adjacent Peninsular bighorn sheep habitat. The
following measures mitigate the potential impact of increased human
presence and non-native wildlife on Peninsular bighorn sheep to a level
that is less than significant.
The included measures abov
Transportation and Circulation
e
11
Air Quality
The intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street is projected to
operate at an unacceptable level of service during the PM peak hour of
2003 with the proposed project without roadway or intersection
improvements. Therefore, the addition of project generated traffic would
cause a significant impact. However, the following measures reduce the
transportation impacts to less than significant.
Access to and from Washington Street shall be restricted to right turns
in and out of the project driveway.
Construct Washington Street from the north project boundary to the
south project boundary at its ultimate half -section width as a Major
Arterial (120 foot right-of-way) in conjunction with development.
Sight distance at the project entrance should be reviewed with respect
to standard Caltrans/City of La Quinta sight distance standards at the
time of preparation of final grading, landscape and street improvement
plans.
Traffic signing/striping should be implemented in conjunction with
detailed construction plans for the project site.
Adequate on -site parking should be provided to meet City of La Quinta
parking requirements.
Provisions shall be made in site access to provide separation of
electric carts and automobiles. Pedestrian walkways shall be provided
throughout the site for separation of pedestrian and automobile traffic.
There shall be a minimum of 80 feet of queuing distance from
Washington Avenue right-of-way before any circulation drive enters
the primary drive.
Development of the project would require site preparation (i.e., grading)
and construction of the proposed residential and office uses, and
infrastructure. As such, construction activity would potentially generate
significant air quality impacts. The following measures reduce the
construction related air quality impacts to less than significant.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project developer shall
develop a construction management plan, as approved by the City,
which includes the following measures recommended by the
SCAQMD, or equivalently effective measures approved by the
SCAQMD. These measures shall be implemented through the grading
and construction phases of development.
b) Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference.
12
c) Provide temporary traffic controls during all phases of construction
activities to maintain traffic flow (e.g., flag person).
d) Schedule construction activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial
system to off-peak hours to the degree practicable.
e) Re-route construction trucks away from congested streets.
f) Consolidate truck deliveries when possible.
g) Provide dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction trucks and
equipment on- and off -site.
h) Maintain equipment and vehicle engines in good condition and in
proper tune as per manufacturers' specifications and per SCAQMD
rules, to minimize exhaust emissions.
i) Suspend use of all construction equipment operations during second
stage smog alerts. Contact the SCAQMD at 800/242-4022 for daily
forecasts.
j) Use electricity from power poles rather than temporary diesel- or
gasoline -powered generators.
k) Use methanol- or natural gas -powered mobile equipment and pile
drivers instead of diesel if readily available at competitive prices.
1) Use propane- or butane -powered on -site mobile equipment instead of
gasoline if readily available at competitive prices.
Cultural Resources
The Point Happy Date Farm meets the minimum requirements of three of
the four CEQA criterion for determining an object as a historic resource.
Specifically, the site is recognized for its association with regional events
and recognized individuals. Demolition of a resource could result in a
significant impact without proper mitigation. The following mitigation
measures would reduce the cultural impacts to less than significant.
Any cultural resources collected shall be properly packaged for long
term curation, in polyethylene sealed bags, vials, or film cans as
appropriate, all within acid -free, standard size, comprehensively
labeled archive boxes and delivered to the City prior to issuance of first
building permit for the property. Materials shall be accompanied by
descriptive catalogue, field notes and records, primary research data,
and the original graphics.
The applicant shall retain the services of a qualified historical
consultant approved by the City of La Quinta to record oral histories to
document additional historical information on the Point Happy Ranch.
These oral histories shall be collected according to the following
protocol:
13
a) A topic outline and draft list of questions regarding the history of the
Point Happy Ranch shall be prepared and submitted to the to the City
of La Quinta and/or the City of La Quinta Historical Society for
approval prior to conducting the interviews.
b) Prior to any interview, an Oral History Project Interview Agreement,
Deed of Gift and Interviewer's and Photographer's Deed of Gift shall
all be signed by the appropriate individuals and returned to the
historical consultant.
c) Both audio and videotape equipment shall be used simultaneously
during the interview process to create audio and videotapes of the
interviews. Photographs shall also be taken.
d) The recorded interview shall be transcribed verbatim. The transcrip-
tion shall be provided to the narrator for review to correct minor errors
or misspelled words. No major changes shall be made. A final edited
copy of the transcription shall be provided to the narrator.
e) All recorded information, photographs, transcripts and consent forms
shall be duplicated and submitted to the City of La Quinta Historical
Society by the historical consultant.
A commemorative plaque, recognizing the local history of the site as a
homestead, also known as the Point Happy Ranch, shall be installed
prior to final inspection of the Pointe at Point Happy Ranch prior to the
issuance of any grading permit, the applicant shall provide language
for proposed plaque, along with a proposal for its design and location,
to the Community Development Department for review and approval of
the design, location, language and other related aspects shall be given
prior to the release of any permit for permanent buildings.
The Landscape Plan for the project shall incorporate date palm and
citrus trees planted in a pattern that is similar to the existing date palm
groves on the site and citrus groves in the area to retain the existing
historic setting of the site. The existing date palm trees on the site
should relocated and used as landscape materials if feasible.
There is a potential for unidentified subsurface components within or near
the identified sites during future ground altering activities, including
demolition of existing modern structures and facilities. The following
measures would reduce the impacts associated with unearthed cultural
resources to less than significant.
During any ground altering activities associated with project grading or
construction, including demolition of existing structures and facilities,
the project area shall be monitored by a qualified archaeological
monitor. The monitor shall have the authority to halt any activities
impacting potentially significant cultural resources until the resources
can be evaluated for significance and cleared or mitigated. The
monitoring program shall also include consultation with the local Native
14
American representatives (e.g., Torres -Martinez and/or Morongo
Reservations).
Public Services
Project development would increase the demand for services by the
Riverside County Fire Department and Riverside County Sheriff's
Department. With the inclusion of the following measures, impacts to fire
and sheriff services would be reduced to less than significant.
All on -site water distribution facilities shall be constructed in
accordance with Coachella Valley Water District and Riverside County
Fire Department standards.
Fire hydrants shall be provided at the site to the satisfaction of the
Riverside County Fire Department.
Adequate access and turning radii for fire trucks and other fire fighting
apparatus shall be incorporated into project design plans to the
satisfaction of the Riverside County Fire Department.
All on -site structures shall be built to conform with criteria contained
within the Uniform Fire Code and in accordance with Riverside County
Fire Department and City of La Quinta standards.
During the construction and operation of the project, activities involving
the use and storage of highly flammable substances (i.e., fuels and
solvents) shall be conducted in accordance with Riverside County Fire
Department standards.
All exterior doors shall have an industrial quality key and latch system
and deadbolt locks.
All delivery doors for the project site and related structures shall be
equipped with a peephole for delivery identification purposes.
The parking and unloading areas within the project area shall be
designed to avoid creating traffic problems.
Utilities and Service Systems
During the construction phases of development, potable water would be
used to suppress dust generated by earthmoving activities, the operation
of vehicles on dirt surfaces, and exposed dirt surfaces. This is due to the
fact that the project site is not served by a connection to either reclaimed
water sources or water from the canal. This would be significant.
However, the following measure would reduce this construction related
water impact to less than significant.
15
Hazards
During construction activities, water trucks are to acquire water from
non -potable water sources, such as reclaimed water and/or canal
water.
The proposed project would generate substantial amounts of solid waste
materials during the construction periods of development. Using common
recycling practices in effect today, this amount could be reduced by at
least 50 percent. The City of La Quinta encourages developers to recycle
the maximum amount of construction waste possible and publishes a
pamphlet which identifies companies that recycle materials such as
asphalt, brick, cardboard, concrete, green waste, metal, roofing, and wood
waste among others. The following measures would reduce construction
waste impacts to less than significant.
During demolition and project construction, the project developers
shall separate recyclable construction waste materials in separate
bins, and shall arrange for transport of recyclable materials to facilities
that accept the materials. A list of recyclable construction materials
and recycling facilities is available, and shall be obtained, from the City
of La Quinta. All recyclable materials shall be recycled.
Builders competing for construction contracts shall be required to
include proposals for the use of building products made of recycled
materials.
Based on the historical use of the site, there are no known or potentially
contaminated sites within the project area that require remediation.
However, the following measure has been included per the
recommendation of the Department of Toxic Substances Control that
addresses potential hazards resulting from the development of agricultural
soils. With the inclusion of this measure, any potential hazards would be
mitigated to a level that is less than significant.
Prior to the issuance of and demolition or grading permits, the
applicant shall prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for
the project site. This site assessment shall be conducted to determine
if on site soils contain residues at levels that would require remediation
by an approved and/or accredited Phase I Site Assessor. Should
remediation be required, the applicant shall implement all required
measures necessary to prepare the site in a manner suitable for the
proposed development.
C. SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
16
Air Quality
Emissions of PM10 would exceed the thresholds of significance
recommended by the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) during the site preparation phase. The following measures
reduce PM10 generation impacts to the fullest extent feasible, however,
impacts would remain unavoidable significant.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project developer shall
develop a dust control plan, as approved by the City, which includes
the following measures recommended by the SCAQMD, or
equivalently effective measures approved by the SCAQMD. These
measures shall be implemented through the grading and construction
phases of development.
a) Apply approved non -toxic chemical soil stabilizers according to
manufacturer's specification to all inactive construction areas
(previously graded areas inactive for four days or more).
b) Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
c) Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply approved soil binders to
exposed piles (i.e., gravel, sand, dirt) according to manufacturers'
specifications.
d) Water active grading sites at least twice daily.
e) Suspend all excavating and grading operations when wind speeds (as
instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph.
f) Provide temporary wind fencing consisting of 3- to 5-foot barriers with
50 percent or less porosity along the perimeter of sites that have
been cleared or are being graded.
g) All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be
covered or should maintain at least 3 feet of freeboard (i.e., minimum
vertical distance between top of the load and the top of the trailer), in
accordance with Section 23114 of the California Vehicle Code.
h) Sweep streets at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried
over to adjacent roads (recommend water sweepers using reclaimed
water if readily available).
i) Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads
onto paved roads, or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the
site each trip.
j) Apply water three times daily or chemical soil stabilizers according to
manufacturers' specifications to all unpaved parking or staging areas
or unpaved road surfaces.
k) Enforce traffic speed limits of 15 mph or less on all unpaved roads.
17
Noise
1) Pave construction roads when the specific roadway path would be
utilized for 120 days or more.
During the construction phases of development, emissions of VOC would
exceed the recommended daily threshold. This is a result of emissions
associated with the application of architectural coatings. However, it is
assumed that architectural coatings would comply with SCAQMD Rule
1113 for such materials. As no feasible mitigation exists to reduce VOC
emission impacts, impacts would remain unavoidable significant.
No feasible mitigation exists for reducing the generation of VOC by
architectural coatings.
Noise levels generated during the construction phase would primarily
affect the occupants of nearby residential uses immediately to the south
and east of the project site. The closest homes to the construction area
would be shielded from noise by solid masonry walls that would
substantially reduce construction noise levels of heavy grading. A person
who is home during the day and noise sensitive may find the short-term
noise conditions disturbing. The following measures reduce noise
generation impacts to the fullest extent feasible, however, impacts would
remain unavoidable significant.
Between May 1 and September 30, all construction activities on the
project site shall only occur between the hours of 6:00 A.Mnd 7:00
P.Monday through Friday, and from 8:00 A.Mo 5:00 P.Mn Saturday,
and shall be prohibited on Sundays and public holidays. Between
October 1 and April 30, all construction activity on the project site shall
only occur between the hours of 7:00 A.Mnd 5:30 P.Monday through
Friday, and from 8:00 A.Mo 5:00 P.Mn Saturday, and shall be
prohibited on Sundays and public holidays.
The project developers shall arrange for the noisiest construction
operations to run concurrently to avoid continuing periods of greater
annoyance.
The project developers shall locate construction staging areas on site
to maximize the distance between staging areas and occupied
residential areas.
When construction operations occur adjacent to occupied residential
areas, the project developers shall implement appropriate additional
noise reduction measures that include changing the location of
stationary construction equipment, installing muffling devices on
equipment, shutting off idling equipment, notifying adjacent residences
3 ix9
18
in advance of construction, and installing temporary acoustic barriers
around stationary construction noise sources.
The project developers shall prohibit off -site heavy truck activities on
local collector streets.
II. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
A. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
Land Use Planning & Agricultural Resources:
The proposed project's consistency with environmental plans and policies
is project -specific in nature and would not result in corresponding
cumulative impacts.
19
Aesthetics:
This project would not contribute to significant cumulative impacts.
Biological Resources:
Air Quality:
Noise:
Various development projects are currently under way or proposed for
locations in the City of La Quinta. Development in the region has been
reducing the amount of available habitat for common and special -status
species, constricting wildlife movement, and reducing overall biological
diversity. In particular, ongoing development in the region has resulted in
cumulative losses of Sonoran desert scrub, which is a dominant native
vegetation community throughout the Coachella Valley. The proposed
project would remove approximately 0.6 acre of disturbed native desert
scrub. Because these native vegetation communities have already been
negatively affected by historic and existing land uses, and because these
habitats are considered to be of low to moderate value, the loss of native
vegetation and natural wildlife habitat on the project site, would not be
considered a substantial cumulative loss. No significant cumulative
impacts associated with loss of biological habitat would occur.
This project would not contribute to significant cumulative impacts.
This project would not contribute to significant cumulative impacts.
Cultural Resources:
This project would not contribute to significant cumulative impacts.
Public Services
The existing Indio Sheriff Station has been designed to accommodate
anticipated growth through the year 2015 and should be adequate for
years after that. Additionally, as the project would maintain its own 24-
hour private security force. No significant cumulative impacts associated
with Sheriff services would occur.
B. IMPACTS REDUCED TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
Transportation and Circulation
�v
20
Five of the study area intersections are projected to operate at
unacceptable levels of service during the peak hours at General Plan
buildout, with and without the project.
The project shall contribute towards a citywide roadway and traffic
signal improvement program through payment of infrastructure
development fees to the City of La Quinta.
Public Services:
The Riverside County Fire Department has stated that the proposed
project would add to the cumulative affect on the Fire Departments ability
to maintain the current level of service in the surrounding environs.
Furthermore, as the Highway 111 corridor becomes more developed, the
need for additional fire stations would likely arise. To following mitigation
measure has been included that would reduce cumulative impacts on fire
services to a level less than significant.
In order to mitigate any potential cumulative impact on fire protection
services, the developer shall participate in the land acquisition and fire
facility construction, fire equipment upgrades through participation in
the fire mitigation fee program.
C. SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
Utilities and Service Systems
If current levels of growth continue, together with additional resort -
recreation oriented development, water demand will also continue to grow
accordingly. Such growth will place continuing pressure on the CVWD to
develop new water supplies and to develop sources of replenishment for
the underground water source that has historically been the primary
source of domestic water for the valley. As indicated be the CVWD,
although adequate water supplies have been included for the project in
the most recent Urban Water Management Plan, the aquifer is currently in
a state of overdraft. The development of this and all other proposed
project would incrementally contribute to the demand on the overdraft
aquifer. If water conservation, water supply and water replenishment
efforts do not keep pace with growth in water demand, water shortages
could occur at various times and in various places within the Coachella
Valley. The following measures reduce water consumption impacts to the
fullest extent feasible, however, impacts would remain unavoidable
significant.
21
Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for construction of
any building or use contemplated by this Specific Plan, the applicant
shall obtain permits and/or clearance as required from the following
public agencies:
a) Fire Marshall
b) Community Development Department
c) Coachella Valley Water District
d) Imperial Irrigation District
At such time that non -potable water sources become available to the
project site, the project shall connect to this resource and utilize the
non -potable water for irrigation purposes.
Prior to issuance of a building permit for any of the residential units as
either models or production units, the final working drawings for the
structures and landscaping and irrigation (for lots to be developed)
shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for
review and approval to ensure the implementation of water efficient
devices.
• To ensure that future land uses do not include activities which
unnecessarily waste water or which consume exceptional amounts of
water, the City will direct the project developers to consult with the
CVWD to develop appropriate water conservation measures for both
landscaping/irrigation requirements and plumbing controls. Consistent
with CVWD's existing and future water conservation plans, policies
and standards, the City will require that the developers implement the
water conservation measures that are devised from the consultations
with CVWD, and will require compliance with the City's water
conservation programs and ordinance, to the extent applicable.
• The proposed project shall pay the CVWD new development fee of
$2,400 per connection to tap into the potable water distribution system.
The proposed project would generate substantial amounts of solid waste
during its operational lifetime. It is expected that participation in the City's
residential solid waste recycling program, and the recycling of green
waste generated by landscaping and the golf course could exceed 50
percent which would comply with the goals specified in AB 939. Pursuant
to the California Integrated Waste Management Board's (CIWMB) "Model
Ordinance" and the City's Zoning regulations, the proposed project's
individual project final site plan(s) would also be required to provide
adequate areas for collecting and loading recyclable materials in concert
with City of La Quinta efforts and programs to reduce the volume of solid
waste entering landfills.
22
The Riverside Countywide Integrated Management Plan indicates that the
existing landfills within the County could accommodate the volume of
waste that is forecast to be generated through the year 2008. After that,
additional capacity would be needed to accommodate existing as well as
the future residents and businesses. It is, however, reasonable to
assume that the market forces that drive the waste disposal industry will
put pressure on the industry and governmental agencies to continually
identify new economically feasible means of waste disposal in the future
to accommodate future growth. The following measures reduce solid
waste generation impacts to the fullest extent feasible, however, impacts
would remain unavoidable significant.
Green waste generated on the project site shall be treated in such a
way as to avoid disposal in landfills. This may be accomplished, for
example, by composting either on -site or at approved facilities and
mulching for use on- and off -site.
Prior to the issuance of building permits for each phase of the project,
the project developers shall prepare a solid waste management
program for that portion of the site or for larger areas if more efficient,
for review and approval by the City of La Quinta.. These programs
shall maximize the recycling potential of packaging materials
(cardboard), mixed papers, and scrap ferrous materials, and shall
include designated areas for trash separation bins which are
accessible to waste haulers, and identification of materials that are to
be recycled. The following provisions shall be considered in the
preparation of the plans:
e) Locate recycling/separation areas in close proximity to dumpsters for
non-recyclables, elevators, loading docks, and primary internal and
external access points. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance)
f) Locations of recycling/separation areas shall not conflict with any
applicable federal, state or local laws relating to fire, building, access,
transportation, circulation, or safety.
g) Locate recycling/separation areas so they are convenient for those
persons who deposit, collect, and load the recyclable materials.
(From CIWMB Model Ordinance)
Place recycling containers/bins so that they do not block access to
each other.
Solid waste collection/recycling areas are to be compatible with nearby
structures, secure, protected against adverse environmental
conditions, clearly marked, adequate in capacity, number and
distribution, and contain a sufficient number of bins, to serve the
recycling needs of the development. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance)
3 a,
23
• Design and construct collection/ recycling areas to accommodate
front -loader packing trucks, including maneuvering room. (From
CIWMB Model Ordinance)
• Design and construct driveways and/or travel aisles with adequate
width and maneuverability space for unobstructed garbage collection
vehicle access and clearance. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance)
• Post signs at all access points of the recycling areas that clearly
identify all recycling and solid waste collection and loading areas and
the materials accepted therein. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance)
III. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED AS INFEASIBLE
No Project/Existing Conditions Alternative
The "No Project" alternative would leave the project site in its present
condition. None of the impacts associated with the development and use
of the proposed uses would occur if the project were not approved.
Implementation of this alternative would retain the existing natural and
disturbed character of the project site and would avoid any of the adverse
physical impacts associated with development of the proposed project.
Although identified as the environmentally superior alternative, this
alternative would not achieve any of the objectives of the applicant for the
project and has been rejected.
Existing General Plan Designation Alternative
Section 15126.6 (e) (2) of the CEQA Guidelines also require an EIR to
consider what could be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable
future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and
consistent with available infrastructure and community services.
The La Quinta General Plan Land Use designations for the site are Low
Density Residential (LDR), and Medium Density residential (ML). The
maximum permitted density/intensity of residential uses within the LDR
category is 4.0 units per acre, while the maximum permitted number of
units under the ML is 8.0 units per acre. Under this limit, a maximum of
250 residential units could be developed on the project site. This
alternative would not achieve the objectives of the applicant for providing
an assisted living care facility with supporting non-residential uses. For
this reason, the alternative has been rejected.
All Residential Alternative
This alternative calls for the planned development of a senior retirement
village on approximately 43 acres of the project site. It is proposed to
include 62 independent living villa units, a maximum of 310 rooms in two
buildings for assisted living, independent living, and continuing care for
seniors, and 19 acres of open space. No office center will be constructed
24
under this alternative. This alternative would not achieve the objectives of
the applicant for providing a non-residential component in support of the
assisted living care facility. Consequently, this alternative has been
rejected.
Reduced Office Alternative
This alternative calls for the planned development of a senior retirement
village on approximately 43 acres of the project site. It is proposed to
include 62 independent living villa units, a maximum of 310 rooms in two
buildings for assisted living, independent living, and continuing care for
seniors, and 19 acres of open space. This alternative would also
construct 26,750 square feet of office space on -site. As with the
alternative above, it would not achieve the objectives of the applicant for
providing a non-residential component in support of the assisted living
care facility while reducing any of the identified impacts further than the
originally proposed project. Consequently, this alternative has been
rejected.
25
�S
0
v
G �p
�'S
411Qj
v
G
°
P4
ro
~
4
p
v O
+
0
0!
r0
obi
s�
O E
►Gi
O
y �
G
C
tU
W
cu
d
to rL
h
K
W � a�i
•� �
d
M o o
W
y>
O
U $
v
;j
'�
wa
d
iC
O
o
U'
O
p
a
w o p
c,wn3�oi
o cn
'44 G
03 0
r
a nL.
M
Z E �v�i '>
rj
o
Oj
00
N
i N
Z
.X
aH 3 afl v owl
o tj
0 0
z
G v O N
a
z
c�i
d
F
U0
bo—
r. °'•Ei
Q
0
iz
E-•
o g
'
o
.z a
w
.9
ado¢
v
_
o •r o
°O''
in
m
-4 ,. �'O
oV
O C2
p
obi u •.�'.
p
'
bo e0
obi
d
F •No
G
o
R.
O CT
N °
C-+''
y
119
v N
•61 X.x
'�'
r
CL
_O
b
'0,p
G E 24'
z�.�
by TY iri
,4°lu ���
,a
0
W
0
w
w
a
a
a
a
�
�
0
0
0
k
°
°
v
O �
b O
'v v '�
•� �
`•� v o
bo ty Gl Yi
r� 1y °
0 v O O m , = ;a ro
I
� ro .0 y .0
y ro .O
'O
v y> m s'7
p p 'O
s. U
•° 3w � °' ° vu' N v.n q'a �� �
y �� °' N v
d v m ��
o y a
p o o
oo
W�
RNC
°R
Q) CaS
R
°aO,
,o. y.�
VN ,VR,(�u
OR vo A°a
?: acRTr
obv
a
°-0 o
•r7paM!
u° 'a�
. p" •
w
4 'O ccbU
'C0�a,
OoO
g�°
Oo aoi
'b
0
\p to a.° .� u .oa 3 °
p
ooQ"n G g
ooro
aJ
wd .5
^O .
m.. B w° ro
9 a
'o, R°
ppb
o v v
�
°ovv >p
u
Ei
:aNi F"
d
�C mR. +Ov
w0 ��. .�,
av od .y cc
ro °.�
O
C
eaG1
eon
ti
N U v
w° a
may$
yy
.. O N 'a 0 U rob ..N, .il G N •C
QQ G
Ou
p
U ;d p y .G
G/ �" C
ai °A'� p0 •�' O � ..�v. CD � � � R.� d in ,��,
0 •L ro O p
o p"'d '� d :a Py.
'C Lti• �i'
b G
O P, iY .�'
'� R.. Or
��U± y y N y y
1-0:7 Q. N 'D Ci 3 _0v ro w Z G 'd
p /�
A O
O
O G
C° v
eo v° n v°
d
00 c.� �0 c
oa,o.oa,aoo
a. orb
p a
u ro u N N
u N N
u ro
m
E
rt
a
N
HH•i'
a
a
0
CJ AC�w
Z,
U
0 0 p
G �
""
0
h
8
a c.
p y O G�a1i
uC�
OQ 'WOC
'di
0
U
.22
v `�' � :C ,a % u 7 G v v� O R G a� O v v �:d v •Li d G t GQ d� 4. A� .�
aFCp.
OtiV
�v'N xxJy' -2>V
,� �GJ
�>, •�mtt7 .yp H�Gl �p„ �yOl
VG,0 SiyJ. Ay
AGUO
•.v'V�
. .G10
pA� .
OaV�l Q
w W OVVaHO'
'•Y�J :bO Gy Op bHH U�
�r7 etl y y w Cp >' p H eta aai y
a p d VP.
OV Q O •t+J" O •o
'Cl
w � a •.- v v p y� •� �„ � N o a�
v p G �px > 3 o ""
X G G N .'"� R O"P 6! H H H O
G
.-�i
m
0 u $ o p aGi v ma Y� U b 'u •X
• +' N p ..V.a�'b A t,' ww_U •'`" G! Q -'
V wN Olpi
y0
C
-0 0b
o
aU
12 mw yw0 GV eO�au
a o Lao 'yN
pyx
ua.
°2UC
¢"
2 0
,�o '�� e50 ma O
v p
Ox3 v wQ
yU Ux�•7
,,u VvV
o°p O.0
OCl. >�p ..;`�.+.
�v'uvv��
V
° °y
y
'y3G
ma
w.'`�OvO
,GGvo�'
0) C
°°a o u GCl.
rov MC u u H O R aGi
Q
0 M_, y
u
hC
�
G
2F
i
v
'TJ
0 i
O O L°
-00 O
0.0
p .0
R
0 60
a
p ,
O �;,
a
O
0 a
a 0
aC. 0
0
P. 0 a.
0
04
a
a
a
a
a
a
`0
0
0
O
0
0
U
U
Cl
U
CJ
CJ
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
v�
v
a c
> �
�'�
>
p
R
a a
04 V
P4 U
U
A m C
r -Z
a s
q a
a 0
to v�
W O OA :: •t'i
'b
R. v
C!' �4
w
0
aui
a
�y aai
uv
$x,�
3
o
3 n
a.3b
a
91. ro
O a s
• 0
a y
m 0
Pcis
a
b
to
-0�;
a a R
90
>
pp
o m
ab„
0 v
av�
�a >
N o
X a
a p
v o v°
y0
d o °pxtowu
a
y
ro
a
to
U�
p ,yam d o
o o
'9 -0
a
C
= V
a
av
y
.
�u
O>
N a o y
a o 00 00
o
o N ,O
U O a
U y m
1�,
U y' o
a
a
j
a '0^
a ^mod
aU
'
�0
a eg
ro a
y
� o
w
�b4 23
ww axi
3
m w C t w
m a m
0
oiO a 'a u u C.
u
Boa �
v a.p
HBO. M-u0
a�v°m. 3m
Dy
I°
v
U
U
aaa
�a
o.aa
eo
o b
eo
o
0o
o
eo
o
0o
o d
0o
o ti
eo
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
0
a o
a 0
0
0
a
a
a
a
a
ato
a
cc
0
0
0
0
0
0
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
>
>
o>
xa.
cL:a
xcti.
v a
x
a>i
o~o..
a>i
�a
a>i
cwa
2,0
a
y
R�
x0
o
eb •
o :.
'
'C a0
°� °n
uU wa
n Up
v
0 0 0
Q�
abb
cn•o
:
°a�
m o
�9ro
°O
eo°
xJ
>
O •��•. OJ
ai
is v
y
m
d ro "� 'b
0 P+
O
?]
� R'F.�
V
vU� h
'C
0p:�
�00
R �•p �
� Gi•rj
vbMR
i°
(U
3
u
m0 o
to
A b
3 0
[
0
in
v m
a a
i"
2 1
2 o> o
w
ro o
>
a
v
¢ °
o m m
Ua.� 3
moo
Zn 3b L
a
E- 0 a
¢U
,o, a o a
a � 3 H
o"u
°'
CD o p
3 @ 00 n c4 > p v
oo3°'.>°
•y a�'obv� v � �� � � a
d.0 0� b�v�i�.�•3 °.�.�
� o
U
F
E-ro
0
T
a
ro
v
G
O
u
oa
G
i�
v
u ..
EO
o .5
'LS
M
C W
CI °
�CC
.a
a
a
0
U
0
ro
,�°KJ,y °
w
ti�i O
w +'r1
�
° y
O ,�jNt�0
"' w
a°5u°bov�
.b O
�+
G •N
Y
P.
S
F7
m
a
aw
u
o0
5m'
Sao°
Co d C :GO
� � p,.n
'n
v
� a
°
O
r
o w C4
uo°'o
aa,
u
"3a 0R
S
eo
5
o
vo
�
3
a°
,
v
u�
m�
o
ao
L� °
a,y
u
b 5
ro
u
9 a
Q
m
cu °a
d
CD
0 oo
a
.. a
3
O A
v
R vt
3
o.r�
N
a, R
tpro a v v C
m
a
u
o
„;
a
w
>
v
�
d y
a�
u
%
a
a)
a
k
5 ro
C
q
ao
o
0 0 a
v n v v
n�
�&
b
d `C°
aoa
o
oar
c o
v
u > '0 a,0,0
: n'
u
ro o
34
a •5 v� •o
ev�� c�%i
y
u b
�s '"
ro.
:%
> w .t, a0
Ou ai
5 v a
0 v u
O
d C
R G
7
�'
i°Gd
ua~i
r.
yai
m
v v ro
O
•a°�yro'S
oN 0.
°
$,
5 v
O°&
W"Q,
ao;
o
u
A `° vcyiv
a
^u
v
vczeo
a
Sc
o ro
•�°
u v G
a
d
O6
wd
00
N H_
� O
CCro
a
0
U
b G
0
a
>O C.
a o
rA
o>
v� -cS
N
"
m o ro
v'X
3
aaaro,w°1.aro,5
o
¢ti
Wax,
0�b
w
��>pp,
�N3
V y
p
m
o
i5 ro
o 9 v r.
m
y
Q
oaA N°°
ro
3�('U
Jco 5p
eoin>
no�R
o
$ v
�o
1y p
-mu
0
m
d �'
>
v
N
.a
G
...
4�
'O
bo
>
O� O
O
ar -d
>
;:3 O y
.+
'
00 O O
•� Gl
•N a
C
fi
V
Oy v".
vyO
a 8
to
wO>
o
yK
v
«r'ro
>
00
ccm wy
w
.b
'0'u
p m
ow° v
u
.0 a
-d�u m
�o
ro
L
o
bu-0tlN`°1
:
yDAgU
y o
Oo
v°v
Oo
Oro
°> 5 o° y>
3 axi
ro
X 7J
ro w
3
°
G }'
o w v o u
v u
m u ro a
ro y
3
u '
ro .32
C1.
. y
o
n°
3°o
w
o
?
�o
>v
o
3
d a
N >
p rop
v
mQo
°
aroN •ao a
a
v
0A
o
u 61
i
4
bO
o
U
ro
�
R
o
„A
w
a
>.d°
°
?
>
°P�
p d v ,°
° p
.o
.
`; °1 v
'�
,
� e6 �
¢ � ti7 b
� � N
:�
� C
�
yp
r a. N
¢
a
� �
>
ro ro
v
in .o
U
cn
ro
m ro ro
o a
ov v
3� y• oo�
v
O O
O
O
O
0. O a
P• o
a
O
O
u
u
0
0
•� C
'� Ga
� U
��
a •fir N
�O M
•y
y y
eoC0 °•
p G. A
• r x p C
V+ 'X
A V aG. H •'�
a aC
F
�j tear!!
•p^.a 7>7 y � Ol
u �s :3 i"•I O
bo V
�Ti
� y..1
d •� a
box
to 0
:C 0 �.
a W
v
o a u v R
v � � .o � � a aCi '� �
A O p G
.b •X � � a
.�
graC°�eopcp;aC,tiu
u a C v
Q�'6onaEbo::
Qo ooIUZ
W G
0
a u G
vbG°000rop
3.�a.�
ux
y
a
a
a
"
a o
o
"
-r, R U
oao
orColl
d ro
o ro , "
:fix o o
w.S oho.
bC° V R
M
O m p a
:�°0"
,
O O Ly R 3
O O u
a�s ocml
io
G C
�n a
�aobo
p�C
�� ya Sao
a.av
V
21
y oo
v o
0 0
Qj
0 o x o
V
0� ooU°u
v� ° o vx .
'bF'o3 o v�oo
d ri
Ou O O.O.
vA � a�r•o " o in I
a
: v 'C7 a
G!
7
G
r
0
to
.F�.
O ;�
G w
i w s w v
pp
G w
G w
p. o C,
R. o
LOL o
cc
Z,
CY
� U
U
U
U
r
a
v.aj
a
-d a.
44
.fl R
m
0
0
G� •y
d
v y ,� y
6!
d v�
R
d t�
cc
nR
f6
a
ro v
cu
.� '
3 to
Q v W
v
a
•y
a>,3 y R R,,� ro
o A
y RQ
�
o a,
0U R
o° ro
„'o
o U
aiU
C7
>
�"
bo �
oRRwUQa,
a
o
91.
cu
'�v�C�eao�.�
R
RIn
•N�roy
TS
bo
a1 O
CY
O
v
> u ai •b� °
QoRn n°i a'
dou y
w
Qoa.0
Q oU
w
O
N
v
R o 'u
A R ai S] u v
ts w P d FL O ar G
ar O• O O ro A.
'v v o v
30
vuP7UCa �Uc�nfg'
v
u
.a
O
C.
r''
ell
�a
,4a
0°00
o
o
o'a
o
obo
a
oC
O
C. O
Qr O
P. o
C. O
R. O
~ '
L: O
C. 0
v
��
�
a
a
a
w
w
w
w
1p
w
p
0
w
w
� 5
U .auQ
U
U
�
U
U
k,
U
k
U
U
o w
C
O
O
0
p
p
0
O O
O o0i
O a�i
O a�i
a
"
v
0
v
v
v h �°
a
R
a
a,
t3
t
v �R
tx0a
v0�
w$6a
w
aa)
a)o
r. v o
0 o C
aax o
o
5
ro m a
>
v a
u C li Gto to �'� o
R
7l O •• O
N v .�
yam,
•b Q
OM
va C N LO O
k Wv
V
Ci G
O t6�.-7i v
> a F
'0 F o
A
C.•
O
r p
•,7 O
°] o O
c0 um toto p"
�r G
o
o m N �+
N V ¢'
^
+d,
N v
.f'-i
p o m O D`'a
.28
w
A
Nto
>
.�+'
a
0.
3
'U �.
o �'w
N
�
vr
o °
�a :� �
�' a
am,;;
bo
cc o
G N
U
a Y°
"Go
b4J
a�
y0.
ycCO
afC.,J a
°
U •b
N ea
° =o
o
t7
O
�eC
CN.i •Li
U
OC'u
Rv
X.00
ii 6pJ�
°
.
'"y�D"' •aMti�Cy.i
0
FNS.w
�•�~C�A
mG.
�
'7
0
�°.
L
QO..�r>V
pm
v
j
'�yNRr
OR
baO)
vRp
T'nLRS
Oc,O r
•
•.yyob
C
aOv'
eN0
d° pu
r
X
aE
t
in
nA
�u5`rG
?Lo'.
cc
Vd'oL
acu
am
)uv
w
O
0o 00CU
zoov°u3 0 �p
v
.4
0
z
c+�
v
a
eo
.�y
.O
o
� �
r
•O
'd
•° �0
� �A
F
O �
O
0
p�
+ro+
a
.R.•
a
a+
.R.
aR.
0
0
k,
0
Z"
0
"
U
V
u
U
CJ
°
°
G
o
Son
Sao
vR
�04
�°via
c�° c,w"".�
3>.0
d
3>•�
a0i a�i m
v
�i o �, m
.0 Fi
0��RN
R
Od
G)Ob�o
ro
G'00 •.rj O Gi
o 7
y •b O v
O
o a, ono 0 QQ)
° c
3 (A"
°a.��0n�,�ro
Ar
ocfi
N o� ow
[
o`
y 3 a
aR
ad
u
�no� yy o
u
A>
0. 0O
m m 3
b av GGvu"11
Wn `.
Q p
00
7
°u
uu
6r
O O"
LL
0 R O ep
.moo q ... w
V
o
cam.
Z
C�
eon
�onQ•R eov u
S4
d
�iCy! y
C
tea � a,
ana m. "
R
H 3 a.°
C
rh
(A
ro
u
)d
►5
I
O
G O
C O
O
o v o
p a
u a q v eo
u a G a, eo
:N .b .v O � 'b
at �. iE m
H '� b .v C � � 'b
al p
:� � b .p G � •d
a a.�a
9 u� aa.� oon
> u..
to
av ro
3
v ro a
�w(Y
v ro
3
p
u
u a
a
O
w
o gga�d tou
bL-1w yQia
w
O .�
a
1�1 A
�' O' y .v
o
O
ro>
Uu3
u ro>
o v o o
o b
o
3 u a O
3 u
3 u
v •r0^. O A
N G •�
v G .O
u
v O
\
w�! (U •p tG�
O
u�
FC 'n ro go
w �y
O � •b � a
�?3
ouv�'
o
w v
'"
¢ o o >
3 a C
o au, o o a u
ao ab
cc w A
v .° ° O to
F.
cc to
y
R. C�
}�} a d � R� ro �
u ro�
•• O
dr ro O
Nw.'1. U•'.r. �', �
� .% OA�bw �
�vaj
oav�v'�
a R a
2 w u U
�' OD
o
Bu
O
(ma
ro ° >
0
O
` b
aoi d C
1+ •ly H
No 3.a3u�a°u o0w
ti
p d
0
_
a.n
ao
ao
a
9
CY
..5 H
0
to yd
R
U
U3
o
o v
o y
U R O d
V Glvy,
d m
is y
.0
'v a
�1
.0 'v
d
Rom.
3 >r 3 a
e0
3>
•�� e0o .
0 0 E
OU �
+v:
X�
aR
Np
�p
Ru O
ar � p R
2
¢' •
vywv
cc�cpp7
�XR
C°
nro CF7
. 41 -0 00bO
U
.vi
y.
00,2
OA�
To q
jmay�
o b
vXO4a'
y
o;
U y Ll, mv
°
uiu
ER
GGl
wHR
u
OARH
Rvja]r
�
.•�R�aH°i,
R'0b
p3Qiai
"rtea7,
•rp^�v>�
,P5zv°,
ro7 6 R
RyyFvG
OAO
a p
y
7°p'7p
,'
w
N
WRra
vU]
b30
i
.
.
dOw
.'.d
p
tNGy/
;oH3y; p,4 t vU
tE
Dy3l
u�>
�•-0tb0
t00 R w G V{ b .HO.
3 p o o C 3 R C
you N i�
f/�
w O N ±° G
Gal °
r.
\
Gl
k> w
y 0 V
\to ° G/
�49 0 H 0 CL 3;
o�n
A. 5
G°,•o ao o 914 .2 oA
a'
P
eoo U
a
o y
�
R La +' OA :: OG v ..L1 y Gl
O w R .� ly N Gl
E a3 m 3
O
Gl .�
'dw ti
0 LL O a , ar y .4 Gl
R Gl :� R 'L7 H w>
° °' oo � R 0
' j 4
U v 'SS �.
�
w e0 O
O o 0
V •° rO! cR�
u
U R O \ o v,
:y ar v p G U o
~
W R d R .A •° y Gj
.
o C .0-.
t]. Gl R
aEi �j ow
'� op GJw u G O,0
R �. o k� x p
Gl U p R, V .^d U •�+
�j'
H aRv
R
(/l'3-
F _.-R. •°
o Q1
O
'�
.. Gl
J7
"0 ro °u m Ri m
ao v
H .Ly R GD .
oH°'oU :: o R 3 u.�a
o� o o
'ppR' 3
p�p U o
.0
:iy O, aJ
o
a b a,
v a
O
o'o
H CL.
'17 `
r-1
O K Ga. p O R O O
E- 3 u aR.� u 3 3 u u 3 0
G>i O
�v o.
cu d
•i: R H T v
a� 3 °.o•���:o:b.° aia
.n
v
an
Y YJ
ra tf Vl
O Gl 0
O N O '� '� V �
00.a �''
m Q d
y •O.•
oo is Gl
O O 'n
O y
y
ORHiO j
GlG1.
N OiG C V
w V H
° O/ tN. uR 7l
A w GR w •b O.
74 �
� L
R •� p ar
•� Gl
F[•Ua�a.SGXl3U�3°oo>,d�v3��a3�
5,4
ao.aaa
Via.
o;b
oti
od
o;.d
ob
oti
0
o
o
o
o
o �n
r
I+w
Cw
Cw
�iw
r+w
0
F, o
C. o
F. o
e. o
F. o
a
a
a
a
a
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
U
U
U
U
U
U
O yvi y
O N
O
O
O
O
3�
3v
'' p
•2
c�°�a
arxa
f0
g
as
�j N
xa.
/0
as
m C$ p
oo
w
b
•,,
y
..d v
OD
O
D
ro v
.G ,��,
v b o bo
°
ro auib
0
v
#f
•� b
u" 3 u
N 'C3 p
U O
RRj
}..a
f! V .� 0
gyp+
00 r4
0-0,
� > '�
p� 0. l0
.O y
y
w a
p 0 Q
w �g
p G
v°° z
.9
v a,
a f'
' ��C{ o
'03 d
0
0
0'n
O
rG
0
U �
~
Vto
d "'nd
N
u
O
0,N m to u
"C3
O ,j,' O
U
C b
OO .� OH
bo
v O N
3>$ a°/i
ti to
O
u 3
Rt !0
eu WD
v�,a�cd
eqto
m
Cb•
,y
C
„�
y b v w
evC v
to �yy' 't7 v p
m ro
ign, 0
�i O N
R v
m e~o •b O
C7 .� .n 'm 0
C, n
.°�
cR u t7
�] euo
L]
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FROM MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL TO OFFICE COMMERCIAL AND LOW
TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
CASE NO.: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-069
POINT HAPPY RANCH, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 27T`' day of November, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to
consider the request of POINT HAPPY RANCH, LLC for approval of a General Plan
Amendment from Medium Density Residential (MDR) to Office Commercial (OC) for
5 acres of the 43+ acre site and from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium
Density Residential (MDR) for 11.55 acres for the 62 villas, for property generally
located on the west side of Washington Street, approximately 350 feet south of
highway 111, more particularly described as:
Portions of APN's 643-170-001, 643-170-002, and 604-050-009
WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment 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 the La Quinta Community
Development Department has completed Environmental Assessment 99-387. A Draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse #2001021037 has been
prepared for the proposed project. It has been determined that with mitigation
measures, the project will not have a significant environmental impact and the EIR
should be certified; and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify
a recommendation for approval of said General Plan Amendment:
1. The proposed General Plan Amendment is internally consistent with the goals,
objectives, and policies of the General Plan not being amended in that the
General Plan Amendment results in promoting a residential character with
supporting commercial use. The commercial is adjacent to a major arterial as
well as a commercial shopping center.
p:\stan�gpa 99-063 pc res.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
General Plan Amendment 99-063
November 27, 2001
2. Approval of the General Plan Amendment will not create conditions materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare in that the
resulting project provides substantial setbacks, is well designed and
landscaped, and will comply with all applicable City, County, State and Federal
requirements.
3. The General Plan Amendment is compatible with adjacent properties in that the
resulting Medium Density Residential project is similar in nature with
surrounding single family residences and the Office Commercial use will provide
a buffer from the shopping center at the southwest corner of Highway 111 and
Washington Street.
4. The General Plan Amendment is suitable and appropriate for the property in
that it will allow replacement of uses which are in a state of disrepair and
overgrown with new residential and office commercial uses.
5. Approval of the General Plan Amendment is warranted because the situation
and general conditions of the property have substantially changed in that it is
no longer needed for agricultural use since the adjacent property to the south,
east and north have been developed with either residential or commercial 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 constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case;
2. That it does recommend approval of General Plan Amendment 99-063 for the
reasons set forth in this Resolution and as shown in the attached Exhibit "A",
and;
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27"' day of November, 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
p:\stan\gpa 99-063 pc res.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
General Plan Amendment 99-063
November 27, 2001
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
p:\stan\gpa 99-063 pc res.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
General Plan Amendment 99-063
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
LEGEND
LDR TO MDR
MDR TOOC
NMI,
EXHIBIT "A"
1\
IN
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A ZONE CHANGE
FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM
DENSITY AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO
OFFICE COMMERCIAL
CASE NO.: ZONE CHANGE 99-091
POINT HAPPY RANCH, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 27' day of November, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to
consider the request of POINT HAPPY RANCH, LLC for approval of a Zone Change
from Medium Density (RM) to Office Commercial (CO) for 5 acres of the 43+ acre
site and from Low Density Residential (RL) to Medium Density Residential (RM) on
11.5 acres of the 43 + acre site located on the west side of Washington Street,
approximately 350 feet south of Highway 111 , more particularly described as:
Portions of APN's 643-170-001, 643-170-002, and 604-050-009
WHEREAS, said Zone Change 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 the La Quinta Community Development
Department has completed Environmental Assessment 99-387. A Draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse #2001021037 has been
prepared for the proposed project. It has been determined that with mitigation
measures, the project will not have a significant environmental impact and the EIR
should be certified; and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify
a recommendation for approval of said Zone Change:
1. The proposed Zone Change is consistent with the goals, objectives, and
policies of the General Plan in that it results in promoting a residential character
with supporting commercial use. The commercial is adjacent to a major arterial
as well as a commercial shopping center..
2. Approval of the Zone Change will not create conditions materially detrimental
to the public health, safety, and general welfare in that the resulting project
provides substantial setbacks, is well designed and landscaped, and will
comply with all applicable City, County, State and Federal requirements
(3 ':
PASTANVC 99-091 PC RES.WPD
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Zone Change 99-091
November 27, 2001
3. The new zoning is compatible with the zoning on adjacent properties in that
the resulting Medium Density Residential project is similar in nature with
surrounding single family residences and the Office Commercial use will provide
a buffer from the shopping center at the southwest corner of Highway 111 and
Washington Street.
4. The new zoning is suitable and appropriate for the subject property in that it
will allow replacement of uses which are in a state of disrepair and overgrown
with new residential and office commercial uses.
5. Approval of the Zone Change is warranted because the situation and general
conditions of the property have substantially changed in that it is no longer
needed for agricultural use since the adjacent property to the south, east and
north have been developed with either residential or commercial 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 constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case;
2. That it does recommend approval of Zone Change 99-091 for the reasons set
forth in this Resolution per attached Exhibit "A".
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27" day of November, 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PASTAWC 99-091 PC RES.WPD
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Zone Change 99-091
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
...
. '
f}
LEGEND
0Or
RL TO RM
RM TO CO
.;?.... ...
NORTH
H
W
W
Q=
E-•
z
O
F-•
(D
z
s
EXHIBIT "A"
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN DEVELOPMENT
PRINCIPALS AND GUIDELINES FOR A SENIOR CARE
FACILITY AND RELATED OFFICE COMPLEX
CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 99-039
POINT HAPPY RANCH, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did on the
27TH day of November, 2001, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the
request of POINT HAPPY RANCH, LLC for approval of development principals and
guidelines for a senior care facility and related office complex, generally located on
the west side of Washington Street, approximately 350 feet south of Highway 111,
more particularly described as
APN's 643-170-001, 643-170-002, and 604-050-009
WHEREAS, said Specific Plan Amendment has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that the La Quinta Community Development
Department has completed Environmental Assessment 99-387. . A Draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse #2001021037 has been
prepared for the proposed project. It has been determined that with mitigation
measures, the project will not have a significant environmental impact and the EIR
should be certified; and,
WHEREAS, at said public hearing upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said
Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the
recommendation for approval of the Specific Plan:
1. The Specific Plan, as proposed, is consistent with the goals and policies of the
La Quinta General Plan in that the property is proposed for a senior care facility
and related office commercial complex. The Land Use Element with the
proposed General Plan Amendment will be consistent with the specific plan.
The Circulation, Open Space, Parks and Recreation, Environmental
Conservation, Infrastructure and Public Services, Environmental Hazards, and
Air Quality Elements are consistent with the project proposed by the Specific
Plan through compliance with Conditions of Approval or design of the project.
P:\STAN\sp 99-039 pc res.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Specific Plan 99-039
November 27, 2001
2. The Specific Plan, subject to conditions will not create conditions materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare in that
development allowed under the Specific Plan is compatible with existing uses
and development standards and infrastructure proposed in the Specific Plan will
ensure high quality development.
3. The Specific Plan will provide land use compatibility with zoning on adjacent
properties in that the project principles and guidelines ensure that the adjacent
residential uses will not be negatively impacted.
4. The Specific Plan project is suitable and appropriate for the property in that the
majority of the property has been designated for residential use and the
commercial development has been designed to be compatible with adjacent
uses, and development will comply with applicable City requirements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the Planning Commission in this case.
2. That it does hereby recommend that an Environmental Impact Report be
certified for this project.
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above -
described specific plan request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution,
subject to the attached conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27T" day of November, 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
P:\STAN\sp 99-039 pc res.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 99-659
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
GENERAL
1. This approval is for a senior residential care facility consisting of 62 single family
attached villas, two multi -family buildings with a maximum of 310 residents rooms
and related commercial complex.
2. The subdivider 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 subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and
shall cooperate fully in the defense.
3. 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)
• State Water Quality Control Board (SWQCB)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from
those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans,
applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the
plans.
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater
discharge permit. This project shall conform to the requirements of the NPDES
General Permit. The applicant shall submit a copy of the SWQCB acknowledgment
of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading or site construction
permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection
Plan is available for inspection at the project site.
4. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and
other property rights required of this approval or otherwise necessary for construction
►:.
P:\STAN\sdp 99-659 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 1 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 99-659
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include
irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency
services and for maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of essential
improvements.
5. The applicant shall 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.
6. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or
access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by
others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access
easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property
owners.
KTAW&OINWTAiZ111111111112
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.
7. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified
engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Such plans shall be submitted
on an approved 24" x 36" media.
8. The applicant shall submit a "Site Development Plan," prepared by a licensed civil
engineer, showing all surface improvements, complete with grading and drainage, all
ADA requirements and parking lot improvements.
9. "Site Development Plans" shall have signature blocks for Community Development
Director and the City Engineer. All other plans shall have signature blocks for the City
Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
10. 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 plans and/or detail sheets from the City.
P:\STAN\sdp 99-659 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 2 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 99-659
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
11. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCAD files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the
City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCAD menu items so they may be
fully retrieved into a basic AutoCAD program. At the completion of construction and
prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to
reflect as -constructed conditions.
If the plans were not produced in AutoCAD or a file format which can be converted
to AutoCAD, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans.
GRADING
12. Prior to any disturbance of the site, the applicant shall furnish verification from the
Regional Water Quality Control Board that an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed.
Applicant shall also provide a copy of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for
this development project.
13. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, 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.
14. Prior to issuance of any grading permit(s), the applicant shall furnish a preliminary
geotechnical ("soils") report and an approved grading plan prepared by a qualified
engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils
report and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist.
15. 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.
16. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad
certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each pad,
the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference
between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be organized by lot
number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times.
P:\STAN1sdp 99-659 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 3 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 99-659
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the
following:
17. Applicant is required to file a Notice of Intent (N01) with the State Water Quality
Control Board comply with the terms of the NPDES General Permit. Provisions of the
General Permit also require the applicant to prepare a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
18. Unless supported by a comprehensive hydrology study, prepared by an individual duly
licensed by the state to prepare such study, showing that the existing 60" storm
drain located in Washington Street will accommodate the runoff from the site of the
peak 24 hour period of a 100 year storm, storm water falling on the site during the
peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm (the design storm) shall be retained within
the development, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
19. Prior to any tie in to the existing 60" storm drain in Washington Street, the applicant
shall pay its pro-rata share of the cost of said 60" storm drain.
20. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated,
unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route.
21. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on site
or passed through to the overflow outlet.
22. Retention facility design shall be based on site -specific percolation data which shall
be submitted for checking with the retention facility plans. The design percolation
rate shall not exceed two inches per hour.
23. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in an approved manner.
UTILITIES
24. 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.
.S5
P:\STAN\sdp 99-659 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 4 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 99-659
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
25. Existing aerial lines within or adjacent to the proposed development and all proposed
utilities shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 92 kva are exempt
from this requirement.
26. 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.
27. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with the
General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements shall
conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.)
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1) Washington Street (Major Arterial)
a) Street Improvements - No additional street improvements are
required.
B. ON -SITE PRIVATE STREETS:
1) 28-foot travel width. On street parking is prohibited and applicant shall
provide for perpetual enforcement of the restriction by a homeowners
association or other suitable document.
2) A secondary access (with all-weather surfacing) shall be provided from the
project and connected to Highland Palms Drive.
3) If access at the south property line onto Highland Palms Drive is to be
restricted, a 50-foot turnaround shall be provided at the most southerly
terminus of the private street.
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, turn knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts,
dedicated turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved construction plans may
warrant additional street widths as determined by the City Engineer.
SG
P:\STAN\sdp 99-659 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 5 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 99-659
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
28. 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.
29. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development
boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading;
traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets
and sidewalks).
30. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC,
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved by
the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas
shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
31. Knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard
Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City
Engineer.
32. Public streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations which
convey water without ponding and provide lateral containment of dust and residue
for street sweeping. Onsite private streets shall have a wedge curb, the design of
which shall be approved by the City Engineer. The lip of the wedge curb at the
flowline shall be vertical (1/8" batter) and a minimum of 0.1' in height. Unused curb
cuts on any lot shall be restored to normal curbing prior to final inspection of
permanent building(s) on the lot.
33. Street pavement sections shall be based on CalTrans' design procedure (20-year life),
and use site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including
construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows (or approved
equivalents for alternate materials):
Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b.
Collector 4.0"/5.00"
Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00"
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50"
�i
P:ISTAN1sdp 99-659 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 6 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 99-659
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
34. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time
of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The
submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure.
For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six
months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming
that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not
schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved.
35. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other 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 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 project or when directed
by the City, whichever comes first.
36. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted as follows:
A. Washington Street: Access shall be restricted to right turn movements
only for entering and exiting the site.
B. Highland Palms Drive: A secondary access for emergency service vehicles
shall be provided from the site onto Highland Palms
Drive.
LANDSCAPING
37. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the perimeter landscaping setback areas
along Washington Street, retention basins, common lots and park areas.
38. 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.
P:\STAN\sdp 99-659 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 7 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 99-659
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
39. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements that meet 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.
40. Use of existing or taller date palm trees shall be limited to areas of low pedestrian,
recreational, and vehicular use.
41. Preliminary landscaping, hardscape, and irrigation plans, substantially conforming to
this approval shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for
approval by the ALRC prior to submission of plans to the Building and Safety
Department.
MAINTENANCE
42. 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.
43. 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.
•
44. Prior to submission of working drawings to the City, plans shall be reviewed by the
Riverside County Fire Marshal with all required revisions incorporated into the plans.
45. All buildings over 5,000 square feet shall be fully fire sprinkled.
46. A minimum of two distinct and separate public access roads shall be identified to
serve the residential areas. "Fire Only" access roads are not recommended.
47. Infrastructure including water and circulation shall be in place prior to construction
development.
P:\STAN\sdp 99-659 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 8 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 99-659
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
48. Final architectural working drawings for all structures, substantially conforming to this
approval, including all revisions required by the permit shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department for approval prior to submission of plans to the
Building and Safety Department.
49. Final architectural working drawings shall include sufficient details, including size of
equipment, to ensure that roof equipment is screened per Zoning Code requirements.
50. Architectural plans for Villas' garages shall be reviewed and approved by the
Community Development Department prior to issuance of first Villas building permit.
MISCELLANEOUS
51. A six foot high masonry wall shall be provided adjacent to existing single family
residences along the south and east property lines to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Department as part of the first phase of construction. The
goal is to have the new wall replace or supplement existing walls/fences of the
residential properties.
52. The parking space requirements based on Specific Plan 99-039 for the multi -family
units shall be complied with and incorporated into the final working drawings.
53. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the parking lot, a parking lot lighting plan,
with a photometrics study, shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department for approval. The plan shall utilize downshining shoebox fixtures with
a recessed light source with standards (poles) only high enough to meet footcandle
requirements. Glare shields shall be installed on all fixtures which are within 100 feet
of existing residential properties. Commercial area parking lot lights shall be on a
timer which turns off lights by 10:00 P.M.
54. Wall mounted lights for commercial building exteriors shall use non-adjustable
shoebox type down shining light fixtures with recessed light sources.
55. The back-up aisles behind parking spaces shall be 26 feet wide (typical) rather than
24 feet.
j0
P:\STAN\sdp 99-659 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 9 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 99-659
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
56. Within the commercial and multi -family areas, facilities for trash disposal and
recycling shall be provided per Waste Management of the Desert requirements. Trash
enclosure designs shall comply with Waste Management and City requirements.
57. Prior to issuance for first building permit, a detailed sign program for all uses in
project shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval
by the Planning Commission.
58. Prior to issuance of first grading permit, the project applicant shall provide an
easement to be recorded for all hillsides to remain undeveloped open space, or as an
alternative dedicate the hillsides to a public agency, such as the Mountain
Conservancy, with the exception of the existing single family residence and road
leading to it. The easement shall be approved by the City Attorney prior to
recordation.
59. All mitigation measures of the Final Environmental Impact Report for this project shall
be complied with.
60. Prior to issuance of first grading permit, the rockfall hazards from the hillsides shall
be evaluated by a certified engineering geologist to confirm that the proper setback
zones from the hillsides have been provided. If adequate setbacks cannot be
maintained, additional mitigation measures such as boulder removal or the installation
of deflection fences shall be required.
P:\STAN\sdp 99-659 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 10 of 10
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A
SENIOR CARE AND RELATED COMMERCIAL COMPLEX
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-659
POINT HAPPY RANCH, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 27T" day of November, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to
consider the request of POINT HAPPY RANCH, LLC to approve the development plans
for a senior care residential project on the west side of Washington Street,
approximately 350 feet south of Highway 111 more particularly described as:
APN's 643-170-001, 643-170-002, and 604-050-009
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the La Quinta Community Development
Department has completed Environmental Assessment 99-387. A Draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse #2001021037 has been
prepared for the proposed project. It has been determined that with mitigation
measures, the project will not have a significant environmental impact and the EIR
should be certified; and,
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee, on
October 3, 2001, at a regular meeting, recommended approval of the development
plans, 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 project is consistent with the General Plan, as amended, in that the senior
residential care and related commercial complex is permitted by the land use
designation.
2. The senior residential care and related commercial structures are designed to
comply with City Zoning Code requirements and are in compliance with
Specific Plan 99-039, as conditioned.
p:\stan\sdp 99-659 pc res.wpd
Resolution 2001-
Site Development Permit 99-659
November 27, 2001
3. 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
in that the buildings are well designed, use attractive materials and will be
compatible with the surrounding commercial and residential development. The
Spanish Castilian style of the project will be compatible many of the major
projects in the City (i.e. La Quinta Resort and Club).
4. 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.
5. 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, complement buildings, visually emphasize prominent design elements and
vistas, screen undesirable views, provide a harmonious transition between
adjacent land uses and between development and open space, provide an
overall unifying influence, enhance the visual continuity of the project, and
complement the surrounding project area, ensuring lower maintenance and
water use. The conceptual landscaping plans provide a design which will
complement the surrounding developments and retain a connection to the
existing palm tree and citrus groves. Additional review of the plans as they are
developed will be needed since the plans are conceptual.
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 99-659 for the reasons
set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions labeled Exhibit "A",
attached hereto;
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 27Th day of November 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
�U
p:\stan\sdp 99-659 pc res.wpd
Resolution 2001-
Site Development Permit 99-659
November 27, 2001
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
St.
p:\stan\sdp 99-659 pc res.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific plan 99-039
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
GENERAL
1. This approval is for a senior residential care facility consisting of 62 single family
attached villas, and related commercial complex. Specific Plan 99-039 shall comply
with the requirements and standards of the La Quinta Municipal Code and all other
applicable laws, unless modified by the following conditions or the Specific Plan.
2. The subdivider 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 specific plan. The City shall
have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and
shall cooperate fully in the defense.
3. 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)
• State Water Quality Control Board (SWQCB)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from
those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans,
applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the
plans.
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater
discharge permit. This project shall conform to the requirements of the NPDES
General Permit. The applicant shall submit a copy of the SWQCB acknowledgment
of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading or site construction
permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection
Plan is available for inspection at the project site.
4. Prior to the issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements
and other property rights required of this approval or otherwise necessary for
P:\STAN\sp 99-039 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 1 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific plan 99-039
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights
shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for
emergency services and for maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of
essential improvements.
5. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and utility
easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable
specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer.
6. 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.
7. 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.
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. Washington Street (Major Arterial) - 20-feet
The setback requirement applies to all frontage 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. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets and properties
from all frontage along the streets and properties except access points shown on the
approved Specific Plan.
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.
P:ISTAN1sp 99-039 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 2 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific plan 99-039
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
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.
13. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion
of this property, unless such easements are approved by the City Engineer.
14. Prior to issuance of any grading permit(s), the applicant shall furnish a preliminary
geotechnical ("soils") report and an approved grading plan prepared by a qualified
engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils
report and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist.
15. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas
outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
16. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting
properties and between separate tracts and lots within this development. Building
pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for
lots within a tract or parcel map, but not sharing common street frontage, where the
differential shall not exceed five feet.
The limits given in this condition and the previous condition are not entitlements and
more restrictive limits may be imposed in the map approval or plan checking process.
If compliance with the limits is impractical, however, the City will consider
alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -
owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential.
17. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, and the issuance of
a grading permit, 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.
,1
P:\STAN\sp 99-039 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 3 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific plan 99-039
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
19. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad
certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each pad,
the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference
between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be organized by lot
number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times.
20. Prior to any disturbance of the site, the applicant shall furnish verification from the
Regional Water Quality Control Board that an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed.
1";rAk1Y.1XCJA
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the
following:
21. Applicant is required to file a Notice of Intent (N01) with the State Water Quality
Control Board and to comply with the terms of the NPDES General Permit. Provisions
of the General Permit also require the applicant to prepare a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan ("SWPPP").
22. Applicant's SWPPP for this development project shall be approved prior to any on or
off site grading being done in relation to this project.
A. Applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for the following BMPs:
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.
23. All of applicant's erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be approved prior to any
on or off site grading being done in relation to this project.
24. All project BMPs shall be maintained throughout the course of construction, and until
all improvements have been accepted by the City.
25. Unless supported by a comprehensive hydrology study, prepared by an individual duly
licensed by the state to prepare such study, showing that the existing 60" storm
drain located in Washington Street will accommodate the runoff from the site of the
peak 24 hour period of a 100 year storm, storm water falling on the site during the
P:\STAN\sp 99-039 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 4 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific plan 99-039
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm (the design storm) shall be retained within
the development, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
26 Prior to any tie in to the existing 60" storm drain in Washington Street, the applicant
shall pay its pro-rata share of the cost of said 60" storm drain.
27. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated,
unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route.
28. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on site
or passed through to the overflow outlet.
29. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in an approved manner.
30. 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 site specific,
City, or regional 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 tentative map excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or
deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City
Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall
make provisions in the CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations.
31. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water 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.
UTI LITI ES
32. 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.
33. Existing aerial power transmission lines within or adjacent to the proposed
development and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. Power lines
exceeding 92 kva are exempt from this requirement.
P:\STAN\sp 99-039 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 5 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific plan 99-039
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
34. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in
existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration
requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide
certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
35. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with the
General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements shall
conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.)
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1) Washington Street (Major Arterial)
a) Street Improvements
required.
B. ON -SITE PRIVATE STREETS:
- No additional street improvements are
1) 28-foot travel width. On street parking is prohibited and applicant shall
provide for perpetual enforcement of the restriction by a homeowners
association or other suitable
2) A secondary access (with all-weather surfacing) shall be provided from the
project and connected to Highland Palms Drive.
3) If access at the south property line onto Highland Palms Drive is to be
restricted, a 50-foot turnaround shall be provided at the most southerly
terminus of the private street.
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, turn knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus
turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved
construction plans may warrant additional street widths as determined by the City
Engineer.
36. 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.
rJ
P:\STAN\sp 99-039 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 6 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific plan 99-039
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
37. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development
boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading;
traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets
and sidewalks).
38. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC,
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved by
the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas
shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
39. Knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard
Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City
Engineer.
40. Public streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations which
convey water without ponding and provide lateral containment of dust and residue
for street sweeping. Onsite private streets shall have a wedge curb, the design of
which shall be approved by the City Engineer. The lip of the wedge curb at the
flowline shall be vertical (1/8" batter) and a minimum of 0.1' in height. Unused curb
cuts on any lot shall be restored to normal curbing prior to final inspection of
permanent building(s) on the lot.
41. Street pavement sections shall be based on CalTrans' design procedure (20-year life),
and use site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including
construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows (or approved
equivalents for alternate materials):
Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b.
Collector 4.0"/5.00"
Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00"
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50"
42. 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.
>J
P:\STAN\sp 99-039 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 7 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific plan 99-039
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
43. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other 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 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 project or when directed
by the City, whichever comes first.
44. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted as follows:
A. Washington Street: Access shall be restricted to right turn movements
only for entering and exiting the site.
B. Highland Palms Drive: A secondary access for emergency service vehicles
shall be provided from the site onto Highland Palms
Drive.
IWAUD—Rify—M
45. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the perimeter landscaping setback areas
along Washington Street, retention basins, common lots and park areas.
46. 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.
47. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements that meet 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.
MAINTENANCE
48. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all on -
site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. The
I1
P:\STAN\sp 99-039 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 8 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific plan 99-039
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
applicant shall maintain required public improvements until expressly released from
this responsibility by the appropriate public agency.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
49. 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.
50. Within 48 hours after review by the City Council, the property owner/developer shall
submit to the Community Development Department two checks made out to the
County of Riverside in the amount of $78.00 and $850.00 to permit the filing and
posting of the Notice of Determination for EA 99-387 as required by the California
Environmental Quality Act.
MISCELLANEOUS
51. The Specific Plan text shall be amended to include the following:
A. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall provide an
easement to be recorded for all hillsides to remain undeveloped open space, or
as an alternative dedicate the hillsides to a public agency, such as the Mountain
Conservancy, with the exception of the existing single family residence and road
leading to it, which may remain. The easement shall be approved by the City
Attorney prior to recordation. (Page 28)
B. 6. One-way access ways shall have a minimum width of +2 15 feet....
7. Two-way access ways shall have a minimum width of -24 28 feet .... (Page
80)
C. Street widths and materials as required by the Engineering Department shall be
revised (no grasscrete streets permitted).
D. The back-up aisles behind parking spaces shall be shown as 26 feet wide
(typical) rather than 24 feet (Exhibit 6).
E. Wall section at the existing residential shall be shown as a six foot high solid
masonry wall (Exhibit 25).
P:\STAN\sp 99-039 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 9 of 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific plan 99-039
Point Happy Ranch, LLC
November 27, 2001
52. Five copies of the final revised Specific plan text shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department within 30 days after final City council approval, and shall
include all conditions of approval.
53. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, building permit, demolition permit, or any
earth moving activities for the project allowed in this specific plan, whichever comes
first, the property owner/developer shall prepare and submit a written report to the
Community Development Department demonstrating compliance with those mitigation
measures of EA 99-387.
P:\STAN\sp 99-039 pc coa.wpd Printed November 21, 2001 Page 10 of 10
ATTACHMENT #1 - SEE SEPARATE DOCUMENT
y^
CASE MAP
CASE No. THE PO I NTE AT
POINT HAPPY RANCH
ATTACHMENT #2
NORTH
SCALE:
NTS )
ATTACHMENT #3 - SEE SEPARATE DOCUMENT
94
ATTACHMENT 4
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall Session Room
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
October 18, 2001
This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order by Chairman
Maria Puente at 3:02 p.m. who led the flag salute and asked for the roll call.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance.
B. Roll Call.
Present: Commissioners Irwin, Mitchell, Sharp, Wright, and Chairman
Puente. Unanimously approved.
Staff Present: Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Secretary Carolyn
Walker.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Mitchell to
approve the Minutes of September 20, 2001 as submitted. Unanimously
approved.
V. BUSINESS ITEMS
A. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment of the Point Happy Ranch Proiect
Area: a request for approval of the Phase I Cultural Resources
investigation of a 43 acre parcel of property located on the west side of
Washington Street, approximately 300 feet south of Highway 111.
Applicant: Point Happy Ranch, LLC - Archaeological Consultant:
McKenna Et Al (Jeanette A. McKenna, Principal).
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.
PACAR0LYN\HPC10-18-01.wpd -1- 915
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
October 18, 2001
2. Commissioner Mitchell concurred with the staff's
recommendations.
3. Commissioner Wright stated he was in favor of staff's
recommendations but thought the site should be monitored during
any kind of excavation.
4. Commissioner Irwin also supported staff's recommendations but
was concerned about monitoring the site and preservation of
certain trees that are a part of Point Happy's history. She also
pointed out Attachment #1, Page 004, had the wrong map. She
added one of the buildings, on that property, was the first air-
conditioned building in the Valley and the entrance itself, is
historic.
5. Commissioner Wright stated it was in the City of La Quinta's
Historic Primary Record. He added most of the buildings were
dilapidated but still had historical significance as well as the entry
way gates. When the Commission looked at the Tradition project
they were very emphatic about every saveable building. As a
result the garages near the Hacienda were saved. He suggested
the staff report recommend every structure be looked at on its
own historic merit. This project should be handled the same way
Tradition was handled, including saving historic trees, especially
since planting citrus was tried there for the first time, as well as
experiments with growing cotton.
6. Commissioner Sharp stated he wasn't as familiar with the property
as the other Commissioners but he does know Louise Neeley and
he did know Alice Marble. According to the staff report photos
there did not appear to be much worth saving. There was some
good ironwork and it would be nice if it was incorporated
somewhere in the project.
7. Chairman Puente asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commissioners' concerns.
8. Archaeological Consultant McKenna pointed out Happy Lunbeck
owned a larger parcel than what was included in this project and
this portion did not have sugar cane, nor cotton.
P.TAROLYMiPCl0-18-01.wpd -2- 96
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
October 18, 2001
9. Commissioner Irwin replied the Historical Society had photographs
which showed these crops being cultivated on this property.
Archaeological Consultant McKenna asked if they were grown in
this specific area. Commissioner Irwin answered yes.
Archaeological Consultant McKenna stated she was not aware of
this information while conducting her study. She used what
information was provided. The original property was considerably
larger, but this portion did not show any physical evidence of that
type of activity.
10. Commissioner Irwin stated the road that goes up over the hill was
once part of the stage line.
11. Archaeological Consultant McKenna agreed but stated the stage
stop itself, was not on the property.
12. Commissioner Irwin stated it was at Indian Wells, across the
street. She added the Cultural Report referred to Happy Lunbeck,
while the staff report did not. Point Happy Ranch started in 1920
and got its name from Happy Lunbeck.
13. Archaeological Consultant McKenna stated Point Happy, as the
date farm, assumed the name. It wasn't called Point Happy Date
Farm.
14. General discussion followed regarding the reference to Point
Happy Ranch versus Point Happy Date Farm and the fact that the
project property had become commonly- known as Point Happy
Ranch.
15. Commissioner Irwin asked who was contacted at the Historical
Society.
16. Archaeological Consultant Jeanette A. McKenna stated she had
spoken with Mrs. Louise Neeley, who was born and raised on the
Point Happy property and she also referred them to another
gentlemen who contributed the name of a third individual. That
was why a recommendation was made in the report, that an Oral
History needed to be prepared on this property.
P:\CAR0LYN\i-iPC10-18-01.wpd -3-
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
October 18, 2001
17. Commissioner Wright stated his number one concern was
preserving the structures that were deemed historic. They needed
to be integrated into the project the same way the Hacienda was
integrated into Traditions.
18. Principal Planner Sawa introduced the applicant's representative,
Mr. Robert Sundstrom. He stated Point Happy LLC started
working on the project approximately two -and -a -half years ago at
which time they began looking into the history of the Ranch and
the historical nature of anything that was still remaining. They
went through a private assessment, filed an initial study and
started the public process to have the City determine those
buildings that potentially had any historical value in the site
planning process. He added they did recognize there were a lot of
significant trees in the project and did have an arborist do a
complete count of every tree, every tree species, the nature of the
tree, the condition of every tree, and the type of tree. The
instructions given to the arborist were to look at the trees for
condition, age, and the possibility of relocation on site and
utilization within the project itself. It was the applicant's intent to
reconstruct, or recreate, a date garden feel utilizing as many of
the taller trees as possible. They would relocate the date palms
that were in condition to be relocated. Their original assessment
did not find any buildings that were of strict historical nature that
could be either preserved or relocated on the property. A lot of
the design criteria in this project relates to the Ranch, its history,
the utilization of the ironwork throughout the project, and the
installation of citrus in keynote areas to create the idea that this
was a ranch and an operating citrus and date grove. The current
plan does not incorporate any of the existing buildings. The only
building that is currently proposed to be retained is "the Dupont
House". The bulk of the houses have considerable structural
deficiencies. He then offered to answer any questions.
19. Commissioner Sharp asked if the name of the project would be
Point Happy, as it was an important landmark to the community.
20. Mr. Sundstrom answered the project was named "The Pointe at
Point Happy Ranch". This was done to differentiate this project
from the commercial project "Point Happy" on Highway 111.
P:\CAR0LYN\HPC10-18-01.wpd -4-
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
October 18, 2001
21. Commissioner Sharp asked a question about the width of the
entrance gate.
22. Mr. Sundstrom replied he had always been intrigued by the
ironwork at the entryway gate. However, as the entryway was
now it did not meet the current standards for the Fire Department.
The new entryway/wall would be designed to emulate the wall
and the fencing with the archway while meeting Fire Department
standards.
23. Commissioner Sharp asked if there was a drawing of the building
and landscape plans available and what type of architecture would
be utilized.
24. Mr. Robert Sundstrom apologized that he did not have any large
drawings with him.
25. Commissioner Wright asked why the Oral History was to be done
by the Morongo Basin Historical Society, not the La Quinta
Historical Society. He commented the Oral History should be
done by the La Quinta Historical Society.
26. Chairman Puente asked if any of the remaining structures were in
good condition.
27. Mr. Sundstrom replied no.
28. Chairman Puente asked what the possibility was to save or
relocate them.
29. Mr. Sundstrom replied, in their assessment, the remaining
buildings served no useful purpose from a historical point and
therefore not incorporated into the site plan. There were a series
of assessments done, but the only building to be shown of
significance was the old school house which is no longer on the
property. It has been the applicant's intent to incorporate the
history of the Date Gardens, into the landscaping theme and
incorporate the feel of the Date Gardens into the project itself.
30. Commissioner Irwin stated the La Quinta Historical Society had
the City of La Quinta Curation Standards. She stated she was
surprised to find an oral history project from the Morongo Basin
Historical Society in the report directing all the information and
PACAR0LYN\HPC10-18-01.wpd -5- !J
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
October 18, 2001
photographs to them. She then asked Principal Planner Sawa why
this request was in the back of the report since the City already
had standards in place. She added the City was building a state-
of-the-art facility and would be one of the few cities in Southern
California to have such a facility. She wondered why another
facility would be involved.
31. Principal Planner Sawa replied this may have been a
recommendation in the report, but the City would have changed
it to read the La Quinta Historical Society.
32. Commissioner Wright suggested a condition be added requiring
the Oral History to be prepared in cooperation with the La Quinta
Historical Society.
33. Commissioner Irwin stated if somebody else wanted to participate
in the Oral History, they could work with the La Quinta Historical
Society.
34. Archaeological Consultant McKenna commented the Oral History
needed to be done in a fashion that was consistent with what had
already been done.
35. Commissioner Irwin questioned the use of the Morongo Basin
Historical Society.
36. Archaeological Consultant McKenna replied she had nothing in her
report making that suggestion.
37. Commissioner Irwin directed the Commission to the back of the
report.
38. Archaeological Consultant McKenna said it had been appended by
someone other than herself. She only stated that the Oral History
needed to be done.
39. Principal Planner Sawa thought the attachment was meant only as
an example of what an oral history program would look like, and
it should have been marked as a sample.
40. Commissioner Wright stated the concern was any material, oral
history, photographs, derived from the Oral History, would become
the property of the City of La Quinta. He suggested another
P:ACAROLYNWCl0-1 8-01.wpd -6-
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
October 18, 2001
condition be added requiring collected materials become the
property of the City of La Quinta per the adopted standards of
curation.
41. Mr. Sundstrom asked if Oral Histories were privately prepared.
42. Commissioner Irwin answered she didn't know if they were done
privately, but several Historical Societies in the Valley were
currently working on Oral Histories.
43. Mr. Sundstrom stated he was more concerned with the format of
the report meeting with City's standards.
44. Chairman Puente suggested a correction be made to this report
stating the Oral History form be identified as an example of an
Oral History.
45. Commissioner Irwin asked Mr. Sundstrom to indicate where the
ironwork would be placed.
46. Mr. Sundstrom gave a summary of the project and the proposed
site of the trees and ironwork.
47. Commissioner Sharp asked how many apartments would be in the
development.
48. Mr. Sundstrom replied there were two structures with a total of
310 units. One unit is planned primarily for independent living, and
the second independent clubhouse building was intended for use
by the 62 villa units as opposed to the component of the
independent living facility.
49. Commissioner Sharp asked if the clubhouse would have a dining
room. Mr. Sundstrom stated yes.
50. Commissioner Mitchell asked if the condominiums were for
seniors. Mr. Sundstrom replied the whole project was for seniors.
51. Commissioner Mitchell asked if a senior could move from one area
to another, as their needs dictated. Mr. Sundstrom answered that
was possible. He then went into the physical layout of the site
plan, including street and pedestrian access.
P:\CAR0LYNWC10-18-01-wPd -7-
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
October 18, 2001
52. Commissioner Irwin asked if there was going to be any access to
the shopping center. Mr. Sundstrom replied there currently was
none.
53. Commissioner Mitchell stated the archway was a very sensitive
issues to the citizens of La Quinta.
54. Mr. Sundstrom replied it was also a sensitive issue with the
existing property owner. The applicant had discussed the
possibility of saving some of the physical features that are on the
property including the gates and archway. There was a
suggestion of using it in conjunction with a pedestrian pathway,
or cart paths, so it would still meet Fire Department requirements.
55. Commissioner Mitchell asked if the scrollwork and any other
appropriate historic objects could be placed in a central location
to serve as a miniature display of what the Point Happy once was,
and include the Oral History in the same locale.
56. Mr. Sundstrom indicated an area that was a water feature and
suggested it might be possible to place items in that general area.
He also discussed possible areas where these items could be
incorporated into the project. He stated they would use as many
of the different types of architectural features, as well as flora, to
maintain the historic ambiance of the Date Ranch.
57. Commissioner Wright stated the different architectural styles was
why it was so unique.
58. Commissioner Irwin stated another thing that makes this place so
unique is the fact that the people who lived there were so self
sufficient. They did a little of everything. They were finish
carpenters and experimented with different crops. Even the
Clark's themselves were very unique people. Mrs. Clark was so
concerned about the children, who were growing up on that
Ranch, that she sent the girls to high school away from there and
built an air-conditioned house for them to sleep in. She also took
the women to Idyllwild during the summer while the men stayed
to work the Ranch.
59. Mr. Sundstrom acknowledged he had read the history of Point
Happy Ranch.
PACAR0LYN\B?C10-1R-ot.wpd -8-
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
October 18, 2001
60. Commissioner Irwin asked if there might be a place to feature the
original photographic history of the Ranch, so people would be
able to see and understand the history of Point Happy Ranch.
61. Commissioner Wright commented it could be similar to what was
done at the Tradition with their historical montage and items on
the walls in the Hacienda.
62. Commissioner Irwin stated the difference was that Hacienda del
Gato had been maintained and Point Happy had not.
63. Mr. Sundstrom stated he was not sure how to respond to that
question. He had been working with staff to maintain as much
ambiance in the project as they could.
64. Commissioner Irwin thanked the applicant for his efforts and
reiterated this is a historic site and the Commission is concerned
about not losing the history connected with this site.
65. Chairman Puente asked if there were any plans with more specific
places where the historical features could be placed.
66. Mr. Sundstrom replied they did not have final construction
drawings. He asked if the plans would come back to the Historic
Preservation Commission for approval before the building permits
were issued. He asked if the Commission had any ideas on what
they would like to see, as well as specific locations. He would be
happy to accept them because that was their original intent.
67. Commissioner Mitchell stated he like the project, but was
concerned about the old Ranch and how things were going to be
incorporated to retain the flavor and integrity of the original Ranch.
68. Mr. Sundstrom replied it was their full intention to build the project
with those parameters in mind. He and his brother had drawn the
landscape plan and written a good portion of the Specific Plan
because they understood the history of this site and wanted to
retain as much of it as possible.
69. Commissioner Mitchell asked if the Commission could see the
Specific Plan.
P:\CAR0LYN\HPC10-18-01.wpd -9-
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
October 18, 2001
70. Principal Planner Sawa stated a copy of the Specific Plan was
available.
71. Chairman Puente stated the Commission would like to review the
Specific Plan, as well as a list of what items would be included
and where.
72. Mr. Sundstrom then briefly went over some items in the Specific
Plan with the Commissioners.
73. Chairman Puente asked if the Commissioners could each have a
copy of the Specific Plan. Staff would provide copies to the
Commission.
74. Mr. Sundstrom explained they were currently going through the
Site Plan process. They needed to refine the placement of all the
specific features. The buildings are intended to be in the
Castillian- Ranch- style with red the roofs, slate type features on the
facades with earth tones. This all lends to a character very similar
to what is at Rancho La Quinta and the original La Quinta Resort.
75. Commissioner Wright stated he would like to see what was
proposed as to where the walls, gates, and the porticos were
going to be placed as the Commission would like the opportunity
to comment on these plans.
76. Principal Planner Sawa stated a condition could be added stating
prior to issuance of a demolition or grading permit, whichever
comes first, the developer shall met with the Community
Development Department and the Historic Preservation
Commission to determine which existing features of the farm are
to be incorporated into the proposed project.
77. Commissioner Irwin commented on one of the date trees near the
entrance of the property.
78. Mr. Sundstrom replied it was an Indian Red Gum that cannot be
moved. It will die if you move, or trim it. He added most of the
Date Palms were not salvageable, but the taller trees could be
used in conjunction with a building that is relatively tall, which is
what is proposed for this project.
P:\Cax0r.YN\1-PC10-18-01.wpd -10-
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
October 18, 2001
79. Commissioner Wright concurred with his opinion but added it
would be even more important if a photographic record was made
of the property as it exists.
80. Mr. Sundstrom stated maintaining the historic integrity of the
property would be a good marketing feature.
81. Commissioner Wright agreed stating the Traditions had found that
to be very true.
82. Commissioner Sharp asked if the applicant proposed a museum on
the site. Mr. Sundstrom stated they envisioned more of an all-
weather outdoor display.
83. Commissioner Irwin suggested the streets or lanes be named after
the people who lived and worked there. She also requested
monitoring be required during trenching.
84. Archaeological Consultant McKenna stated the report requested
monitoring during all earth moving.
85. Commissioner Irwin asked if monitoring was needed during all
earth moving, as this was not normally required.
86. Archaeological Consultant McKenna replied it was necessary for
pre -history.
87. Commissioner Wright asked Commissioner Mitchell what his
thoughts were on the necessity of monitoring during all earth
moving.
88. Commissioner Mitchell replied monitoring was not necessary if the
trenching was comprehensive enough to satisfy everyone in terms
of exploration and subsurface. Otherwise, you would just do the
major grading.
89. Archaeological Consultant McKenna stated that generally the
rough grading, tree removal, and things like that are done initially
to determine if there is any prehistory. The trenching is usually at
the end for finish viork where you get a look at the deeper
substrata. If you do not do the rough grade monitoring, you may
lose your pre -history.
P:\CAROLYN\HPCI 0-18-01.wpd -11-
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
October 18, 2001
90. Mr. Sundstrom monitoring is done on a daily basis.
91. Commissioners Wright and Irwin concurred it would be a beautiful
project.
92. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Wright/Mitchell to adopt Minute Motion 2001-016
recommending approval of Phase I Cultural Resources investigation
of a 43 acre parcel of property, located on the west side of
Washington Street, approximately 300 feet south of Highway
111, subject to the condition as modified:
1. The Oral History Program shall be prepared in cooperation
with the La Quinta Historical Society.
2. Collected materials shall become the property of the City of
La Quinta per the City's Standards of Curation.
3. Prior to issuance of a demolition or grading permit,
whichever comes first, the developer shall meet with the
Community Development Department and the Historic
Preservation Commission to determine which existing
features of the farm are to be incorporated into the
proposed project.
Unanimously approved.
B. Cultural Resources Assessment For Tentative Tract 30331: a request for
approval of the cultural Resources Assessment for Tentative Tract 30331, a
vacant rectangular 4.18 acre parcel located on the north side of Avenue 50,
west of Jefferson Street. Applicants: Santa Properties and Development LLC -
Archaeological Consultant: Archaeological Advisory Group (James Brock).
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. Commissioner Mitchell concurred with staff's recommendations.
3. Commissioner Wright asked if all the dunes had been tested.
4. Applicant, Nick Santa stated he spent two -and -a -half days on the
backhoe with the Archaeological Consultant. They tested the
P.\CAR0LYN\HPC10-18-01.wpd -12- ' , i
ATTACHMENT #5
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
October 3, 2001
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained
in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community
Development Department.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like
to say anything. Mr. Dan Brown, representing the applicant, gave
a presentation on the project.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked the height of the buildings. Mr.
Brown stated 26 feet. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about
the brackets shown on the elevations and whether or not they
were structural. Mr. Brown stated they were not structural and
were made out of wood. Committee Member Bobbitt went over
the plant list and suggested they eliminate the eucalyptus trees.
Barrel Cactus are expensive and can be a liability. Committee
Member Bobbitt recommended the date palms be inspected and
young in age.
4. Committee Member Cunningham stated he liked the project and
had no objections.
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion
2001-043 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2001-
012, as recommended.
G. Site Development Permit 99-659; a request of Point Happy Ranch LLC
for review of architectural and landscaping plans for a mixed use project
consisting of commercial buildings and senior care living in villas and
multi -tenant buildings located on the west side of Washington Street,
south of Highway 111.
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained
in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community
Development Department.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like
to address the Committee. Mr. Dennis Sunstrom, the applicant,
gave a presentation on the project.
GAWPD0CS\ARLC%ALRCI0-3-01.wpd 6
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
October 3, 2001
3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that on an existing date grove
it is wise to get rid of all the older trees. The design of the
buildings are dramatic and very attractive. He asked what the
commercial uses would be. Mr. Sunstrom stated they would
primarily support the residential use of the facility.
4. Committee Member Cunningham stated the historical value is a
private value in this case. It is a good project and he has no
objections.
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Cunningham/ Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion
2001-044 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 99-
659, as recommended.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS:
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members
Cunningham/Bobbitt to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architecture and
Landscaping Review Committee to a regular meeting to be held on November 7, 2001.
This meeting was adjourned at 11:18 a.m. on October 3, 2001.
Respectfully submitted,
BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
GAWPDGCMARLC\ALRC 10-3-01.wpd 7