2002 10 08 PCPlanning 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
OCTOBER 8, 2002
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 2002-093
Beginning Minute Motion 2002-017
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 September 24, 2002.
B. Department Report
V. PRESENTATIONS: None
PC/AGENDA
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Item ................. CONTINUED - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
2001-411, SPECIFIC PLAN 2001-051 AMENDMENT
#1 AND VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-007,
AMENDMENT #1
Applicant .......... Cameo Homes
Location ............ East side of Eisenhower Drive, north of Calle
Tampico and west of Avenida Bermudas
Request ........1. Certification of Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1
Revised
2. Amendment to the Specific Plan design guidelines for
a mixed land use development on 33 + acres,
including detachment of 12.72 acres for a future
public school; and
3. Review of architectural and landscaping plans for a
200-unit apartment complex and two commercial
pads in multiple story buildings on 12.04 acres.
Action ............... Resolution 2002- Resolution 2002-
Resolution 2002-
B. Item ................. VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2002-014
Applicant ..........
Lori Abdelnour (Allstate Insurance)
Location ............
Northeast corner of Avenida Bermudas and Calle
Amigo (51-650 Avenida Bermudas)
Request .............
Consideration of a conversion of a two story
residence to office use
Action ...............
Resolution 2002-
C. Item .................
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-457 AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30834
Applicant ..........
Madison Estates LLC
Location ............
The north side of Avenue 58, west of Madison Street
and south and east of Hermitage
Request .............
Consideration of a request to subdivide approximately
29.29-::E acres into 76 single family and other
common lots with private streets
Action ...............
Resolution 2002- and Resolution 2002-
D. Item .................
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29878, 1 ST TIME
EXTENSION
Applicant ..........
KSL Hotel Land, L.P.
Location ............
Southeast corner of Avenue 54 and PGA Boulevard
Request .............
Consideration of a one year extension of time for a
60-lot single family subdivision with private streets
on 22.21 acres
Action ...............
Resolution 2002-
PC/AGENDA
E. Item .................
Applicant ..........
Location ............
Request .............
Action ...............
VII. BUSINESS ITEMS:
VIII.
IX
X.
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29963 REVISED
Dr. Bruce Baumann
The northernmost terminus of Coral Mountain Court
and west of Madison Street
Consideration of a request to relocate the access
street serving a four -lot single family subdivision on
approximately 9.29 acres
Resolution 2002-
A. Item .................
APPEAL OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DECISION - RC 2002-708
Applicant ..........
Mr. Jerry Ellenz
Location ............
52-230 Avenida Montezuma
Request .............
Appeal of a decision denying an access way of less
than 15 feet in width along a house as required by La
Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.150.080.A.8.d.
Action ...............
Minute Motion 2002- ,
CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Report on the City Council meeting of October 1, 2002
ADJOURNMENT:
This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting
to be held on October 22, 2002, at 7:00 p.m.
PC/AGENDA
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
September 24, 2002 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 Butler who asked Commissioner Abels to lead the flag
salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Tom Kirk, Steve Robbins, Robert
Tyler, and Chairman Richard Butler.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City
Attorney Kathy Jenson, Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer, Principal
Planner Fred Baker, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Butler asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of
September 3, 2002. Commissioner Robbins asked that Page 1, under
Roll Call be corrected to show Commissioner Tyler's name only once.
Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 1, under Roll Call also be corrected
to remove "unanimously approved"; Page 1, under Consent Items
corrected to show, "Chairman Butler asked if there were any
corrections..." and show that Chairman Butler abstained from voting on
Page 2; Page 8, Item 6 correct the spelling of "toe". There being no
further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Robbins/Tyler to approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously
approved.
B. Department Report: None
V. PRESENTATIONS: None
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\9-24-02.wpd 1
Planning Commission Minutes
September 24, 2002
A. Specific Plan Amendment 2000-043 Amendment #2 and Sign
Application 2002-62 - a request of Madison/P.T.M La Quinta, L.L.C. for
consideration of a request to delete the Sign Program provisions from the
Specific Plan for Point Happy Commercial Center and review of a Sign
Program for Point Happy Commercial Center for the property located at
the northwest corner of Washington Street and Highway 1 1 1.
1. Chairman Butler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Butler asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Robbins asked why conditions not pertaining to the
sign program were included. Staff explained that when a Specific
Plan is brought back before the Commission all conditions are
subject to review by the Commission. Commissioner Robbins
asked why there was a difference between the staff report and
specific plan in regard to who would be approving signs. Staff
explained the sign program and any modifications to that program
will be approved by the Planning Commission. Individual building
signs as currently contained in the Specific Plan can be approved
by the Community Development Director.
3. Commissioner Tyler asked if the purpose of the Specific Plan is to
authorize deviations from the Zoning Code. At the moment the
Specific Plan has a reference to a sign program, so if the sign
program is deleted from the Specific Plan, the Commission then
has the authority to grant changes that are no longer in the
Specific Plan. Staff stated the Specific Plan does identify sign
types that are not allowed by the Zoning Code. Standards and
specifications, the size of the sign, type of letters, where they are
to be mounted, are in the sign program. By adopting the Specific
Plan the Commission is authorizing the specific sign types and
their configuration is contained in the sign program. The text for
the provisions of a sign program is being removed, but the
specifications will remain.
4. Commissioner Kirk asked if neon tubing was allowed in the City.
Staff stated not under the Zoning Code, that is why it is included
in the Specific Plan. Commissioner Kirk asked how would it be
determined whether or not neon would be allowed. Staff stated
the sign program would identify how the sign would be mounted,
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\9-24-02.wpd 2
Planning Commission Minutes
September 24, 2002
the size, color and type of the letters, not the Specific Plan.
Commissioner Kirk asked why neon tubing, but not allowed in the
City. Staff stated it was too flashy, bright and with the current
technology it can be toned down and more acceptable to the City.
5. Chairman Butler asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Rick Wilkerson, representing the development,
stated he was available to answer questions.
6. Commissioner Tyler stated there currently are two monument
signs, and asked if the blank monument signs would have the
signs of future tenants. Mr. Wilkerson stated the one at the
corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Washington Street is specifically for
"Point Happy" only. Their Specific Plan allows them two tenant
signs with three signs on each monument at the entrance off
Washington Street and the right in/out entrance by the Falls
Steakhouse.
7. There being no further questions of the applicant and no other
public comment, Chairman Butler closed the public participation
portion of the hearing and opened the matter up for Commission
discussion.
8. Commissioner Tyler noted some corrections in the sign program
and asked who would be monitoring the temporary banners, etc.
Staff stated temporary signs would still require the applicant to
apply for a use permit. The developer is wanting to have
preapproval of the signs before submitting them to the City for
approval. Commissioner Tyler asked about the signage control
inside the store. Staff noted the developer will maintain control
over all signs.
9. Commissioner Kirk asked if the developer was trying to regulate
every sign inside the store. Mr. Wilkerson stated they want strict
control on any signs. Discussion followed as to the type of signs
that would be regulated.
10. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2002-090 recommending approval of Point Happy
Specific Plan Amendment #2, as recommended.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\9-24-02.wpd 3
Planning Commission Minutes
September 24, 2002
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and
Chairman Butler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN:
None.
11. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2002-091 recommending approval of the Point Happy
Sign Program 2002-629, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and
Chairman Butler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN:
None.
B. Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1 Revised, Specific Plan 2001-051
Amendment #1, and Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1: a
request of Cameo Homes and Landaq, Inc. for certification of a Revised
Environmental Assessment, an Amendment to the Specific Plan design
guidelines for a mixed land use development on 33 + acres including
detachment of 12.72 acres for a future public school, and review of
architectural and landscaping plans for a 200-unit apartment complex and
two commercial pads in multiple story buildings on 12 acres located on
the east side of Eisenhower Drive, north of Calle Tampico and west of
Avenida Bermudas.
1. Chairman Butler 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. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Butler asked if the
applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Victor
Mahoney, representing Cameo Homes, gave a description of the
project.
3. Commissioner Kirk asked the applicant what the view of the
project would be from the street. Mr. Mahoney explained and
discussion followed as to what would be seen from the street.
Mr. Manny Gonzalez, architect for the project gave a further
explanation of the project.
4. Commissioner Tyler asked the grade differential from the street to
the project. Mr. Mahoney stated it was two feet at the entrance.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\9-24-02.wpd 4
Planning Commission Minutes
September 24, 2002
5. Commissioner Tyler noted items in the Specific Plan that needed
to be deleted as it was carried over from the prior Specific Plan.
He asked what the easterly boundary would be. Mr. Mahoney
explained the location and stated it would have a wrought iron
fence. Mr. Chris Bergh noted the location of the Hotel parking lot.
6. Commissioner Kirk questioned if the density complies with the
current Zoning Code. Staff stated yes, under the Village zoning
designation, the Planning Commission sets the density in the
Village. The highest density the City has is 16. In addition, State
law allows density bonuses for affordable units and staff is
working with the developer to obtain 75 units of affordability.
Commissioner Kirk asked if there was a cap. Staff stated there
was. Commissioner Kirk asked how many units would fall below
the minimum unit size. Mr. Mahoney stated 46 units at 670
square feet. Commissioner Kirk asked if they were able to address
the changes recommended by the Architecture and Landscaping
Review Committee (ALRC). Mr. Mahoney stated they have made
all the changes requested. Commissioner Kirk asked the location
of where other recreational amenities were placed. Mr. Mahoney
noted the common areas that contained barbeques, etc.
7. Commissioner Robbins asked for clarification as to whether this is
an Amendment to the Specific Plan or a new Specific Plan; what
happens to the KSL parking lot. Staff stated the Specific Plan
covers the same parcels of dirt, but rather than preparing a new
Specific Plan, staff requested the applicant to amend the Plan to
show the new configuration of this parcel. Commissioner Robbins
noted statements that needed to be deleted from the Specific Plan.
Staff noted the Village Use Permit was submitted for the
apartment complex; the specific plan is to accommodate the
apartments or any other type of commercial projects. This was to
give them flexibility with the project.
8. Commissioner Abels asked for more detail on the live -work
commercial areas. Mr. Mahoney explained the units would be
located below and the tenant would lives above the work area.
Commissioner Abels asked what type of tenants they were looking
for. Mr. Mahoney stated working professionals.
9. Commissioner Kirk asked the applicant for other locations where
this type of project has been successful. Mr. Mahoney stated San
Juan Capistrano for one, but it was not in conjunction with a
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\9-24-02.wpd 5
Planning Commission Minutes
September 24, 2002
multi -family residential. Commissioner Kirk asked the location of
the pedestrian access. Mr. Mahoney stated it is at Eisenhower
Drive. They are working with KSL to obtain access at the east end
of the project.
10. Commissioner Tyler noted the ALRC recommendation for a wall on
the south and east perimeter; what will be done on the north side.
Mr. Mahoney stated there is an existing wall on the east side and
it will be a wrought iron on the south, but the units on the north
would not have a wall to retain the view of the golf course.
11. Commissioner Robbins noted there would be a request of CVWD
for limited access to the levy on the north side. Mr. Mahoney
stated they propose to work with the CVWD to have wrought iron
with shepherd hooks on the top of the fence, at the toe of the levy
to not block the view.
12. Chairman Butler asked if there was any other public comment.
Mrs. Kay Wolff, 77-235 Calle Ensenada, stated she did not know
anything about the project before tonight. Apartments normally
get a bad reputation and La Quinta does need them. When
considering apartments she thinks about density, quality,
management, and placement of the neighboring population and
traffic. The density of this project is a concern as they are asking
for considerable change. Traffic will be a big concern including the
school traffic. She is not sure what could be done to improve this,
but the density and traffic should be addressed.
13. There being no other public comment, Chairman Butler closed the
public participation portion of the hearing and opened the matter
up for Commission discussion.
14. Commissioner Robbins stated he agrees with the concerns on the
traffic and noted there was no traffic study included with the
report. A project of this size next to a school is a concern.
15. Commissioner Tyler asked what improvements are planned for
Eisenhower Drive. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated
there has been a significant amount of planning for Eisenhower
and it will be widened at this location as part of the Capital
Improvement Program. With respect to the traffic generation,
there is no study for this project because during the General Plan
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\9-24-02.wpd 6
Planning Commission Minutes
September 24, 2002
update there was no change of zoning proposed and therefore the
General Plan had already took into consideration the amount of
traffic that would be generated on this street. The City collects
fees to provide for the traffic signals and off -site improvements.
There will be a right in/right out and left -in to the site.
16. Commissioner Robbins stated he is still concerned that the traffic
issues need to be address. Community Development Director
Jerry Herman stated there was a traffic study done and it agrees
with the information obtained during the General Plan update.
17. Commissioner Kirk stated that multi -family housing has a place in
La Quinta and he agrees with the density for this site. However,
he also believes there needs to be more amenities on the site and
if they need to reorientate the site to provide more open space,
then so be it. He would rather have the balconies, vines and trellis
work that was proposed in the original plan, but also he would
prefer a more urban setting, pedestrian linkages, and additional
amenities.
18. Commissioner Tyler stated he agrees with Commissioner Robbins
on the errors in the staff report and Specific Plan. Also, there
needs to be a well planned wall on the north property line.
19. Commissioner Abels suggested the project be continued to allow
the applicant time to better define some of the concerns that have
been raised.
20. Chairman Butler reopened the public hearing. Mr. Forrest Haag,
landscape architect for the project, explained how the Specific
Plan was amended.
21. There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed.
22. Commissioner Tyler stated he believes the Specific Plan does not
give enough explanation of the site.
23. Chairman Butler asked if staff believed the project could be better
defined if it were allowed to come back, or could the Commission
refine the conditions at this meeting. Staff stated either way.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\9-24-02.wpd 7
Planning Commission Minutes
September 24, 2002
24. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Abets to continue the project to October 8,
2002, asking the applicant to better clarify the Specific Plan to
know what is being approved, show additional amenities woven
into the site plan, improved pedestrian access to the Village and
shows the location of the perimeter walls. Unanimously approved.
Chairman Butler recessed the meeting the meeting at 8:44 p.m. and reconvened at
8:50 p.m.
C. Zoning Code Amendment 2002-073; a request of the City for
consideration of an amendment to Chapter 9.60, Section 9.60.030-
Fences and Walls, of the La Quinta Municipal Code, to permit split rail
fencing in the front yard within residential zones.
1. Chairman Butler 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. There being no questions of staff and no other public comment,
Chairman Butler closed the public participation portion of the
hearing and opened the matter up for Commission discussion.
3. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Tyler/Abets to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2002-092 recommending approval of Zoning Code
Amendment 2002-073, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abets, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and
Chairman Butler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN:
None.
VII. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Notice of Public Nuisance Citation #6559 a request of Bill and Jan Turner
for an appeal of a Public Nuisance Citation regarding the violation of
front/side yard setback, satellite dish location, and construction without
a permit.
1. Chairman Butler 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.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\9-24-02.wpd 8
Planning Commission Minutes
September 24, 2002
2. Chairman Butler asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Robbins stated the report submitted by Code
Compliance shows a multitude of canopies/structures, and asked
if other residents had received citations. Staff stated they will be
cited depending on the outcome of this meeting.
3. Commissioner Tyler noted there were three portions to the
citation. Staff stated that was correct.
4. Commissioner Robbins asked if this type of structure were located
in the sideyard, or back yard, and a vehicle be allowed to drive
back and park under it: would a building permit be allowed.
Community Safety Manager John Hardcastle stated the Building
Code calls out the square footage for when a permit is allowed.
It depends on the amount of area under the canopy to determine
if a permit would required.
5. Commissioner Abels stated it is important to keep in mind the look
of the streetscape.
6. Commissioner Kirk stated that if this is an illegal structure, you
cannot have a building permit. Staff stated that it is not a
buildable structure because of the setback. Community
Development Director Jerry Herman recited the Code requirements
for shade structures.
7. Chairman Butler asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. and Mrs. Bill Turner, 53-750 Avenida Obregon,
stated the purpose of putting up the shade structure. They did
drive up and down the Cove before determining what type of
canopy to purchase and to see what had been allowed. They
chose the one currently installed as it was a much sturdier one
than what they had seen in the Cove. They have addressed the
company they bought the shade structure from and they have
corrected their information. They have a corner lot and do not
have any options due to the setbacks, to provide shade for their
driveway. They are trying to enhance the landscaping as well. It
is not a permanent structure and is not attached to their home.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\9-24-02.wpd 9
Planning Commission Minutes
September 24, 2002
8. Commissioner Abels asked if the company they purchased it from
informed them as to whether or not these structures were
allowed. Ms. Turner stated no. American Awning was
subsequently informed and they have put all future sales on hold.
9. Commissioner Tyler asked when the house was built. Ms. Turner
stated 1990. Commissioner Tyler asked if the size of the garage
is the same now. Staff stated yes; 20 feet by 20 feet.
Commissioner Tyler asked why they did not park in the garage.
Ms. Turner stated they have motorcycles and other vehicles in the
garage. In regard to the satellite dish, they can remove it, but it
can only be seen when looking down the sideyard.
10. Commissioner Robbins stated he commends them on installing a
nice looking awning in comparison to some of the others shown
in the examples submitted. He is concerned that the retail stores
are not informing the public where they can and cannot be
installed.
11. Commissioner Kirk stated he too is concerned as to how you
approve one and not the others. He asked staff how they make
a determination as to what meets the Code and what can create
trouble for staff. Staff stated it becomes subjective and it is not
their desire to be treating people unequal.
12. Commissioner Robbins asked why this structure was the only one
given a citation. Staff noted this was not the first one, this is the
first that appealed the citation.
13. Commissioner Kirk stated the Cove does have some special
circumstances in regard to the size of the lots. Some specific
requirements could be placed on the shade structures to permit
their use. He would support flexibility in the Ordinance to allow
them.
14. Chairman Butler stated this is a nice installation, but he does not
want to approve them as it could open the door for it to be
allowed anywhere.
15. Commissioner Tyler stated the City does recognize their are special
circumstances with the Cove lots. He does have a problem
supporting them as it will allow all types and styles that could be
unattractive.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\9-24-02.wpd 10
Planning Commission Minutes
September 24, 2002
16. Commissioner Abels stated the streetscape is important and
unfortunately the applicants have been taken advantage of.
17. There being no further discussion, Chairman Butler closed the
public participation portion of the meeting and opened the meeting
for Commission discussion.
18. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Tyler/Abels to adopt Minute Motion 2002-015,
denying appeal of Public Nuisance Citation #6559, as
recommended. Motion carried with Commissioner Kirk opposed.
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL:
IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. No report of the September 17, 2002, City Council meeting, was given.
X. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Abels/Tyler to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission to be held October 8, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. This
meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:39 p.m. on September 24,
2002.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\9-24-02.wpd 11
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2002 (CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 24,
2002)
CASE NUMBERS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-41 1 REVISED,
SPECIFIC PLAN 2001-051 AMENDMENT #1, AND VILLAGE
USE PERMIT 2001-007 AMENDMENT #1 - VISTA
MONTANA
APPLICANT/
DEVELOPER: CAMEO HOMES (VICTOR MAHONY)
REQUESTS: 1. CERTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
2001-41 1 REVISED;
2. AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGN
GUIDELINES FOR A MIXED LAND USE DEVELOPMENT ON
APPROXIMATELY 33 ACRES, INCLUDING DETACHMENT
OF 12.72 ACRES FOR A FUTURE PUBLIC SCHOOL AND
2.68 ACRES FOR AN EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING; AND
3. REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS
FOR A 200-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX AND TWO
COMMERCIAL PADS IN MULTIPLE STORY BUILDINGS ON
12.04 ACRES.
LOCATION: EAST SIDE OF EISENHOWER DRIVE, NORTH OF CALLE
TAMPICO AND WEST OF AVENIDA BERMUDAS
PROPERTY
OWNERS: CAMEO HOMES AND LANDAQ, INC.
ARCHITECT: KTGY GROUP, INC.
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT: FORREST K. HAAG, ASLA, INC.
ENGINEER: M.D.S. CONSULTING (CHRIS J. BERGH, L.S.)
GENERAL PLAN/
ZONING
DESIGNATIONS: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL (VC)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED REVISIONS TO
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-411 PURSUANT
TO THE SUBMISSION OF TRAFFIC AND HYDROLOGY
STUDIES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT REQUEST. BASED
UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE
A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT; THEREFORE, A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION IS RECOMMENDED.
LAND USES:
NORTH: EXISTING FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL (GOLF COURSE
FAIRWAY) AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION HACIENDA'S @
LA QUINTA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT BEYOND
SOUTH: ACROSS CALLE TAMPICO, COMMERCIAL AND
RESIDENTIAL USES, AND SCATTERED VACANT LOTS IN
THE VILLAGE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
EAST: ACROSS AVENIDA BERMUDAS, EXISTING AUGIE'S MEAT
MARKET AND FUTURE EMBASSY SUITES HOTEL
PROJECT PER SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-050 AND VILLAGE
USE PERMIT 2001-012 (SANTA ROSA PLAZA)
WEST: ACROSS EISENHOWER DRIVE, EXISTING FLOOD
CONTROL CHANNEL AND GOLF COURSE FAIRWAYS
BACKGROUND:
Planning Commission Review
On September 24, 2002, the Planning Commission raised a number of questions about
the development, and on a unanimous vote, continued the public hearing to October
8" A copy of the minutes from this meeting are in the packet under separate cover.
Two new planning documents were received from the developer on October 1, 2002,
which identify changes they have made to the project since the last Planning
Commission meeting.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant is requesting to amend the Vista Montana Land Use Plan as follows:
Commercial Component (Planning Area #1) - Two commercial building sites are being
proposed to the west of the multi -family component with frontage on Eisenhower
Drive on 1.73 acres (Parcel 4 of TPM 30721). Plan exhibits conceptually show two
story buildings that range up to 30'-0" high with a combined floor area of 12,000
square feet setback approximately 32 feet from Eisenhower Drive. The proposed
buildings will be architecturally similar to the existing KSL Resort office building on
oc42
Calle Tampico through the use of varied roof and window designs and other
ornamental features (Attachment 1).
90 open parking spaces encircle each building while a 48'-0" wide driveway separates
each building site. This primary driveway is designed for right-in/right-out and left -in
traffic movements whereas the southernly-most driveway is gated to restrict access
to emergency vehicle use only. Access gating is planned to separate residential
parking areas from commercial parking facilities.
Residential Component (Planning Area #2) - A multi -family component of 200 units on
10.31 acres is proposed for the northwest corner of the project area on Parcel 3 of
Tentative Parcel Map 30721 located approximately 630 feet north of Calle Tampico
and 150 feet east of Eisenhower Drive. Two story building complexes are planned
oriented around common open space and parking areas. Five unit types ranging from
670 square feet (one bedroom) to 1,177 square feet (three bedrooms) are proposed.
On -site parking is a combination of open and covered spaces, using a ratio of 2.3
spaces per dwelling, taking access from a looping two-way driveway. A one story
recreation building of 2,694 square feet is located on the west side of the project with
open space courtyard and amenities on the east (e.g., swimming pool, spa, etc.).
Recreation improvements planned in the retention basin are soccer field, sand lot
volleyball and perimeter walking/jogging track.
The various components of the project have been designed in the same architectural
style as the La Quinta Resort featuring a smooth stucco finish, concrete roof tile, and
other ornamental features.
The Zoning Code specifies that the ultimate decision on density shall rest with the
Planning Commission unless final action by the City Council is required. Medium High
and High Density residential development standards of the City's Zoning Ordinance
were used as guidelines for development of the apartment complex as the Village
Commercial District does not contain an in-depth list of residential development
standards.
Distribution Center Component (Planning Area #3) - The applicant has shown the
original 40,000 sq. ft. distribution center for the La Quinta Resort Hotel and its
employee parking lot on 5.04 acres (Parcel 2 of TPM 30721) as approved by the City
Council on March 6, 2001. Development standards have been added to the Specific
Plan document.
School Site (Desert Sands Unified School District) - Property at the northeast corner
of Calle Tampico and Eisenhower Drive is being considered for a new public school to
accommodate 750 elementary students. Therefore, the applicant and property owners
have requested that this 12.74 acre (Parcel 1 of TPM 30721) area be removed from
the Specific Plan document since it will owned by a public agency.
CONCLUSION:
The City's General Plan encourages varied housing product types and assumes that
planned communities may include affordable units in high density developments. By
providing a mixed land use development, this in -fill urban project will assure an active
downtown center with residential uses being an active part of the Village environment.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Findings and Conditions of Approval necessary to approve the project can be made as
noted in the attached Resolutions.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending to the City
Council certification of EA 2001-41 1 (Revised) for Specific Plan 2001-051
Amendment #1 and Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1;
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment #1, subject to
conditions; and
3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, subject to
conditions.
Attachments:
1. Concept Master Plan Exhibit
2. Revised Specific Plan/Village Use Documents dated 10-1-02 (Commission only)
PrWrcvf by:
Troad il, Associate Planner
ecu
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A REVISED
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT 2001-411 PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN
2001-051 AMENDMENT #1 AND VILLAGE USE PERMIT
2001-007 AMENDMENT #1
CASE: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-411, REVISED
APPLICANT: CAMEO HOMES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did, on the 3rd and 241h days of September, 2002, and 8th day of October, 2002, ahold
duly noticed Public Hearings to consider Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1
(Revised) for Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment #1 and Village Use Permit 2001-
007 Amendment #1 ("Proposed Project") located at the northeastern corner of
Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico, more particularly described as follows:
Assessor's Parcel Numbers 773-022-014 and 773-022-032
Parcels 1-4 of Parcel Map 29886; Portion N %2 of Section 1, T6S, R6E, SBBM
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on
the 6th day of March, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider certification
of Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1 for Vista Montana (i.e., General Plan
Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use
Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map 30043), and on a 5-0 vote,
adopted Resolution 2001-16, requiring compliance with mitigation measures during
on -site construction work; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did, on the 27th day of February, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1 for Vista Montana (i.e., General Plan
Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use
Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map 30043) located at the northeastern
corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico, and unanimously recommended
certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for
Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1 under Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
017; and
WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment (EA) has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970," as amended (City Council Resolution 83-68), in that the Community
Development Department has prepared a Revised Environmental Assessment for EA
2001-41 1, determining that although the proposed Project could have a significant
0l
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
EA 2001-411 Revised for Vista Montana, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 2
adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case
because appropriate mitigation measures are being required consistent with the prior
assessment as certified by the City Council on March 6, 2001, by adoption of
Resolution 2001-16; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Intent to Adopt an Revised Environmental
Assessment was posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office on August 8,
2002, for Vista Montana by the Community Development Department. On September
26, 2002, the Community Development Department mailed a copy of the completed
Environmental Assessment to the Departments of Fish and Game and U.S. Wildlife
Service for their review and comment; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the public
hearing notice in the Desert Sun Newspaper on August 22, 2002, for the September
3, 2002 Planning Commission meeting as prescribed by Section 9.200.110 (Public
Notice Procedure) of the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to
all property owners within 500 feet of the site by the Community Development
Department on August 13, 2002. To date, no comments have been received from
adjacent property owners; and
WHEREAS, on July 8, 2002, the Community Development Department
mailed case file materials to all affected agencies for their review and comment. All
written comments are on file with the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has prepared traffic and hydrology studies for
the new project to supplement earlier studies that were evaluated by the City Council
on March 6, 2001; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission, as
follows:
SECTION 1: The above recitations are true and correct and are adopted as the
findings of the Planning Commission.
SECTION 2: The Planning Commission finds that the revised Environmental
Assessment was prepared and processed in compliance with CEQA Guidelines and the
City's implementation procedures, and that mitigation measures identified in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration have been incorporated into the Proposed Project and
that these measures mitigate any potential significant effect to a point where clearly
no significant environmental effects will occur as a result of this Project.
SECTION 3: No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances
under which the Proposed Project will be undertaken, which will require major
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
EA 2001-411 Revised for Vista Montafia, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 3
modifications or revisions to the Environmental Assessment, due to the involvement
of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of the
previously identified significant effects.
SECTION 4: No new information of substantial importance which was not known, and
could not have been known, with the exercise of reasonable diligence, at the time the
Environmental Assessment was adopted, has become available which shows any of
the bases described in CEQA Guidelines § 15162(a)(3), for requiring an Environmental
Impact Report.
SECTION 5: Based on these findings and the EA Addendum, the City has determined
that no Environmental Impact Report is required or appropriate under Public Resources
Code § 21166, and that an Addendum is sufficient to make the prior Environmental
Assessment apply to the Proposed Project.
SECTION 6: The Proposed Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or
§general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no significant
unmitigated impacts were identified.
SECTION 7: The Proposed Project will not have the potential to degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants, or animals, or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history, or prehistory.
SECTION 8: 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, as the site has been used for farming activities since the late 1940's
and the site's date palm grove was removed in 1999.
SECTION 9: The Proposed Project does not have the potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as no
significant effects on environmental factors have been identified.
SECTION 10: The Proposed Project will not result in impacts which are individually
limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed
development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be
significantly affected by the Proposed Project.
SECTION 11: The Proposed Project will not have the environmental effects that will
adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant
impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public
services.
0l ,
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
EA 2001-411 Revised for Vista Montana, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 4
SECTION 12: The Planning Commission has fully considered the proposed revised
Environmental Assessment, underlying Mitigated Negative Declaration and the
comments received thereon.
SECTION 13: The EA Addendum reflects the independent judgment and analysis of
the Planning Commission.
SECTION 14: The location of the documents which constitute the record of
proceedings upon which the Planning Commission decision is based, is the La Quinta
City Hall, Community Development Department, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta,
California 92253, and the custodian of those records is Jerry Herman, Community
Development Director.
SECTION 15: Based upon the Environmental Assessment and the entire record of
proceedings, the Proposed Project has no potential for adverse effects on wildlife as
that term is defined in Fish and Game Code § 711.2.
SECTION 16: The Planning Commission has on the basis of substantial evidence,
rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 California Code of
Regulations 753.5(d).
SECTION 17: The revisions to EA 2001-41 1 are hereby recommended to the City
Council for certification.
SECTION 18: The Community Development Director shall cause to be filed with the
County Clerk a "Notice of Determination" pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15075(a)
once reviewed by the City Council.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 81h day of October, 2002, by the vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RICH BUTLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
a
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
EA 2001-411 Revised for Vista Montana, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 5
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
C.
Environmental Checklist Form
1. Project Title: Specific Plan 2001-051, Amendment No. 1, Village Use
Permit 2001-007, Amendment No. 1
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Greg Trousdell, 760-777-7125
4. Project Location: Northeast corner of Calle Tampico and Eisenhower Drive
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Cameo Homes
20 Corporate Plaza
Newport Beach, CA 92660
6. General Plan Designation: Village Commercial
7. Zoning: Village Commercial
8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to
later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its
implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment changes the proposed land uses for a
Specific Plan approved by the City in 2001. The site is a total of 32 net acres.
The previous approval allowed 227 residential units on the westerly 22 acres,
20,000 square feet of retail commercial space on 1.68 acres, 20,600 square
feet of office commercial space on 2.57 acres, and a distribution center and
employee parking Oot for the La Quinta Resort on 5.79 acres. Since approval of
the Specific Plan, a portion of the employee parking lot (94 of the possible 630
allowed spaces) and a 17,891 square foot office building have been
constructed.
The applicant proposes to amend the Specific Plan to reduce the residential site
to 10.3 acres, with a total of 200 units (on the northwestern portion of the
site); to allow for a future school site on the southwestern 12 acres; to delete
the 1.68 acre retail commercial site on Calle Tampico; to allow 15,000 square
feet of retail commercial land uses on 1.7 acres on the western end of the
property; and to maintain the distribution center and parking lot approval on the
5.79 acre parcel on the northeastern portion of the site. The approved and
constructed office building site is currently built out.
PAGreg T\CameoEA411 Chklist(Revised).wpd 1
The Village Use Permit would allow the construction of 200 apartments on 10.3
acres, and the parking areas on the 1.7 acre commercial site. The apartment
complex also includes parking, a common recreation building, one swimming
pool and two tennis courts.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings.
North: La Quinta Evacuation Channel, golf course at Duna La Quinta
South: Calle Tampico, generally vacant Village Commercial lands
East: Vacant Village Commercial lands, recently approved for hotel and
commercial development
West: Eisenhower Drive, golf course
10, Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
None
P:\Greg T\CameoEA41 1 Chklist(Revised).wpd
2 � ,
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
Agriculture Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Geology and Soils
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation/Traffic
Utilities and Service Systems
Mandatory Findings
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.
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 equired.
Signature Date
PAGmV\CameoEA411 Chklist(Revised).wpd
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 3.6)
b) Damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
(Site topography, TTM 3 065 1)
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)
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? (General
Plan EIR p. I11-21 ff.)
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract? (Zoning Map, Property Owner)
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 nonagricultural use? (No ag. Land in proximity to
project site)
II. 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, 2002 PM 10 Plan for the Coachella Valley)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
(Project Description)
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
X
X
X
X
lA
X
X
11
X
X
,Greg T\CameoEA411Chklist(Revised).wpd
IV.
V.
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
people? (Project Description)
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? (LSA, letter report, 1/17/01)
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? (LSA, letter report, 1/17/01)
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?((LSA, letter report, 1/17/01)
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? (LSA, letter report, 1 / 17/01)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (LSA, letter
report, 1/17/01)
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? (LSA, letter report,
1/17/01)
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? ("Historical/
Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report," CRM Tech,
1 /8/2001)
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)?("Historical/ Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing
Report," CRM Tech, 1 /8/2001)
c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site?
(Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 5.9)
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries? ("Historical/ Archaeological Resources Survey and
Testing Report," CRM Tech, 1/8/2001)
X
X
X
X
X
rm
X
F19
\Greg T\CameoEA411 Chklist(Revised).wpd
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? (MEA Exhibit 6.2)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ("Geotechnical Investigation..."
Sladden Engineering, July 2002)
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? (General
Plan Exhibit 8.2)
iv) Landslides? (General Plan Exhibit 8.3)
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (General
Plan Exhibit 8.4)
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? (General Plan EIR, Exhibit III-17)
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, Exhibit III-17)
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? (General Plan EIR, Exhibit
III-17)
'II. 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? (General
Plan MEA p. 95 ff.)
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? (General
Plan MEA p. 95 ff.)
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? (General Plan MEA p. 95 ff.)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
km
1/
FAq
ireg T\CameoEA411 Chklist(Revised).wpd
7
Is
VIII.
X.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use
map)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip; would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the
project area? (General Plan land use map)
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (General
Plan MEA p. 95 ff)
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)
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project:
a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements? ("Preliminary Hydrology
and Hydraulics Report," MDS Consulting, July 2002)
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 p. III-87 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? ("Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report," MDS
Consulting, July 2002)
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? ("Preliminary
Hydrology and Hydraulics Report," MDS Consulting, July 2002)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control?
("Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulics Report," MDS Consulting,
July 2002)
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 Exhibit
6.6)
g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or
redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 6.6)
LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? (Project Description)
F7
F4
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
\Greg T\CameoEA411Chk1ist(Revised).wpd
8
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? (General Plan p. 18 ff.)
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
communities conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p.
74 ff.)
�. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Result 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 Environmental
Assessment p. 71 ff.)
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 p. 71 ff.)
(I. NOISE: Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies? ("Noise Impact Analysis,"
LSA, 1/16/01)
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels? (Residential project -- no
ground borne vibration)
c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
("Noise Impact Analysis," LSA, 1 /l 6/01)
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? (General Plan
land use map)
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 land use map)
M
X
X
X
X
X
�2
X
X
KII. 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 X
example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (General
Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials)
\Greg T\CameoEA411 Chklist(Revised).wpd
9
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)
(III. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any
of the public services:
Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57)
Police protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57)
Schools? (General Plan MEA, p. 52 ff.)
Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan)
Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 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)
cV. 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)? ("Traffic
Impact Analysis," Endo Engineering, 1/16/01 & 7/18/02)
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?("Traffic Impact Analysis," Endo
Engineering, 1/16/01 & 7/18/02)
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? (No air traffic involved in project)
X
iN
X
X
i2
X
Greg T1CameoEA411Chklist(Revised).wpd
lut
d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)? (VUP site plan)
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (VUP site plan)
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (VUP site plan)
g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (VUP site plan)
KVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan
MEA, p. 58 ff.)
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p.
58 ff.)
d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
e) 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, p. 58 ff.)
f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity
to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (General
Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
KVII. 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)?
\Greg T\CameoEA411 Chklist(Revised).wpd
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or X
indirectly?
KVIII. EARLIER ANALYSIS
Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects
have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a
discussion should identify the following on attached sheets.
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analysis and state where they are available for review.
The original technical studies and Initial Study, prepared and adopted in 2001 for Specific Plan 2001-051, were used in
this review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
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.
OURCES:
Taster Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 2002.
eneral Plan, City of La Quinta, 2002.
,eneral Plan EIR, City of La Quinta, 2002.
CAQMD CEQA Handbook.
ity of La Quinta Municipal Code
iistorical/Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report," prepared by CRM Tech, January 8, 2001.
Vista Montana Village Use Permit Traffic Impact Analysis," prepared by Endo Engineering, January 16, 2001.
�a Quinta Village Apartments.... Traffic Impact Analysis," prepared by Endo Engineering, July, 2002.
etter Report regarding biological resources prepared by LSA, January 17, 2001.
Vista Montana Development Noise Impact Analysis," prepared by LSA, January 16, 2001.
?reliminary Hydrology Report," prepared by MDS Consulting, July, 2002.
\Greg T\CameoEA411 Chklist(Revised).wpd
12
0L
Daily
Threshold* 550 75 100
150
Based on 4,370 trips/day and average trip length of 10.0 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.
The revised project would result in 200 apartment units, a future school site on
12 acres, 12,000 square feet of retail commercial land uses on 1.7 acres, and
to a 40,000 square foot distribution center and 630 parking spaces for
employees. The approved and constructed office building site is currently built
out. These land uses have the potential to generate 7,312 daily trips2. These
trips could generate the following level of pollutants.
Running Exhaust Emissions - Proposed Amended Specific Plan
(pounds/day)
PM10 PM10 PM10
CO ROC NOx Exhaust Brakes Tires
45 mph 359.9 16.14 64.5 -- 1.61 1.61
5 7
Daily
Threshold 550 75 100 150
*
Based on 7,312 trips/day and average trip length of 10.0 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.
Although the revised project will result in increased emissions, the revised
project will not exceed any threshold for the generation of moving emissions,
as established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District in
determining the need for an EIR. The impacts to air quality relating to chemical
pollution are not expected to be significant.
III. b) The proposed project will not result in any stationary source air quality
violations, because residential and commercial land uses are proposed, which
will not generate stationary source emissions.
2 Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Endo Engineering, January, 2001 ("Vista Montana Traffic
Impact Analysis"), and July 2002 ("La Quinta Village Apartments Traffic Impact Analysis".
P:\Greg T\CameoEA41 1 Add(Revised).wpd 2
III. c) & d)
The construction of the revised project will have the potential to generate dust,
which could impact residents both on and off site. The Coachella Valley is a
severe non -attainment area for PM 10 (particulate matter of 10 microns or
smaller). The Valley has recently adopted stricter measures for the control of
PM 10. These measures will be integrated into conditions of approval for the
proposed project. The contractors for all projects on the site will be required to
submit a PM10 Management Plan prior to initiation of any earth moving activity,
and to submit the Plan to both the City and SCAQMD. In addition, the potential
impacts associated with PM 10 can be mitigated by the measures below.
1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to
minimize exhaust emissions.
2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary
power poles to avoid on -site power generation.
3. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit
opportunities.
4. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site.
5. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of
three feet prior to the onset of grading activities.
6. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed
on an on -going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the
site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered
regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall
be watered at the end of each work day.
7. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the
potential for wind erosion. Parkway landscaping shall be installed with
the first phase of development. Any portion of the site which is graded
and not immediately built upon shall be stabilized with either chemical
stabilizers or natural ground cover, subject to approval by the City
Engineer.
8. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of
construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site.
9. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage
ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour.
P:\Greg T\CameoEA41 1 Add(Revised).wpd 3
0�
With the implementation of these mitigation measures, and the implementation
of the Coachella Valley PM 10 Management Plan 2002, the impacts from
particulate matter to air quality from buildout will not be significant.
III. e) The construction of homes and retail commercial development will not result in
objectionable odors, because the permitted land uses within each of the
planning areas do no generate such odors.
IV) a)-f)
A biological survey was conducted for the original project'. The survey found
that the site provides poor habitat due to previous disturbances on the site.
Although common species were found at the time of the survey, no threatened
species are expected to occur on the site. No mitigation measures are
necessary. Since the revised project will be substantially similar to the original
project in terms of types of construction, the impacts of the revised project are
also expected to be less than significant.
V. a), b) c) & d)
A cultural resource survey and testing program was conducted for the subject
property'. The survey and testing found that no resources occur on the site.
The report further finds that it is possible that buried artifacts could be
encountered during the construction process. In order to mitigate this potential
impact, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented:
1. Should any earth moving activity on the site uncover a potential
archaeological resource, all activity on the site shall stop until such time
as a qualified archaeologist has evaluate the resource, and recommended
mitigation measures. The archaeologist shall also be required to submit
to the Community Development Department, for review and approval, a
written report on all activities on the site.
VI. a) i1, ii) & iv)
The proposed project lies in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The property, as
with the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the
event of a major earthquake. In order to mitigate and protect the City from this
hazard, the City has adopted the Uniform Building Code, and the associated
construction 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
3 Letter report prepared by LSA, January, 2001.
Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report, prepared by CRM Tech,
January, 2001.
PAGreg T\CameoEA41 1 Add(Revised).wpd 4
impacts from ground failure are reduced to a less than significant level. This
mitigation will be sufficient to reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
The project site is not located adjacent to a hillside, and will not be subject to
landslides.
VI. b) The site is not located in a blowsand hazard area. As discussed above, the soils
on the proposed site are loose silty sand. Sandy soils must be properly
compacted prior to construction to assure long-term stability. The City's
standards for site preparation shall be adhered to, as required by the City
Engineer. In order to reduce the impacts of unstable soils on the proposed site,
the following mitigation measure shall be implemented:
1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for any structure on the proposed
site, the applicant shall submit, for review and approval by the City
Engineer, a detailed, site specific soil study, which shall include
recommendations designed for the specific structure(s) being
constructed.
Vi. c)-e)
The soils on the site are not expansive, and support the development proposed.
The soils on the site may be subject to caving during excavation, but this
potential impact will be mitigated by the geologist in the above -required
geotechnical analysis. The potential impacts associated with geology are less
than significant.
V11. a)-h)
Residential and commercial land uses will not generate any unregulated
hazardous material. The site is not located within an airport land use plan. The
site is not located within a wildland fire area. Emergency response will be
implemented in accordance with the City's Emergency Response Plan, in
cooperation with the County of Riverside.
VIII. a), c),d) & e)
The proposed project will be required to retain the 100 year, 24 hour storm on -
site. This requirement includes the installation of "water cleaning" devices when
necessary to ensure that no contaminants are introduced into the storm water
system. This requirement will reduce the potential for violation of a water
quality standard to a less than significant level.
VIII. b)
All development adds to demand for groundwater. 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 project will be required to
retain storm flows on -site, which will encourage percolation of storm water into
the ground. The project proponent will be required to implement the City's
P:\Greg T\CameoEA41 1 Add (Revised). wpd 5
standards for water conserving plumbing fixtures. Finally, the proposed project
will be required to meet the requirements of the City's water -conserving
landscaping ordinance, which requires that projects demonstrate that
landscaping plans are water -efficient. These mitigation measures will reduce
potential impacts to a less than significant level.
VIII. c)-e)
The proposed project, through the construction of buildings and parking lots,
will create impermeable surfaces, which will change drainage patterns in a rain
event. The project site is located in an AO Flood Zone. The project will,be
required to meet the City's standards for retention of the 100 year storm on -
site. This will control the amount of runoff which exits the site during a storm.
The site's drainage plan will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer
prior to the issuance of grading permits. This will ensure that impacts to the
City's flood control system are reduced to a less than significant level.
VIII. f) & g)
The proposed project is located in an AO flood zone. The City Engineer will
require that all structures on the site are constructed above the potential flood
level in this zone. This standard will serve to mitigate potential impacts to a less
than significant level.
IX. a)-c)
The project site is currently vacant, and will be integrated into an existing
country club development. The project is consistent with the General Plan and
Zoning designations for the project site. No impacts to land use and planning
will result from construction of 200 single family homes.
X.a) & b)
The project site occurs outside the MRZ-2 Zone, and is not expected to contain
resources.
XI. a) & c)
A noise impact analysis was prepared for the proposed projects. Noise impacts
exceeding the City's standards will occur during construction activities. At
buildout, however, the proposed project will meet the City's current exterior
noise standard for sensitive receptors. Construction mitigation measures are
offered below. These mitigation measures will ensure that impacts from noise
are reduced to less than significant levels.
1. All construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the
La Quinta Municipal Code.
5 Noise Impact Analysis, prepared by LSA, January, 2001.
P:\Greg T\CameoEA411Add(Revised).wpd 6 <
2. On -site generators, if required, shall be located in the northern portion of
the site.
XI. c) The construction of the project will generate noise from construction equipment
and activities. Existing homes occur to the north, west and south of the site.
Homes are considered sensitive receptors to noise, and the construction at the
site could have a negative impact. In order to reduce these potential impacts,
the following mitigation measures shall be implemented:
1. All internal combustion equipment operating within 500 feet of any
occupied residential unit shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers
and air intake silencers.
2. All stationary construction equipment (e.g. generators and compressors)
shall be located as far away from existing homes as possible.
3. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the La
Quinta Municipal Code.
XI. d) & e)
The project site is not within the vicinity of an airport or airstrip.
X11. a)-c)
The revised project will be constructed on currently vacant land, and will
provide a mix of residential and commercial development. The site has the
potential to employ some of the residents within either the commercial retail
area, or at the school. No impacts to population and housing are expected.
XIII. a)
Buildout of the site will have a less than significant impact on public services.
The proposed project will be served by the County Sheriff and Fire Department,
under City contract. Buildout of the proposed project will generate property and
sales tax which will help offset the costs of added police and fire services.
Ali homes within the proposed project boundary will be required to pay the
state -mandated school fees to mitigate potential impacts to schools.
To offset the potential impacts on City traffic systems, each project within the
tract map area will be required to participate in the City's Impact Fee Program.
Site development is not expected to have a significant impact on municipal
services or facilities.
P:\Greg T\CameoEA41 1 Add (Revised). wpd 7
t. L
XIV. a) & b)
The buildout of the revised project will result in an increase in population which
will have a need for recreational facilities. The project site will include a
clubhouse, pool, and tennis courts for residents' recreation. The generation of
property tax, and the General Plan policies in place to ensure that standards for
parkland acquisition are followed by the City as development occurs, will
mitigate potential impacts to these facilities to a less than significant level.
XV. a) & b)
Traffic analysis were prepared for the proposed project and the revised projects.
The analysis found that surrounding intersections will operate at acceptable
levels of service, with or without the proposed project; that minor alterations
to lane geometries will be required to accommodate the project, and are listed
below under mitigation measures. Both analysis found that signalization would
not be necessary at Eisenhower and Calle Tampico with implementation of
either the original or the revised project. The study for the revised project,
however, did not include any of the uses currently constructed on the site, and
potential expansion of these uses, as permitted in the Specific Plan. Specifically,
the study did not include the office building currently on the southeastern corner
of the site, or the potential 40,000 square foot distribution center and 630
parking spaces allowed on the east side of the site. By combining the two
studies, it was determined that the revised project will generate 7,312 daily
trips, while the original project would have generated 4,370 daily trips. Because
of the increase in trips, and the high concentration of these trips during the
morning peak hour, when the future school will also have a significant impact,
it is likely that the intersection delay at Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico will
increase to an unacceptable level. Since this assumes buildout of the 630
parking spaces (only 94 such spaces are currently built), which have the highest
potential impact to AM peak traffic, should the parking not be constructed, the
traffic signal may not be needed immediately. In order to assure that the
impacts to traffic and circulation from buildout of the revised project are not
significant, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented:
1. Prior to any additional site plan or Village Use Permit on this site, the
applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, that
all of the components of the Specific Plan land area have been
considered in a traffic signal analysis. That analysis shall also include
recommendations on thresholds for the construction of the traffic signal
at the corner of Calle Tampico and Eisenhower Drive.
6 Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Endo Engineering, January, 2001 and La Quinta Village
Apartments Traffic Impact Analysis, July 2002.
P:\Greg T\CameoEA41 1 Add (Revised). wpd 8
' n
The July 2002 traffic study also included mitigation measures to assure that
impacts of the project were less than significant. The following mitigation
measures shall be implemented:
1. Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico will be fully improved to their
General Plan half -widths adjacent to the project site.
2. All project exits will be STOP sign controlled.
3. The project proponent will contribute his fair share to the signalization of
Eisenhower and Calle Tampico.
4. The project proponent shall provide lane geometries as depicted in Figure
VI-2 of the Traffic Analysis, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
5. The project proponent will participate in the City's Impact Fee program.
The implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce the potential
impacts to the circulation system to a less than significant level.
XV. d)
The project proposes a right -in, right -out access onto Calle Tampico, between
Avenida Bermudas and the primary site access. The distance between these
drives may not be sufficient to allow for safe ingress and egress. In order to
ensure that this potential impact is mitigated, the following mitigation measure
shall be implemented:
XV. f)
1. The City shall monitor development proposals for the school site, and
shall participate in the public comment process to assure that driveways
accessing the school are at safe distances.
The commercial retail component of both the original and the revised project
include the potential for restaurant land uses. The parking on the retail portion
of the site, however, has been calculated for general retail use, which is much
less stringent than restaurant use. Should large portions of the retail square
footage be dedicated to restaurant use, the site would have insufficient parking.
In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation measure shall
be implemented:
1. Restaurant use within the Commercial Retail component of the proposed
project shall be limited to 5,000 square feet gross floor area.
P:\Greg T\CameoEA411Add(Revised).wpd 9
�� a
XV. c), e), g)
The project will not impact air patterns. The design of the project does not
create any hazardous design features. The map provides for an emergency
access point in addition to project access. Alternative transportation in the form
of trails and public transportation will be implemented based on General Plan
policies and programs.
XVI. a)-f)
Utilities are available at the project site. The project developer will be required
to pay connection and service fees for each of the utilities, which are designed
to incorporate future needs and facilities. These fees will eliminate the potential
impacts associated with utilities at the site.
P:\Greg T\CameoEA411Add(Revised).wpd 10
�l
l �
N
M
O
N
N
0
M
c�
O
i
N
N
O
r,
N
O
O
N
M
a)
H
o
zo
z
x
U
a
A
U
W
d
w
F
A
z A
�w
U
PA
�w
U
U
U
�Qy
a
'U
o
U
►� �
�
a
a
�
�. a
w
„
U to
cn
a
a
U F vo
bD b
bA
bA
cad
4.
to
41 O
bA
O
O
4•
a)
U C
C
O
U
O
U
�
O
U
O
U
4
0.0
41O
Ch O b4 GD
a as
a
a
as
a;
a
as onQ
r
�o
ti E"
cu
Lj aai
E
o G
G
o
Cd
�
`n z
� E o
-0
W
a
a
on
an
an
an
W —aoi
I
W
b
W
b
y
>°
UAU
U
U
U
0A
UAm
�
O
►..
Waa)
A..
F �r
N Q'
ti
O
kn
p, N
s:
CIS
Q
F
ct O
O
°
N
'
�
Cd
O
cn�
~
�
O�
a °
°'
—
�
F"
U
�
�
�
Ca.
�
0
� on
co
CA
a
3
r
C
0
rn
0
0
E
U
W
Q
A
U�
zA
aU
OU
4.
40,
H
y
� •U
a
,3 0
O
U
U
bq
�
z
o
H
�
cd
d
bD
Q
ou
a
a
¢•
0
z�
z
00
Q
� a
UQ
a
0
z
o
w
U
Ha
p
a
U U
bA ::3
F
O O
U y
A
q
U�
U�
QW
�A
�W
a�
OV
UV
b
ai
0
bu
�
•
Z
Cci
'zi
U U V
CA
U
a to a
Q Q Q
oz
zz
zz
a O�r
�,
y
cc
aRi a¢i a¢i
C� Ca Ca
lA i
v1
w
b b b
z
0
w 3
H o
aVw
cdr.r
�
U y
N
U U
bo
Oa
+`d
'C7
Q 4�
� w
0
O
C
c�
z
0 ed
V
>C
U cn a
W
Er
Q
a
TWWA
ax
�+ U
jU
r
el
v1
c� >
>
U
>
>
UCA
a
�
�
b
b
o
a
�
o
w
O
U
C.)vI
r-
U
b
U
i
o
O
'
y
Uri
U
vOi
.�
vOi
C
O
.4
w on
O
O rA O
O Enr.
O
O
O
O
O
~
c
o
0
jc
,W
c
Q
Q
Q
44
o
U CQ
U A
.3°0
cd
V]
F+
C°
p
U
C-i
U
+•
>
N �
o
o
tw
n •J
•J
o
--
cz
a ,GV
U
❑
CA
(-r
•�
G1.
O>
U
¢
O
w
O
V))
E�
°
a
F-
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF DESIGN GUIDELINES
AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A MIXED LAND
USE DEVELOPMENT ON APPROXIMATELY 33 ACRES
LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF CALLE
TAMPICO AND AVENIDA BERMUDAS
CASE NUMBER: SPECIFIC PLAN 2001-051 AMENDMENT #1
APPLICANT: CAMEO HOMES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 3" and 24t'' days of September, 2002, and 8tn day of October, 2002, hold
duly noticed Public Hearings for the Vista Montana project for review of a Specific Plan
Amendment approving design guidelines and development standards for Planning
Areas #1 and #2 consisting commercial pads and 200 multiple family dwelling units
on 12.04 acres, and detachment of 12.74 acres for a public school at the northwest
corner of Calle Tampico and Avenida Bermudas, more particularly described as:
Assessor's Parcel Numbers 773-022-014 and 773-022-032
Parcels 1-4 of Parcel Map 29886; Portion N % of Section 1, T6S, R6E, SBBM
WHEREAS, this development application has generated the following
actions:
WHEREAS, on July 8, 2002, the Community Development Department
mailed case file materials to all affected agencies for their review and comment. All
written comments are on file with the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, the City published a notice of its intention to adopt revisions
to EA 2001-41 1 in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 22, 2002, and further
caused the notice to be filed with the Riverside County Clerk on August 8, 2002, in
accordance with the CEQA Guidelines. On September 26, 2002, the Community
Development Department mailed a copy of the completed Environmental Assessment
to the Departments of Fish and Game and U.S. Wildlife Service for their review and
comment; and
WHEREAS, the City mailed public hearing notices to all property owners
within 500 feet of the project site on August 13, 2002, pursuant to Section
9.200.1 10 of the Zoning Ordinance. All written correspondence is on file with the
Community Development Department; and
Planning Commission Resolution 2002 --
Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 2
WHEREAS, during the comment period, the City received comment letters
on the development request from local public agencies. Community Development
Department personnel reviewed and considered these comments, and prepared written
responses to these comments which are contained in the staff report and/or
recommended conditions; and
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for the
City of La Quinta did, on the 7tn day of August, 2002, recommend approval of the
proposed mixed land use project on 12.04 acres (Planning Areas #1 and #2 of SP
2001-051 Amendment #1) by adoption of Minute Motion 2002-032, subject to
conditions of approval; and
WHEREAS, previous site development actions are described below:
and WHEREAS, site grading to remove a date palm grove occurred in 1999;
WHEREAS, on January 18, 2001, and June 21, 2001, the City's Historic
Preservation Commission reviewed Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey and
Testing Reports (Vista Montana Development) for the 33 ± acre site, previously known
as the "Hunt Date Garden." Based on this information, Minute Motions 2001-002 and
-01 1 were adopted requiring site work to be stopped if cultural material is discovered
during construction activities; and
WHEREAS, on February 7, 2001, the City's Architecture and Landscape
Review Committee recommended approval of Village Use Permit 2001-007 by
adoption of Minute Motion 2001-006, subject to the following condition: "Prior to
issuance of a building permit, the office building elevations shall include the depth of
the window insets and design treatment as well as the texture of the wall to be similar
to the residential component"; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 6tn day of March, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for the Vista Montana
project for review of a Specific Plan approving design guidelines and development
standards for a commercial/office, distribution center and 227 whole ownership single
family dwellings with the leasing potential of 365 guest rooms at the northeast corner
of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico, and by a 5-0 vote, adopted Resolution 2001-
18 for SP 2001-051; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved Resolution 2001-155 on
December 11, 2001 approving a General Plan Consistency Finding to vacate portions
of Avenida Bermudas to assist development of the Vista Montana project. City
Council Resolution 2002-03 finalized this street vacation request on January 15,
2002; and
Planning Commission Resolution 2002 -
Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 3
WHEREAS, on June 29, 2001, Tentative Parcel Map 29886 was recorded
with the County of Riverside establishing four development parcels on 32.5 acres
within the boundaries of Specific Plan 2001-051, based on City Council Resolution
2001-46; and
WHEREAS, on August 20, 2002, the Community Development Director
approved Tentative Parcel Map 30721 to subdivision 29.82 acres into four
development parcels in conformance with the proposed amendments being addressed
herein. Final map processing is ongoing.
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering
Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1 (Revised), and all testimony and arguments, if
any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did
recommend to the City Council the following mandatory findings approving said
Specific Plan Amendment:
1. The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the La
Quinta General Plan, the Land Use Map for the General Plan and supports the
development of the proposed project, as conditioned. It is anticipated that
affordable housing units will be included in Planning Areas #1 and #2, and that
live/work units may also be constructed depending upon market factors and
contractual arrangements with the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency. Removal
of 12.74 acres within the project for development of a public school does not
adversely hinder development of the remaining privately held parcels.
2. The proposed Specific Plan is compatible with the City's Zoning Ordinance and
the Village Design Guidelines in that it provides standards for the proposed land
uses.
3. The Specific Plan, subject to conditions, will not create conditions materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare in that the mixed
use development allowed under the Specific Plan is compatible with existing
uses and surrounding zoning, and development standards and infrastructure
proposed in the Specific Plan will ensure high quality development.
4. Development of the proposed Specific Plan is compatible with the parcel on
which it is proposed, and surrounding land uses, as conditioned.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planing Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case;
Planning Commission Resolution 2002 -_
Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 4
2. The location of the documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon
which the Planning Commission decision is based is the La Quinta City Hall,
Community Development Department, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta,
California 92253, and the custodian of those records is Jerry Herman,
Community Development Director;
3. That it does hereby require compliance with the Conditions of Approval for the
proposed Specific Plan Amendment;
4. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment
2001-41 1 (Revised) assessed the environmental concerns of this Specific Plan
Amendment; and
5. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Specific Plan
2001-051 Amendment #1 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 Planing Commission held on this 8tn day of October, 2002, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RICH BUTLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
Planning Commission Resolution 2002 -
Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 5
City of La Quinta, California
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN 2001-051 AMENDMENT #1, CAMEO HOMES
OCTOBER 8, 2002
GENERAL
1. All changes to the Specific Plan which are also included in the Village Use
Permit shall be made to the latter to ensure consistency. The project proponent
shall submit amended final documents within 30 days of City Council approval
of the Specific Plan and Village Use Permit and/or prior to issuance of a grading
permit, whichever occurs first. Ten copies of the final Plan with Conditions of
Approval in the appendix shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department. Included in the filing shall be a copy of the Specific Plan document
on diskette in WordPerfect format.
2. The applicant/developer 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
project. 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. The Specific Plan, and any Parcel Map submitted thereunder, shall comply with
the requirements and standards of Government Code § 66410 through
66499.58 (the "Subdivision Map Act"), and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta
Municipal Code ("LQMC").
The City of La Quinta's Municipal Code can be accessed on the City's Web site
at www.la-quinta.org.
4. Prior to the issuance of any permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain the
necessary permits and/or clearances from the following agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
• SunLine Transit Agency
The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances
from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of
Planning Commission Resolution 2002 -
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 2
improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when
submitting the improvement plans for City approval.
5. Right of way dedications required of this development include:
A. PUBLIC STREETS
1. Avenida Bermudas (Collector) - 44 foot right of way, from
centerline up to the point of the street vacation pursuant to City
Council Resolution 2002-03. Vacated areas shall be compatible
with the Santa Rosa Plaza development located on the east side
of Avenida Bermudas.
2. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - 50 foot half of 100 foot right of
way.
3. Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - 50 foot half of 100 foot right
of way.
B. PRIVATE STREETS
Primary Entry Drive (off Eisenhower Drive): Minimum 48 feet in width
(measured from back of curb to back of curb) within the right of way;
textured concrete paving shall be used for driveway surfaces within 80
feet of Eisenhower Drive. All other streets shall be approved by the City
Engineer.
C. CULS DE SAC
For culs de sac use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A
(offset) with 39.5-foot radius, or larger, or specific design as approved
by the City Engineer. For non-standard culs de sac, right of way
dedication shall be as required by the City Engineer.
6. 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. Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - 20-feet
B. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - 20-feet
C. Avenida Bermudas - 10-feet
Planning Commission Resolution 2002 -
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 3
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.
7. Existing aerial lines within or adjacent to the proposed development and all
proposed utilities shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5
kv are exempt from this requirement.
8. 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. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - Construct modification to raised
median to include a dedicated left turn lane to the site from
eastbound Calle Tampico @ Avenida Mendoza.
Applicant shall bear the cost of roadway improvements on the
outer twenty (20) feet of the roadway.
Eisenhower Drive (Major Arterial) - Construct 38-foot half of 76-
foot improvement (travel width, excluding curbs) plus 8 ft.
meandering sidewalk. Applicant shall construct the full raised
center median. Center median shall include turning pocket for left
turn for southbound Eisenhower Drive. Applicant to design
improvement to compliment the alignment of the bridge.
In lieu of constructing the permanent raised median, the applicant
shall install a 6-inch curb berm on pavement that delineates an
interim median lay out. The lay out shall be defined during the
design of the street improvements, and take into account the
unwidened bridge and the turning movement restriction.
Applicant shall bear the cost of roadway improvements on the
outer twenty (20) feet of the roadway. The cost of the median
modifications shall be reimbursed from the Development Impact
Fee fund in an amount not to exceed the budgeted amount.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002 -
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 4
2. Avenida Bermudas (Collector) - Reconstruct the northwest corner
of Avenida Bermudas and Calle Tampico and install new curb at
32 feet west of centerline, widening Avenida Bermudas for 100
feet north of the curb return. Provide 15:1 taper from 32 feet to
20 feet. Provide additional lane on the west side of centerline to
provide dedicated left turn lane and through/right turn lane.
Provide additional paving as necessary on the east side of the
centerline, if no paving exists, to provide for a total of two 14 foot
travel lanes.
B. PRIVATE STREETS -
1. Eisenhower Drive Project Entry: Construct minimum 48 foot full
width improvements (measured from back of curb to back of curb)
within the right of way.
2. All on street parking is prohibited and the applicant shall be
required to provide for the perpetual enforcement of the restriction
by the Homeowners' Association for condominiums or property
management agency for apartments.
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.
MAINTENANCE AND LANDSCAPING
9. 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.
10. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots, levees and park areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas
in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to
Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC.
11. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians,
retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape
architect.
,I's
Planning Commission Resolution 2002 -
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 5
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.
12. 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.
13. Landscape plans, which shows plant size, location, berming and walls shall be
submitted to the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for review and
approval prior to issuance of building permits. Street trees shall have a
minimum 1.5-inch caliper and be 10' tall once planted. Palm trees shall have
a minimum brown trunk height of 8'-0". Parking lot trees shall have a 1.0-inch
caliper and be 8'-0" tall once planted. Other related trees shall not have a
caliper of less than 0.75-inches. All landscaping plans shall conform to the
City's Water Efficiency Ordinance (Chapter 8.13).
14. The landscaping plan shall include all frontages on City streets, and shall be
installed as part of the first phase of construction on the project site. Integrated
into the landscape plan shall include a grove of Date Palms (18' high and taller)
and plaque to memorialize the agricultural history of the site.
MISCELLANEOUS
15. Development areas for SP 2001-051 are defined as follows:
Planning Area #1 - Office/Commercial
Planning Area #2 - Residential/Retention Basin
Planning Area #3 - Resort Hotel Distribution Center
Planning Area #4 - Existing KSL Resort Offices
Planning Area #5 - Future Public School
Special Note: No on -site development standards are specified for Planning Unit
#5 as this property will be developed with a public school, subject to the
requires of the State of California and Desert Sand Unified School District.
Regarding continued development in Planning Area #3, any new development
projects shall require approval of a Village Use Permit by the Planning
Commission. Furthermore, any applicable conditions of City Council Resolution
Planning Commission Resolution 2002 -
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 8
2001-18 shall be met unless otherwise defined hereon.
16. Buildings shall not exceed a height of 35 feet. Architectural features may
extend up to 40 feet, subject to approval by the Community Development
Director. Building features higher than 40'-0" shall be submitted to the Planning
Commission for review and possible approval.
17. The maximum residential density for Planning Areas #1 and #2 is 16 dwelling
units per acre, unless affordable units are offered. An Affordable Agreement
shall be approved by the City's Redevelopment Agency and recorded against the
property for a term of not less than 55 years outlining the percentage of units
within the development that are income restricted not to exceed a site allocation
of 200 housing units. Additional live/work residential units may be located in
Planning Area #1, subject to approval by the Community Development Director.
Each residential dwelling unit shall have one covered parking space while open
parking spaces shall be commonly shared. A residential parking ratio of 2.3 per
unit shall be maintained. Minimum liveable square per apartment unit shall be
670 square feet and larger.
18. 30% of office/commercial parking areas shall be covered by trellis structures.
Plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review
and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
19. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Specific Plan and Village Use Permit
documents shall be amended to show the location of all trash enclosures on the
site. The plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department
for review and approval.
20. A master signage program shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Planning Commission (i.e., Business Item), subject to the requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance.
21. Specific Plan 2001-051 shall comply with all applicable conditions and/or
mitigation measures for the following related approvals:
• Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1 Revised
• Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1
In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of
these approvals, the Community Development Director shall determine
precedence.
"�
Planning Commission Resolution 2002 -
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 7
The Community Development Director shall cause to be filed with the County
Clerk a "Notice of Determination" pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15075(a) once
reviewed by the City Council.
22. Minor changes, as determined by the Community Development Director to be
consistent with the intent and purpose of the Specific Plan, may be approved.
Examples include modifications to landscaping materials and/or design, parking
and circulation arrangements not involving reductions in required standards
beyond those identified in the Specific Plan, minor site, building area or other
revisions necessary due to changes in technical plan aspects such as drainage,
street improvements, grading, etc. Such changes may be approved on a staff -
level basis and shall not constitute a requirement to amend the Specific Plan.
Consideration for any modifications shall be requested in writing to the Director
and submitted with appropriate graphic and/or textual documentation in order
to make a determination on the request.
23. Buildings that have been planned under a Village Use Permit application do not
require a separate Site Development Permit application in order to be built.
24. Perimeter wall heights for the apartment complex shall not exceed 8'-0". Open
wrought iron or tubular metal fencing is recommended to enclose the west and
north sides of Planning Area #2.
25. Each planning area shall include a shaded areas for bicycle storage racks. The
use of loop and ribbon bars are encouraged.
26. Parking requirements set forth in Chapter 9.150 of the Zoning Ordinance shall
be meet, unless otherwise allowed by the conditions noted herein. Two-way
parking driveway aisles for the residential component of the Plan may be 24
feet wide as noted on the Technical Site Plan (Revision #2) exhibit. Parking lot
light fixtures shall not exceed 18'-0" in overall height as measured from
adjacent paved surfaces.
n�;
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, RECOMMENDING TO THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT
CHANGES TO A MIXED LAND USE PROJECT ON
APPROXIMATELY 33 ACRES LOCATED ON THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF AVENIDA BERMUDAS AND
CALLE TAMPICO - VISTA MONTANA
CASE NUMBER: VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-007 AMENDMENT #1
APPLICANT: CAMEO HOMES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 3`d and 24' days of September, 2002, and 8t' day of October, 2002, hold
duly noticed Public Hearings for CAMEO HOMES for review of changes to a mixed land
use development on 33 ± acres located on the northwest corner of Calle Tampico and
Avenida Bermudas, more particularly described as:
Assessor's Parcel Numbers 773-022-014 and 773-022-032
Parcels 1-4 of Parcel Map 29886; Portion Nth of Section 1, T6S, R6E, SBBM
WHEREAS, this development application has generated the following
actions:
WHEREAS, on July 8, 2002, the Community Development Department
mailed case file materials to all affected agencies for their review and comment. All
written comments are on file with the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for the
City of La Quinta did, on the 7" day of August, 2002, recommend approval of the
proposed mixed land use project on 12.04 acres (Planning Areas #1 and #2 of SP
2001-051 Amendment #1) by adoption of Minute Motion 2002-032, subject to
conditions of approval; and
WHEREAS, the City published a notice of its intention to adopt revisions
to EA 2001-41 1 in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 22, 2002, and further
caused the notice to be filed with the Riverside County Clerk on August 8, 2002, in
accordance with Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
statutes. On September 26, 2002, the Community Development Department mailed
a copy of the completed Environmental Assessment to the Departments of Fish and
Game and U.S. Wildlife Service for their review and comment; and
G:\ResoPCVUP007RevCameoHomes.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 2
WHEREAS, the City mailed public hearing notices to all property owners
within 500 feet of the project site by the Community Development Department on
August 13, 2002, pursuant to Section 9.200.110 of the Zoning Ordinance. All
written correspondence is on file with the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, during the comment period, the City received comment letters
on the development request from local public agencies. Community Development
Department personnel reviewed and considered these comments, and prepared written
responses to these comments which are contained in the staff report and/or
recommended conditions; and
WHEREAS, prior actions by the City on the site are as follows:
WHEREAS, on January 18, 2001, and June 21, 2001, the City's Historic
Preservation Commission reviewed Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey and
Testing Reports (Vista Montana Development) for the 33-acre site, previously known
as the "Hunt Date Garden." Based on this information, Minute Motions 2001-002 and
-01 1 were adopted requiring site work to be stopped if cultural material is discovered
during construction activities; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 6" day of March, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL Development
Corporation for review of development plans for residential guest rooms and a 20,600
sq. ft. office building on a portion of a 33-acre site located on the northeast corner of
Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico, and after deliberation, adopted Resolution 2001-
19 for VUP 2001-007, approving the request on a 5-0 vote; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved Resolution 2001-155 on
December 11, 2001 approving a General Plan Consistency Finding to vacate portions
of Avenida Bermudas to assist development of the Vista Montana project. City
Council Resolution 2002-03 finalized this street vacation request on January 15,
2002; and
WHEREAS, on June 29, 2001, Tentative Parcel Map 29886 was recorded
with the County of Riverside establishing four development parcels on 32.5 acres
within the boundaries of Specific Plan 2001-051, based on City Council Resolution
2001-46; and
WHEREAS, since approval of the Vista Montana development, KSL Land
Corporation has built an office building of 17,891 square feet on Calle Tampico and
,� 4 :?
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 3
employee parking lot for 94 vehicles with access to Avenida Bermudas, and to the
north of this facility is an additional 285 vehicle parking lot for the La Quinta Resort
and Club and 1.4-acre retention basin on Parcels 3 and 4 of Parcel Map 29886.
WHEREAS, on August 20, 2002, the Community Development Director
approved Tentative Parcel Map 30721 to subdivision 29.82 acres into four
development parcels in conformance with the proposed amendments being addressed
herein. Final map processing is ongoing.
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 recommend to the City Council mandatory findings approving
said Village Use Permit Amendment:
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 resort residential and commercial opportunities for the residents
and visitors to the Cove and historic downtown.
2. The proposed Village Use Permit is consistent with the standards of Specific
Plan 2001-051 (Amendment #1), which establishes development standards for
the project.
3. 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.
4. The proposed Village Use Permit complies with the architectural design
standards for Specific Plan 2001-051 (Amendment #1), and implements the
high quality standards called for in that document.
5. The proposed Village Use Permit is consistent with the landscaping standards
and palette in Specific Plan 2001-051 (Amendment #1).
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;
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 4
2. The location of the documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon
which the Planning Commission decision is based is the La Quinta City Hall,
Community Development Department, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta,
California 92253, and the custodian of those records is Jerry Herman,
Community Development Director;
3. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment
2001-41 1 Revised assessed the environmental concerns of this Village Use
Permit Amendment; and
4. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Village Use
Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution,
and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto; and
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 8tn day of October, 2002, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RICH BUTLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-007 AMENDMENT #1, CAMEO HOMES
OCTOBER 8, 2002
GENERAL
1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La
Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action
or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Village Use
Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the developer of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. Prior to the issuance of any permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain the
necessary permits and/or clearances from the following agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
• SunLine Transit Agency
The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances
from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of
improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when
submitting the improvement plans for City approval.
3. This Village Use Permit application shall run concurrently with the Conditions
of Approval for Specific Plan 2001-051 . Phased site improvements shall be
addressed during review of any Precise Grading Plan application.
4. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater
Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water),
LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources
Control Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ.
A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of
land that disturbs five (5) acres or more of land, the Permitee shall be
required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP").
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 2
B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to
any on or off -site grading being done in relation to this Site Development
Permit.
C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for
inspection at the project site at all times through and including
acceptance of all improvements by the City.
D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following
Best Management Practice ("BMPs"), 8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC:
1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control).
2) Temporary Sediment Control.
3) Wind Erosion Control.
4) Tracking Control.
5) Non -Storm Water Management.
6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control.
E. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be
approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading,
pursuant to this project.
F. The approved SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire
duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and
accepted by the City.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
5. Prior to the issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire, or confer,
those easements, and other property rights necessary for the construction
and/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 the maintenance, construction and reconstruction
of essential improvements.
6. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and
left turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved construction plans.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 3
7. The perimeter setback requirements are addressed and approved under Specific
Plan 2001-051, Resolution No. 2001-18.
8. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the
placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, park lands, and
common areas shown on the plan.
9. Direct vehicular access to Eisenhower Drive from any portion of the site from
frontage along Eisenhower Drive is restricted, except for those access points
identified on the site plan for this project, or as otherwise conditioned in these
conditions of approval.
10. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as
appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading,
retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, ingress/egress, or other
encroachments will occur.
11. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any
portion of the subject property between the date of approval of this Site
Development Permit and the date of final acceptance of the on and off -site
improvements for this Site Development Permit, unless such easement is
approved by the City Engineer.
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.
12. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of
qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the
provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC.
13. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review
and approval by the City. A separate set of plans for each line item specified
below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified,
unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be
prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the
applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here
pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 4
A.
Perimeter Landscape Plan:
1 "
= 20'
Horizontal
B.
On -Site Rough Grading Plan:
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal
C.
On -Site Precise Grading Plan:
1 "
= 30'
Horizontal
D.
Site Development Plans:
1 "
= 30'
Horizontal
E.
Site Utility Plan:
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal
Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not
listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to
commencing plan preparation.
"Site Development" plans shall normally include all on -site surface
improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs &
gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA
requirements; and show the existing street improvements out to at least the
center lines of adjacent existing streets.
"Site Utility" plans shall normally include all sub -surface improvements including
but not necessarily limited to sewer lines, water lines, fire protection and storm
drainage systems.
"Rough Grading" plans shall include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of
Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot of
cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions.
14. The City maintains standard plans, details and/or construction notes for
elements of construction. For a fee, established by City resolution, the
applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction
notes from the City.
15. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all complete,
approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City
Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may
be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program.
At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the
improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order
to reflect the as -built conditions.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 5
Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD
format, or a file format which can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City
Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans.
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENT
Improvement security agreement is set forth under the Conditions of Approval for
Parcel Map 30721.
GRADING
16. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading
Improvements), LQMC.
17. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes,
the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer.
18. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain
approval of all of the following:
A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect,
B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified
engineer, and
C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16
(Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC.
D. Storm Water Pollution Prevention and Best Management Plans.
All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary
Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by
an engineering geologist.
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 submitted with its application for a grading permit.
19. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to
prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped
land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 6
other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control
Plan.
20. Grading within perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating
terrain and shall conform to LQMC 9.60.240(F). The maximum slope shall not
exceed 4:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, and shall not exceed 8:1
in the first 6 feet adjacent to the curb in the right of way.
21. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot
from the building pads in adjacent developments.
22. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining
properties and the pads within this development.
Building pad elevations on contiguous interior lots shall not differ by more than
three feet except for lots that do not share a common street frontage, where
the differential shall not exceed five feet.
Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may
consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance
difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential.
23. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the
site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations
shown on the Technical Site Plan, the applicant shall submit the proposed
grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review.
24. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall
provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or
surveyor.
Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved
grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if
any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad
soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if
submitted at different times.
25. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 (Flood Hazard Regulations),
LQMC. Since it is located within a flood hazard area as identified on the City's
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 7
Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all
floors and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-
year) flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required
in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to
issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall
furnish elevation certifications, as required by FEMA, that the above conditions
have been met.
DRAINAGE
"Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report
for La Quinta Village Apartment. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved
manner."
26. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage),
LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More specifically, stormwater falling on
site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall
extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. The design storm shall be
either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off.
27. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two
inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the
applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise.
28. Ornamental metal fencing, a minimum height of 5'-0", shall be constructed
around the 1.15-acre retention basin. Pedestrian gates shall be equipped with
self -closing hardware and deadbolt lockset to ensure safety and restrict access
to project residents and guests.
29. For on -site common retention basins, the basin depth shall not exceed 11 feet
for 40,000 SF basin size according to Engineering Bulletin 97-03 Amendment
#1.
30. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback
lots Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the
setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The
perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped
with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 8
31. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries,
levels or frequencies in any area outside the development.
32. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received
and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief
route.
33. Property must continue to accept off -site drainage from Eisenhower Drive.
UTILITIES
34. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.110 (Utilities),
LQMC.
35. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of
all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures
including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves,
and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic
purposes.
36. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development,
and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground.
All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles
are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground.
37. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For
installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply
with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City
Engineer.
The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for
approval by the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
Public Street improvements shall be constructed as required by the Conditions of
Approval for Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment No. 1.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 9
38. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries to
ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements.
39. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design
procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated
traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall
be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials):
Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b.
Primary Arterial 4.5" a.c./6.00" c.a.b.
40. 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.
41. In lieu of constructing the permanent raised median, the applicant shall install
a 6" AC curb berm on pavement that delineates an interim median lay out. Lay
out shall be defined during the design of the street improvements and take into
account the unwidened bridge and the turning movement restriction.
PARKING LOTS AND ACCESS POINTS
42. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking).
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, dedicated turn
lanes and other features shown on the approved Technical Site Plans, may
require additional street widths as may be determined by the City Engineer.
43. General access points on Eisenhower Drive shall be limited to the following:
A. Primary Entry
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 10
1. Only right turn in, right turn out and left turn in are allowed. Left
turn out movement is prohibited.
2. Construct minimum 48 foot full width improvements, measured
back of curb to back of curb within the right of way at the entry.
B. Emergency access shall be gated in accordance with the Fire Department
regulations.
44. 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.
45. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved
by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access and parking areas
shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
46. Corner cut -backs shall conform to Riverside County Standard Drawings #805,
unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
CONSTRUCTION
47. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the
buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -
maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control
devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets in
residential developments are initially constructed with partial pavement
thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections
of the last ten percent of homes within the development or when directed by
the City, whichever comes first.
LANDSCAPING
48. The applicant shall comply with Sections 9.90.040 (Table of Development
Standards) & 9.100.040 (Landscaping), LQMC.
49. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention
basins, common lots, levees, and park areas.
6
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 11
50. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians,
retention basins, levees, and park areas shall be signed and stamped by a
licensed landscape architect.
The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community
Development Department (CDD), prior to plan checking by the Public Works
Department. When plan checking has been completed by CDD, the applicant
shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural
Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the City Engineer.
NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer.
51. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with
no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public
streets.
52. Only incidental storm water will be permitted to be retained in the landscape
setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-
way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section
9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC.
53. Once the trees have been delivered to the site for installation, a field inspection
by the Community Development Department is required before •planting to
insure they meet minimum size and caliper requirements noted in approved
plans. All trees shall be double staked or guyed to prevent damage from
seasonal winds.
54. Integrated into the landscape plan shall include a grove of Date Palms and
plaque to memorialize the agricultural history of the site.
55. The landscaping plan shall include all frontages on City streets, and shall be
installed as part of the first phase of construction on the project site.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
56. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet
with the approval of the City Engineer.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 12
57. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such
other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with
which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate
construction supervision.
58. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements,
sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program,
but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction
materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and
other applicable regulations.
59. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with
reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by
the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or
"As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor
certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant
shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City,
revised to reflect the as -built conditions.
MAINTENANCE
60. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160
(Maintenance), LQMC.
61. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual
maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access
drives, and sidewalks.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
62. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and
Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City
for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall
be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and
permits.
63. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the
Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at
the time of issuance of building permit(s).
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 13
MISCELLANEOUS
64. Prior to building permit issuance, trash and recycling areas for the project shall
be approved by the Community Development Department. The plan will be
reviewed for acceptability by applicable trash company prior to review by the
Community Development Department.
65. The proposed signs shall be compatible with the architectural theme of the
project in regard to quality, color, size, placement, and configuration. Additional
sign components are:
A. Residential Component - Only one freestanding monument sign of 24
square feet (double -sided) is allowed on Eisenhower Drive, provided
indirect uplighting is used and the sign does not exceed a maximum
height of 6'-0". Exposed sign surfaces, other than sign graphics, shall
be stuccoed.
B. Commercial Component - One individual channel letter sign per tenant
space not exceeding 30 square feet (i.e., one square foot of sign per
linear foot of frontage, up to a maximum of 30 square feet). If lit signs
are required, only indirect or backlit reverse channel letter signs are
permitted. Signs made be constructed using wood or metal, unless
painted directly on walls and windows. Logos and decorative accents
are permitted as a part of the tenant signs. Second story tenants,
greater than 2,000 sq. ft., are permitted a wall sign with a maximum size
of 25 square feet.
One freestanding monument sign of 30 square feet (double -sided) is
allowed per street frontage or development parcel, provided indirect
uplighting is used and the sign does not exceed a maximum height of 8'-
0". Exposed sign surfaces, other than sign letters, shall be stuccoed.
C. Colors, copy style and layout are not specified, but subject to individual
approval by the owner prior to City approval.
D. Permanent signs may be approved by the Community Development
Department, unless referred to the Planning Commission (Business Item).
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 15
71. A centralized mailbox delivery system shall be used for the project pursuant to
any requirements of the U.S. Postal Service.
72. Oversized vehicles, recreational vehicles and trailers shall be prohibited in open
or carport spaces. Parking restrictions shall be enforced by the property owner
and/or manager.
73. VUP 2001-007 shall comply with all applicable conditions and/or mitigation
measures for the following related approvals:
• Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1 Revised
• Specific Plan 2001-051 Amendment #1
In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of
these approvals, the Community Development Director shall determine
precedence.
The Community Development Director shall cause to be filed with the County
Clerk a "Notice of Determination" pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15075(a) once
reviewed by the City Council.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Conditions are subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or
when building permits are not obtained within twelve (12) months. Final conditions
will be addressed when plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire
Department at the time construction plans are submitted. All questions regarding the
meaning of the Fire Department conditions should be referred to the Fire Department
Planning & Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886.
74. Approved super fire hydrants, shall be spaced every 330 feet and shall be
located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the
building as measured along vehicular travel ways.
75. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the
side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations.
76. Fire Department connections shall be not less than 15 feet nor more than 50
feet from a fire hydrant and shall be located on the street side of the buildings.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 16
77. The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 3000
g.p.m. and the actual fire flow from any two adjacent hydrants shall be 1500
g.p.m. for a 2-hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure.
78. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run
concurrent with the City plan check.
79. Water plans for the fire protection system (fire hydrants, fdc, etc.) shall be
submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to issuance of a building
permit.
80. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all commercial buildings 5,000 sq. ft. or
larger to be fully sprinkled (NFPA 13 Standard). Sprinkler plans will need to be
submitted to the Fire Department.
81. 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.
82. Fire Department street access shall come to within 150 feet of all portions of
the 1st floor of all buildings, by path of exterior travel.
83. Any commercial operation that produces grease-ladden vapors will require a
hood/duct system for fire protection (i.e., restaurants, drive-thru's, etc.).
84. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for
approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane
painting and/or signs. Streets shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide with a height
of 13'-6" clear and unobstructed.
85. Install a KNOX key box on each commercial suite.
86. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code.
87. Gates entrances shall be at least two feet wider than the width of the travel
lanes. Any gate providing access from a road to a driveway shall be located at
least 35'-0" setback from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop
without obstructing traffic on the road. Where one way road with a single
traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 40-foot turning radius shall be
used.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 17
88. Gates, if any, shall be equipped with a rapid entry system (KNOX). Plans shall
be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. 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. A separate pedestrian access gate is also required.
89. The minimum dimension for access roads is 20 feet clear and unobstructed
width and a minimum clearance of 13'-6" in height.
PUBLIC SAFETY
Conditions are subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or
when building permits are not obtained within twelve (12) months. Final conditions
will be addressed when plans are reviewed. All questions regarding the meaning of
following conditions should be addressed to Senior Deputy Andy Gerrard at (760) 863-
8950.
90. Illuminated directory signs shall be installed within the apartment complex to
identify building locations and unit numbers (e.g., 5' high by 4' wide @ 20 sq.
ft.). A protective Plexiglas cover shall be installed over each directory sign to
discourage vandalism of sign elements. Signs shall be positioned so they are
visible from main vehicular or pedestrian access points. An emergency phone
number shall also be posted on each sign.
91. Each individual building and unit shall be clearly marked with the appropriate
building number and address. The placement of building and unit numbers shall
be positioned so as to be easily viewed from vehicular and pedestrian pathways
throughout the complex. Main building numbers shall be a minimum height of
12-inches and internally illuminated.
92. Security lighting shall be provided throughout the master planned development.
The lighting shall have sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to
make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises form
a least 25 feet away during the hours of darkness and provide a safe and secure
environment for all persons, property, and vehicles.
93. No Trespassing/Loitering signs shall be posted at the entrance of parking lots
and located in other appropriate places. Signs must be at least 2' high by 1,
wide (two sq. ft.) in overall size with white background and black 2" lettering.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-007 Amendment #1, Cameo Homes
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 18
All entrances to parking areas shall be posted with appropriate signs per
22658(a) California Vehicle Code to assist in removal of vehicles at the property
owner's/manager's request.
94. Pedestrian and vehicular access gates shall be installed for the apartment
complex. Dual switch KNOX devices (Model 3503) shall be installed to assist
emergency personnel.
95. Common use facility rooms such as conference, laundry, TV rooms, etc., shall
have doors that lock and contain transparent material for surveillance (e.g.,
windows, etc.).
96. Dwelling front doors shall have wide -angled peepholes installed.
97. Convex mirrors shall be installed at stairwell landings if the stairwells do not
have in -line sight.
98. If elevators are planned, elevator shafts and cabs shall be transparent to allow
occupants to be visible. Convex mirrors shall be installed in each elevator cab.
99. Graffiti resistant paint should be applied to building and fence surfaces.
ATTACHMENTS
,. P"
.2.2 PROPOSED VISTA MONTANA SPECIFIC PLAN
Attachment #1
PARCEL t
ILA C
School Site o11W-
Building
N.A.P. &
Parking
N.A.P.
TABLE II REPRESENTS PROPOSED LAND USE FOR THE VISTA MONTANA
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT I
TABLE H
PROPOSED LAND USE
The Vista Montana Specific Plan
VC Village Commercial Residential VC * 10.31
VC Village Commercial VC * 1.73
SUBTOTAL 12.04
KSL Distribution Center & Parking 5.08
KSL Office (N.A.P.) 3.14
School Site (N.A.P.) 12.74
TOTAIL 33.00
*The La Quinta Village Apartments in the Vista Montana Specific Plan provides for 193 units on 12.04 Acres
resulting in a net desity of approximately 16 DU/AC. Subject to adoption of Housing Agreement with City of La
Quinta, the total unit count could increase to a maximum of 200 dwelling units at a net density of 16.6DU's/AC.
2.2 �I i` ;_ �tl Vista Montana Specific Plan 10/08/02
L
t
t
i
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
October 3, 2002
TO:
VICTOR MAHONEY CC: PAT BROWN
COMPANY:
CAMEO HOMES RGC
FROM:
TACY SOUTHARD
JOB NO:
55200
SUBJECT:
CVWD EVACUATION CHANNEL
I spoke with David Keeley of C.V.W.D. this morning about filling and landscaping the
evacuation channel bank adjacent to the La Quinta Village Apartments development.
He was receptive to the improvements that are being proposed, and indicated that
there is a two-part application process:
1) Submit a Temporary Encroachment Permit application (application forms enclosed).
This will cover the addition of fill to the base of the bank, the initial landscaping, the
removal of the chain link fence at the top of the bank, and the installation of the tubular
steel fence on the property line. C.V.W.D. may also require an access gate to be
installed in the tubular steel fence to provide them access to the evacuation channel.
2) Submit a Permanent Encroachment Permit application (application forms enclosed).
This will cover the ongoing maintenance of the landscaping on the C.V.W.D. property.
C.V.W.D. never grants easements, but they often grant Permanent Encroachment
Permits. They include a 30-day revocable clause, but C.V.W.D. almost never initiates
revocation of a permit.
Attachments:
Temporary Encroachment Permit application
Permanent Encroachment Permit application
Exhibit depicting improvements requested
1 QUINTA VILLAGE APARTMENTS SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEETS
LILAGE USE PERMIT 2001-007
;TY OF LA QUINTA
TRACT BOUNDARY
i
I
I
PROPOSED TWO STORY 10' MIN. (D 26'
APARTMENT BUILDING
FIN. FL = 44.00
PROPOSED FILL
M 0 R S 1 79.799 Old Avenue 52
. La Cuinlo, CA 92253
D O K I C M
Voice: 760.771.4013
SCHULTZ FAX.• 760-771-4073
'LANNERS ENGINEERS SURVEYORS
0) 12'
i
SCALE 1"=10'
EXISTING 5' CHAIN
LINK FENCE WITH
BARBED WIRE
EXSITING GROUND
REQUEST FROM DEVELOPER:
TEMPORARY ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR:
1Q GRADING (INCLUDES FILL OF UP TO 3'),
2O INSTALLATION OF LANDSCAPING FROM EXISTING
CHAIN LINK FENCE AT TOP OF BANK, SOUTH
TO PROJECT BOUNDARY, AND
3O REMOVAL OF EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE, AND
CONSTRUCTION OF TUBULAR STEEL FENCING AT
PROPERTY LINE (TOE OF SLOPE), INCLUDING
ACCESS GATE, IF REQUIRED BY C.V.W.D.
PERMANENT ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR:
® MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING.
55200/EXHIBITS/CVWD—Ef2 _10/3/02
i
r
W0
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2002
CASE NO.: VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2002-014
APPLICANT: LORI ABDELNOUR (ALLSTATE INSURANCE)
REQUEST: CONVERSION OF TWO STORY RESIDENCE TO OFFICE USE
LOCATION: 51650 AVENIDA BERMUDAS IN THE VILLAGE (NORTHEAST
CORNER OF AVENIDA BERMUDAS AND CALLE AMIGO)
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION: THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS
DETERMINED THAT THIS REQUEST IS CATEGORICALLY
EXEMPTED FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO
SECTION 15301, CLASS 1 OF THE GUIDELINES FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT AS AMENDED (RESOLUTION 83-63).
SURROUNDING
ZONING/LAND
USE: THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED ON THE NORTH, SOUTH AND
EAST BY LAND THAT IS ZONED VC (VILLAGE COMMERCIAL).
TO THE WEST THE LAND IS ZONED RC (COVE RESIDENTIAL).
TO THE NORTH IS A RESTAURANT, WITH VACANT LAND TO
THE EAST AND SOUTH. TO THE WEST ARE SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCES.
BACKGROUND:
The property is located in the south end of the village area (Attachment 1). A two
story building exists on the property and was originally constructed as a residence.
The property was vacant for some time. The property has been rehabilitated by the
applicant who has begun using the building as an insurance office.
The structure's front door is on Calle Amigo, with a walkway leading to the street.
The existing driveway is on Avenida Bermudas and leads to the back of the building.
A short block wall encloses the front exterior side yard s along the streets. A taller
block wall encloses the rear yard area.
p:\stan\vup 2002-014pc rpt.wpd
In front of the property on Calle Amigo, there is a porkchop shaped traffic island,
guiding one-way west bound traffic on Calle Amigo to Avenida Bermudas.
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
The applicant previously operated out of an office building on Calle Tampico, east of
Desert Club Drive. The office has been moved to the subject property.
The applicant previously received clearance from the Historic Preservation
Commission to restore the exterior of the building. The applicant sought to keep the
structure as faithful to its original design as possible. The applicant obtained
Commercial Property Improvement Program (CPIP) funding assistance in the amount
of $15,000 of the estimated $43,500 restoration costs. Improvements included
renovation of all windows, repainting the exterior, repairing and replacing roof tiles,
and replacing exterior doors. Additionally, landscaping surrounding the building was
cleaned up and replanted as needed.
The two story structure contains 2,342 square feet of floor space and is occupied by
four employees including the applicant. Per Zoning Code requirements, one space per
250 square feet of floor space or 10 parking spaces are required. The applicant
states that her office handles primarily business accounts over the phone or by fax
or computer (Attachment 2). On an average, they receive three visitors a day. Those
visitors can and do park on Calle Amigo which permits street parking. Employees
normally park on the long driveway off of Avenida Bermudas. No additional parking
spaces are proposed in that access to them at the front would not be ideal, and they
would destroy the original landscape design (roses and older trees) and ambiance of
the front yard garden.
A freestanding wood "Allstate" sign has been installed in the front yard area, facing
Calle Amigo. The sign is 3' high by 7' long and five feet high and complies with the
sign requirements.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This request was advertised in the Desert Sun Newspaper on September 29, 2002,
and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet around the project boundaries. To
date, no correspondence has been received.
PUBLIC AGENCY REVIEW:
All written comments received are on file with the Community Development
Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made part of the
Conditions of Approval for this case.
p:\stan\vup 2002-014pc rpt.wpd R ° (
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING CONVERSION OF A RESIDENCE TO AN
OFFICE
CASE NO.: VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2002-014
LORI ABDELNOUR (ALLSTATE INSURANCE)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8" day of, October, 2002, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
the request of Lori Abdelnour (Allstate Insurance), for approval of a Village Use Permit
to allow conversion of a residence to an office located at 51650 Avenida Bermudas,
more particularly described as:
APN 770-182-003
WHEREAS, said Village Use Permit has complied with the requirements
of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as
amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the Community Development Department has
determined this Village Use Permit request is categorically exempt from further
environmental review pursuant to Section of the Guidelines for
amended (Resolution
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, as
83-63), 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 justify approval of
said Village Use Permit:
A. The project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Code in that the use
is permitted in the VC District and has been designed to comply with the
applicable VC District development standards, guidelines, and provisions, except
for providing the required on -site parking. In this case, parking need will be
adequately satisfied with the limited on -site parking and adjacent street parking.
B. This project has been determined to be categorically exempted from California
Environmental Quality Act requirements under Section 15301, Class 1 of the
Guidelines for Implementation.
C. The project will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health,
safety, and general welfare in that the use is contained in an existing structure.
n•\ctan\%mn 9nn9--n14.wnd
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2002-014
Lori Abdelnour (Allstate Insurance)
October 8, 2002
GENERAL
1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La
Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action
or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this
tentative map or any final 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.
2. The second story shall not be used by health care providers or for retail use
unless an elevator is provided.
3. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code (Fire
Department - 863-8886).
4. Install a KNOX key box on each commercial suite as required by the Fire
Department. Small buildings may use a common box (Contact the Fire
Department for an application).
5. Use shall not be expanded or changed without approval of the Community
Development Department.
6. The freestanding business identification sign is hereby approved.
P:\STAN\vup 2002-014 pc coa.wpd Printed October 3, 2002 Page 1 of 1
y.•
jr
mr
/••
I
�••
TRA
I
020
-
063
N
I;
O
b
• b I. O
o O
n
I
"
►�
��
pre
0NA
y
BARCE�
-----"_.
CAL L E--
a
°
Z
I
I
1 N o
y
a
�
r
I;+
I•
A
I
O
r
I
•
(
lop
I
rRA
022-051
r
V
V`
l�-}�1
�
J
•
c
O
.•
i
b
v �
� V
W /•n32 /+4i!
CAL L E
I-
o, SOT
a o.
fo.4a
dh H
rN
A
1 a
CASE MAP
NORTH
CASE No. V U P 2OU-014
SCALE:
'ORI ABDELN UR (ALL_ TATE) NTS
AIISfioat®
You're in good hands.
Planning Commission
City of La Quinta
Re: Section 9.65.030 A.3.a
ATTACHMENT #2
Lori Abdelnour
51650 Avenida Bermudas
La Quinta, CA 92253
August 26, 2002
We appeal to the commission for permission to utilize and pay fees for the public parking
provided for village use or allow us to use on -street parking in front of our office. The
front of our building faces Calle Amigo although our address says Bermudas. We have a
long, slender driveway that exits on to Bermudas, which we've retained for staff use. We
have three employees who, with me, can easily fit in the driveway space where our cars
remain all day. We are the sole occupants of the property, so this works well. There is a
bike path that bisects our driveway.
Our customer traffic consists of an average of three visitors per day. They have
automatically parked on Calle Amigo because an opening in the wall with a sidewalk
leads to our front door. Almost 91 % of our business is conducted via phone or
electronically, as we are primarily a commercial (as oppose to a personal) division of
Allstate Insurance Company.
We were told that for every 250 square feet of gross building space we are required to
provide off-street parking. The total square footage is 2,342. The Village Guide Book
says that parking should not be located in the front of buildings but to the rear. We have
approximately eighteen feet from the
rear of the property line to the building. i
There is yard space in what is the front
of the building but not enough for 10
spaces. Also, a front exit parking area ► 1 3�'►v9A
P p g /�r�►, ��u ,�--
would spill right into the one-way "Y"�
near the little lighted island and a i `�
stop sign. i
We have spent approximately $43,567.02 on careful restoration and preservation of one
of the oldest, unique and most beautiful historic buildings in La Quinta. In lieu of parking
spaces, we are hoping that you will allow us to preserve the hundred year old trees,
1940's rose garden and wonderful original landscape that we've labored to revive and
nurture.
Thank You,_
Lori Adbelnour
fy-�,s
R2853-1
n
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2002
CASE NUMBERS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-457 AND TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 30834, STONE CREEK RANCH
APPLICANT/
PROPERTY
OWNER: MADISON ESTATES, LLC
REQUEST: 1) CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; AND 2) SUBDIVISION OF
APPROXIMATELY 29.29 ACRES INTO 76 SINGLE FAMILY AND
OTHER COMMON LOTS
LOCATION: APPROXIMATELY 2,640 FEET WEST OF MADISON STREET AND
ON THE NORTH SIDE OF AVENUE 58
ENGINEER: NOLTE ASSOCIATES
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT: RGA LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, INCORPORATED
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HAS COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-457.
BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT WILL NOT
HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT; THEREFORE, A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION IS RECOMMENDED. SPECIAL STUDIES ON FILE
WITH THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ARE
HISTORIC, ARCHAEOLOGIC, PALEONTOLOGIC, ACOUSTIC,
HYDROLOGIC AND SOILS.
GENERAL
PLAN/
ZONING
DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (UP TO FOUR DWELLING UNITS PER
ACRE) AND RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
SURROUNDING
LAND USES;
NORTH: HERMITAGE STREET IN PGA WEST WITH SINGLE STORY
RESIDENTIAL HOUSES BEYOND PER SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002
SOUTH: ACROSS 58T" AVENUE, VACANT RESIDENTIALLY ZONED
PARCELS; A SKEET SHOOTING RANGE WAS LOCATED AT 80-
085 AVENUE 58 UNTIL BEING ABANDONED IN 1985.
EAST: VACANT AND DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL PARCELS
WEST: HERMITAGE STREET IN PGA WEST WITH SINGLE STORY
RESIDENTIAL HOUSES BEYOND AND EXISTING GOLF COURSE
MAINTENANCE BUILDING (80-202 AVENUE 58; PLOT PLAN
NUMBERS 87-378 AND 89-424)
BACKGROUND:
The L-shaped site, measuring approximately 1,320 feet wide by 1,272 feet deep, is
bounded on the south by Avenue 58 and located approximately 0.5 miles west of
Madison Street (Attachment 1). Five vacant parcels make up the proposed 29.29 acre
development site. From a topographic standpoint, the parcels are slightly elevated
above Avenue 58 with tamarisk and mesquite trees on the northerly portions of the
site. Creosote and salt brush cover large portions of the site. Overhead utilities exist
on the south side of Avenue 58, a two-lane street without curb and gutter
improvements (Attachment 2).
Properties to the west and north are inside the PGA West Country Club. Lake Cahuilla
County Park and The Quarry Country Club are located approximately 0.5 miles west
of the project site. On May 2, 1995, the City Council approved the realignment of
Jefferson Street south of Avenue 58 which begins its transition to the west of this
site.
The vacant five acre parcels to the north and east of the Stone Creek tract map have
been approved for a four -lot single family subdivision at the northerly terminus of Coral
Mountain Court (formerly Kirk Court) under Tentative Tract Map 29963, pursuant to
City Council Resolution 2002-13. Discussion of this project will occur later in this
report.
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
The Tentative Tract Map proposes to create 76 single family lots oriented around a
looping set of private streets that connect to a two-lane median entrance on Avenue
58, a density of 2.59 units per acre. Only 12 single family lots are adjacent to Avenue
58, an existing two lane public street. Street cul-de-sacs are interspersed throughout
the proposed development with usually four lots flanking each small inset. The
homesites typically range in size from 10,003 square feet to over 15,900 square feet
IDC4'
which exceeds the Zoning Code requirement of 7,200 square feet. Site grading plans
have been designed to be consistent in pad elevation heights of surrounding properties.
A 26'-0" wide secondary access lane is planned to the east side of the development
with a connection on Street Lot "C" (i.e., relocated Coral Mountain Court). This
proposed perimeter 50'-0" wide street has 28'-0" of paving and 11 foot wide
parkways. Development of this street is necessary to provides access to adjacent
single family parcels to the north and assist the project with a second point of access
(Attachment 3).
Development of the site requires abandonment of two existing north/south oriented
street easements planned under Parcel Map Numbers 6377 and 8834. The affected
cul-de-sac streets are unbuilt and no impacts to public utility companies are anticipated
based on public agency comments.
A conceptual landscape plan has been prepared. The applicant's design uses specimen
size trees (multiple varieties), palm trees, five gallon shrubs, rock boulders, and various
forms of groundcover. Parkway areas include earthen mounding and a 8'-0" wide
meandering public sidewalk. Internal common areas use similar plant materials to the
parkway areas but are highlighted by water features, small bridges and shaded outdoor
dining patio and fireplace. Decomposed granite is proposed for the internal serpentine
paths. Open picket, ornamental metal fencing is to be used to gate the private
development flanked by stone pilasters and decorative six foot high masonry walls.
The primary site entrance on Avenue 58 will also include colored paving to enhance
the project's overall appearance.
Housing units for this development will be processed separately at a later date, subject
to the requirements of Zoning Ordinance.
Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) Review:
On August 15, 2002, the City's Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the
applicant's environmental studies and adopted the following actions:
Minute Motion 2002-018 and Minute Motion 2002-020 require:
A. The site shall be monitored during rough grading and off -site trenching by a
qualified archaeological monitor.
B. The final report on the archaeological monitoring shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the first building
permit for the project.
0C
Minute Motion 2002-019 and Minute Motion 2002-021 require:
A. A Phase 2 surface collection of the fresh water mollusk shall be under taken
(APN: 762-240-009 and -010). The surface collection report shall be submitted
to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the first
grading permit for the project.
B. The surface collection report shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department prior to the issuance of the first grading permit for the project (APN:
762-240-004, -005 and -006).
C. The final report on the paleontological monitoring shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the first building
permit for the project.
D. Collected paleontological resources are to be delivered to the City of La Quinta
for curation per City requirements.
Architecture and Landscape Review Committee (ALRC)
On October 2, 2002, the ALRC, on a 3-0 vote, adopted Minute Motion 2002-040
recommending approval of the conceptual landscape plan for Stone Creek Ranch,
subject to Conditions of Approval #65 and #71 being imposed (Attachment 4).
Public Notice: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on September
17, 2002, and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site on September
6, 2002, pursuant to Section 13.12.100 of the Subdivision Ordinance. To date, no
comments have been received from adjacent property owners. Any written comments
received will be handed out at the meeting.
Public Agency Review: A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public
agencies and City Departments on August 5, 2002. All written comments received
are on file with the Community Development Department. Applicable comments
received have been included in the recommended Conditions of Approval.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Findings to approve this request can be made and are contained in the attached
Resolutions.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed tract map creates single family lots in excess of the City's RL Zoning
Code standards and on -site facilities to ensure the welfare of the future residents
QL$
based on the recommended conditions. A homeowners' association will be formed to
maintain retention basins, common landscaped areas, and private roads. Condition of
Approval #34 requires: "Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by
more than one foot from the building pads in adjacent developments."
The abandonment of Coral Mountain Court will require the developer of Tentative Tract
Map 29963 to change their access layout to take access from Street Lot "C" as
shown on this map. The property owners are aware of this requirement and have
revised their map to correspond with this application.
The developer asked the Community Development Department to review the
Conditions of Approval for the PGA West Golf Course Maintenance facility to the west
of their site concerning its operational standards, Avenue 58 access and screen wall
requirements. Condition #3 of Plot Plan 89-424 required a 6'-0" high wall to be built
along the east side of the maintenance facility. The wall has never been constructed
and the Community Development Department informed the property owner of this
obligation on September 5, 2002. A response letter from KSL Desert Resorts, Inc.
was received on September 25, 2002 requesting that each property owner share in
the cost of building the common boundary wall (Attachment 5). Condition of Approval
#100 requires Madison Estates to assume no more than 50% of the costs associated
with development of the six-foot high wall. Regarding traffic access onto Avenue 58,
access will be permitted until further limitations are imposed by the Public Works
Department during the construction of Jefferson Street.
Avenue 58 improvement requirements are addressed in Condition of Approval #56
which state that the developer shall rehabilitate and/or reconstruct existing roadway
pavement as necessary to augment and convert it from a rural county -road design
standard to La Quinta's urban arterial design standard. Street widening improvements
shall include all appurtenant components such as, but not limited to, curb, gutter,
traffic control striping, legends, signs, sidewalks, etc.
Development growth is anticipated in this area of the City and the proposed tract map
is a logical extension in this residentially zoned area.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending to the City
Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact (EA 2002-457) according to the findings set forth in the attached
Resolution; and
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 30834, subject to findings and
conditions.
0CH
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Aerial Map
3. Reduced Tract Map Exhibit
4. October 2, 2002 ARLC Draft Minutes (Excerpt)
5. KSL Desert Resorts Letter of September 23, 2002
6. Large Exhibits (Planning Commission Only)
red
T*sde)l'Associate Planner
OCC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY
COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION (ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-
457) FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30834
APPLICANT: MADISON ESTATES, LLC
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration has been
prepared collectively for a 76-lot single family development on 29.29 ± acres located
on the north side of Avenue 58, approximately 2,640 feet west of Madison Street in
a RL Zoning District (collectively "the Project"), more particularly described as:
APN: 762-240-004, -005, -006, -009 and -010 (5 parcels)
SW 1 /4 OF THE SE 1 /4 OF SECTION 21, T6S, R7E, SBBM
WHEREAS, the City has prepared the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
Declaration in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code
of Regulations, Title 14, section 15000 et seq. ("CEQA Guidelines"); and
WHEREAS, the City mailed notice of its intention to adopt the Mitigated
Negative Declaration in compliance with Pubic Resources Code (PRC) § 21092 on
September 5, 2002, to landowners within 500 feet of the Project Site and to all public
entities entitled to notice under CEQA, which notice also included a notice of the
public hearing before the Planning Commission on October 8, 2002, and City Council
on November 5, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the City published a notice of its intention to adopt the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and associated Initial Study in the Desert Sun on
September 17, 2002, and further caused the notice to be filed with the Riverside
County Clerk on September 9, 2002, in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, during the comment period, the City received comment letters
on the Mitigated Negative Declaration from local public agencies. Community
Development Department personnel reviewed and considered these comments, and
prepared written responses to these comments which are contained in the staff report;
and
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Planning Commission on October 8, 2002, did
consider the Project and recommended to the City Council certification of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration for the Project; and
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
EA 2002-457 for TTM 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 2
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission, as
follows:
SECTION 1: The above recitations are true and correct and are adopted
as the Findings of the Planning Commission.
SECTION 2: The Planning Commission finds that the Mitigated Negative
Declaration has been prepared and processed in compliance with CEQA, the State
CEQA Guidelines and the City's implementation procedures. The Planning Commission
has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND), and finds that it adequately describes and addresses the
environmental effects of the Project, and that, based upon the Initial Study, the
comments received thereon, and the entire record of proceeding for this Project, there
is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record that there may be significant
adverse environmental effects as a result of the Project. The mitigation measures
identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration have been incorporated into the Project
and these measures mitigate any potential significant effect to a point where clearly
no significant environmental effects will occur as a result of this Project.
SECTION 3: The Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or
general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no significant
unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment 2002-457.
SECTION 4: The Project will not have the potential to degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants, or animals, or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history, or prehistory.
SECTION 5: There is no evidence before the City that the Project will
have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which
the wildlife depends.
SECTION 6: The Project does not have the potential to achieve short-
term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as
no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the
Environmental Assessment.
Q� G
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
EA 2002-457 for TTM 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 3
SECTION 7: The Project will not result in impacts which are individually
limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed
development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be
significantly affected by the Project.
SECTION 8: The Project will not have the environmental effects that will
adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant
impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public
services.
SECTION 9: The Planning Commission has fully considered the proposed
Mitigated Negative Declaration and the comments received thereon.
SECTION 10: The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) reflects the
independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission.
SECTION 11: The location of the documents which constitute the record
of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission decision is based is the La Quinta
City Hall, Community Development Department, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta,
California 92253, and the custodian of those records is Jerry Herman, Community
Development Director.
SECTION 12: A Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP), a copy of which
is attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby adopted pursuant to PRC § 21081.6 in order
to assure compliance with the mitigation measures during Project implementation.
SECTION 13: Based upon the Initial Study and the entire record of
proceedings, the Project has no potential for adverse effects on wildlife as that term
is defined in Fish and Game Code § 711.2.
SECTION 14: The Planning Commission has on the basis of substantial
evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 California Code
of Regulations 753.5(d).
SECTION 15: The Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby recommended
to the City Council for final certification.
SECTION 16: The Community Development Director shall cause to be
filed with the County Clerk a Notice of Determination pursuant to CEQA Guideline §
15075(a) once reviewed by the City Council.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
EA 2002-457 for TTM 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 4
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 8tn day of October, 2002, by the vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RICHARD BUTLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
Environmental Checklist Form
1 . Project Title: Tentative Tract Map 30834
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Greg Trousdell, 760-777-7125
4. Project Location: North side of Avenue 58 and east and south of PGA
West
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Madison Estates LLC
437 S. Highway 101, Suite 220
Solana Beach, CA 92075
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 30834 would subdivide 29.29 acres of land into 76
residential lots. In addition, the vacation of two previously planned cul de
sacs is proposed.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings.
North: Hermitage Street and PGA West single family homes
South: Avenue 58 and vacant residential parcels beyond
East: Single family house and vacant desert lands
West: PGA West Golf Maintenance and other PGA West properties
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
None
PAGreg T15toneCrEAChk1st.wpd
.1�
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this
project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as
indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics
Agriculture Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Geology and Soils
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation/Traffic
Utilities and Service Systems
Mandatory Findings
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.
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.
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,� c udi g revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project,
no/Nnjl urtl�er is required.
`V
�-27-mow
Date
CI
G:IWPDOCS\Env Asses\EAChklst.wpd
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:
and a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question;
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less
than significance
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAChklst.wpd
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 3.6)
b) Damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to,
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state
scenic highway? (Site topography, TTM 30834)
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)
II. 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?
(General Plan EIR p. III-21 ff.)
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map, Property Owner)
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 nonagricultural use? (No ag. Land in
proximity to project site)
1. 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)
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
X
X
X
X
f3
91
X
9
X
VPDOCS\Env Asses\EAChklst.wpd
4 01
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, 2002 PM10
Plan for the Coachella Valley)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
(Project Description)
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people? (Project Description, residential planned, no
source for odors)
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? (General Plan Exhibits 6.1 to 6.7)
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? (General Plan
Exhibits 6.1 to 6.7)
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?((General Plan Exhibits 6.1 to
6.7)
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? (General Plan Exhibits 6.1 to 6.7)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance? (General Plan P. 66-67)
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? (General Plan Exhibit 6.1)
X
X
F3
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ireg T\StoneCrEAChklst.wpd
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? (CRM Tech letter, 8/2/02)
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)?(CRM Tech letter, 8/2/02)
c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or
site? (CRM Tech letter, 8/2/02)
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries? (CRM Tech letter, 8/2/02)
/I. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? (MEA Exhibit 6.2)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (MEA Exhibit 6.2 2)
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?
("Phase I Environmental Site Assessment," Earth Systems
8/9/02)
iv) Landslides? (General Plan Exhibit 8.3)
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
(General Plan Exhibit 8.4)
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? (General Plan EIR,
Exhibit III-17)
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, Exhibit III-17)
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? (Earth Systems letter 8/6/02)
M
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ireg T\StoneCrEAChklst.wpd
01�
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? ("Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment," Earth Systems, 8/9/02)
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? ("Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment," Earth Systems, 8/9/02)
c) Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school? ("Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment," Earth Systems, 8/9/02)
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?
("Phase I Environmental Site Assessment," Earth Systems,
8/9/02)
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)
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan? (General Plan MEA p. 95 ff)
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)
III. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY : Would the project:
a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements? ("Preliminary
Hydrology Study," Nolte Associates, August 2002)
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 p. 111-87 ff.)
X
X
M
X
M
X
X
X
X
X
✓PDOMEnv Asses\EAChklst.wpd
01
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?("Preliminary Hydrology
Study," Nolte Associates, August 2002)
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? ("Preliminary Hydrology Study," Nolte
Associates, August 2002)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
to control? ("Preliminary Hydrology Study," Nolte Associates,
August 2002)
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 Exhibit 6.6)
g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would
impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental
Assessment Exhibit 6.6)
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? (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?
(General Plan p. 18 ff.)
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural communities conservation plan? (Master
Environmental Assessment p. 74 ff.)
C. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Result 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 Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.)
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 p. 71 ff.)
X
M
X
X
n
X
K4
X
9
WPDOCS\Env Asses\EAChklst.wpd
01
XI
NOISE: Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
("Noise Impact Analysis," Penardi & Assoc. 7/17/02)
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
(Residential project -- no ground borne vibration)
c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project? ("Noise Impact Analysis," Penardi &
Assoc. 7/17/02)
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? (General Plan land use map)
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 land use map)
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, p. 9 ff.,
application materials)
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)
PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57)
Police protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57)
Schools? (General Plan MEA, p. 52 ff.)
KI
X
X
X
X
X
KI
f3
K9
X
VPDOCS\Env Asses\EAChklst.wpd
Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan)
Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.)
XIV. RECREATION:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application Materials)
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
(Application Materials)
XV. 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, p. III-29 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, p. III-29 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? (No air traffic involved in
project)
d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)? (TTM 30834)
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (TTM 30834)
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (TTM 30834)
g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Project
description)
;VI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General
Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
K4
U
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
K4
NPDOCS\Env Asses\EAChklst.wpd U 6
10
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
e) 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,
p. 58 ff.)
f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal
needs? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
(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?
Vill. EARLIER ANALYSIS.
F�9
X
X
X
M
Li
K9
K4
Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one
or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets.
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analysis and state where they are available for review.
None
NPDOCS\Env Asses\EAChklst.wpd
11
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.
OURCES:
faster Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 2002.
eneral Plan, City of La Quinta, 2002.
eneral Plan EIR, City of La Quinta, 2002.
_-AQMD CEQA Handbook.
ty of La Quinta Municipal Code
iistorical/Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report," prepared by CRM Tech, April 5,
)02.
vo letters from CRM Tech, dated August 2, 2002
loise Impact Analysis Report..." prepared by Penardi & Associates, July 17, 2002.
'reliminary Hydrology Study" prepared by Nolte Associates, August 2002.
eport of Phase I Environmental Site Assessment," prepared by Earth Systems Southwest,
igust, 2002.
tter dated August 6, 2002, from Earth Systems Southwest, RE: Infiltration Testing.
reliminary Hydrology Report," prepared by Nolte Associates, August, 2002.
✓PDOCS\Env Asses\EAChklst.wpd
12
Addendum for Environmental Assessment 2002-457
I. a), b) & c)
The project site is vacant desert land. No significant features occur on the
land. The site is not designated as a City entry feature. The site is
surrounded on three sides by similar single family development.
I. d) The tract map will not, in and of itself, generate light or glare. Buildout of the
site with 76 single family homes will create some light, but this light will be
regulated by the City's Outdoor Lighting Ordinance, which will significantly
limit the type of lighting that can be used on the site. These standards will
mitigate the potential impacts of light and glare to a less than significant
level.
II. a)-c)
The proposed project site is neither in a prime agricultural area, nor subject
to Williamson Act contracts.
III. a) The primary source of air pollution in the City is the automobile. The buildout
of the tract map will result in the construction of 76 single family homes.
These 76 homes could generate up to 727 daily trips'. The table below
illustrates the vehicular emissions which would have been generated by the
project trips at buildout.
Running Exhaust Emissions - Approved Specific Plan
(pounds/day)
PM 10 PM 10 PM 10
CO ROC NOx Exhaust Brakes Tires
50 mph 30.04 1.16 6.16 -- 0.13 0.13
Daily
Threshold 550 75 100 150
Based on 727 trips/day and average trip length of 8 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.
Based on the table above, the buildout of the project will not generate
significant air quality impacts, particularly when compared to the SCAQMD's
threshold for significance.
1 Traffic Generation, 6th Edition. Institute of Traffic Engineers, for category 210, Single Family Homes.
P:\Greg T\StoneCrEAAdd.wpd 1 `�
III. b) The proposed project will not result in significant stationary source air quality
violations, because residential land uses are proposed, which will have little
impact on stationary source emissions.
III. c) & d)
The construction of the 76 homes will have the potential to generate dust,
which could impact residents both on and off site. The Coachella Valley is a
severe non -attainment area for PM10 (particulate matter of 10 microns or
smaller). The Valley has recently adopted stricter measures for the control of
PM 10. These measures will be integrated into conditions of approval for the
proposed project. The contractor(s) on the site will be required to submit a
PM 10 Management Plan prior to initiation of any earth moving activity, and to
submit the Plan to both the City and SCAQMD. In addition, the potential
impacts associated with PM 10 can be mitigated by the measures below.
1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to
minimize exhaust emissions.
2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary
power poles to avoid on -site power generation.
3. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit
opportunities.
4. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site.
5. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of
three feet prior to the onset of grading activities.
6. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed
on an ongoing basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site.
Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered
regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall
be watered at the end of each work day.
7. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the
potential for wind erosion. Parkway landscaping on Avenue 58 and the
retention basins shall be landscaped with the first phase of development
on the site. Any portion of the site which is graded and not immediately
built upon shall be stabilized with either chemical stabilizers or natural
ground cover, subject to approval by the City Engineer.
8. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of
construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site.
P:\Greg T\StoneCrEAAdd.wpd 2 0 2 `
9. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage
ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour.
With the implementation of these mitigation measures, and the implementation
of the Coachella Valley PM 10 Management Plan 2002, the impacts from
particulate matter to air quality from buildout will not be significant.
III. e) The construction of homes will not result in objectionable odors, because the
permitted land uses do no generate such odors.
IV) a)-f)
The site is not designated as potential habitat for any species of concern in the
City's General Plan.
V. a), b) & d)
A cultural resource survey and testing program was conducted for the subject
property2. The survey and testing found that no resources occur on the site.
The report further finds that it is possible that buried artifacts could be
encountered during the construction process. In order to mitigate this potential
impact, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented:
1. An archaeological monitor shall be on site during all earth moving
activities. The archaeologist shall be empowered to stop or redirect
grading activities if resources are uncovered. The archaeologist shall also
be required to submit to the Community Development Department, for
review and approval, a written report on all activities on the site.
V) c) A paleontologic survey was performed at the proposed site'. The survey found
that fossilized mollusks occur on the site, and that a Phase II surface collection
was necessary, and that a paleontologic monitor should be present during earth
moving activities. In order to mitigate the potential impacts associated with
paleontological resources, the following mitigation measures shall be
implemented:
1. A Phase II paleontologic resource survey shall be completed on the site
prior to the issuance of any grading permit.
2. A paleontologic monitor shall be on site during all earth moving activities.
The paleontologist shall be empowered to stop or redirect grading
activities if resources are uncovered. The paleontologist shall also be
required to submit to the Community Development Department, for
review and approval, a written report on all activities on the site.
2 HistoricaVArchaeological Resources Survey, prepared by CRM Tech, April 2002 and August 2002.
3 Letter dated August 2, 2002 by CRM Tech. ti
PAGreq T\S2oneCrEAAdd.wpd 3
VI. a) i), ii) iii) & iv)
The proposed project lies in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The property, as
with the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the
event of a major earthquake. In order to mitigate and protect from this hazard,
the City has adopted the Uniform Building Code, and the associated
construction 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. The
project site is not located adjacent to a hillside, and will not be subject to
landslides. A Phase I Environmental Assessment prepared by Earth Systems
Southwest for the property found that the water table is located approximately
126 feet below the surface. Since liquefaction occurs when water is 50 feet or
less below the surface, the site will not be subject to liquefaction.
VI. b) The site is located in a moderate blowsand hazard area. The soils on the
proposed site are loose silty sand. Sandy soils must be properly compacted prior
to construction to assure long-term stability. The City's standards for site
preparation shall be adhered to, as required by the City Engineer. In order to
reduce the impacts of unstable soils on the proposed site, the following
mitigation measure shall be implemented:
1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for any structure on the proposed
site, the applicant shall submit, for review and approval by the City
Engineer, a detailed, site specific soil study, which shall include
recommendations designed for the specific structure(s) being
constructed.
VI. c)-e)
The soils on the site are not expansive, and support the development proposed.
The soils on the site may be subject to caving during excavation, but this
potential impact will be mitigated by the geologist in the above -required
geotechnical analysis. The potential impacts associated with geology are less
than significant.
VII. a)-h)
Residential land uses will not generate any unregulated hazardous material. The
City's solid waste provider has programs available for household hazardous
waste. The site is not located within an airport land use plan. The site is not
located within a wildfire area. Emergency response will be implemented in
accordance with the City's Emergency Response Plan, in cooperation with the
County of Riverside.
PAGreg T\StoneCrEAAdd.wpd 4 ,n
VIII. a) & c)
The proposed project will be required to retain the 100 year, 24 hour storm on -
site. The tentative tract map proposes a series of retention basins which will act
as open space between the residential lots. The percolation of water through
soil serves to clean the water. Should additional techniques be required to clean
the soil, the City has standards in place for the installation and maintenance of
these facilities. This requirement will reduce the potential for violation of a
water quality standard to a less than significant level.
VIII. b)
All development adds to demand for groundwater. 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 project will be required to
retain storm flows on -site, which will encourage percolation of storm water into
the ground. The project proponent will be required to implement the City's
standards for water conserving plumbing fixtures. Finally, the proposed project
will be required to meet the requirements of the City's water -conserving
landscaping ordinance, which requires that projects demonstrate that
landscaping plans are water -efficient. These mitigation measures will reduce
potential impacts to a less than significant level.
VIII. c)-e)
The proposed project, through the construction of streets, homes, patios and
driveways, will create impermeable surfaces, which will change drainage
patterns in a rain event. Retention basins have been designed for the center of
the site. The basins will not significantly alter the topography of the site. The
profile of these basins will be regulated by the City Engineer to ensure
compliance with City standards. The site's drainage plan will be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading permits. This will
ensure that impacts to the City's flood control system are reduced to a less
than significant level.
Vill. f► & g)
The homes being proposed for the tract map will not be located in a flood zone.
There will be no impact.
IX. a)-c)
The project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning designations for the
project site. The project site is surrounded on three sides by existing
development or projects under construction. No impacts to land use and
planning will result from construction of 76 single family homes.
X.a) & b)
The project site occurs outside the MRZ-2 Zone, and is not expected to contain
PAGreg T\StoneCrEAAdd.wpd 02,11
resources.
XI. a) & c)
A noise impact analysis was prepared for the proposed project'. The study
found that at General Plan buildout, the noise level at the site will be 61.5 dBA
CNEL (at the closest pad to Avenue 58). This level of noise is well within the
City's General Plan noise standard for sensitive receptors of 65 dBA CNEL.
Noise levels will be higher during construction on the project site. Since phasing
of the site may occur, and some homes may be occupied when others are being
constructed, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented.
1. All construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the
La Quinta Municipal Code.
2. On -site generators, or other stationary equipment, shall be located as far
away from existing residential units, whether on or off site, as possible.
3. All internal combustion equipment operating within 500 feet of any
occupied residential unit shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers
and air intake silencers.
XI. d) & e)
The project site is not within the vicinity of an airport or airstrip.
XII. a)-c)
The proposed project will be constructed on currently vacant land, and will
provide 76 single family residences. The maximum additional population likely
to be generated by the project is 200 persons. The site will not displace any
existing housing or people. No impacts to population and housing are expected.
Xill. a)
Buildout of the site will have a less than significant impact on public services.
The proposed project will be served by the County Sheriff and Fire Department,
under City contract. Buildout of the proposed project will generate property tax
which will help offset the costs of added police and fire services.
All homes within the proposed project boundary will be required to pay the
state -mandated school fees to mitigate potential impacts to schools.
To offset the potential impacts on City traffic systems, the project proponent
will be required to participate in the City's Impact Fee Program.
4 Noise Impact Analysis, Penardi and Associates, July 2002
PAGreg T\StoneCrEAAdd.wpd 6 (� `%
U �. (_
Site development is not expected to have a significant impact on municipal
services or facilities.
XIV. a) & b)
The buildout of the proposed project will increase the population, and therefore
the need for recreation. The proposed tract map, however, includes retention
basins which will serve as recreational areas for the residents. Altogether, 3.04
acres of retention area and recreation space will be available to residents of the
project. In addition, the General Plan policies in place to ensure that standards
for parkland acquisition are followed by the City as development occurs, will
mitigate potential impacts to these facilities to a less than significant level.
XV. a) & b)
The proposed tract map will result in the construction of 76 homes on 29.3
acres. As stated previously, these homes could generate up to 727 daily trips.
The maximum daily trips which could be generated by a project proposed on the
site at the maximum General Plan density would result in 1,122 trips'. The
project falls well within the parameters of the land use designation assigned to
the property, and therefore well within the potential impacts associated with
traffic on Avenue 58 analyzed in the General Plan EIR. That document found
that Avenue 58 would operate at Level of Service B at General Plan Buildout.
XV. c►, d), e), f) & g)
The project will not impact air patterns. The design of the project does not
create any hazardous design features. Parking requirements for the homes are
included in the Development Code, and will be applied when plans for homes
are submitted. The map provides for two project access points, one on Avenue
58, and one through "Lot C". Alternative transportation in the form of trails and
public transportation will be implemented based on General Plan policies and
programs.
XVI. a)-f)
Utilities are available at the project site. The project developer will be required
to pay connection fees for each of the utilities, which are designed to
incorporate future needs and facilities. Future residents will pay service fees
which also will contribute to future facilities. These fees will eliminate the
potential impacts associated with utilities at the site.
5 Traffic Generation, 6th Edition. Institute of Traffic Engineers, for category 210, Single Family Homes, detached.
P:\Greg T\StorveCrEAAdd.wpd 7r
0
0
0�
0
0
116
0
0
0
.1ir
0
0
0
N
N
N
O
O
N
c*i
N
N
O
m
MA
U
°z
o
<
w
z
w
x
W
W
V
a
A
U
d
A
U�
�A
�U
UU
U
-d
Wcl,�n
O
o
P.
o
0
Ai
A4
op
�
�
Cd
b
o
o
o
o
0
°
°
a
o
z
w
En
En
O
En
En
O
cl,
�
-"
O
En
V.
cn
r.
U
U
�
U
U
°
U
0
�,
�,
0
�
oou
r
4
z�
Cod
j
o
cq
Cis
>
b
b
U Q
U
U
U
pq
U
pq
pQ
w
�
�
to
Cd
3
N
N
to
�{
cz
G
�
N
'U
f.
tar
°
0
Q
'a
°
0-4
d
c,3
N
3
C,3
40,
o
a
0-4
-o
a
3
C
0
2
.EI
W
F
Q
A
U
o�C
�WA
aU
�w
ox
UU
w
wCO to
ap r. Ed
d 0 w -0 O
-- 0 (L) 0
U
U �t�.i:U
U)
on
> a
0
F
cad
cd
N
pq 0
C� a
0 0
�o
>
zz
Q Q
�
0 � a V
C4
0¢
a
U Ca U (U
cn 0
° >,
o
0 b
z
U U
'
Gb
0 o
o �
c
ciC°U Ca
Eb �31 a
co
C13 0
V
� 0 o
Q °
H
H
A
A
Uz pq
U o�q
aU
�w
a.0
�w
UU
UU
b
b
W
W
`n •..
o 0
Fri
U
Q!
U
��
'o
U
U
o
a
v� U
, a v� vn
4-4
C7
on
C7
0 0 0
N
U U
F
0 ti
F
O to
OVA GD b
a �n a
Ca Q Q
Oz
O�
U
q q q
w
O
O
�3
0 orn
H
CODb
H
° 5n
N
o ai
U a 0"0
bo
cd
� cd
Ob
0-4♦--�
0
0
z
42 b 0 w
D
cis
�C
w
0z 0 0 p
0 CD
U W a = to
a
3
0
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL TO SUBDIVIDE 29.29 ±
ACRES INTO 76 ± SINGLE FAMILY AND OTHER COMMON
LOTS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF AVENUE 58,
APPROXIMATELY 0.5 MILES WEST OF MADISON STREET
CASE: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30834, STONE CREEK RANCH
APPLICANT: MADISON ESTATES, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California
did, on the 8th day of October, 2002, hold duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a
request by Madison Estates, LLC to create 76 single family and other common lots on
29.29 ± vacant acres, located to the north of Avenue 58 and 2,640 ± feet west of
Madison Street, in a Low Density Residential (RL) Zoning District, more particularly
described as:
Assessor's Parcel Numbers 762-240-004, -005, -006, -009 and -010 (five parcels)
SW 1 /4 of the SE 1 /4 of Section 21, T6S, R7E, SBBM
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the public
hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on September 17, 2002, for the October
8, 2002 Planning Commission meeting as prescribed by Section 13.12.100 (Public
Notice Procedure) of the Subdivision Ordinance. Public hearing notices were also
mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the tract map site on September 6,
2002; and
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Community Development Department has
completed Environmental Assessment 2002-457. Based upon this Assessment, the
project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment; therefore, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a
Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office
on September 9, 2002, as required by Section 15072 of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) statutes; and
WHEREAS, the City's Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the
applicant's Paleontological and Cultural Resources Assessments on August 15, 2002,
determining site monitoring and additional site research was required pursuant to
adoption of Minute Motion 2002-018 through Minute Motion 2002-022 by unanimous
votes; and
WHEREAS, on September 4, 2002, the City's Architecture and Landscape
Review Committee reviewed the Avenue 58 parkway landscape plan, and after
discussion, requested that the developer submit the retention basin improvements to
them for consideration on October 2, 2002. On October 2, 2002, the ALRC approved
031,
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 2
the applicant's concept landscape plan on a 3-0 vote by adoption of Minute Motion
2002-040, subject to conditions being met during plan check; and
WHEREAS, on August 5, 2002, the Community Development Department
mailed case file materials to all affected agencies for their review and comment. All
written comments are on file with the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning
Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings to justify a recommendation
to the City Council for approval of said Map:
Finding A - Consistency with General Plan, Zoning Code and any applicable Specific
Plans.
The property is designated Low Density Residential (LDR) and not located in the PGA
West Specific Plan. The Land Use Element of the General Plan encourages differing
residential developments throughout the City. This project is consistent with the
goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan insofar as the creation of
residential lots (2.59 ± dwelling units per acre) will provide another type of housing
market for La Quinta residents while not exceeding the City's maximum density of four
units per acre. Conditions are recommended requiring on -site and off -site
improvements based on the City's General Plan Circulation Element provisions.
The property is designated Low Density Residential (RL) and is consistent with the
City's General Plan Land Use Element. The developer is proposing lots of 10,003 sq.
ft. and larger which exceeds the City's minimum size of 7,200 square feet. No houses
are proposed for the project under this application. However, lots are big enough to
support building detached housing units that are a minimum size of 1,400 square feet
excluding garage parking areas.
All plans for future single family homes shall be consistent with the provisions of the
Zoning Code in effect at the time building permits are acquired. The development of
the project, as conditioned, will be compatible with the surrounding area.
Finding B - Site Design and Improvements
Infrastructure improvements to serve this project are located in the immediate area and
will be extended based on the recommended Conditions of Approval. The private
streets will provide access to each single family lot in compliance with City
requirements, as prepared. Tract access is from Avenue 58 and Street Lot "C,"
ensuring convenient travel methods for residents and emergency vehicles.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 3
Improvements on Avenue 58 will be guaranteed as required by the City's General Plan
Circulation Element at the time the final map is considered pursuant to Section
13.20.100 of the Subdivision Ordinance. Provisions shall be made to the map's
design to allow the project to be gated in the future through vehicle stacking and
turnaround areas.
Internal storm water retention basins flank the rear of approximately half of the single
family lots for a combined drainage area of three acres. Development of these
common areas will provide passive recreation facilities for the residents depending
upon the final design components and whether or not water features are incorporated.
The final design of these common facilities are subject to approval by the Public Works
and Community Development Departments.
The subdivision layout is consistent with the Land Use Vision Statement in the City's
General Plan, which focuses on the facilitation and integration of development, through
desirable character and sensitive design residential neighborhoods to enhance the
existing high quality of life.
Findings C through E - Compliance with the California Environmental Qaulity Act
Various environmental studies were prepared for this project, and after careful
evaluations, the Historic Preservation Commission and various City Departments have
determined that the proposed Map could not have a significant adverse impact on the
environment provided that recommended mitigation is required pursuant to
Environmental Assessment 2002-457.
Finding F - Public Health Concerns
The design of the proposed subdivision map and related improvements are not likely
to cause serious public health problems, in that responsible agencies have reviewed
the project for these issues with no significant concerns identified. The health, safety
and welfare of current and future residents can be assured based on the recommended
conditions, which serve to implement mitigation measures for the project. The Fire
Department has evaluated the street layout and finds no problems with the design
parameters.
The site is physically suitable for the proposed land division in that no obstacles exist
to constrain development opportunities. Site grading is also consistent with other
surrounding developed and vacant parcels. Dust control measures shall be required
during any further on -site construction work as required by Chapter 6.16 of the
Municipal Code.
That under the City's policy for parks and recreation development, found in the City's
General Plan, the City's goal is to provide three (3) acres of park land per 1,000
0<
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 4
residents. This project will provide payment to the City for usable open space outside
the Tract's boundary which is allowed pursuant Chapter 13.48 of the Subdivision
Ordinance.
Finding_G - Site Design (Public Easements)
Public easements will be retained and required in order to construct any houses on the
proposed lots, ensuring adequate facilities for future homeowners in compliance with
Section 13.24.100 of the Subdivision Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
said Planning Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2002-457 in that no significant effects on the
environment were identified, provided mitigation measures are met; and
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above -
described subdivision map for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 8th day of October, 2002, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOTES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RICHARD BUTLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
4
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 5
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
a..
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30834, STONE CREEK RANCH
MADISON ESTATES, LLC
OCTOBER 8, 2002
GENERAL
1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La
Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or
proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Tentative Tract
Map, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion
in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. This Tentative Tract Map, and any Final Map recorded thereunder, shall comply
with the requirements and standards of Government Code § 66410 through
66499.58 (the "Subdivision Map Act"), and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta
Municipal Code ("LQMC").
The City of La Quinta's Municipal Code can be accessed on the City's Web site
at www.la-quinta.org.
3. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City,
the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from the
following agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Coachella Valley Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
• SunLine Transit Agency
The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances
from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of
improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when
submitting those improvements plans for City approval.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 2
4. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater
Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water),
LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources
Control Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ.
A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land
that disturbs five (5) acres or more of land, or that disturbs less than five
(5) acres of land, but which is a part of a construction project that
encompasses more than five (5) acres of land, the Permitee shall be required
to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP").
B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any
on -site or off -site grading being done in relation to this project.
C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for
inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance
of all improvements by the City.
D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best
Management Practices ("BMPs") (8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC):
1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control).
2) Temporary Sediment Control.
3) Wind Erosion Control.
4) Tracking Control.
5) Non -Storm Water Management.
6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control.
E. All erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to any on -site or off -site grading, pursuant to this project.
F. All approved project BMPs shall be maintained in their proper working order
throughout the course of construction, and until all improvements have been
accepted by the City.
5. The tentative map shall expire within two years, unless an extension is granted
per Section 13.12.150 of the Subdivision Ordinance.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 3
PROPERTY RIGHTS
6. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements
and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of
the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to
dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for
maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements.
7. The current General Plan identifies Avenue 58 as a secondary arterial that
requires 88' of right of way. The applicant may show a 6-foot wide street
vacation along Avenue 58 that reduces the right-of-way width from 50' to 44'.
8. The proposed vacation of the existing right-of-way will diminish the access rights
to the properties located north of the tract boundary. The recordation of the tract
map is subject to the Applicant providing an alternate right-of-way or access
easement, to those properties, or notarized letters of consent from the affected
property owners.
g. The applicant shall retain for private use on the Final Map all private street right-
of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable
specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer.
10. The private street right-of-ways to be retained for private use required for this
development include:
A. PRIVATE STREETS
Property line shall be placed at the back of curb similar to the lay out shown
on the rough grading plan and the typical street section shown in the
approved tentative map. Use of smooth curves instead of angular lines at
property lines is recommended.
1) Streets "A" and "B" (Residential Street)
The right of way width is 36 feet wide to accommodate two travel lanes
with a width not less than 32 feet, with on -street parking restricted to one
side, provided that there is an adequate off-street parking for residents and
visitors and the Applicant makes provisions for ongoing enforcement of the
restrictions.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 4
2) Street "C" (Country Lane) - Coral Mountain Court
The right of way width shall be 50 feet wide.
B. CUL DE SACS
The cul de sac shall be according to the tentative map with a 38-foot curb
radius or larger at the bulb, using a smooth curve instead of angular lines.
C. Emergency access with a 20 foot width or larger shall tie into the interior
street with a dust pan approach and gates installed at the west end of the
walled corridor.
11. Right-of-way geometry for standard knuckles and property line corner cut -backs
at curb returns shall conform to Riverside County Standard Drawings #801, and
#805, respectively, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
12. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street
right-of-ways shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map are necessary prior to
approval of the Final Map dedicating such right-of-ways, the applicant shall grant
the necessary right-of-ways within 60 days of a written request by the City.
13. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map a ten -foot wide public
utility easement contiguous with, and along both sides of all private streets.
Such easement may be reduced to five feet in width with the express written
approval of IID.
14. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of-
ways as follows:
A. Avenue 58 (Secondary Arterial): The General Plan setback requirement is 10
feet, but the Applicant may provide a wider setback if desired.
The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall
design is approved.
The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to,
sites dedicated for utility purposes.
0 ".
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 5
Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks,
the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on
the Final Map.
15. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the
placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox
clusters, park lands, and common areas on the Final Map.
16. Direct vehicular access to Avenue 58 from lots with frontages along Avenue 58
is restricted, except for those access points identified on the tentative tract map,
or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access
restriction shall be shown on the recorded final tract map.
17. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as
appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading,
retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur.
18. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any
portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Tentative
Tract Map and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is
approved by the City Engineer.
FINAL MAPS
19. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker on
a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a standard
AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD program.
Where a Final Map was not produced in an AutoCAD format, or produced in a file
that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept a
raster -image file of such Final Map.
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.
N
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 6
20. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of
qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the
provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC.
21. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and
approval by the City. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below
shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless
otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at
a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may
be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to
improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors.
A. Off -Site Street Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical
The street improvement plans shall include permanent traffic control
and separate plan sheet(s) (drawn at 20 scale) that show the
meandering sidewalk, mounding, and berming design in the combined
parkway and landscape setback area.
B. Perimeter Landscape Plan: 1 " = 20'
C. On -Site Street Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical
D. On -Site Rough Grading Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal
E. On -Site Precise Grading Plan: 1 " = 30' Horizontal
F. Street parking Plan 1 " =100' Horizontal
Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed
above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to
commencing plan preparation.
All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans and Signing & Striping Plans shall show
all existing improvements for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project
limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions.
"Street Parking" plan shall include appropriate signage to implement the "No
Parking" concept, or alternatively an on -street parking policy shall be included in
the CC & R's subject to City Engineer's Approval. The parking plan or CC & R's
shall be submitted concurrently with the Street Improvement Plans.
"Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top of Wall
& Top of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot
of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions.
() 4
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 8
25. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between
the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of guaranteeing the
completion of any improvements related to this Tentative Tract Map, shall comply
with the provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security); LQMC.
26. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include the removal of any
existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the proposed
improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey
monumentation.
27. Depending on the timing of the development of this Tentative Tract Map, and the
status of the off -site improvements at the time, the applicant may be required to:
(1) construct certain off -site improvements, (2) construct additional off -site
improvements, subject to the reimbursement of its costs by others, (3) reimburse
others for those improvements previously constructed that are considered to be
an obligation of this tentative tract map, (4) secure the costs for future
improvements that are to be made by others, or (5) to agree to any combination
of these means, as the City may require.
In the event that any of the improvements required for this development are
constructed by the City, the applicant shall, prior to the approval of the Final
Map, or the issuance of any permit related thereto, reimburse the City for the
costs of such improvements.
28. When improvements are to be secured through a SIA, and prior to any conditional
approval of the Final Map by the City Council, the applicant shall submit detailed
construction cost estimates for all proposed on -site and off -site improvements,
including an estimate for the final survey monumentation, for checking and
approval by the City Engineer. Such estimates shall conform to the unit cost
schedule adopted by City resolution, or ordinance.
For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs shall
be approved by the City Engineer.
At the time the applicant submits its detailed construction cost estimates for
conditional approval of the Final Map by the City Council, the applicant shall also
submit onf copy each of an c- 1 /2 " >; 1 1 " reduction of each page of the Final
Map, along with a copy of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " Vicinity Map.
0
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 9
Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be
approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant's
detailed cost estimates.
Security will not be required for telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V.
improvements.
29. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development, or
fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City
shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building
inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project,
or call upon the surety to complete the improvements.
GRADING
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading
Improvements), LQMC.
30. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the
applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer.
31. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain
approval of all of the following:
A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect,
B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer
C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16,
(Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC.
D. SWPPP and BMP plan
All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary
Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a Soils Engineer, or by
an engineering geologist.
A statement shall appear on the Final Map that a soils report has been prepared
in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953.
The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an
amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust
Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit.
t� 4
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 10
32. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent
wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall
either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion
control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan.
33. Grading within perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain
and shall conform to LQMC 9.60.240(F). The maximum slope shall not exceed
4:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, and shall not exceed 8:1 in the first
6 feet adjacent to the curb in the right of way.
34. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more than one foot
from the building pads in adjacent developments.
35. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining
properties and the lots within this development.
Building pad elevations on contiguous interior lots shall not differ by more than
three feet except for lots that do not share a common street frontage, where the
differential shall not exceed five feet.
Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may
consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance
difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential.
36. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the
site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown
on the approved Tentative Tract Map, the applicant shall submit the proposed
grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review.
37. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall
provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or
surveyor.
Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved
grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any.
Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The
data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at
different times.
0
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 11
38. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating
terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F)
except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope
shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the back
slope (ie the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not exceed 2:1
if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet
adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is
within six (6) feet of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of
way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall
be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches (18")
behind the curb.
DRAINAGE
"Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report
for Stone Creek Ranch. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved manner."
39. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage),
LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More specifically, stormwater falling on
site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall
extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. The design storm shall be
either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off.
40. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two inches
per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant
provides site specific data indicating otherwise.
41. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance
water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leach field approved by the
City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be designed to contain surges
of up to 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. of landscape area, and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft.
42. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water
(through underground piping and/or retention facilities) from any on -site or
adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a
requirement for development of this property.
43. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved
by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer.
04
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 12
44. For on -site common retention basins, retention depth shall be designed according
to Engineering Bulletin 97-03, and side slopes shall not exceed 3:1. For retention
basins on individual lots, retention depth shall not exceed two feet.
45. 5tormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback
lots Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the
setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The
perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped
with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC.
46. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries,
levels or frequencies in any area outside the development.
47. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention
capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into
the historic drainage relief route.
48. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and
retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route.
49. When an applicant proposes discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into
the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant will indemnify the City
from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage
discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City or
area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or
expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be
executed and furnished to the City prior to the issuance of any grading,
construction or building permit, and shall be binding on all heirs, executors,
administrators, assigned, and successors in interest in the land within this
tentative parcel map excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated
or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to
the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the
applicant shall make provisions in the final development CC&R's for meeting
these potential obligations.
UTILITIES
50. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.1 10 (Utilities),
LQMC.
01.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 13
51. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all
utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above ground utility structures
including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves,
and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic
purposes.
52. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development,
and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground.
All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are
exempt from the requirement to be placed underground.
53. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For
installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply
with trench restoration requirements maintained, or require by the City Engineer.
The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for
approval by the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
54. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street
Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access For
Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and Section
13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed.
55. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations that will
convey water without ponding, and provide lateral containment of dust and
residue during street sweeping operations. If a wedge or rolled curb design is
approved, the lip at the flow line shall be near vertical with a 1 /8" batter and a
minimum height of 0.1'. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to
standard curb height prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot.
56. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with
the General Plan street type noted in parentheses.
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1) Avenue 58 - Secondary Arterial; 88' R/W
04
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 14
Widen the north side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the
Tentative Tract Map boundary. Rehabilitate and/or reconstruct
existing roadway pavement as necessary to augment and convert it
from a rural county -road design standard to La Quinta's urban arterial
design standard. Street widening improvements shall include all
appurtenant components such as, but not limited to, curb, gutter,
traffic control striping, legends, and signs, except for street lights.
Other significant new improvements required for installation in, or
adjacent, to the subject right of way include:
The pavement/restoration improvement work located more than 20
feet from the outer curb face (i.e., in the arterial core) is eligible for
reimbursement from the City's Development Impact fee fund in
accordance with policies established for that program.
(a) 8-foot wide meandering sidewalk.
The meandering sidewalk shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout
that utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the curbline
that touch the back of curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The
sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet, and at
each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in
creating the arrhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall meander into the
landscape setback lot and approach within 5 feet of the perimeter wall
at intervals not to exceed 250 feet.
B. PRIVATE STREETS
1) Streets "A" and "B"
Construct 32-foot wide travel width as shown on the tentative map
measured from gutter flow line to gutter flow line, provided parking
is restricted to one side and there is adequate off-street parking for
residents and visitors, and the applicant makes provisions for perpetual
enforcement of the restrictions.
2) Street "C" (Country lane) - Coral Mountain Court
Construct 28-foot wide road bed as shown on the tentative map
consisting of 20 feet of pavement and a 4-foot shoulder on both sides
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 15
of the street. On -street parking shall be prohibited and the Applicant
shall make provisions for perpetual enforcement of the restrictions.
C. CUL DE SACS
Shall be constructed according to the tentative map with not less than 38-
foot curb radius at the bulb using a smooth curve instead of angular lines
similar to the layout shown on the rough grading plan.
D. Curve radii for curbs at all street intersections shall not be less than 25 feet
unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer at unique locations where
special consideration is appropriate.
E. Emergency access
Emergency access with a 20-foot width or larger shall tie into interior
streets with a dust pan approach and gates installed at the west end of the
walled corridor.
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, standard knuckles, corner cutbacks,
dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved construction
plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined by the City
Engineer.
57. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design
procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength
and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural
sections shall be as follows:
Residential
Secondary Arterial
3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b.
4.0" a.c./6.00" c.a.b
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
58. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
following:
A. Primary Entry (Avenue 58): Full turn movement is allowed.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 16
59. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings
and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and sidewalks.
Mid -block street lighting is not required.
60. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted
standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City
Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall
be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
61. Standard knuckles and corner cut -backs shall conform to Riverside County
Standard Drawings #801 and #805, respectively, unless otherwise approved by
the City Engineer.
62. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries and
to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements.
CONSTRUCTION
63. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the
buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -
maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control
devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets in
residential developments are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness,
the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten
percent of homes within the development or when directed by the City,
whichever comes first.
LANDSCAPING
64. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) &
13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC.
65. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots and park areas pursuant to the September 19 and 27, 2002
submittals, unless otherwise noted herein. The developer and subsequent
property owner(s) shall continuously maintain all required landscaping in a healthy
and viable condition as required by Section 9.60.240 (E3) of the Zoning
Ordinance.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 17
66. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians,
retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape
architect. Additionally, side slope of the retention basins shall be planted with
groundcover that is maintenance free.
The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community
Development Department (CDD), prior to plan checking by the Public Works
Department. When plan checking has been completed by CDD, the applicant
shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural
Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the City Engineer. Compliance
with the requirements of Chapter 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscaping) of the
Municipal Code is required.
NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer.
67. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the -
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no
lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18-inches of curbs along public
streets.
68. Trees shall be staked with lodge poles to protect against damage from gusting
winds.
69. Prior to building permit issuance, a front yard landscape plan shall be prepared for
each homesite to include a minimum of two shade trees (15 gallon with 0.75
caliper), five ten-gallon shrubs, and groundcover. No more than 50% of the front
yard area shall be devoted to lawn.
70. Parkway shade trees shall be delivered to the site in 24" or larger boxes with
minimum 1.25-inch calipers. Trees shall be a minimum height of ten feet once
installed. Parkway palm trees shall have a minimum brown trunk height of eight
feet. Existing site vegetation on the project's perimeter shall be retained in place,
unless noted otherwise on the grading plan. Any mature trees that are relocated
during construction shall be evaluated by a licensed arborist prior to replanting.
71. Pedestrian walkways within on -site retention basins shall be concrete and/or
another ADA compliance hardscape material.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 18
QUALITY ASSURANCE
72. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet
with the approval of the City Engineer.
73. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such
other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with
which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate
construction supervision.
74. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements, sampling
and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program, but which
may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction materials and
methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and other applicable
regulations.
75. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with
reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by
the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or
"As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor
certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall
have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City, revised
to reflect the as -built conditions.
MAINTENANCE
76. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160
(Maintenance), LQMC.
77. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance
of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and
sidewalks.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
78. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and
Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City
for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall
be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and
permits.
0t
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 19
79. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the
Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the
time of issuance of building permit(s).
80. The developer shall pay school mitigation fees to the Coachella Valley Unified
School District based on their requirements. Fees shall be paid prior to building
permit issuance by the City.
81. The Community Development Director shall cause to be filed with the County
Clerk a "Notice of Determination" pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15075(a) once
reviewed by the City Council.
82. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.48 (Park
Dedications), LQMC.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Conditions are subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or
when building permits are not obtained within twelve (12) months. Final conditions will
be addressed when plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire
Department at the time construction plans are submitted. All questions regarding the
meaning of the Fire Department conditions should be referred to the Fire Department
Planning & Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886.
83. For residential areas, approved standard fire hydrants, located at each street
intersection and spaced 330 feet apart with no portion of any lot frontage more
than 165 feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1,000 g.p.m. for a 2-
hour duration at 20 psi.
For any building with public access (e.g., recreation halls, clubhouses, gatehouse,
maintenance and/or commercial buildings), Super fire hydrants are to be placed
no closer than 25 feet and not more than 165 feet from any portion of the first
floor of said building following approved travel ways around the exterior of the
building. Minimum fire flow shall be 1,500 g.p.m. for a 2-hour duration at 20
psi.
84. Blue dot retro-reflectors shall be placed in the street 8-inches from centerline to
the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations.
n�-
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 20
85. Buildings that are 5,000 square feet and larger, other than single family houses,
shall be fully sprinkled (NFPA 13 Standard). If required, sprinkler plans will need
to be submitted to the Fire Department. Area separation walls may not be used
to reduce the need for sprinklers.
86. Any turnaround requires a minimum 38-foot turning radius.
87. All structures shall be accessible from an approved roadway to within 150 feet
of all portions of the exterior of the first floor.
88. The minimum dimension for access roads is 20 feet clear and unobstructed width
and a minimum clearance of 13'-6" in height.
89. Any gate providing access from a road to a driveway shall be located at least
35'-0" setback from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop
without obstructing traffic on the road. Where one-way road with a single traffic
lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 38-foot turning radius shall be used.
90. 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. Automatic gates shall be provided
with backup power. A separate pedestrian access gate is also required.
91. Roadways may not exceed 1,320 feet without secondary access. This access
may be restricted to emergency vehicles only, however, public egress must be
unrestricted.
92. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and
accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building
materials being placed on an individual lot. Two sets of water plans are to be
submitted to the Fire Department for approval.
93. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for
approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting
and/or signs.
94. A display board may be required for the project, contact the Fire Department for
details.
N
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 21
MISCELLANEOUS
95. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file
documents for plan checking purposes.
96. All mitigation measures included in Environmental Assessment 2002-457 are
hereby included in this approval.
97. Design guidelines for housing product shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Commission per Section 9.60.330 (Tract Development) or Section
9.60.340 (Custom Homes) of the Zoning Ordinance. Prior to building permit
issuance, all required RL Zoning District requirements shall be met.
98. A permit from the Community Development Department is required for any
temporary or permanent tract signs. Uplighted tract ID signs are allowed subject
to the provisions of Chapter 9.160 of the Zoning Ordinance.
99. Parkway walls shall be decorative as defined on the concept landscape plan,
including the use of 30-inch wide pilasters at each intersecting property line.
Perimeter tract walls shall be constructed before the 10t' house is ready to be
occupied. Access gates for the project shall be approved by the Community
Development Department before installation.
100. The developer shall share in the construction costs, up to and not exceeding
50%, to build a six-foot high masonry wall on the west side of the development
with KSL Desert Resorts to complete the obligations addressed in Plot Plan 89-
424 and Specific Plan 83-002 (PGA West).
101. The Community Development and Public Works Directors may allow minor design
changes to final map applications that include a reduction in the number of
buildable lots, changes in lot sizes, relocation of common open space areas or
other required public facilities (e.g., CVWD well sites, etc.) and changes in the
alignment of street sections, provided the applicant submits a Substantial
Compliance Application to the Public Works Department during plan check
disclosing the requested changes and how the changes occurred. These changes
shall be conveyed to the City Council when the map is presented for recordation
consideration.
III—'
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 30834, Madison Estates, LLC
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 22
102. Prior to submitted the Final Map for plan check consideration, the following
corrections and/or information shall be provided:
A. Two copies of the draft Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's).
The City Attorney shall approve the document prior to approval of the final
map by the City Council.
B. A minimum of three street names shall be submitted for each private street
shown on the Map exhibit. A list of the names in ranking order shall be
submitted to the Community Development Department for approval.
ATTACHMENTS
'ALLUU men` '
PGA West
IL Qa
I
I
i
23
1
e
Avenue SS ►R
TRA 020-060
PM 1 eeaoe 730,04
7 02=40
330.03
PM 7SIS5
TRA
020-073
RI PAR 1
O4 F o O
e PAR 2 a
O a
o4.65ACGR
4.SMACGR
10.03 OR 4.43 AC NT
4.54 AC NT 2,
(`
m
0\ 2
o0
11
12
13
/
9.70 AC
9.78 AC
9.70 AC
3Sa.o
330A I I A2
PAR <1
10 PAR
AR 2 � PAD
9O
1� 10
I
SACG
I 6ACGR
4 AC _ _ . _ 4..81 NT I
I I
14.81 AC
II
I
930.W
.Oi PM 19g7 PY7'l/eS
330.01
ASSESSOR'S MAP BK752 PG.24
Riverside County, Calif, All
r
Attachment 2T'
Baumann Property
- Avenue 5 8
m
Figure 2 - Site Layout
LEGEND Proposed Residential Development
Site Boundary 29.2 Acres on Avenue 58, Y2 Mile West of Madison
Project Number: 08589-04
® Approximate Boring Location
OIEarth Systems
VPS� Southwest
1N�i �d�i• „�Q J,.iINf1tNWCG
� r1Mi(IGbI d0 ALiG
6
ZOO? 6 ► s 3SIA3u
�� Attachment 3
ryii gg ei �
a p p 4
i i
loll III Ilk
0
Attachment 4
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
October 2, 2002
6. Commissioner Thorns suggested the area be increased to bring the
walkway out to the street and suggested some changes to the
landscaping o bring the river rock to the corner. He further stated
his cone hat those traveling east could potentially have a
visibili� blem. He suggested closing off the southern -most
acces• oint and allowing only one way in and out. Staff noted
this s a question for Public Works. Mr. Prest stated that having
t access points is alwa tter.
7. here being no r discu , it was moved and seconded by
Committee ers Cunn' m/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion
2002-03 commendi proval of Village Use Permit 2002-
015, Ject to the co ons as amended.
Texas Rang d Green C rubs be incr d in size
to five gall
B. Contourin ong eetscape needs continuance
with river ed to the street in ction.
C. Redesign the pedestrian entrance t ate a courtyard
affect on the north side of the buildi
D. The applicant is to consider the possib f a one way in
and out access point for the parking lot.
Unanimously approved.
B Tentative Tract Map 30834; a request of Madison Estates, LLC for
review of landscape plans for a 76 lot single family development on 29
acres located on the north side of Avenue 58 and west of Madison
Street.
1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department and introduced Mr. Ron
Gregory, landscape architect for the project, who gave a
presentation on the request and introduced Matt Summitt, Project
Designer for the project.
2. Committee Member Thoms asked if the individual lots have access
out to the common area. Mr. Gregory stated not at this point.
Committee Member Thorns asked the height of the walls inside the
retention basin. Mr. Gregory stated 4-5 feet.
G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\ 10-2-02.wpd 3
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
October 2, 2002
3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the lower the wall the better to
not give a confined feeling. Also, he asked if there are controls as
to the height of the walls, or CC&Rs that delineate what they can
and cannot do. Mr. Gregory stated yes, the future owners would
be restricted in development of any on -lot walls or fences.
4. Committee Member Cunningham stated that if the developer sets
the limits/design for the walls it can reduce the number of issues
that can come up with property owners. He asked if it was more
costly to design the streets with the tree wells than giving more
yard. Mr. Gregory stated it is more expensive, but the developers
wanted it.
5. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if there was a reason why there
was no access from the other areas into the retention basin areas.
Mr. Summitt stated it was an issue with grading. Committee
Member Bobbitt asked the height of the walls next to the common
area. Mr. Gregory stated it would be handled with the design of
the house, but the developer would prefer to have no privacy walls
between the houses. Although fencing will be needed for pool
access.
6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Member Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion
2002-040 recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 30834,
as recommended. Unanimously approved.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS:
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members
Cunningham/Bobbitt to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and
Landscaping Review Committee to a regular meeting to be held on November 6, 2002.
This meeting was adjourned at 1 1:12 a.m. on October 2, 2002.
Respectfully submitted,
BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
GAWPD0CS\ARLC\10-2-02.wpd 4
Desert Resorts, Inc.
Attachment 5
September 23, 2002
f AF )
City of La Quinta
Attention: Jerry Herman — Community Development Director
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta, CA 92253
RE: Golf Course Maintenance Building at 80-202 Avenue 58 (Plot Plan 89-424)
Dear Mr. Herman:
Thank you for your letter of September 5, 2002 concerning the required wall on the
easterly side of the above referenced building. KSL is aware that the wall needs to be
built and is in the process of creating plans for submittal to the City of La Quinta for
approval.
Due to the eminent development of the parcel to the easi of our building, KSL would like
to cooperate with the owner concerning the design of the wall so it will be mutually
agreeable to both parties. Since this wall will mutually benefit both parties, we believe
that is it fair and reasonable that the owner of the adjoining parcel share in the cost of the
wall. Please include a requirement for their subdivision conditions of approval, a sharing
of the cost for this common wall.
If you have questions, or need additional information, please contaci me at 760.564.7164,
or via e-mail at bdoddsna kslmail.com.
Very truly yours,
_r—
William J. Dodds
WJD/ls
cc: Joey Garon
tl�� •5.+ x �S3-n : t-S
50-905 Avenida Bermudas • La Quinta, CA 92253 • (760) 564-8000 0 Fax (760) 564-8091 06
Iwo
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2002
CASE NUMBER: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29878, 1 ST TIME EXTENSION
APPLICANT/
PROPERTY OWNER: KSL HOTEL LAND, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
REQUEST: A ONE YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR A 60-LOT SINGLE
FAMILY SUBDIVISION ON APPROXIMATELY 22.21 ACRES
LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PGA BOULEVARD AND AVENUE
54 WITHIN PGA WEST
ENGINEER: M.D.S. CONSULTING (CHRIS J. BERGH, LAND SURVEYOR)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EA 83-009;
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 83062922) WAS CERTIFIED
FOR THE PGA WEST DEVELOPMENT BY THE CITY
COUNCIL ON MAY 1, 1984 UNDER RESOLUTION 84-28.
AN ADDENDUM WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
ON OCTOBER 3, 2000 FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
2000-070, CHANGE OF ZONE 2000-095, SPECIFIC PLAN
83-002 (AMENDMENT #4) AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
29878 UNDER RESOLUTION 2000-128. THEREFORE, NO
CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES, CONDITIONS OR NEW
INFORMATION EXISTS WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THE
PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT EIR PURSUANT TO
PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE § 21166.
GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE AND
ZONING
DESIGNATIONS: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (UP TO EIGHT DWELLING
UNITS PER ACRE) AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
(RM) WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002
BACKGROUND:
The 22.21 acre site, located at the southeast corner of Avenue 54 and PGA
Boulevard, was graded approximately 17 years ago during construction of the original
off -site street improvements for PGA West and planned to be a shopping center.
On October 3, 2000, the City Council approved the following site related development
actions:
1. General Plan Amendment 2000-070 and Zone Change 2000-095, a land use
change from Community Commercial to Medium Density Residential under
Resolution 2000-129 and Ordinance No. 349;
2. Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment #4, a land use change from Community
Commercial to Medium Density Residential under Resolution 2000-130. This
plan update also reduced the number of residential units from 5,000 to 3,936
on 1,687 ± acres. Of this total, golf course fairways make up approximately
38% of the master planned community; and
3. Tentative Tract Map 29878 (the subject property), a 60 single family and
various lettered lot subdivision on 22 ± acres in Planning Area #4 of SP 83-002
under Resolution 2000-131. Access to the project is PGA Boulevard with
emergency only access on Avenue 54 on the east side of the parcel. A private
loop street (Lots "A" through "DI and single cul-de-sac (Lot "E") provide access
to the proposed lots ranging in size from 6,250 square feet to 10,932 square
feet; each lot backs up to a four acre manmade lake in the center of the
development (Attachments 1 and 2).
Guest parking is planned throughout the project on the two-way private streets.
Lot #61 is being set aside for development of a clubhouse. Other supplemental
lots are provided for a well site (Lot 62) and Verizon substation (Lot "U"). A
copy of the City Council Minutes is attached (Attachment 3).
On October 30, 2000, the site's underlying parcel map (PM 29799) was recorded
establishing a 19.267 acre residential parcel and six perimeter lettered lots.
The City Council, on November 21, 2000, adopted Resolution 2000-149 for TTM
29878 granting conditional approval of the final map and subdivision improvement
agreement, subject to certain requirements being met before recordation.
On November 27, 2001, the Planning Commission approved Site Development Permit
2001-717 allowing a merchant builder sales office of 2,400 sq. ft. and parking for 20
vehicles on the site by adoption of Resolution 2001-143. The existing temporary sales
facility is allowed to remain operational until November 27, 2005, unless the
subdivision is constructed.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Condition #4 of City Council Resolution 2000-131 required the subdivision map to be
recorded by October 3, 2002, unless a time extension was granted. On August 26,
2002, the applicant requested a one year time extension for their residential
subdivision. No subdivision map changes have been requested.
Public Notice: This case was advertised in the Desert Sun on September 25, 2002,
and all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the project were mailed
a copy of the public hearing notice on September 6, 2002 by the Community
Development Department. To date, no comments have been received from adjacent
property owners. Any written comments received will be handed out at the meeting.
Public Agency Review: The request was sent out for comments to City Departments
and affected public agencies on August 26, 2002. Agency comments received have
been made a part of the Conditions of Approval.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Under La Quinta Municipal Code provisions, the subdivider may apply for a maximum
of three one-year time extensions. Findings to approve this request can be made and
are contained in the attached Resolution pursuant to Section 13.12.160 (Extensions
of time for tentative maps) of the Municipal Code.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending to the City Council
approval of a one year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 29878, subject to
findings and the attached conditions.
Attachments:
1 . Specific Plan Exhibit
2. Approved Tract Map Exhibit
3. October 3, 2000 City Council Minutes (Excerpt)
4. Large Tract Map Exhibit (Planning Commission only)
by:
ell, Associate Planner
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF A ONE YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR
A 60 SINGLE FAMILY AND OTHER COMMON LOT
SUBDIVISION ON 22.21 ACRES LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF AVENUE 54 AND PGA
BOULEVARD
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29878, TIME EXTENSION #1
APPLICANT: KSL HOTEL LAND, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8t" day of October, 2002, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL Hotel
Land, L.P. to consider a one year time extension for a 60 single family and other
common lot subdivision on 22.21 acres located at the southeast corner of Avenue 54
and PGA Boulevard within Specific Plan 83-002 (PGA West Resort and Club), more
particularly described as:
Assessor's Parcel Numbers 775-080-009 to -014 (formerly 775-080-002)
Parcels 1 and A-F of Parcel Map 29799
WHEREAS, the City Council of La Quinta, California, did on the V day
of October, 2000, adopt Resolution 2002-131 approving Tentative Tract Map 29878,
subject to Findings and Conditions of Approval. Condition #4 required recordation of
the subdivision map by October 3, 2002, unless a time extension is applied for and
granted; and
WHEREAS, on October 30, 2000, the site's underlying parcel map (PM
29799) was recorded establishing a 19.267 acre parcel and six perimeter lettered lots;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council of La Quinta, California, did on the 21 st day
of November, 2000, adopt Resolution 2000-149 granting conditional approval of the
final map and subdivision improvement agreement, subject to certain requirements
being met before recordation. The map has gone unrecorded, therefore, a time
extension has been requested pursuant to Section 13.12.160 (Extensions of time for
tentative maps) of the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, on August 26, 2002, the Community Development
Department mailed case file materials to all affected agencies for their review and
comment. All written comments are on file with the Community Development
Department; and
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Tentative Tract 29878, Time Extension #1
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 2
WHEREAS, the City mailed public hearing notices to all property owners
within 500 feet of the project site on September 6, 2002 pursuant to Section
13.12.100 of the Subdivision Ordinance and published a notice in the Desert Sun
newspaper on September 25, 2002. All written correspondence is on file with the
Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map has complied with the requirements
of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as
amended; Resolution 83-63 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the City
Council certified an Addendum to the PGA West EIR (State Clearinghouse No.
83062922; Environmental Assessment 83-009) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15164
on October 3, 2000 by adoption of Resolution 2000-128. No changed circumstances,
conditions or new information exists which require preparation of a subsequent EIR
pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21 166; and
WHEREAS, perimeter infrastructure improvements and on -site grading
occurred approximately 17 years ago; 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 recommend
approval to the City Council of said Time Extension for Tentative Tract Map 29878:
Finding Number 1 - Consistency with the General Plan/Specific Plan
The project is consistent with the City's General Plan Medium Density
Residential land use designation of up to eight dwelling units per acre pursuant
to General Plan Amendment 2000-070 and Specific Plan 83-002 (Amendment
#4, Planning Unit #4).
The Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the City's General Plan with the
implementation of Conditions of Approval to provide for adequate storm water
drainage.
Finding Number 2 - Consistency of Design and Improvements
The design and improvements of the proposed subdivision are consistent with
the City's General Plan; the implementation of the recommended conditions of
approval ensures proper street widths, perimeter walls, parking requirements,
and timing of construction improvements.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Tentative Tract 29878, Time Extension #1
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 3
Finding Number 3 - Consistency of Public Easements
As conditioned, the design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not
conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or
use of, property within the subdivision.
Finding Number 4 - Public Health and Safety
The design of the subdivision and type of improvements, as conditioned, are not
likely to cause serious public health problems, in that this issue was considered
in Specific Plan 83-002 (Amendment #4) in which no significant health or
safety impacts were identified for the proposed project.
Finding Number 5 - Suitability of Site
The design of the subdivision, or the proposed improvements, are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially, and unavoidably injure
fish or wildlife, or their habitat, in that SP 83-002 (Amendment #4) prepared for
Tract 29878 did not identify any significant impacts for this issue.
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 pursuant to Section 13.12.130 of the Municipal Code;
2. That it does hereby require compliance with Specific Plan 83-002 (Amendment
#4), a golf -oriented residential development on 1,687 ± acres;
3. No changed circumstances, conditions or new information exists which would
require the preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code
§ 21 166; and
4. That it does recommend approval of a one year time extension for Tentative
Tract Map 29878 to the City Council for the reasons set forth in this Resolution
and subject to the attached conditions.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Tentative Tract 29878, Time Extension #1
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 4
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 8th day of October, 2002, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RICH BUTLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
r,
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29878, 1 ST TIME EXTENSION
KSL LAND HOLDINGS, INC.
OCTOBER 8, 2002
GENERAL
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
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. Tentative Tract Map 29878 shall comply with the requirements and standards of
§ 66410 through 66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision
Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC).
3. This Map shall expire on October 3. 2003, unless extended pursuant to the
requirements of Section 13.12.160 of the Subdivision Ordinance.
4. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant
shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Coachella Valley Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances
from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement
plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City
approval of the plans.
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES
construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 1" Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 2
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.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
5. Prior to approval of a final map, 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.
6. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and
utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code,
applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer.
7. Right of way dedications required of this development include:
A. PUBLIC STREETS
1) None required
B. PRIVATE STREETS
1) Residential: 31-foot width. On -street parking is prohibited and
provisions shall be made for adequate off-street parking for residents
and visitors. The CC&R's shall contain language requiring the
Homeowner's Association to provide for ongoing enforcement of the
restrictions.
2) Entry street: 45-foot width.
C. CULS DE SAC
1) Public or Private: Use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or
800A (offset); Public - 45-foot radius, Private - 39.5-foot radius.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 1" Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 3
8. Right of way geometry for knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with
Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
9. 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.
10. If the City Engineer determines that access rights to proposed street rights of
way 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.
11. The applicant shall dedicate ten -foot public utility easements contiguous with and
along both sides of all private streets. The easements may be reduced to five
feet with the express concurrence of IID.
12. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as
follows (listed setback depth is the average depth if meandering wall design is
approved):
A. PGA Boulevard: 20-feet
B. Avenue 54: 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.
13. 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.
14. 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.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 1" Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 4
15. 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.
16. 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
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) AND PARCEL 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.
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 "Rough Grading," "Precise
Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." Precise grading plans shall
have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building
Official. All other plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans
are not approved for construction until they are signed.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 11' Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 5
"Streets and Drainage" 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.
"Precise Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
20. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for
elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant
may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City.
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.
If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be
converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the
plans.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
22. 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 subdivider may be
required to construct improvements, to construct additional improvements
subject to reimbursement by others, to reimburse others who construct
improvements that are obligations of this map, to 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.
23. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish
an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy
obligations required by the City prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or
.9 7
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 11' Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 6
issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured
agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with
Chapter 13, LQMC.
Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing
structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements.
24. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of
improvement costs 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.
25. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative
approvals (e.g., Site Development Permits), 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.
26. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely
manner or as specified in an approved phasing plan or in an improvement
agreement, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits or
final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of
the project or call upon the surety to complete the improvements.
GRADING
27. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard
Regulations). If any portion of any proposed building lot in the development is
or may be located within a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood
Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors
and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year)
flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 1" Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 7
Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to
issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall
furnish certifications as required by FEMA that the above conditions have been
met.
28. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, 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.
A statement shall appear on final maps (if any are required of this development)
that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health
and Safety Code.
29. 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.
30. 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 Vimits 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.
31. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant
shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in
accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The Applicant shall furnish security, in
a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance
with the provisions of the permit.
32. 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.
33. 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
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 11' Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 8
difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be
organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times.
DRAINAGE
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and
the following:
34. Stormwater 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.
35. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual -lot
basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for lots
2.5 acres in size or larger or where the use of common retention is impracticable.
If individual -lot retention is approved, the applicant shall meet the individual -lot
retention provisions of Chapter 13.24, LQMC.
36. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated,
unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route.
37. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on
site or passed through to the overflow outlet.
38. 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.
39. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1 . Maximum retention depth shall be
six feet for common basins and two feet for individual -lot retention.
40. 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 leechfield shall be designed to contain surges
of 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. (of landscape area) and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft.
41. 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.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 11 Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 9
42. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the
Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from
the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge
which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide
pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses
which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and
furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or building
permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and
successors in interest in the land within this 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&R's
for meeting these potential obligations.
43. The tract 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.
UTILITIES
44. 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.
45. Existing aerial lines within or adjacent to the proposed development and all
proposed utilities shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv
are exempt from this requirement.
46. 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
47. 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.)
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 11t Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 10
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1) PGA Blvd. (Private Street):
a. Remove existing median break and left -turn pocket located
northerly of proposed project entry (Lot A) and reconstruct
median island and landscaping.
b. Remove existing curb returns located northerly of proposed
project entry (Lot A) and reconstruct curb and gutter. Construct
8-foot wide sidewalk and perimeter landscaping.
2) Avenue 54 (Primary Arterial):
a. Remove existing median break and left -turn pocket located
approximately 600-feet easterly of the centerline of Jefferson
Street/PGA Blvd. and reconstruct median island and landscaping.
b. Remove existing curb returns located approximately 600-feet
easterly of the centerline of Jefferson Street/PGA Blvd. and
reconstruct curb and gutter. Construct 8-foot wide sidewalk and
perimeter landscaping.
B. PRIVATE STREETS
1) On -site streets: construct 28-foot wide full -width improvements
(measured from gutter flowline to gutter flowline) within the 31-foot
right of way. All on -site streets shall be constructed with "wedge"
type curb design as approved by the City Engineer.
2) All on -street parking is prohibited and the applicant shall be required
to provide for the perpetual enforcement of the restriction by the
Homeowners' Association.
C. CULS DE SAC
1) Use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A (offset).
Curb flowline shall be have a 38-foot.
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. 1
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 11 Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 11
48. 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.
49. 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).
50. 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.
51. Knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard
Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City
Engineer.
52. 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. If a wedge or rolled curb design is 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.
53. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design
procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated
traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall
be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials):
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"
54. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the
time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete.
The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design
procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include
recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation
test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current ,1
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 1" Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 12
production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix
designs are approved.
55. 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 tract or when directed by the City, whichever comes first.
56. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
following:
A. PGA Blvd. - Main project entry, to be located approximately 1,000-feet
southerly of Avenue 54 and will be allow full turning movement. The gated
entrance shall be designed to include two incoming lanes and one exit lane
with appropriate vehicle stacking capacity, subject to final approval by the
City Engineer.
B. Avenue 54 - Emergency access entry, to be located approximately 1,100
feet west of the centerline of Jefferson Street. This point of entry will be
restricted to right -turn movements only.
LANDSCAPING AND 'PERIMETER WALL
57. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots, and park areas.
58. Landscape and irrigation plans 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.
59. 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.
1)
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 11 Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 13
60. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide calculations
consistent with Chapter 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscaping) of the Municipal
Code for development of the lake.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
61. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
62. The applicant shall employ or retain qualified civil engineers, geotechnical
engineers, surveyors, or other appropriate professionals to provide sufficient
construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings.
63. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and
testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program but required by
the City as evidence that construction materials and methods comply with plans,
specifications and applicable regulations.
64. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible
record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each
sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed"
and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the
accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image
files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions.
MAINTENANCE
65. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all
on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. The
applicant shall maintain required public improvements until expressly released
from this responsibility by the appropriate public agency.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
66. 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.
67. The applicant shall pay a cash fee to the City in the amount of $355,000
($16,000/gross acre subdivided) to offset offsite improvement costs for
improvements installed by KSL that are a requirement of Specific Plan 83-002
and benefit all developers in the specific plan area. A portion of the fee may be
refunded if the actual amount of the pro-rata share, based on actual construction
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 1" Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 14
costs, is confirmed to be lower. The City will not release or distribute the
reimbursement funds to KSL until the actual construction costs have been
confirmed and the pro-rata share formula has been approved by the City.
68. Final maps under this tentative map shall be subject to the provisions of the
Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of final map approval.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land division, the
Fire Department (760-863-8886) recommends the following fire protection measures
be provided in accordance with La Quinta Municipal Code and/or Riverside County Fire
Department protection standards:
69. Fire hydrants in accordance with CVWD Standard W-33 shall be located at each
street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no
portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire
flow will be 1,000 g.p.m. for a two-hour duration at 20 psi. Blue dot reflectors
shall be mounted in the middle of the streets directly in line with fire hydrants.
70. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant/developer shall furnish one
blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review and
approval. Plans will conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and
the system will meet the fire flow requirements. Plans will be approved and
signed by a registered civil engineer and the local water company with the
following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in
accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire
Department."
71. The required water system, including fire hydrants, will be installed and accepted
by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being
placed on an individual lot.
72. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the construction
of the model units only. Plans for a temporary water system must be submitted
to the Fire Department for review prior to issuance of building permits.
73. Gates installed to restrict access shall be power operated and equipped with a
Fire Department override system consisting of Knox Key Operated switches,
series KS-2P with dust cover, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox
q
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Tentative Tract Map 29878, 11 Time Extension
KSL Land Holdings, Inc.
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 15
Company. Improvement plans for the entry street and gates shall be submitted
to the Fire Department for review/approval prior to installation.
74. Gate entrance and exit openings shall not be less than 16 feet in width. All gates
shall be located at least 40 feet from the roadway and shall open to allow a
vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road. Gates shall have either
a secondary power supply or an approved manual means to release mechanical
control of the gate in the event of loss of primary power.
75. If public use type buildings are to be constructed, additional fire protection may
be required. Fire flows and hydrant locations will be stipulated when building
plans are reviewed by the Fire Department.
76. The minimum dimensions for fire apparatus access roads entering and exiting this
project shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20'-0" in each direction
and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 1 X-6".
SPECIAL
77. Letters from public agencies for this project shall become plan check
requirements for final map preparation.
78. A paleontologist and archaeologist shall be present during grading and excavation
of the proposed lake.
ATTACHMENTS
Planning Area IV Attachment 1
Planning Area IV addresses land use for the 22 acres of land at the project entry on Avenue
54. This Planning Area provides for a variety of housing types consistent with the Medium
Density Residential designation. Typical residential land uses may include single family
detached dwellings on medium and small size lots and/or single family attached, townhome,
or multifamily condominium dwellings with open space.
�r
Ave. 54
a
Atr oar
rF--� 1
0
Avg. 58
TABLE 4
PLANNING AREA IV - LAND USE
A
PGA WEST Specific Plan Amendment IV Medium Density Residential Area
ACRES UNITS DE SITY i
GENERAL PLAN/LAND USE ZONE
MDR - Medium Density Residential RM 22 176 8 DU/AC
TOTAL 22 176
PGA WEST - Amendment IV
2.15
r-,
..
a
z �� 6
Attachment 2
s ;s" a o�
r r
od pp o = g
O
UI yh, N O$ s e o Q
O tey
Q� W� W)
j� N ¢i Y i (71 >
1 t T Y
r ' a
66 o
i 4
1S NOSa3333f l n
1N3411;8d30
1N31NdCl3A3Q� 11 W4NOC i i '
bSNif10H A110 4
I r
ZUBG J C`"s E . ,
y
W
g
e e
W'
3 3tse
a�3 S��
�I
Zi
WI
�I
gac e7_.
•
CC��x-:
Attachment 3
City Council Minutes 15
October 3, 2000
2. PUBLIC HEARING TO CERTIFY AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY
CERTIFIED PGA WEST ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, AMEND THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT (GPA 2000-070) FROM COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, ZONE CHANGE
(CZ 2000-095) FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL, MODIFY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN
GUIDELINES AND LAND USE ALTERNATIVES (SP 83-002, AMENDMENT #4),
AND APPROVE THE SUBDIVISION (TTM 29878) OF 212 ACRES INTO 50
RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND MISCELLANEOUS LOTS ON THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF AVENUE 54 AND PGA BOULEVARD. APPLICANT: KSL LAND
HOLDINGS, INC.
The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN at 7:09 p.m.
Community Development Director Herman presented the staff report and
reviewed the requested changes on the tract map.
Chevis Hosea, 55-920 PGA Ooulevard, of KSL Land Corporation, spoke
regarding the need for a golf cart lane to provide homeowners access to the
courses at PGA West and urged Council to support the proposed applications.
Robert Foulk, 57-540 Interlachen, President of PGA West Master Association,
stated the Association's security concerns have been resolved and they support
the development.
There being no further requests to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC
HEARING CLOSED at 7:1 1 p.m.
In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Herman confirmed the closest
commercial project is at Avenue 52.
Council Member Adolph noted one resident has written a letter voicing
disappointment with the zone change. However, he felt the zone change was
best for the community and congratulated KSL and the homeowners association
for resolving the security concerns.
Council concurred.
City Council Minutes 16 October 3, 2000
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-128
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING AN ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT 83-009 PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-070,
SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002 AMENDMENT #4, CHANGE OF ZONE 2000-095, AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29878.
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to adopt Resolution No.
2000-128 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-129
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-070 TO
MODIFY THE LAND USE ELEMENT FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) TO
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR) WITHIN PGA WEST (KSL LAND
HOLDINGS INC.)
It was moved by Council Members Henderson/Sniff to adopt Resolution No.
2000-129 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to take up Ordinance
No. 349 by title and number only and waive further reading. Motion carried
unanimously.
ORDINANCE NO. 349
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CHANGE OF ZONE 2000-095 FROM COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR 22 ACRES LOCATED
AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PGA BOULEVARD AND AVENUE 54 WITHIN
PGA WEST (KSL LAND HOLDINGS INC.)
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to introduce Ordinance No. 349
on first reading. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Adolph, Henderson, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
b.
City Council Minutes
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-130
17
October 3, 2000
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002 AMENDMENT #4 REVISING
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, REDUCING RESIDENTIAL UNITS, CHANGING
PLANNING AREAS, AND LAND USE CHANGE FROM COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR 22 ACRES (PGA
WEST) (KSL LAND HOLDINGS INC.)
It was moved by Council Members Henderson/Sniff to adopt Resolution No.
2000-130 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-131
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 22.21 ACRES INTO 60
SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, CLUBHOUSE LOT, WELL LOT, AND VARIOUS
COMMON LOTS ON PRIVATE STREETS LOCATED. AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF AVENUE 54 AND PGA BOULEVARD WITHIN PGA WEST
(TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29878 - KSL LAND HOLDINGS INC.)
It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to adopt Resolution No.
2000-131 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
CONSENT CALEND ..Z
ntinued
2. ADOPT N OF A RRANTIN CONDITIONAL PROVAL OF A
FIN MAP AND IMPR EMENT AGREE NT FOR PARCP 29799, KSL LAT N. /
(This item wa removed from t e Consent Cal en r for separate a on - see
Confirmatio'plof Agenda.)
.� f
MOT10 - It was move y Council Mem rs Adolph/Sniff adopt Resolu ' n
No. 00-132 granti g conditional a royal of a Final ap and Subd' sion
Improvement Agreement for Parcel 9799 - KSL Land Corporation, Motion
carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 2000-186.
mm
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2002
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29963, REVISED
APPLICANT: DR. BRUCE R. BAUMANN
PROPERTY
OWNERS: DR. AND MRS. BRUCE R. BAUMANN
REQUEST: TO RELOCATE THE ACCESS STREET SERVING A FOUR -LOT
SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION ON APPROXIMATELY 9.29 ACRES
LOCATION: ON THE NORTHERNMOST TERMINUS OF CORAL MOUNTAIN
COURT (FORMERLY KIRK COURT) AND APPROXIMATELY 2,640
FEET WEST OF MADISON STREET
ENGINEER: COACHELLA VALLEY ENGINEERS (MARK A. TURNER, LAND
SURVEYOR)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT 2001-415) WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY
COUNCIL ON FEBRUARY 5, 2002, FOR THIS TRACT UNDER
RESOLUTION 2002-11. THERE ARE NO CHANGED
CIRCUMSTANCES, CONDITIONS, OR NEW INFORMATION
WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A
SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO
PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE § 21166.
GENERAL
PLAN/
ZONING
DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (UP TO FOUR DWELLING UNITS PER
ACRE) AND RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
NORTH: HERMITAGE STREET (PRIVATE) IN PGA WEST WITH SINGLE
STORY RESIDENTIAL HOUSES BEYOND
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
TTM 29963 Revised, Baumann 'Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 2
Finding A - Consistency with General Plan, Zoning Code and any applicable Specific
Plan
The property is designated Low Density Residential (LDR). The Land Use Element of
the General Plan encourages differing residential developments throughout the City.
This project is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General
Plan insofar as the creation of estate residential lots (0.43 dwelling units per acre) will
provide another type of housing market for La Quinta residents while not exceeding
the City's maximum density of four units per acre. Conditions are recommended
requiring two lanes of paving from the site to Avenue 58 along the east boundary of
Tentative Tract Map 30834.
The property's RL Zoning designation is consistent with the City's General Plan Land
Use Element which mandates development lots of 7,200 square feet and larger.
All plans for future single family homes shall be consistent with the provisions of the
Zoning Code in effect at the time building permits are acquired. The development of
the project, as conditioned, will be compatible with the surrounding area.
Finding B - Site Design and Improvements
Infrastructure improvements to serve this project are located in the immediate area and
will be extended based on the recommended Conditions of Approval. Under the
revised map, site access has been shifted 300 feet east to allow development of
Tentative Tract Map 30834.
Findings C through E - Compliance with the California Environmental Qaulity Act
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (Environmental Assessment 2001-415) was certified
by the City Council on February 5, 2002, for Tentative Tract Map 29963 under
Resolution 2002-11. There are no changed circumstances, conditions, or new
information which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental
assessment pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21166.
Finding F - Public Health Concerns
The design of the proposed subdivision map and related improvements are not likely
to cause serious public health problems, in that responsible agencies have reviewed
the project for these issues with no significant concerns identified. The health, safety
and welfare of current and future residents can be assured based on the recommended
conditions, which serve to implement mitigation measures for the project.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
TTM 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 3
Site improvements comply with City requirements, provided on -site water retention is
handled on the private lots, or a common basin. Dust control measures shall be
required during any further on -site construction work as required by Chapter 6.16 of
the Municipal Code. The site is physically suitable for the proposed land division, as
the area is flat and without physical constraints, and the Map is consistent with other
surrounding parcels.
Finding G - Site Design (Public Easements)
Public easements will be retained and required in order to construct any houses on the
proposed lots, ensuring adequate facilities for future homeowners in compliance with
Section 13.24.100 of the Subdivision Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
said Planning Commission in this case;
2. That mitigation measures identified in City Council Resolution 2002-1 1 shall be
met; and
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above -
described revisions to Tentative Tract Map 29963 for the reasons set forth in
this Resolution, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 81" day of October, 2002, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOTES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RICH BUTLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
TTM 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 4
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29963 REVISED, BAUMANN FAMILY
OCTOBER 8, 2002
GENERAL
1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La
Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or
proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Tentative
Tract Map, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. The City shall have sole
discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. This Map approval shall expire and become null and void on February 5, 2004,
unless an extension of time is granted according to the requirements of Section
13.12.150 of the Subdivision Ordinance.
3. This tentative tract map, and any Final 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").
The City of La Quinta's Municipal Code can be accessed on the City's Web site
at www.la-quinta.org.
4. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City,
the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from the
following agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Coachella Valley Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
• Sunline Transit Agency
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 2
The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances
from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of
improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when
submitting those improvements plans for City approval.
5. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater
Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water),
LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources
Control Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ.
A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of
land that disturbs five (5) acres or more of land, the Permitee shall be
required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP").
B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to
any on or off -site grading being done in relation to this project.
C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for
inspection at the project site at all times through and including
acceptance of all improvements by the City.
D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following
Best Management Practices ("BMPs") (8.70.020, LQMC):
1 . Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control).
2. Temporary Sediment Control.
3. Wind Erosion Control.
4. Tracking Control.
5. Non -Storm Water Management.
6. Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control.
E. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be
approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading,
pursuant to this project.
F. All approved project BMPs shall be maintained in their proper working
order throughout the course of construction, and until all improvements
have been accepted by the City.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 3
PROPERTY RIGHTS
6. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer
easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper
functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include
irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for
emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of
essential improvements.
7. Prior to recording Tract 29963, applicant shall acquire access route across
property located south of subject tract. The access route shall conform to the
geometric layout shown on Tentative Tract Map 29963.
8. The applicant shall retain for private use on the Final Map all private street right-
of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code,
applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer.
9. The private street right-of-ways to be retained for private use required for this
development include:
A. PRIVATE STREET
1) Lot "A" (Coral Mountain Court) - The right of way width is 50
feet.
B. CUL DE SAC
The cul de sac shall conform to the shape shown on tentative tract map
with a 47-foot radius or larger at the bulb at the right of way line.
C. KNUCKLES
The knuckles shall conform to the shape shown on the tentative tract
map except for minor revisions as may be required by the City Engineer.
10. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street
right-of-ways shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map are necessary prior
to approval of the Final Map dedicating such right-of-ways, the applicant shall
grant the necessary right-of-ways within 60 days of a written request by the
City.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 4
1 1. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map a ten -foot wide public
utility easement contiguous with, and along both sides of all private streets.
Such easement may be reduced to five feet in width with the express written
approval of HD.
12. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the
placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins,
mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas on the Final Map.
13. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as
appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading,
retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will
occur.
14. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any
portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Tentative
Tract Map and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is
approved by the City Engineer.
FINAL MAP(S)
15. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker
on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a
standard AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD
program.
Where a Final Map was not produced in an AutoCAD format, or produced in a
file that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept
a raster -image file of such Final Map.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as
"engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed
to practice their respective professions in the State of California.
16. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of
qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the
provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 5
17. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review
and approval by the City. A separate set of plans for each line item specified
below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified,
unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be
prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the
applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here
pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors.
The street improvement plans shall include permanent traffic control and
separate plan sheet(s) (drawn at 20 scale) that show the meandering sidewalk,
mounding, and berming design in the combined parkway and landscape setback
area.
A.
On -Site Street Plan:
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical
B.
On -Site Rough Grading Plan:
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal
C.
On -Site Precise Grading Plan:
1 "
= 30'
Horizontal
Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not
listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to
commencing plan preparation.
"Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top of Wall
& Top of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot
of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions.
18. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for
elements of construction. For a fee, established by City Resolution, the
applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction
notes from the City.
19. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all approved
improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The
files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully
retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program.
At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the
improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order
to reflect the as -built conditions.
Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD
format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City
Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 6
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS
20. Prior to approval of any Final Map, the applicant shall construct all onsite and
offsite improvements and satisfy its obligation for same, or shall furnish a fully
secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") guaranteeing
the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for
same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City.
21. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between
the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of guaranteeing the
completion of any improvements related to this Tentative Tract Map, shall
comply with the provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC.
22. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include the removal of
any existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the
proposed improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey
monumentation.
23. Depending on the timing of the development of this Tentative Tract Map, and
the status of the off -site improvements at the time, the applicant may be
required to: (1) construct certain off -site improvements, (2) construct additional
off -site improvements, subject to the reimbursement of its costs by others, (3)
reimburse others for those improvements previously constructed that are
considered to be an obligation of this tentative tract map, (4) secure the costs
for future improvements that are to be made by others, or (5) to agree to any
combination of these means, as the City may require.
In the event that any of the improvements required for this development are
constructed by the City, the applicant shall, prior to the approval of the Final
Map, or the issuance of any permit related thereto, reimburse the City for the
costs of such improvements.
24. If the applicant elects to utilize the secured agreement alternative, the applicant
shall submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed on -site and
off -site improvements, including an estimate for the final survey
monumentation, for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Such
estimates shall conform to the unit cost schedule adopted by City resolution,
or ordinance.
For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs
shall be approved by the City Engineer.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 7
At the time the applicant submits its detailed construction cost estimates for
conditional approval of the Final Map by the City Council, the applicant shall
also submit one copy each of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " reduction of each page of the
Final Map, along with a copy of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " Vicinity Map.
Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be
approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant's
detailed cost estimates.
Security will not be required for telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V.
improvements.
25. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development,
or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City
shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building
inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project,
or call upon the surety to complete the improvements.
GRADING
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading
Improvements), LQMC.
26. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes,
the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer.
27. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain
approval of all of the following:
A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect;
B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified
engineer;
C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16,
LQMC; and
D. SWPPP and BMPs.
All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary
Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a Soils Engineer, or by
an engineering geologist.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 8
A statement shall appear on the Final Map that a soils report has been prepared
in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953.
The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an
amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust
Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit.
28. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to
prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped
land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such
other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control
Plan.
29. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's
approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless
the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these
Conditions of Approval.
30. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the
site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations
shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map, the applicant shall submit the
proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance
finding review.
31. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall
provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or
surveyor.
Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved
grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if
any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad
soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if
submitted at different times.
DRAINAGE
32. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage),
LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More specifically, stormwater falling
on site during the 100-year storm shall be retained within the development,
unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area
shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. The design storm shall
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 9
be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run
off.
33. In design of retention faciiities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two
inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the
applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise.
34. For retention basins on individual lot, retention water depth shall not exceed
two feet.
35. The retention basins adjacent to the streets shall be landscaped and maintained
by the Home Owner's Association through the CC&R's.
36. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries,
levels or frequencies in any area outside the development.
37. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received
and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief
route.
UTILITIES
38. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.1 10 (Utilities),
LQMC.
39. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of
all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above ground utility structures
including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves,
and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic
purposes.
40. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development,
and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground.
All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles
are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground.
41. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlaying hardscape. For
installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply
with trench restoration requirements maintained, or require by the City Engineer.
I
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 10
The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for
approval by the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
42. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street
Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access
For Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and
Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are
proposed.
43. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with
the General Plan.
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1) Avenue 58: No improvements are required at this time. However,
the applicant shall enter into a secured SIA for the deferred
improvements of 50% (fifty percent) of the half width of Avenue
58 for improvements to conform with the Secondary Arterial
street standard as outlined in the General Plan in effect on the date
of Council approval of this tentative map, including the meandering
sidewalk. The limits of this improvement shall be the prolongation
of the east and west boundary of this map to Avenue 58. The
bonding requirements will be waived if the required improvements
are secured by others by mutual consent.
B. ON -SITE STREETS
1) Lot "C" - Coral Mountain Court
Construct the geometric layout of entry area to conform to the
layout shown on the tentative tract map, except for minor
revisions as may be required by the City Engineer.
Gated entries shall provide for a two -car minimum stacking
capacity for inbound traffic; and shall provide for a full turn around
outlet for non -accepted entry vehicles. Applicant shall submit a
detailed exhibit at a 1 " = 10' scale, demonstrating that those
vehicles that do not gain entry can safely make a U turn back out.
2) Emergency Turn around
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 11
Construct the turn around to conform to the layout shown on the
tentative tract map with a 38-foot radius or larger.
3) Lot "A" - Coral Mountain Court
Construct a 28-foot wide road bed with 20 feet of pavement and
a 4-foot shoulder on each side of the street segment aligned in the
east -west direction. On -street parking shall be prohibited and the
applicant shall make provisions for perpetual enforcement of the
no parking restriction.
Construct a 40-foot wide road bed with 32 feet of pavement and
a 4-foot shoulder on each side of the street segment aligned in the
north -south direction and transition between the cul de sac and the
knuckle. On street parking is restricted to one side and the
applicant shall make provisions for perpetual enforcement of the
no parking restriction.
4) Cul de sac (Coral Mountain Court)
Construct the cul de sac to conform to the layout shown in the
tentative tract map with a 38 foot radius or larger at the bulb.
5) Knuckle
Construct the knuckle to conform to the layout shown in the
tentative tract map, except for minor revisions as may be required
by the City Engineer.
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, standard knuckles, corner
cutbacks, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved
construction plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined
by the City Engineer.
45. The applicant shaF design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design
procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength
and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum
structural sections shall be as follows:
Residential 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 12
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
46. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
following:
A. Primary Entry (Avenue 58): Full turn movement is allowed.
47. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs,
markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and
sidewalks. Mid -bock street lighting is not required.
48. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved
by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking
areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
49. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries and
to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements.
CONSTRUCTION
50. 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 the 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 mix designs have been approved.
LANDSCAPING
51. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscape Setbacks) &
13.24.140 (Landscape Plans), LQMC.
52. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention
basins, common lots and park areas.
53. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, retention
basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 13
The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community
Development Department (CDD), prior to plan checking by the Public Works
Department. When plan checking has been completed by CDD, the applicant
shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural
Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the City Engineer.
NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer.
54. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with
no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public
streets.
55. The developer and subsequent property owner shall continuously maintain all
required landscaping in a healthy and viable condition as required by Section
9.60.240 (H) of the Zoning Ordinance.
56. Trees shall be staked with 2.0-inch diameter lodge poles to protect against
damage from gusting winds.
57. Prior to building permit issuance, a front yard landscape plan shall be prepared
for each homesite to include a minimum of two shade trees (15 gallon with
0.75 caliper), five ten-gallon shrubs, and groundcover.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
58. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet
with the approval of the City Engineer.
59. 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.
60. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements,
sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program,
but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction
materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and
other applicable regulations.
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 14
61. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with
reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by
the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or
"As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor
certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant
shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City,
revised to reflect the as -built conditions.
MAINTENANCE
62. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160
(Maintenance), LQMC.
63. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual
maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access
drives, and sidewalks.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
64. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and
Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City
for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall
be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and
permits.
65. 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).
66. The developer shall pay school mitigation fees to the Coachella Valley Unified
School District based on their requirements. Fees shall be paid prior to building
permit issuance by the City.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
67. Applicant/developer will furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to
the Fire Department for review and approval. Plans shall conform to the fire
hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system will meet the fire flow
requirements. Plans will be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and
the local water company with the following certification: "I certify that the
design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed
by the Riverside County Fire Department."
Planning Commission Resolution 2002-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29963 Revised, Baumann Family
Adopted: October 8, 2002
Page 15
68. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and
accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building
materials being placed on an individual lot.
69. The minimum dimensions for fire apparatus access roads entering and exiting
this project shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet in each
direction and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13'-8".
Parking is permitted on one side of roadways with a minimum width of 28 feet.
Parking is permitted on both sides of the roadways with a minimum width of 36
feet.
70. The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 1,500
g.p.m. and an actual fire flow available from anyone hydrant will be 1,000
g.p.m. for a two-hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure. Minimum
thrust velocities shall not exceed 10 feet per second.
71. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of streets directly in line with
fire hydrants.
72. Applicant/developer will provide written certification from the appropriate water
company that the required fire hydrant(s) are either existing or that financial
arrangements have been made to provide them.
MISCELLANEOUS
73. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file
documents for plan checking purposes.
74. Custom house design guidelines shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Commission per Section 9.60.340 of the Zoning Ordinance.
75. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for the project shall be submitted
to the City Attorney for review and approval concurrently with review of the
Final Tract Map. Recordation of the CC&R's is required.
Attachment 1
m
n
m
O
p
D
m
1
D
V 2P
lull
�i
� g o
ODm
Zzo
z
M
Np<
S m H
vMO
zz
T
vTO
N00
OD
.9
D=OA
Q
"
0
0
3tnX�i
ZDOT
D
O
OO
O0D
T ti N
mm
K
O
D�
z0�
m
m
M>Z
D
LA
0 m
O
m
ZO
A
O m
T N
_^■
$
v0
O
O
c
D
a
TH
�1
IN
Vacant
PE lip A,IIi m
i i
Attachment 2
City Council Minutes 16 February 5, 2002
MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Adolph/Henderson to continue the
public hearing on applications filed by RLF DeOer
ent to February 19, 2002.
Motion carried unanimously with Council Perkins and Mayor Pena
ABSENT.
3. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE AD N OF A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE
CITY COUNCIL'S INTENT T CATE PORTIONS OF AVENIDA BERMUDAS
NORTH OF CALLE TAMP CALLE AMIGO NEAR AVENUE 52, AVENUE 48
WEST OF WASHING STREET, AND A 12-FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT
BETWEEN LOTS 1 17 OF TRACT 2667.
The Mayor PrqiW declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN at 8:07 p.m.
Interim PArWorks Director Stephenson presented the staff report.
The,iiWing no other requests to speak, the Mayor Pro Tem red the
P HEARING CLOSED at 8:10 p.m.
OLUTION NO. 2002-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CALIFORNIA, VACATING PORTIONS OF A
CALLE TAMPICO, CALLE AMIGO NEAR AV
WASHINGTON STREET, AND A 12-FOOT
16 AND 17 OF TRACT 2667 (CASE N
2001-10).
r
TY OF LA QUINTA,
RMUDAS NORTH OF
VENUE 48 WEST OF
MENT BETWEEN LOTS
I-V 2001-07, 2001-08, 2001-09,
It was moved by Council Me enderson/Adolph to adopt Resolution No.
2002-10 as submitted. carried unanimously with Council Member
Perkins and Mayor Pen NT.
4. PUBLIC HEARING TO CERTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-415
AND APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29963 AND STREET NAME CHANGE
2001-013; A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 9.1 ACRES INTO FOUR SINGLE
FAMILY LOTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHERN TERMINUS OF KIRK COURT
APPROXIMATELY 659 FEET NORTH OF AVENUE 58, AND RENAME KIRK
COURT TO CORAL MOUNTAIN COURT. APPLICANT: DR. AND MRS. BRUCE
BAUMANN.
The Mayor Pro Tern declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN at 8:13 p.m.
City Council Minutes 17 February 5, 2002
Planning Manager di iorio presented the staff report.
David Turner, 77-899 Wolff Road, Palm Desert, of Coachella Valley Engineers,
advised the applicant is in agreement with the conditions of approval.
Council Member Henderson noted the requested street name could cause
confusion with the nearby Coral Mountain development.
Community Development Director Herman stated street names are considered
on a first -come, first -serve basis. ,
There being no other requests to speak, the Mayor Pro Tem declared the
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 8:15 p.m.
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (EA 2001-415 - DR. AND MRS.
BRUCE BAUMANN.
It was moved by Council Members Adolph/Henderson to adopt Resolution No.
2002-11 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously with Council Member
Perkins and Mayor Pena ABSENT.
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-12
A RESOLUTION- OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 9.1 ACRES INTO FOUR
SINGLE FAMILY ESTATE LOTS AND ONE LETTERED STREET LOT LOCATED
AT THE NORTHERN -MOST TERMINUS OF KIRK COURT, APPROXIMATELY 659
FEET NORTH OF AVENUE 58 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29963 - DR. AND
MRS. BRUCE BAUMANN).
It was moved by Council Members Adolph/Henderson to adopt Resolution No.
2002-12 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously with Council Member
Perkins and Mayor Pena ABSENT.
z
City Council Minutes 18 February 5, 2002
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-13
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A STREET NAME CHANGE FOR KIRK COURT TO
CORAL MOUNTAIN COURT (STREET NAME CHANGE 2001-013 - DR. BRUCE
BAUMANN.)
It was moved by Council Members Adolph/Henderson to adopt Resolution No.
2002-13 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously with Council Member
Perkins and Mayor Pena ABSENT.
5. PUBLIC HEARING TO CERTIFY ENVIRONMENTa& ASSESSMENT 2001-417
AND APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AMENDMENT NO. 1; A
REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 38.4 ACRES 130 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST C OF AVENUE 58 AND MONROE
STREET. APPLICANT: BARTON ERTIES, INC.
The Mayor Pro Tern declargmldWPUBLIC HEARING OPEN at 8:17 p.m.
Planning Manager di resented the staff report.
Council Membe ph expressed appreciation for the Ian a setbacks at
Avenue 548 onroe Street but voiced concern ab a lack of visitor
0
parking in I -de -sacs.
Com Development Director Herman a the City Code does not
ad hat issue and added driveways wil mmodate a minimum of two
There being no other requests todMk, the Mayor Pro Tern declared the
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 8:21W.m.
Council Member Henderso mented on the density of the project and lack
of open space and stated also has a problem with the lack of parking e
suggested sending the ect back to the developer for redesign.
After a brief discu , Council concurred to continue this it
ive staff an
opportunity to with the developer to address the is of lot design,
parking, and t configuration.
MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Hend n/Adolph to continue the
public hearing for Tentative Tract Map 30092 - Barton Properties, Inc. to
March 5, 2002. Motion carried unanimously Council Member Perkins and
Mayor Pena ABSENT.
RL - ZONING TRA C T MA - ."-. -'-
(RESIDENTIAL SCILF COURSEJ M.B. 2,54.Attachment 3
=--t 21 -HERMITAGE
IF
>
7J
0
rD
10
at
LCN -A- G�
OA2 AC.
r4
rD
lz C.r-
0
0
lZ z
Od 11z x
< IC-1 pi -M.
(A) m 0
0 C;
n
AVENUE 58 � .,.~-1T..�- . r-._ _-�=
A
I
w
J i
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2002
CASE NO.: RC 2002-708
REQUEST: APPEAL OF A DECISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR DENYING AN ACCESS WAY OF LESS THAN 15 FEET
IN WIDTH ALONG THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE AS REQUIRED IN
SECTION 9.150.080.A.8.d
LOCATION: 52-230 AVENIDA MONTEZUMA
APPLICANT: JERRY L. ELLENZ
BACKGROUND:
On September 30, 2002, staff advised the appellant by letter (Attachment 1)that his
proposed housing plans needed to be revised to provide a 15 foot wide driveway along
the side of the proposed house to access his garage which is located on the back half
of the lot pursuant to Section 9.150.080.A.8.d. (Attachment 2).
The builder, Mr Jerry Ellenz is appealing ( Attachment 3)this decision as permitted in
the Section 9.200.120 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (Attachment 4).
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Minute Motion 2002-upholding the Community Development
Director's decision.
Attachments:
1 . City letter
2. Code Section 9.150.080.A.8.d
3. Letter of Appeal
4. Code Section 9.200.120
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\appeals\APPEAL-DRIVEWAY-STANDARD.wpd
ATTACHMENT I
hiring Brighter Than
P.O. Box 1504
78-495 CALLE TAMPICO
LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253
September 30, 2002
Mr. Jerry Ellenz
Pacific Habitat Inc.
P. 0. Box 2898
Palm Desert, CA 92261
SUBJECT: HOUSE PLANS FOR 52-230 AVENIDA MONTEZUMA
Dear Mr. Ellenz:
(760) 777-7000
FAX (760) 777-7101
Staff has reviewed your plans for the above -noted house and based on that review it
is my interpretation of the Code, you will need to provide an access way of 15 feet
along the house to get to the garage in the rear of the property. This decision is based
on Section 9.150.080(A.8.d.) of the La Quinta Municipal Code (attached).
You have the right to appeal my decision within 15 calendar days of this date to the
Planning Commission. I have enclosed the necessary application form which must be
submitted with the fee of $175.00, to this Department for scheduling before the
Planning Commission.
Should you have any questions concerning the above information, please contact me
at 760-777-7125.
Sincerely,
,BERRY HERMAN
Community Development Director
JH:bjs
Attachments
ATTACHMENT #;
9.150.080 Parking facility design standards.
A. parking Layout and Circulation.
1. Except for single-family detached, single-family attached, duplex .and townhome residential uses, no
parking facility shall be designed so that vehicles are required to back into a public street to exit the facility.
2. No parking space shall be located within three feet of any property line.
3. Tandem parking shall be permitted only in mobilehome parks/subdivisions,.as driveway guest parking
for single-family detached, single-family attached and duplex residential uses, and where valet parking is provided.
4. With the exception of single-family detached, single-family attached and duplex residential uses, all
parking bays shall be bordered by continuous curbs to serve as drainage channels and as wheel stops. Individual
wheel stops shall not be permitted in lieu of such curbs.
5. All driveways shall be designed for positive drainage. If -an inverted crown is proposed for a driveway,
the center portion shall be a ribbon gutter of Portland cement concrete rather than asphaltic concrete.
6. parking lot layouts shall provide a clear hierarchy of major access drives (connecting the parking area
to the public street); fire lanes, loading areas, minor drives, parking bay maneuvering areas, etc. Parking shall
not be arranged to .require backing out into major access drives:
7: In order to avoid dead-end aisles, parking bays with ten spaces or more shall connect with other parking
bays or drive aisles or shall provide a turnaround area at the end of the bay.
8. parking accessways are those driveways that provide ingress or egress from a street to the parking
aisles, and those driveways providing interior circulation between parking aisles. No parking is permitted on
an accessway. Such accessways shall conform to the following standards:
a. All parking facilities taking access from a major, primary or secondary arterial highway shall have
a parking accessway between the arterial and the parking aisles.
b. • parking accessways from arterial highways shall not have parking spaces taking direct access therefrom
and shall not be intersected by a parking aisle or another parking accessway for a minimum distance of thirty
feet for projects with zero to two hundred parking spaces, fifty feet for projects with two hundred one to three
hundred fifty spaces, seventy feet for projects with three hundred fifty-one to four hundred fifty spaces, and
ninety feet for projects with four hundred fifty-one spaces or more. All distances shall be measured from the
curb face of the ultimate curbline of the adjacent street.
c. parking accessways from nonarterial streets and highways shall be not less than twenty feet in length
from the ultimate curbline of the adjacent street.
,_ - d. One-way accessways shall have a minimum width of fifteen feet, unless the accessway is a fire lane,
which requires a minimum of twenty feet.
e. Two-way accessways shall have a minimum width of twenty-eight feet.
9. Entry/exit driveways shall be placed where they result in the least interference with the flow of traffic
on the public street to which they connect.
10. Joint entry driveways are encouraged and shall be arranged to allow parking lot maneuvering from
one establishment to another without requiring exit to the street. Adjacent properties shall maintain agreements
which permit reciprocal driveway connections across property lines.
B. parking Facility Design and Dimensions.
1. Regular Space Dimensions. All parking spaces up to the minimum required shall be designated for
regular vehicle parking. Regular vehicle spaces shall have the following minimum dimensions: width, nine
feet; length, seventeen feet to curb plus two feet overhang; where curbs are not provided, a minimum length
of nineteen feet is required.
2. Compact Space Dimensions. Compact spaces are permitted only if such spaces are in excess of the
minimum parking requirement for the use. Compact vehicle spaces shall have the following minimum dimensions:
width, eight and one-half feet; length, sixteen feet to curb plus -one and one-half feet overhang; where curbs
are not provided, a minimum length of seventeen and one-half feet is required. Compact vehicle spaces shall
be clearly marked and distributed throughout the parking facility
3. End Spaces. Parking spaces at the end of a parking aisle against a curb or wall shall be widened by
two additional feet and/or shall have a backing -out pocket provided.
4. Parallel Spaces. Spaces pmvided for parallel parking 'shall be a minimum of nine feet wide and twenty-four
feet in length to permit room for maneuvering. If a wall or curb in excess of eight inches in height is adjacent
to the parallel parking space, the space shall be ten feet in width. All end spaces confined by a curb shall
be thirty feet long.
S. Support Posts. No support posts or other obstructions shall be placed within one and one-half feet
of any parking stall, except that such obstructions are allowed adjacent to the stall within the fiast'six feet
of the front of the stall, including any overhang area (see illustration).
fLa Quinta
unity Development Department
Calle Tampico
nta, California 92253
'77-7125 FAX: (760) 777-1233
plication for
ATTACHMENT #;
Case No. A C 7a8
Date Recvd. 2_
Fee: t •.�
Related Apps.:
Logged in by:
Appeal of Findings And/or Conditions
ppellant's Name 7({gy � , ,Gr"�/f/Z Date 9 - Q S • 0.2,
ailing Address Z2- 990 - i%„maes7e4,W
fa�.rr l�es�rT 9'2�60 Phone: ( 60) 3 "-6682
or 567- / S75
-,solution # and Condition(s) of Approval being appealed
riy development review action may be appealed pursuant to Section 9.220.120 of the Zoning Code.
ease identify the type of application:
Te of Appeal:
Change of Zone Tentative Tract Map
Specific Plan Tentative Parcel Map
Conditional Use Permit Site Development Permit
Variance Tempor ry Usp Permit
Minor Use Permit ,o o' Other QWS(UAW
ease provide sufficient information so as to make clear the substance of each of the grounds for appeal.
applicable, indicate the number of the specific condition which is being protested.
;e additional sheets if necessary.
I
f A
B6Wppeal Finds-Cond
eptember 25, 002
ity of La Quinta
immunity Development Department
9495 Calle Tampico
a Quin1S, Cayfornia 92253
_ L
c i , 2002
he standard requiring 15 ft. wide driveways includes commercial, multiple and sfngle family homes. One
ould assume this would allow for moving vans, commercial vehicles and space for private vehicles to
ass either way. Access from the street. requires 12 ft. width; presumably, to allow for turning room onto a
rivate drive.
arage door width is not regulated. However an 8 ft. door is common; therefore, I feel an 8fl drive would
r adequate.
i order to preserve the same square footage as designed, a 15 ft. drive would create a long, skinny bouse
V x 78'). This wuWd snake an iinpractical and unattractive design, one in which I vvamild not care to live.
be design I have presented places the garage in the rear with adequate parleM and turn around space,and
oomn in the front yard for a pool and landscape.
paid premium price for one of the few remaining unobstructed view lots in the cove area. It doesn't make
;nse to block the beauffW view of the mountains with a garage.
hank you for your consideration.
ATTACHMENT #2
,.. 9.200.120 Appeals.
A. Appealable Decisions. Any development review action by the director may be appealed to the planning
commission and any development review action by the planning commission may be appealed to the city
council in compliance with the provisions of this section.
B. Designation of Board of Appeals: The planning commission shall constitute the board of appeals for
decisions by the community development director and the city council shall constitute the board of appeals
for decisions by the planning commission.
C. persons Who May Appeal. Any interested person may appeal a decision of the director or the planning
commission regarding the action taken on a -development review permit application for a development project
upon submittal of the required documents and information and the payment of the required fee.
D. Call -Up Review. The board of appeals (either the planning commission or city council), on its own
motion adopted by a majority vote of its total membership, may elect to call up and review any decision of
the director or the planning commission regarding the action taken on a development review permit application.
The board of appeals' call-up review shall be processed in accordance with subsection E of this section and
may be exercised at any time prior to the expiration of fifteen days from the date on which the decision was
made.
E. Appeal Procedures.
1. Time Limits for Filing Appeals. All appeals shall be filed with the director within fifteen calendar
days of the date on which the decision being appealed was rendered. if the fifteenth day is a nonworking day
for the city, the appeal period shall be extended to include the next city working day. No appeal shall be accepted
after the appeal period has expired.
2. Required Documents. Each appeal, except for call-up reviews initiated by a .board of appeals on its
own motion, shall be in writing and shall include all grounds for the appeal and sufficient information so
as to make it clear to the board of appeals the substance of each of the grounds for appeal. The director may
require that the written appeal be accompanied by such other documents and information that the director
determines to. be necessary to adequately explain and provide proper notification for the appeal. No appeal
shall be accepted if it fails to containthe grounds for the appeal and the. description of the grounds.
3. Forwarding of Records. When an appeal has been received, the director shall forward to the board
of appeals all documents and information on file pertinent to the appeal together with the minutes or official
action of the decision -making authority and a report on the basis of the decision.
4. public Hearing Requirements. If the original approving action did not require. a public hearing, the
appeal review shall not require a public hearing. If the original approving action required a public hearing,
the appeal review shall also require a public hearing. Notice and scheduling requirements for an appeal hearing
shall be the same as those for an original hearing as described in Section 9.200.110.
5. Issues to be Considered. The board of appeals may refuse to consider any issues which were not raised
by the appellant or another person either by verbal testimony or written correspondence made at or before
the time the decision -making authority took action. When reviewing a decision -making authority's decision
via its own call-up review, the board of appeals may raise and consider any issue it deems appropriate to the
project application.
6.. Action on Appeal. Not later than forty-five days after an appeal has been received and accepted by
the director, the board of appeals shall consider the appeal and take one of the following actions:
a. Take action to sustain, reverse or modify the original decision. If an original decision to approve a
project is modified, the board of appeals may modify permitted land uses, place additional or different conditions
of approval on the project, direct that revisions be made to project plans, or require other project modifications.
b. Continue the appeal for further consideration.
c. Refer the application back to the original decision -making authority with directions.
7. Majority vote. Action by the board of appeals to reverse or modify an appealed decision shall require
a majority vote of appeal board members present. If there is a tie vote, the original decision shall stand. (Ord.
294 § 1 (Exh• A) (per), 1996)
372-9 n' QW=' 3o-M
w
E-i
ImTMONS
PLAN PIEV.
FIEV.
N W N
f•L� V �'1
N
ZaN�
rn :
C7�'em
ul
I rn m
o �
a..�n
��a
� T
4
m
N
O
O
H �
U a
ZH
U
E mdw
E-
��A
U m
Cq q�
m r_ N �
� k C
z U0.
LL won
a
rn am
mute m, Mr- TELLEZ
DATE: DMICAT:P
SCALE: 1/8" = 1*-0"
NOW:
S -- *1
or SHMS.
`o
LO
^
`^\2'
m
`Q
U
z
\Y
a
1
N
w
E-4
z
0
Q
1--1
z
W
C
m
1