Loading...
2002 09 03 PCPlanning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-quinta.org PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Special Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California SEPTEMBER 3, 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 2002-084 Beginning Minute Motion 2002-014 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 July 23, 2002. B. Department Report V. PRESENTATIONS: None PC/AGENDA VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Item ................. Applicant .......... Location ............ Request ........1. 2. 3. Action ............... B. Item ................. Applicant .......... Location ............ Request ............. Action ............... C. Item ............ , .... Applicant .......... Location ............ Request ............. Action ....... , ....... ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-411 REVISED, SPECIFIC PLAN 2001-051 AMENDMENT #1, AND VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-007 AMENDMENT #1 - VISTA MONTANA Cameo Homes and Landaq, Inc. East side of Eisenhower Drive, north of Calle Tampico and west of Avenida Bermudas Certification of Environmental Assessment 2001-411 Revised 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. Continue to September 24, 2002 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-071 Wal-Mart Store #1805 78-950 Highway 1 1 1, within the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center Consideration of a request to allow 55 metal containers for the temporary storage of holiday merchandise from September 5, 2002 through January 30, 2002, on the north and west sides of the existing store. Resolution 2002- SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-702 AMENDMENT #1 La Quinta Congregations of Jehovahs Witnesses East side of Dune Palms Road, between the Coachella Valley Storm Channel and Westward Ho Drive. Review of development plans for a second church hall on a 2.39 acre site. Resolution 2002- PC/AGENDA D. Item ................. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185 Applicant .......... T D Desert Development Location ............ Southwest corner of Cabrillo Way and Mission Drive West, within Rancho La Quinta Request ............. Consideration of a request to subdivide approximately 3.62 acres into seven single-family residential lots, one open space lot and a well site. Action ............... Resolution 2002- E. Item ................. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-452, SPECIFIC PLAN 98-032 AMENDMENT #1 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30561 Applicant .......... Winchester Development Location ............ West of Madison Street, south of Quarry Lane Request ............. Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, remove Planning Area No. 3 from the Quarry Retreat Specific Plan; and review of a subdivision of 74.78 ± acres into 28 residential and other amenity and common lots Action ............... Resolution 2002- Resolution 2002- and Resolution 2002- F. Item ................. SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-043, AMENDMENT #2 AND SIGN APPLICATION 2002-629 Applicant .......... Madison/P.T.M. La Quinta, LLC Location ............ Northwest corner of Washington Street and Highway 111 Request ...... 1. Request to delete the Sign Program provisions from the Specific Plan for Point Happy Commercial Center 2. Review of a Sign Program for Point Happy Commercial Center Action ............... Resolution 2002- , Resolution 2002- , VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: 10 Item ................ CONTINUED - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002- 744 Applicant .......... Jai Nettimi Location ............ 79-390 Paseo del Rey Request ............. Compatibility review of a deck for a single family two-story house Action ............... Minute Motion 2002- PC/AGENDA B. Item ................. Applicant .......... Location ... , ........ Request ............. Action ............... C. Item ................. Applicant .......... Location ............ Request ............ Action ............... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-749 Ponderosa Homes Within Tract 29323; northwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street Review of architectural plans for three new prototype residential units Resolution 2002- ZONING ISSUES City of La Quinta City-wide Staff request for direction regarding split rail wood fencing As deemed appropriate by the Commission VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Report on the City Council meeting of August 8, 2002 X. ADJOURNMENT: This meeting of the Planning Commission will adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be held on September 24, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. There will be no September 10, 2002 meeting. PC/AGENDA MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA July 23, 2002 I. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:09 p.m. by Vice Chairman Tyler who asked Commissioner Abels to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Tom Kirk, Steve Robbins, and Vice Chairman Robert Tyler. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to excuse Chairman Richard Butler. Unanimously approved. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Assistant City Attorney Marc Luesebrink, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planners Stan Sawa and Fred Baker, Associate Planners Martin Magana and Greg Trousdell, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of July 9, 2002. There being no corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to approve the minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. B. Department Report: None V. PRESENTATIONS: None VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Site Development Permit 2002-746: a request of Toll Brothers, Inc. for review of architectural and landscaping plans for the Golf Course Maintenance Facility, Gatehouse, Clubhouse and Spa Facility for Mountain View Country Club located at the northeast corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 1 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 1. Vice Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Martin Magana presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Abels asked about the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee's (ALRC) recommendation to have a black vinyl fabric covering on the chain link fence. Staff explained it could be any color. Commissioner Abels suggested using a green fabric rather than black. 3. Commissioner Robbins questioned why the screening was needed as it would be for the purpose of separating two parking lots within the maintenance compound that would not be seen by anyone except the workers. Staff explained the ALRC wanted to hide the chain link fence. 4. Vice Chairman Tyler asked staff to indicate on the plans the area that was to have the enhanced landscaping. Staff showed it was to be along the All American Canal, but they are proposing is a six foot high block wall along the entire boundary. 5. Commissioner Kirk asked if the maintenance building was a metal building. Staff stated yes. Commissioner Kirk asked how many maintenance buildings in the City had been approved with the corrugated metal material. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated two. 6. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Forrest Haag, representing Toll Brothers, stated he was available to answer questions. In regard to the maintenance building, they are enhancing the landscaping on the All American Canal side where the ALRC thought the view on the westerly bound traffic along Avenue 52 would be able to see the maintenance building. He explained the purpose of the chain link fence was to separate the employees of the homeowners association and those for the Country Club. The homeowners' association employees would have a place to park and stage without having access to the Country Club maintenance facility. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 2 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 7. There being no further questions of the applicant and no other public comment, Vice Chairman Tyler closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the matter up for Commission discussion. 8. Commissioners concurred that it was a good project and the landscaping enhancement along the Canal was the only area of concern. 9. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-077 approving Site Development Permit 2002- 746, as amended. a. Delete any condition regarding fabric for the chain link fence ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Vice Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: Chairman Butler. ABSTAIN: None. B. Site Development Permit 2002-747: a request of Peter Jacobs Homes for compatibility review of architectural plans for two new prototype residential units that are 3,422 square feet and 3,949 square feet and not exceeding 20 feet in height to be constructed adjacent to the Greg Norman Signature Golf Course on the south side of Brown Deer Park, west of Turnberry Way. 1. Vice Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Robbins asked staff to clarify why the windows on the garage doors were being eliminated. Staff stated the ALRC made a recommendation that they be deleted from the garage doors. Staff did make a site visit and there are other homes in the vicinity that do have the windows in the garage doors. 3. The applicant not being present, and no other public comment, Vice Chairman Tyler closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the matter up for Commission discussion. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 3 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 4. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-078 approving Site Development Permit 2002- 747, amended. a. Condition #4: Deleted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Vice Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: Chairman Butler. ABSTAIN: None. C. Site Development Permit 2002-745: a request of Marvin Investments for review of architectural and landscaping plans for Phase I and a sign program for Old Town La Quinta consisting of three commercial buildings located on the south side of Calle Tampico, between Avenida Bermudas and Desert Club Drive. 1. Vice Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. There being no questions of staff, Vice Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Margo Thibeault, representing Mainiero Smith & Associates, engineers for the project, asked for clarification on Condition #53. Staff stated the ALRC wanted to see a more detailed landscaping plan. Ms. Thibeault asked about Condition #64, the light poles. Mr. Wells Marvin, the applicant, stated they could submit a more detail landscaping plan, but this is a very urban project, very intensive project on a relatively small piece of land. There is very little scope for landscaping when it is built out and they would like to have the condition eliminated. In regard to the condition concerning street lights there seems to be a desire to require them to use the existing light fixtures along Calle Estado. He believes there can be diversity in the City to create interest. The height suggested by staff of 12 feet is not practical. There are trucks that exceed this height and can cause trouble. They need the bottom of light to be not less than 13 feet in height. If they are required to keep the same style, they will do so, but they would like to request more height. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 3. Commissioner Abels stated he agrees with the applicant's request for different street lights. His concern is with the Arts Foundation building being left in the middle of the project. Mr. Marvin stated he is negotiating to purchase the building, but no determination has been made. If he is successful, he will remodel the building to achieve an eclectic look. Discussion followed regarding the building facing the Arts Foundation building. 4. Commissioner Kirk asked if the lighting condition was required by the City Council. Staff stated the perimeter street lights are to match those on Calle Estado and other streets in The Village area. The parking lot poles can be a different style, but cannot exceed 12 feet in height. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated that on the public streets the light standards have to match the City's light standard. The interior lights can be at the applicant's discretion. The height of the light fixture is to be 12 feet unless the Specific Plan is amended. 5. Commissioner Kirk asked if there were any design elements of the existing Village area that will tie in with the rest of The Village. Mr. Marvin stated it would be similar to the La Quinta Hotel, El Ranchito Restaurant, the Public Library building, etc. Commissioner Kirk asked if the Arts Foundation building structure would change. Mr. Marvin stated they would be changing the stucco and type of roof to make it similar. The wall would be removed and there would be a walkway. Commissioner Kirk asked about the vertical height and horizontal length on the major streets; is this enough of an enclosure to create the urban feel. Mr. Marvin stated this is a minimal height. It might even be more attractive if it had a third story, but there has been some controversy about the height of buildings in the area. They have a 50-foot corridor along the street, and narrower between the palm trees which creates an exterior room by the palm trees. 6. Vice Chairman Tyler asked about if the second floor tenant signs were wall mounted or would there be some blade type signs. Mr. Marvin stated he did not believe there would be any blade signs on the second floor. The signs would be similar in design to what is at the La Quinta Hotel. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 5 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 7. There being no further questions of the applicant and no other public comment, Vice Chairman Tyler closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the matter up for Commission discussion. 8. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-079 approving Site Development Permit 2002-745, as amended. a. Condition #53: Eliminate landscape plan review by ALRC. b. Condition #63: Clarify street lights to match City lights only on public streets. C. Condition #64: Clarify the street lights and the height shall be 12 feet at the bottom of the light fixture. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Vice Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: Chairman Butler. ABSTAIN: None. D. Tentative Tract Map 29436, Extension #1: a request of Transwest Housing Inc., Inc. for a one year extension of time for a tract map which creates 169 single family lots on 75.86 acres located on the north side of Eisenhower Drive and one half mile west of Washington Street. 1. Vice Chairman Tyler 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. There being no questions of staff, Vice Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Margo Thibeault stated they agreed with the conditions as written. 3. There being no further questions of the applicant and no other public comment, Vice Chairman Tyler closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the matter up for Commission discussion. 4. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-080 approving a one year extension of time for Tentative Tract Map 29436, as submitted. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 6 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Vice Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: Chairman Butler. ABSTAIN: None. E. Environmental Assessment 2001-435 Addendum and Tentative Tract Map 30331 Amendment #1: a request of Santa Properties and Development LLC for certification of an Environmental Assessment and review of a subdivision of 5.1 acres into 12 single family and other common lots located west of Jefferson Street on the north side of Avenue 50. 1. Vice Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if the entryway was in the same location opposite the Palmillia development. Staff stated it was. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there was a substantial amount of dirt that would need to be imported to the site. Staff stated they have worked with the adjacent properties to obtain the needed dirt. 3. There being no further questions of staff, Vice Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Mick Santa, Santa Properties, requested relief from Condition #37. Moving the road to create 12 lots changes the lot elevations. The elevation of the road is due to the noise study which determined their walls needed to be at the subgrade elevation of 42 feet which creates the problem of meeting the condition for a one foot pad elevation requirement. They would like to request some latitude in regard to the elevations in order to meet the noise study requirements. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the development to the west, Transwest, had higher pad elevations approved. They came to staff after the public hearing and asked for lower lots under a substantial conformance. Staff approved the lower lots which has left this applicant with the old conditions which do not work for him. Staff suggests that if the Planning Commission concurs that this is a hardship for this applicant, staff would rewrite the condition to allow the pad elevations as shown on the tentative map. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 7 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 4. Commissioner Robbins stated it appears to only be one lot that this would affect. Mr. Santa stated it is two lots, but they are still required to meet the City's standards. 5. Senior Engineer Steve Speer informed the Commission that this entrance street does not align with the Palmillia development and should be conditioned to have a right in and right out. 6. There being no further questions of the applicant and no other public comment, Vice Chairman Tyler closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the matter up for Commission discussion. 7. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-081 recommending certification of an Addendum to Environmental Assessment 2001-435, as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Vice Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: Chairman Butler. ABSTAIN: None. 8. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-082 recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 30331 Amendment #1, as amended. a. Condition #37: Pad elevations shall be as shown on the tentative tract grading map. b. Add Condition: Right turn in and right turn out. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Vice Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: Chairman Butler. ABSTAIN: None. Vice Chairman Tyler recessed the meeting at 8:27 p.m. and reconvened at 8:34 p.m. F. Environmental Assessment 2002-454. General Plan Amendment 2002 086. Zone Chanae 2002-109. Specific Plan 2002-059, Tentative Tract Map 30550, and Site Development Permit 2002-740 a request of Mark Carpenter & The Casey Group/Dutch Parent for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to remove 26.12 acres of Office G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 8 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 Commercial and add 20.14 acres to High Density Residential, add 1.75 acres to Community Commercial, and add 4.23 acres to Commercial Park; review of a Specific Plan to allow more units that the permitted density and a lesser square footage requirement for 24 studio apartments; review of a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 77.44 acres into seven numbered lots and four lettered lots; and review of development plans for a 217 unit apartment complex on Lot 3 of the Tentative Tract Map. 1. Vice Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Martin Magana presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Robbins asked staff to clarify the zoning for Lot 4 is High Density Residential and under the current zoning, apartment buildings could be built adjacent to the Bella Vista development. Under the proposed development there would be no apartments for the distance of Lot 4. Staff stated yes. 3. Commissioner Robbins asked if Washington Street was built out to its ultimate limit. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated Riverside County, jointly with the City of Palm Desert, Indian Wells, and La Quinta built the street. North of La Quinta's city limits there was inadequate right of way and the County did not acquire any additional right of way therefore, they kept the same street cross section as it continued into La Quinta's jurisdiction. 4. Vice Chairman Tyler asked how this would affect the required setback for the right of way for Washington Street. Staff stated it would not; the ultimate right of way is still 120 feet. The sidewalk and bikeway would be combined into one eight feet wide meandering sidewalk. Until the area north of the City is built out, the sidewalk will end at the City limits. 5. Commissioner Robbins asked if the property north of Darby Road were to be developed would the County require the street to be widened. Senior Engineer Speer stated no; the east curb line is at its ultimate location in the County. Staff is proposing to keep that portion of Washington Street in the City consistent with what is proposed in the County. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 9 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 6. Commissioner Robbins asked for clarification on the density change as to what would be allowed and what is proposed. Staff stated the current density allowed is 207 and they are proposing 217 unit. 7. Vice Chairman Tyler asked staff what the distance was from the apartments to the single family homes on the east. Staff stated the eastern property line is 383 feet west of the Bella Vista development. 8. Staff requested an additional condition that if the applicant applied for density bonuses a conditional use permit would be required. Commissioner Robbins asked the purpose of the density bonus. Staff stated it is to provide a wide range of units for different income levels. Assistant City Attorney Marc Luesebrink clarified there is a provision in the Government Code that allows a density bonus to encourage the provision of low income housing. 9. Commissioner Robbins stated he had a concern about the southerly entrance to the project. It appears the gate is on the property line and may cause stacking issue. Staff stated the plan is conceptual and would have to be set back to accommodate the stacking. 10. Vice Chairman Tyler asked about the interim Palm Royale Street that was constructed for a back entrance for Bella Vista. Staff indicated the location on the map and showed a proposal by the Public Works Department for the ultimate design of road construction. It would be constructed as part of this tract map. 11. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to clarify whether under State Law and City Code, the density bonus is greater than what is being requested. Assistant City Attorney Marc Luesebrink stated it is up to 25%. Commissioner Kirk stated that if the applicant did not provide moderate and low income housing the project would be allowed 207 units and they are proposing 217, but they could have proposed 250-260. Assistant City Attorney Marc Luesebrink stated yes. The City Code allows up to 25 % density bonuses provided the applicant meets the requirements of the City Code. Commissioner Kirk clarified Lot 4 could have been built with High Density housing at a similar scale with three stories. Staff stated they would be allowed under the current designations and could go to 40 feet in height. Commissioner Kirk stated their proposal G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 10 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 is to move the higher density away from the existing homes to the east and closer to Washington Street. Staff stated yes. Commissioner Kirk asked why the City should accommodate what may, or may not occur in the County. Why not build our bike lane and see what happens. Senior Engineer Steve Speer clarified that if the bike lane were put in the street, when you get to the northern City limits you are automatically forced out into a 13 foot traffic lane. If the bike lane is in conjunction with the sidewalk, for the near term, when they get to the end of the sidewalk at the undeveloped land they will be in sand, but the problem will eventually go away as the site will be developed. 12. Commissioner Robbins asked what is currently on Washington Street south of Fred Waring Drive. Staff stated the Palm Royale project which was originally approved under the County General Plan and the street is narrower than what the City's General Plan requires. The curb lane is at 43 feet. When you go south to the La Quinta Del Oro project the curblane goes out to 48 feet. Discussion followed regarding the sidewalk and street width. 13. Commissioner Kirk questioned the amendment to the Specific Plan. He asked why the Specific Plan would need to be amended to delete this portion of the Zoning Code variation. Staff stated a specific plan is required whenever an applicant wants any deviations in the Code. If they increase the density allowed they are required to apply for a specific plan. Commissioner Kirk asked if their Specific Plan provided the density thereby creating the zoning for the property. Staff stated yes, but if they do not provide the 217 units proposed they must revert back to the maximum allowable density of 207. Community Development Director Jerry Herman clarified that if they chose not to provide any units that meet the criteria for the density bonus, they have to revert back to the original density under the Zoning Code. Commissioner Kirk questioned whether or not they would be able to build the desired 217 units, whether affordable or not, under their Specific Plan. Assistant City Attorney Marc Luesebrink stated the specific plan creates essentially a different zoning category. As with the zoning classification, under the specific plan you are allowed to develop at a lower density than permitted under the zoning classification. In this case, given the fact that the specific plan anticipates High Density Residential in conformance with the City's Zoning and State Code for low income housing, if they decline to provide low income housing, G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 11 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 they decline to provide low income housing, may require them to amend the Specific Plan. Commissioner Kirk asked if the Specific Plan could be written to allow the requested density whether or not they were proposing affordable units. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the Code requires the Planning Commission and City Council to approve a conditional use permit in addition to the specific plan. Assistant City Attorney Marc Luesebrink stated no, as they would not be in conformance with the General Plan. You are allowed to deviate from the General Plan provided you fall within the Code requirement and the State housing requirements relating to low income housing. Commissioner Kirk asked if staff had spoken with the applicant to encourage them to use the specific plan more broadly than the one parcel they control. Staff stated they had not. Commissioner Kirk asked if staff was aware that the Commission had concerns about using a specific plan for a single parcel when multiple parcels are involved. Staff explained the applicant for Lot 3 was only involved with the one parcel. 14. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Mike Rowe, representing the applicant Dutch Parent, gave a presentation on the project. He asked for clarification on Condition #61.A.5.a., requesting they be responsible for only 50% of the cost of the signal at Palm Royale Drive and Fred Waring Drive. 15. Commissioner Robbins asked if the applicant agreed with staff's proposal to curve the extension of Palm Royale Drive instead of the left turn. Mr. Rowe stated that if they are conditioned to do so, they are comfortable. 16. Commissioner Kirk asked if they would be willing to modify the Specific Plan to include some circulation plans for all the parcels and still give some flexibility. Mr. Rowe stated they are not going to develop the property, so they want to give the end users the maximum flexibility for whatever they want to propose based upon the zoning designations approved under the General Plan and Zone Change applications. 17. Vice Chairman Tyler asked what the rationale was for the easement for Lots 5, 6, and 7. Mr. Rowe stated there will be a connection between Palm Royale Drive to Washington Street through Lots 5, 6, and 7. The purpose of the easement is to allow G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 12 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 flexibility for the end users to be sure there is an alignment there, but it works in conjunction with their planned projects. Vice Chairman Tyler asked why Palm Royale Drive is referenced as a private street. Mr. Rowe stated it is not public because it is an easement for the commercial development of Lots 5, 6, and 7. 18. Mr. Paul Casey, the architect for the apartment complex, gave a presentation on the complex. 19. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there would be a full time residential manager in perpetuity for the apartments. Mr. Casey stated yes, as well as full time maintenance people. 20. Commissioner Kirk asked for clarification on the term "courtyard". Mr. Casey stated each building is oriented around an open space area. Commissioner Kirk asked if the roof elements were in the Tuscany style. Mr. Casey stated yes. It is an evolving architecture. Commissioner Kirk asked if staff had given them any guidance on preparing a specific plan. Mr. Casey stated yes. Commissioner Kirk asked why an additional 43 parking spaces. Mr. Casey stated that in his experience an apartment complex never has enough parking. 21. Vice Chairman Tyler asked the target clientele for the project. Mr. Casey stated they were designed for market rate. Vice Chairman Tyler asked how they determined the number of people for the units. Mr. Casey stated it is primarily determined by HUD. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant had taken into consideration the heat in the area. Mr. Casey stated they had spent a lot of time reviewing projects in the area. He went on to explain the studio unit where they were asking for approval of a reduced size ranging between 594 to 606 square feet. 22. Mr. Mark Carpenter, developer of the apartment complex, gave a presentation on the project. 23. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if the commercial users were high density. Mr. Rowe stated they were both high density. The end user is trying to determine what would be compatible with what is in the neighborhood. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 13 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 24. Mr. Lynn Gulick, 78-637 Camino Drive, stated her concerned about the Environmental Impact Report, which does not address the impact on the police, fire, schools or waste. Lot 4 could be developed as anything as it is not defined. This project abuts a single family community with homes valued from $250-350,000 and they are proposing Section 8 housing and small apartments that are not reflected in their neighborhood. This project will degrade their area. 25. Mr. Patricia Johnson, 78-195 Crimson, stated she is the President of Palm Royale Country Club Homeowners' Association and they would like to go on record as being opposed to the development due to the traffic, noise, and lights as well as the additional strain on police and fire and the negative impact it will have on their property values and quality of life. They would request the City retain the existing General Plan designation. 26. Commissioner Kirk asked if they prefer they stay with the existing General Plan designation, which would allow them to have high density next to Bella Vista. Ms. Johnson stated they would prefer the commercial. 27. Mr. Bruce Scott, 43-665 Milan Court, Lot 28 directly adjacent to Lot 4, stated their concern is that this is a piece meal approach to the overall approval of these parcels. Seven parcels being created in this tract and yet only one is being presented. They are very concerned about what the potential uses will be for the remainder of the lots. They would prefer this proposal be placed on hold and the entire site submitted at one time. They are also concerned about timetable of the completion of the entire project. Their property will be subject to problems with blow sand, potential increase of cars and people that could ultimately lead to vandalism. Another concern is the potential for any parcel to be rezoned for a different use in the future. The elevation change for the proposed road would cause headlights to shine directly into the adjacent properties. Their will be a considerable number of cars on the easement road and it will only be setback 20 feet from the adjacent properties. Congestion and traffic is already a problem at Fred Waring and Palm Royale Drive and at what stage of the project would the traffic light be constructed. The buffer created by Parcel 4 between his property and the proposed G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 14 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 apartments would allow him greater privacy, but it depends on the ultimate use of Lot 4. Due to the uncertainty of the remainder parcels, he would like to request denial of the project untill it is better defined. 28. Ms. Sherry Trevor, 43-516 Via Magellan, Palm Desert, stated her concern is for density, traffic, crime, noise, property values. She requests the existing zoning be retained. 29. Mr. Anthony Moreno, 78-652 Sienna Court, inquired if a condition could be imposed to restrict the project to a total of 10 units for Section 8 housing. Assistant City Attorney Marc Luesebrink stated the exact number is yet to be determined. It would depend on whether they are very low, low, or moderate income. Based upon whatever category or conditions are placed on these units, it will determine the number of affordable units. It would be 10% or 20% based on whether it is very low, or low income. Mr. Moreno stated his opposition that this amount of Section 8 housing would have a detrimental affect on the existing housing. 30. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if Section 8 and affordable housing were the same. Assistant City Attorney Marc Luesebrink stated no, affordable housing is a requirement of State law. 31. Mr. Kevin Jauch, 78-737 Torino Drive, stated he and his wife are teachers in the area and they are first time homebuyers. Their biggest concern is the traffic and high density rentals that could be just a stepping stone to more. He is concerned about the increase of parking and safety of the schools. He would suggest the City buy the property and donate it to the community as a park for many different uses. 32. Mr. Richard Weaver, 43-592 Palermo Court, stated he was concerned that if the proposed storage facility for Lot 4 does not develop, the lot could be changed to an industrial use. He would request the zoning be left as it is currently zoned until the user is known. Industrial property adjacent to R-1 property does not make planning sense to him. 33. Ms. Celeste Shraft for Ruth Morse, 78-595 Naples Drive, stated this project does not serve their community as the majority of the people are retired. There is no provision for handicapped in a three story structure. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 15 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 34. Mr. Raul Ramirez, 78-707 Torino Drive, asked if there was anyway to revisit this corner and not allow the mixed uses. The corner could be planned better. 35. Mr. David Hinkey, 78-585 Naples Drive, stated he was concerned about the whole project. He never envisioned his home would be next to a low income housing project. He is concerned about the safety of his family and home. The quality of children that will be going to school with his son. The quality/value of his property would be damaged. This is an inappropriate location for this type of development. 36. Mr. John Nelson, 43-755 Milan Court, asked why a residential development was not proposed for this site. 37. There being no further questions of the applicant and no other public comment, Vice Chairman Tyler closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion. 38. Commissioner Abels explained that a 25 acre park has been planned by the City for this area. In regard to elevators they are a market driven issue. This is a difficult issue, but the distance provided by the developer from the single family homes is sufficient and in regard to low income housing, that is determined by the State. Studies have been made in regard to the traffic. 39. Commissioner Kirk stated the land use proposed by the applicant is better than the existing. He is concerned about the piecemeal approach and how the Specific Plan is used. A specific plan should not be used to circumvent portions of the Zoning Code. This is an opportunity to look at multiple properties and design infrastructure to accommodate multiple property locations and understand cumulative impacts of the multiple properties being developed over time. He does not approve using a specific plan in this nature. The project looks like it was thrown together fairly quickly to accommodate a specific need and does not give a good sense of circulation, and some of the other major issues. In terms of the Apartment complex itself, on the whole it is a positive project. The layout is good and he is encouraged to see, even though in his opinion it is over parked, parking does not dominate. The architect did a nice job incorporating garage structures into the design of the building. They are not overwhelming; it is G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 16 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 appropriate. However the architect could have done more with respect to replicating the Tuscany look. He would like to have seen different materials used such as stone or stone veneers which is a Tuscany type that is used. He is also concerned about the roof lines and more amenities could have been provided. He would suggest reducing the amount of parking and give more landscaping. The City cannot reduce the number of low, or very low income families as it is unknown at this time. On a site scale, improvements can be made. On a planning scale he is concerned about the use of a specific plan as a tool in this case. 40. Commissioner Robbins agreed with Commissioner Kirk on the parking issues. He is against over parking on any project. This project is very short on open space and needs to decrease the parking and have more open space and amenities. He is against high density in the desert and even more opposed to density bonuses. Palm Royale Drive needs to curve and connect to the access street as opposed to the 900 angle shown. He does like the architecture of the units, however, the site planning is boring and unimaginative. He does not like the piecemeal planning. 41. Vice Chairman Tyler stated that if they were considering the apartment complex by itself, it would be salvagable. He cannot approve zoning that allows light industrial next to single family development. A storage unit would be better, but a CP zoning designation allows whatever use is zoned under the CP zoning district to be constructed. He has a strong concern about the circulation. The original project had access points off Washington Street that needed to be removed and now with this project we are adding more access points. He has difficulty increasing the density on a parcel of very few acres. The traffic would be a nightmare and the schools would be more overloaded than they are now. 42. Commissioner Robbins stated that although he was not in favor of this project, part of what is being proposed is better than what would be allowed currently. There could be a three story apartment project right next to the current single family homes in the area. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 17 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 43. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if Lot 4 could be restricted to only a storage center in perpetuity. Assistant City Attorney Marc Luesebrink stated no, because it would bind the future decisions of the city and not a condition of approval of this project. 44. Commissioner Kirk asked if the specific plan could be expanded to include some elements of the other parcel. In particular, circulation, condition future development along the eastern property boundary with performance standards that take into account compatibility of the neighboring residences. Can the Commission reject this specific plan and ask them to bring back a specific plan that addresses some aspects of the other parcels in the General Plan Amendment and condition the Specific Plan as to the types of uses that would be allowed along the eastern boundary. Assistant City Attorney Marc Luesebrink stated yes they could. Commissioner Kirk stated he would recommend approval of the Environmental Assessment, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and ask that the Specific plan be brought back addressing the circulation and compatibility uses along the eastern boundary and then discuss the apartment building in more detail. 45. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if the Commission voted no on the General Plan Amendment, would that be the end of the project. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated it would go to the City Council with a no vote on the General Plan Amendment and no action taken on the other applications. 46. Commissioner Robbins asked if the project could be continued to allow the applicant time to address the concerns that had been raised. Staff stated they could, but they would need to provide the applicant with direction. Mr. Mike Rowe stated that in this project the uses are less intensive than what is existing. The use for Lot 4 is a storage facility. They agree with the curvilinear street, but they do not want a continuance of the project. They want to move forward as they believe they have a plan that gives the City the best use over what has been there previously. In regard to the street alignment, Palm Royale Drive currently intersects with Darby Road. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 18 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 47. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abets to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-083 recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2002-454, subject to the findings, as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels and Kirk. NOES: Commissioner Robbins and Vice Chairman Tyler. ABSENT: Chairman Butler. ABSTAIN: None. 48. There being a tie vote, the motion dies. No further action was taken, VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: A Continued Site Development Permit 2002-744; a request of Jai Nettimi for compatibility review of a deck for a single family two story house located at 79-390 Paseo del Rey. 1. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there was a motion to continue Site Development Permit 2002-744, as requested. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to continue Site Development Permit 2002-744 to September 3, 2002, as requested. Unanimously approved. B. Zoning Issues; a request of staff for review of Shade Structures, Gas Stations, and Drive Thrus. 1. Vice Chairman Tyler 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. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioners Robbins/Kirk stated they support leaving the Zoning Code as it is written for shade structures. 3. Staff asked if the Commission wanted to limit the number of gas stations and fast thru restaurants in the City. Staff is not requesting the prohibition of a restaurants, but rather the drive thru. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 19 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 4. Commissioner Kirk questioned whether or not the City could adopt such an action. Assistant City Attorney. Marc Luesebrink stated the Planning Commission can amend the Zoning Code and make a recommendation that allowing these uses is not good planning. 5. Following discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to continue this to a future meeting, directing staff to prepare an analysis as to how many gas stations and drive thrus there are and where they are located in La Quinta and potential locations. Unanimously approved. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: A. Commissioners discussed the IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. No report was given on the City Council meeting of July 16, 2002. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a special meeting of the Planning Commission to be held September 3, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 10:45 p.m. on July 23, 2002. Respectfully submitted, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-23-02.wpd 20 PH #, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 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: CAMEO HOMES PROPERTY OWNERS: CAMEO HOMES AND LANDAQ, INC. LOCATION: EAST SIDE OF EISENHOWER DRIVE, NORTH OF CALLE TAMPICO AND WEST OF AVENIDA BERMUDAS 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 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 ACRES. RECOMMENDATION: Move to continue the public hearing for the above -cited applications to September 24, 2002, to allow refinements to the development proposal and completion of the Environmental Assessment. P*epared by: f P . Greg TroutQl, Associate Planner (:SRpcSP051Cont2002.wpd PH # STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 CASE NO: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-071 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: WAL-MART STORE #1805 REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO ALLOW 55 METAL CONTAINERS FOR THE TEMPORARY STORAGE OF HOLIDAY MERCHANDISE FROM SEPTEMBER 5, 2002 THROUGH JANUARY 30, 2003, ON THE NORTH AND WEST SIDES OF THE EXISTING 135,693 SQUARE FOOT STORE. LOCATION: 78-950 HIGHWAY 1 1 1, WITHIN THE ONE -ELEVEN LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER ENGINEER: NOT APPLICABLE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15304 (CLASS 4) IN THAT THE STORAGE CONTAINERS ARE TEMPORARY AND WILL HAVE NO PERMANENT EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT. GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: MIXED/REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (M/RC) WITH NOW RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY/ REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (CR) PC stfrpt cup 02-071.wpd Page 1 of 3 BACKGROUND: On November 28, 2000, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 2000-052 (Resolution 2000-085) to allow Wal-Mart to place 35 temporary metal storage containers on the north and west sides of the existing store from September 1, 2000 to January 15, 2001, for holiday merchandise. The meeting minutes are attached (Attachment #2). On August 28, 2001, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 2000-065 (Resolution 2001-107) to allow Wal-Mart to place 43 temporary metal storage containers at the same location from September 1, 2001 to January 15, 2002. The meeting minutes are attached (Attachment #3). At this meeting, the Commission expressed concerns over a blanket approval which would allow the applicant to place these storage containers within the same location every year. The Planning Commission stated that they would rather have the applicant come back every year for approval. Based on last year's approval, three conditions were added which included: 1. Removal of the containers by January 15, 2002; 2. Prohibiting the use of makeshift temporary storage shelves within the store, above the standard shelving currently used, and; 3. Prohibiting the placement of anything on top of the metal storage containers. These conditions have also been added to the proposed Conditional Use Permit. With regard to both approvals mentioned above, there have been no complaints from adjacent business owners concerning the storage facilities. PROJECT PROPOSAL: This year, the applicant is requesting the placement of 55 temporary metal storage containers at the same location to store holiday merchandise from September 5, 2002 through January 15, 2003 (Attachment 4). The outdoor storage containers will be located on property owned by Wal-Mart within the designated truck delivery area for the store. Containers for the merchandise is proposed to the north and west of the store. Each container measures 10 feet wide, by 40 feet long, by ten feet high. PC stfrpt cup 02-071.wpd Page 2 of 3 Public Notice: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 23, 2002, and mailed to all property owners within 500-feet of the site. To date, no letters have been received. Any written comments received will be handed out at the meeting. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings to approve this request per Section 9.210.020 (Conditional Use Permit) of the City of La Quinta Zoning Code can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, approving Conditional Use Permit 2002-071, subject to findings and the attached Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. November 28, 2000, Planning Commission meeting minutes 3. August 28, 2001, Planning Commission meeting minutes 4. Storage Container Location Map Prepared by: i 0 Martin Magana Associate Planner PC stfrpt cup 02-071.wpd Page 3 of 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QU1NTA, CALIFORNIA, ALLOWING 55 TEMPORARY OUTDOOR METAL STORAGE CONTAINERS FROM SEPTEMBER 5, 2002 THROUGH JANUARY 31, 2003, ON THE NORTH AND WEST SIDES OF THE EXISTING WAL-MART STORE CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-071 APPLICANT: WAL-MART STORE #1805 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 3`d day of September, 2002 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Wal-Mart store #1805 to allow 55 temporary outdoor metal storage containers from September 5, 2002 through January 31, 2003, on the north and west sides of the existing Wal-Mart store for holiday merchandise at 78-950 Highway 1 1 1, more particularly described as follows: APN: 643-080-004, WHEREAS, said Conditional Use Permit 2002-071 is within Specific Plan 89-014 for which Environmental Assessment 89-150 was certified by the City Council on April 17, 1990. Therefore, no changed circumstances or conditions and no new information has been provided which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent Environmental Assessment pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes; and WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to Section 9.210.020 of the Zoning Code to justify approval of said Conditional Use Permit: 1. Consistency with the General Plan: The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan in that the property is designated Mixed/Regional Commercial with a Non -Residential Overlay which permits the temporary use proposed by this application. 2. Consistency with the Zoning Code: The proposed project is consistent with the development standards outlined in Section 9.100.120 (Outdoor Storage and Display) of the Zoning Code because merchandise will be stored in metal containers placed on the north and west sides of the existing business. 3. Surrounding Uses: Approval of the Conditional Use Permit will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare or be injurious to, or incompatible with, other properties or land uses in the PAMartin\CUP 2002-071 WalMart\PC Reso CUP 02-071.wpd Jf - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-071-WAL-MART SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 vicinity in that they are placed in areas away from customer traffic and view. The adjacent properties are designated and zoned for commercial use and within the One -Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Conditional Use Permit; 2. That it does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit 2002-071 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 3'd day of September, 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 "J . D P:\Martin\CUP 2002-071 WalMart\PC Reso CUP 02-071.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-071-WAL-MART CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 GENERAL 1. The use of this site shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits contained in Conditional Use Permit 2002-071, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. 2. This Conditional Use Permit allows a total of 55 temporary metal storage containers to be located on the site to be used for the storage of holiday merchandise. The storage units shall be removed by January 15, 2003. 3. Any storage containers that block a required fire access lane to existing commercial buildings shall be relocated within 24 hours of a written notice from the Fire Marshal. 4. Recycled cardboard and excess shopping carts shall be stored in the trailer storage area abutting the west side of the building. The outdoor storage area shall be cleaned daily of debris and litter. 5. The use of makeshift temporary storage shelves within the store, above the standard shelving currently used, is prohibited. 6. Nothing shall be placed on top of the storage containers. 7. Aisle widths shall be a minimum of 12 feet wide between containers. 8. The applicant/property owner agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. This indemnification shall include any award toward attorney's fees. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion. 0 ATTACHMENTS 7 ATTACHMENT r. ATTACHMEN' Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 C. ROLL C pursuant recons En New Condition: scant shall process a able Vehicle Code s o' road as determined a ith a pedestrian acces DFYES: Commissioners Ki NOES: None. ABSENT:4 ABSTAIN: None. Pffir, and Chairman missioners Abels r Chairman Robbins recessed the meeting at 9:23 p.m. and reconvened at 9:28 p.m. D. Conditional Use Permit 2000-052; a request of Wal-Mart Stores to allow 35 metal containers for the temporary storage of holiday merchandise to be located at 78-950 Highway 111, within the One Eleven -La Quinta Shopping Center. 1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked how long the containers have been in place. Staff stated since September. 3. Chairman Robbins asked if the request addresses the pallets or boxes stacked against the containers. Staff stated they would be removed. 4. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Oscar Rubio, Walmart Manager, stated that as the City has grown, so have they. In order to meet the demand of their customers they have to have a minimum of 35 containers as they cannot plan for all' the requests they receive. They just received an order for 1200 specialty items and they will need containers to hold these until they are picked up. They will work with the City to the best interest of both the City and Walmart. 5. Commissioner Kirk asked if the applicant had been contacted by the City regarding the bales. Staff stated they have been working with all the merchants on Highway 1 1 1 . Mr. Rubio stated they have been addressing the issues as the City brings them to their 3 G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd W L Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 attention. Commissioner Kirk asked if the applicant was wanting ' this request granted for every year at this time. Mr. Rubio stated yes. Commissioner Kirk asked why they did not expand the store to accommodate their growth. Mr. Rubio stated currently it is in process, but it is not fiscally feasible at this time. They are looking to expand in about two years. 6. Commissioner Tyler asked if these containers would eliminate the stacking inside the store. Mr. Rubio stated this has not been a practice since he has been manager. Commission Tyler asked if stacking would be on top of the containers. Mr. Rubio stated it would go away. Commissioner Tyler asked if this was normal to approve an application after the fact. Staff stated they are trying to work with the applicant, but no, normally the applicant should apply first before doing the request. 7. Chairman Robbins asked if anyone else wanted to speak regarding this project. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 8. Commission Kirk stated he has a hard time rewarding someone after the fact. He has a problem with their rationale that they need more space at this season. If that were true, everyone would be asking for the same thing. He is concerned about setting a precedent for that reason. He would lean toward rejecting this application, but as they are a good member of the community and it is a well run store, he would agree to approving it for one year and re-examining it on a yearly basis with the applicant coming forward with a more permanent solution, and second, with a provision that it would be rescinded if it became a Code Compliance problem. 9. Commissioner Tyler stated he concurred with Commissioner Kirk's recommendation for only one year. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated you could not rescind an application within 30-days as there is a statutory limit and process one has to go through to rescind a conditional use permit. Therefore, you would have to have it read subject to the revocation process. Second, staff is recommending a two year approval and any store can request and utilize this section of the Municipal Code. G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd , ` 4 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 10. Chairman Robbins stated he concurs with the other Commissioners. A one year approval would allow them time and not require them to remove what is there but, they need to seriousiy consider remodeling the store. At this time, the approval is only for 45 days, so any issues with Code Compliance are mute. 11. Commissioner Kirk suggested staff keep tract of the Code Compliance issues for consideration when this application is re- applied for. 12. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-085 approving Conditional Use Permit 2000-052, as amended. a. Condition ##2; approved for one year, or 2001. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Abels and Butler. ABSTAIN: None. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Continued - Master n Guidelines 2000-0 request of Kristy Brady for review prototype house plg or two ifferent facades located at 51-7 and 51-805 Ave ilia. 1. Chair an Robbins ed for the staff port. Planning Manager Ch�stine di lori esented the info�r ation contained in the staff eport, a co of which is on file the Community Development Departm R r- Z-0 C rman Robbins askeif there were any questi f. ommissioner . 00 3. Commissioner Ty r asked if the pi s submitted we ones that had been b It in the Cov taff stated yes. 4. Commissioner irk a what decorative detiad been added. Staff identified a areas. 5. Chairman Robbins asked if the applica ould like to a�the Commission. Mr. Richard Crockett tated h2ewaf7available to answer questions. G:\WPDOCS\PC1 1-28-OO.wpd aw ATTACHMENT j Planning Commission Minutes August 28, 2001 suggest staff and the City Attorney's office work together to provide information to the Commission at the next meeting in regard to the rules governing towers/antennas. 14. Commissioner Kirk asked that staff fashion an appropriate condition that furthers the spirit of a co -location idea. 15. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-105 certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-427 as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 16. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-106 approving Conditional Use Permit 2001-062, as recommended. a. Condition #10: Policy statement added supporting co - location with the permission of IID. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. C. Conditional Use Permit 2001-065: a request of WalMart Store #1805 for review of a request to allow 43 metal containers for the temporary storage of holiday merchandise from September 1, 2001 through January 15, 2002, on the north and west sides of the existing store within Specific Plan 89-014 for the property located at 78-960 Highway 1 1 1 within the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center. 1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked the at aisle widths be clarified to state aisle widths between groups of containers. In addition, does this permit allow them to have the storage bins every year. Staff G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC8-28-01.wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes August 28, 2001 stated yes, this would allow them to place the storage bins every year for the same time for up to 43 containers. If they wanted to make any changes, they would have to come back to the Planning Commission for an amendment. 3. Commissioner Butler asked if the City had received any complaints in regard to the removal of the containers. Staff stated there had not been no issues raised by the City's Code Compliance Department. Commissioner Butler stated he would prefer them come back each year rather than giving a blanket approval. 4. Commissioner Kirk asked how many containers are out there today. Staff stated none. Commissioner Kirk asked if staff had heard of any expansion plans by WalMart for a permanent solution to the problem. 5. Commissioner Robbins asked staff to clarify how many containers would be on site. Discussion followed regarding the number of containers to be placed on site. 6. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Robert Schneider, representing WalMart, stated he was available to answer any questions. 7. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Kirk asked if there were any plans for expansion. Mr. Schneider stated a WalMart/Sams Club was to be constructed at the Monterey exit from Interstate 10 and it would affect this store significantly and may eliminate their need for the trailers in the future. They are still studying the feasibility of enlarging the building or turn it into a super center. 8. Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to address the Commission on this issue. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the project for Commission discussion. 9. Commissioner Robbins stated he had great concerns about approving this forever. He believes the containers to be unsightly and as their request last year was after the fact, he has no sympathy nor does he believes it has any affect on what they are approving for this year. If they are planning on new stores or ; �� G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC8-28-01.wpd 5 A .J Planning Commission Minutes August 28, 2001 expanding this one, they may not have a need for the additional trailers in the future. Therefore, he would not want to grant an approval for more than one year. 10. Commissioners Kirk and Butler agreed. 11. Commissioner Tyler stated a condition should be added that nothing be placed, or stored on top of the containers. Second, a condition be added that prohibits the use of the temporary storage shelves inside the store. He also agrees that the approval should not be for no more than one year. Mr. Schneider stated he had no objections to the conditions as stated. 12. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-107 approving Conditional Use Permit 2001-065, subject to the findings and conditions as amended: a. Condition #2: Deleted and replaced with, "The storage units shall be removed by January 15, 2002. b. Condition #6: Nothing shall be placed on top of the storage containers. C. Condition #7: The use of make -shift temporary storage shelves above the standard shelving within the store is prohibited. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. D. Site Development Permit 2000-682, Amendment #2: a request of World Gym Palm Desert LLC, for approval of a second sign where one is allowed at the property located at 46-760 Commerce Court. 1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Robbins asked if the logo was consistent with the national trademark logo, and he finds that contradictory to the action taken by the Commission at the last meeting for the Self G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC8-28-01.wpd 6 1F i R �G �A 000, Iil r! 1100 0000, Garden Center Expansion 1 28 , -8„ s 60''� GARDEN CENTER: U j w w " X •a ' r � I w t. 4 ` r ►. .o,o 00 Lai x c 0 a) a. �,0�� cz Q '� a8e�olS _ a9e�olg a8e�olS (IueaeA ... .,... . . J— X W ATTACHMENT S O co fq r W 24 2g1' otOC 1-1n N C ! c r o o ac CID (n Ln NCO �O U co V) �o n loo N N C) k _0 W IOU' )�A, \ \ \ ' `.\ �' '�J I .r dW an BI #� STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 CASE NO: SDP 2002-744 (COMPATIBILITY REVIEW) APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: JAI NETTIMI REQUEST: COMPATIBILITY REVIEW FOR A DECK IN THE REAR YARD OF AN EXISTING TWO-STORY HOME. LOCATION: 79-390 PASEO DEL REY (ALISO AT LA QUINTA) ENGINEER: N/A ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA), PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301 (CLASS 1) IN THAT THE ADDITION TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WILL NOT RESULT IN AN INCREASE OF MORE THAN 50% OF THE FLOOR AREA OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR)/LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL). BACKGROUND: Under Section 9.60.300.D. of the La Quinta Zoning Code, compatibility reviews are subject to approval by the Planning Commission. The site is located at 79-390 Paseo Del Rey, within the "Aliso at La Quinta" tract, a single-family residential development project with a mix of one- and two-story homes (Attachment 1). Kstfrpt.nettimi4. wpd Page 1 of 3 This project was presented at the June 11, 2002, Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission requested the project be continued to the July 9th meeting due to concerns. One was the lack of detailed plans for the project and the other was that adjacent neighbors be notified of the project. Since then, staff has requested continuances to allow the applicant sufficient time to submit the appropriate plans. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval to allow the construction of a second -story deck in the rear yard, to be attached to his existing two-story, single-family home (Attachment 2). Two windows (4' x 4') will be removed and replaced with a sliding glass door (8' x 8') which would allow access to the second story deck from the loft within the upper floor of the house. The deck would be 22 feet wide, extend 10 feet into the rear yard from the house, and be constructed of a combination of wood, stucco and wrought iron. In addition, a spiral staircase will be installed to allow access to the deck from the exterior ground floor. The applicant has complied with the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) in presenting this project to the Aliso at La Quinta Homeowners' Association. The Association mailed a letter with a copy of the plans to the surrounding neighbors requesting their review and comments on the proposed deck. There being no objections to the project, the applicant received a letter of approval from the Association. Both of these letters are attached (Attachment 3). The project is now before you for consideration. Public Notice: Although this project does not require a mailing to everyone within 500 feet of the project boundary, a public notice was mailed to adjacent property owners of the site in question on August 22, 2002, to fulfill the Planning Commission's concern from the June 11, 2002 meeting. To date, no letters have been received. Any written comments received after distribution of this request will be handed out at the meeting. Public Agency Review: N/A. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings necessary to approve this request pursuant to Section 9.60.300.H of the City of La Quinta Zoning Code can be made and are contained below. PCstfrpt.nettimi4mpd Page 2 of 3 i ti 1. General Plan: The proposed project is consistent with the intent of the General Plan in that it will not change the land use of the property. 2. Zoning Code: The proposed project is consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Code in that it meets the development standards outlined in the document. 3. Architectural Design: The architectural design of the deck will be compatible with existing development in the area in that decks are allowed in single-family developments, and are in accordance with the Zoning Code and the goals, objectives and policies of the City's General Plan. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Minute Motion 2002-_, approving the applicant's request for compatibility to allow the second story deck at his home, subject to the conditions of approval. 2. Adopt Planning Commission Minute Motion 2002- _, denying the applicant's request for compatibility to allow the second story deck at his home. Prepared by: Martin Magana Associate Planner Attachments: 1. Site Location Map 2. Proposed drawings for the deck 3. Letters from the Aliso Home Owners Association PCstfrpt.nettimi4mpd Page 3 of 3 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE MOTION 2002- SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-744 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMSER 3, 2002 GENERAL 1. The deck shall be in conformance with the approved plans contained in Site Development Permit 2002-744, and on file in the Community Development Department, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. 2. The applicant shall comply with all building codes in effect at time of plan check. 3. The applicant shall obtain the proper building permits and inspections needed for construction of the deck. Said work shall be done by a licensed and insured contractor. 4. The applicant shall comply with the letter from the Aliso at La Quinta Homeowners' Association, dated May 21, 2002, with regard to the slider frame and landscaping as follows: a. The slider frame must match the existing window frames. b. Plant material at a minimum of 8 feet in height must be installed along the east wall so as to provide privacy to the neighbors. C. Plant material along the west and north walls must be sufficient to provide privacy to the neighbors. 5. The applicant/property owner agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. This indemnification shall include any award toward attorney's fees. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion. ATTACHMENTS e�� 1 1-800=345-7334 IBIS A Ps Pttrast rm A4sRtia NOVStS ma. 10 lIA1LLIli II AssmH ro mt AIMtt1 G m BAIA sIIOAB. ASsk IC LI Nill ts1 pi QSWI np tock tot-yill m BIIIt91K Sltt WOIBARIS. 0 ATTACHMENT #1 POR.SW 20 T.5S.,R.7E ,,9.,, 07o-0,1 6U4-44 CITY OF LA WINTA 601 24 >. n n �' '� alit • S W At MA W'S YIP MR K.At Iinnitt 9-11. tat it. AYJ ,101 m 1s m/1-5 R. M. 27512 Ott 1999 'JAN 0 7 20M 06/13/2002 12:06 760327327E SPEERBUSSVCS ATTACHMENT A11SO IiOMEO WNERS ASSOCIATION C/O QUALM MANAGEMY.NT OF THE DESERT 42-335 Washington St., Ste 4F-427 Palm Desert, CA 922 71 (760) 200-9520 FAX (760)200-9521 Matthew nccfcnbach Allison Knight lake e:nrbacta Kelly Grimcs Prendcm vice TYesident Seerctary/Treasurer D1Y[ctOT May 7, 2002 Mr. & Mrs. Kevin Darcy 79380 Pasco Del Rey La Quinta CA 92253 RE: 79380 Pasco Del Rey Account #166 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Darcy: Allison Mkovskv Director Enclosed you will find plans from your neighbor at 79-390 Paseo Del .Rey, the iNlettimi's, to install a slider, and construct a deck outside their second story loft window, We ask that you review these plans and get back to us within ten Q 0) days of the date of this letter, either via phone or letter, to let us Mow if you would have any objections to this alteration. Please be advised that objections to this alteration would not necessarily cause the project to be denied. However, the Board would consider all concerns when reviewing the request. Thank you for taking the time to review this matter. If we do not hear from you by May 22, 2002 we will conclude that you have no objections to this project. Sincerely. Quality Management of the Desert FOR ALISO AT LA Qu1Ni'A HOA e7L Martha A. Osborne Property Manager Mao Enclosures A1.1S0 AT LA- 4,�+tTINI A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ('IC) 01 T A T iTV l`� A tar n �� nrr»rr �r rr*r rr .�, at, a �.a. a u u u aa..a v!L! ♦ 1 iJ! ! 2 fir 172iJ]P� j `�44-JJJ yva.srtirtgion st., Ste #r-42 r Palm Desert, CA 92211 t7r,nl ?nn-cn : ixt 2C�'e T Cll 1, uCii FTP C1ltPp f :><Iuy 2I, 20C� ��Z . jai I�TAt+2TT:i D�eI RCy La Quirtia CA 92-2, 3 . a V avv RP: 79-390 Paseo Del Rev a I07 Dear Mr. Nettimi: Allison Knight ii514-Ili Julie Grubada Sec'rk taryf f reasut-ri four 1u4ucsi dated May 1, 2002 requesting approval for the construction of a deck outside your second story lott Racing the rear yard) and the removal of the two windows and installation of a slider was approved under the following conditions. t . The slider frame must match the existing window frames. 2. Plant material at a minimum R' heivht n,iIct he installed alortg the east wall so as to nrovidi- privacy to the neighbors ?• F."ant mn atcr lal alIClilg thIC West and flof'ill Walls must be sufficient to yrcJide lotivacy iv the neighbors. .ti^ast tlidi lit effst d and insured contractor will be performing the work and that all t iiy f *red permits wrii be pulled prior to the commencement of the work. We thank for your cooperation in following the guidelines set forth in the CC&R's by tiling for approval prior to commencing with the work. If you should have env questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincef'ely, Quality tviciftii CittCfti o flit: Dt'sert I vie nIIIJC ii T I.H :,eL i:v I A i 1 'A Martha A. Osborne Property Manager AVIao PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 CASE NUMBER: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-749 APPLICANT: MR. DAVID HAUCK - PONDEROSA HOMES PROPERTY OWNER: LA QUINTA DUNES 350, L. L. C. REQUEST: RESIDENTIAL TRACT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW OF THREE SINGLE FAMILY PROTOTYPES WITH THREE FACADE TREATMENTS, AND LANDSCAPE DESIGN PLANS LOCATION: WITHIN TRACT 29323, AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND FRED WARING DRIVE (ATTACHMENT 1) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: EA 2002-446, AN ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-389, WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON JULY 2, 2002 (RESOLUTION 2002-105). NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS EXIST WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF ANY SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. BACKGROUND: Site Background Tract 29323 was approved on July 2, 2002 for 349 lots on 117 acres. The tract was a revised proposal from the Sand Harbor Specific Plan, which had been approved in 1999 for 379 units. The revised map repealed the Specific Plan, and introduced larger lot sizes, a more curvilinear street pattern and more viable open space areas. To date, no homes have been proposed within this tract; therefore, the units under review are not subject to the compatibility provisions of the Zoning Code, but are being reviewed under the provisions of Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review). Prooect Background The applicant requests approval for three prototypes plans, which will be developed over 104 lots within Tract 29323 (Attachment 2). The applicant has named his product line Mosaic, and the three unit designs are proposed as follows: Plan 1 - Approximately 2,800 s.f., Plan 1 provides three bedrooms (two master suites) and three bathrooms, along with separate living and family rooms, and a secluded dining area. This plan allows an option for a fourth bedroom in lieu of the 3`d car garage space. Plan 2 - Approximately 2,915 s.f., this plan provides four bedrooms (one master suite) and 2.5 bathrooms, along with an optional fifth bedroom in lieu of the 3`d car garage space, C:\Wrkgrp\Casedocs\perptsdp749.wpd which could also serve as a separate guest room. Plan 2 features a rear yard loggia off of a central dining/living room. PI - Approximately 3,128 s.f., Plan 3 has four bedrooms (one master suite) and 3.5 bathrooms, with an optional casita room in the 3`d garage space. It features a central entry courtyard, leading through the entry to a great room, separating the kitchen, dining and laundry areas from the bedroom areas. As with Plan 2, the 3' garage space is a separate side -entry enclosure, and can house an optional bedroom. Each plan has three elevation schemes, mixing contemporary Spanish and California Ranch architectural styles. All three plans retain their basic architectural elements, featuring use of stone elements, varying window and roof line treatments, entry porticos and other minor design variations. No significant variation is evident between the right, left and rear elevations of either plan. The architectural materials consist of stucco, clay "S" or flat concrete roof tile, and stone veneers. Exterior material color tones are in varying shades of brown, reddish -brown, and beige, arranged to accent the significant building elements. Building heights are single story - the highest being for Plan 2 at 17 feet, 6 inches. Proposed landscaping for the model home site is only shown conceptually, with no plant pallette. The applicant will be required to submit the detailed model complex landscaping plan with the required Minor Use Permit application. The detailed landscaping plans for the front yard units will be required later, as an amendment to this Site Development Permit application to the Community Development Department. ALRC Action - On August 7, 2002, the ALRC reviewed these prototype architectural plans. No issues were raised by the Committee, which unanimously recommended approval of the Site Development Permit by Minute Motion 2002-034 (Attachment 3). Residential Tract Development Review Requirements - Each prototype plan and elevation meets the standards as specified by Section 9.60.330.D of the Zoning Code. The landscaping as conditioned will be required to be consistent with the requirements specified in Section 9.60.330.E. MANDATORY FINDINGS As required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the Zoning Ordinance, the following findings to approve Site Development Permit 2002-749 are hereby provided: 1. The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan, as it proposes a single family homes in an approved residential tract, which is General Plan -designated for LDR (Low Density Residential) development. 2. The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the La Quinta Zoning Code, as it proposes single family homes in an approved residential tract zoned for RL (Low Density Residential) development. CAWrkgrp\Casedocs\perptsdp749.wpd 3. The proposed Site Development Permit is not subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as an Addendum to Environmental Assessment 99-389 was certified by the City Council on July 2, 2002 (Resolution 2002-105). No changed circumstances or conditions exist which would trigger the preparation of any subsequent environmental evaluation. 4. The architectural design aspects of the proposed Site Development Permit provide interest through varied roof element heights, enhanced building entries, stone veneer wainscot and facade treatments, horizontal banding and other design details which will be compatible with, and not detrimental to, surrounding development, and with the overall design quality prevalent in the City. 5. The site design aspects of the proposed Site Development Permit will be compatible with, and not detrimental to, surrounding development, and with the overall design quality prevalent in the City. 6. The project landscaping for the proposed Site Development Permit has been conditioned so as to unify and enhance visual continuity of the proposed homes with surrounding development. Landscape improvements are designed and sized to provide visual appeal. The permanent overall site landscaping utilizes various tree and shrub species to accentuate views into the building architecture. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2002- , approving Site Development Permit 2002-749, subject to the following Conditions: 1. Detailed landscaping plans for the model complex shall be submitted with the required Minor Use Permit. 2. Typical detailed front yard landscaping plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval, as an amendment to Site Development Permit 2002-749. Attachments: 1 . Location Map 2. Mosaic development lots 3. ALRC Minutes of August 7, 2002 Prepared by: C' Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner CAWrkgrp\Casedocs\perptsdp749.wpd i 40TH AVENUE �°v I NTF�Srq � cave TF 10 mR FRFFi1,q Y i z 422N�ND�pA/V��ENUE "L JL�JLi1J �� FRED WARING DR I in W + W MILES AVE SITE �INDIO VICINITY MAP N.T.S. W it z m N W O w z O 2 ATTACHMENT 1 CASE MAP - NORTH CASE No. SDP 2002-749 SCALE: NTS LOT CLOT 19 I ]4 LOT 33 LOT 32 LOT 71 L0T 30 LOT 29 Lot2a LOT L0T x7 RB Lm2S LOT 21 LOT 23 Lm 22 LOT 37 LOT 20 LOT 38 Lm 35 — --Parkway e-Nort_tr — _ — ` LOT 21 O LOT to LO7 39 LO7 1B1 Loy 152 Lm I83 \ LOT 17 �\ LOT 174 LOT 173 OT 176 0T 177 LOT 17B LOT 179 LOT 1B0 Lm 164 ♦\ \ LOT 40 LOT 173 \ LOT 16 LOT 17 ♦\ LOT 155 LOT 1B6 �� / LOT 189 LOT 160 LOT IB L07 18 LOT 185 LOT 164 Lm 18 Lm 162 LOT 101 L07 160 \ Loy 1S IT 180 / LOT 41 ; LOT 170 LOT 1S9 \ �jy�/• LOT Ia5 LOT 17 \ LOT 42 \ �-- ---�.a�istf8R0 {fl1'{Ve' _ ��'_-LOT 14 LOT 189 LOT 157 1 / \ \\ L07 /3 LOT 7/6 LOT14) LOT 148 LO7 149 LOT 150 L07 751 LOT 75R LO7 157 LOT 154 LOT 155 LOT 1S8 1 LOT 190 I \ \ \ LOT 145 I LOT 1] / LOT 2 \\ \ LOT44 \ Lm 259 \ \ LOT 12 .OT 1 / \\♦ \\ LOT 45 \ LOT143 LOTIII,m 141 LOT 1!0 LOT 139 LOT 135 LOT 137 Lm 13 LOT 135 L07 134 Lm 133 i 1 280 ♦ \ \LOT 1{4 ♦ ♦ LOT 11 m , / ♦\♦ ♦\♦ LJT 48 m 257 Lm 256 ♦\ \\ LOT 47 — — — _ — —, LOT 261 LOT 255 ♦ \ ♦♦ \\ LOT 123 I LOT 10 )T 19y \ LOT 121 LOT 123 LOT 126 LOT 7R7 LOT 12 LOT 129 LOT IJO LOT 131 LOT 13R I 7C LOT254 \ Lmb LOY 48 all T OtlTa—� : ♦\ \ \ LOT 122 I 1 LOT 9 \ \ \ m 194 \ LOT253 \\ \\ LOT49 \\ 1 I \ \ LOT 119 LOT 118 LOT 117 LOT 28 OT 28J LOT 264 \ \ \ \ LOT 121 LO \ \ \ T 116 T IIS �( 17{ LOT 11J LOT 112 I LOT 8 Lm 265 \ LOT 252 \\ \ LOT SO 1 m 19S \\ \\ LOT 120 i \ \\ •�-$arGa1OR8' flfkllB_ _ � - � _ LOT 7 LOT xea LOT 2s1 \ \ LOT s1- I 1 LOT 298 LOT 267 \ \ \ Lot 196 \ \ LOT 286 LOT 250 \ \\ LOT 32 LOT 105 LOT too LCT 107 I LOT 6 I LOT 267 \\\ \\ \ / LOT 10/ LOT 706 LOT 109 LOT 110 Lm 111 I 1 LOT 197 I �4Q LOT 2B5 LOT 2aB N LOT 249 \ I LOT SS Q L0T 102 LOT 101 1 Lgj�i LOT LOT \\ LOT 198 \ LOT NB LOT 103 LOT 100 LOT 99 LOT 90 Lm 97 LOT 4 LOT 210 LOT 289 Lm S{ \ \ 1 1 I 1 \ LOT 214 LOT 269 \ \ I 1 \ LOT 20 i \\\ Lor ss - ��Ar$--:�r1Ye - LOT 3 LOT ,99 \ \ — — \ LOT 183 LOr 270 \ ♦\\ \ \ LOT 91 LOT 92 I/ LOT 29, \ I LOT 200 m NJ \ LOT 248 \ \ LOT SB LOT 93 L0T 94 LOT 93 LOT 96 LOT 2 LOT 252 \ LOT 271 \\\ \\ \ LOT 90 LOT 1 LLOT292 \ \ LOT 245 \ \ LOT 37 \ LOT 78 LOT 251 \ \ 1 I I•. LOT 272 \\ \ \ LOT 89 LOT N2 \ Lm 201 LOTR9] \\ LOT 744 \\ \\ L07 SB LOT 87 LOT i \ LOT BB I \ LOT 290 LOT 277 LOT N3 \\\ \\ \ LOTBB ^^ LOT e 1 $ ,ana e LOT 341 \\ \/� \ \ \ LOT 59 1 e' LOT 202 LOT 294 \ LOT 279 LOT NO LOT 274 \ LOT 2{2 \ \ \ Lm 00 LOT a5 LOT 77 1 1 \ LOT 278 \ f' \ LOT 81 LOT 75 \ LOT 275 \ LOT 241 \\ LOT 20J 1� 1 LOT 295 / \\\ \\ LOT E\ LOT IIILOT70 LOT 204 LOT 1 I I I r+ \\337 LLOT277 \ LOT 240 \\ \\ LOT B3 LOT 71 i I O Lm 296 Lm 339 LOT276 \ \ LOT62 1 1 :: LOT 338 ` ; ` \ LOT 2]9 \\\ \\\ `� \ LOT 82 LOT 79 I LOT 73 1 I LOT 205 1 I - �g�1 co #e- a• \ \ \♦ LOT a3 \ I 1 I •1 1 WI 291 LOT 336 LOT 238 \\ \\ LOT 01 ( LOT 72 I I CD LOT 206 I LOi 333 LOT 3N LOT 333 LOT 33x \ \\\ \\ LOT 61 \ I / .•� LOT 298 LOT 3 LOT LOT 237 \ \\ \ O \ L0T 60 / I \\ \ LOT 77 I I � \ \ \ LOT 69 LOT 207 1 LOT 325 LOT 236 \! / 1 LOT 322 ^ \ LOT j ; / \\ lm 66 LOT 70 / / \ 330 LOT 235 ♦ I LOT 208 lm 299 / LOT 3] \ \ \♦ ♦ \ \ \ LOT 87 / / LOTI `\ Lm 321 { A LOT 234 \♦ \\ j I A \ \ \ Lot300 /—►7TTT1aLTiv�ye — — LOT i LOT 209 \ \ / \ LOT 2J3 \\ / / I 320 \ 30 LOT 319 7 Lm 315 LOT 314 LOT ]t] LOT 231 ♦♦\_i ///// '\ �i I LOT R10 QI / I / I LOT 302 LOT 231 LOT 211 / \ \ LOT 303 LOT J04 / / I / ` LOT I LOT 305 LOT JO6 L07 ]07 LOT 30B IAi 309 LOT 370 LOT 311 LOT 312 / / / \♦♦ LOT :Is / LOT 230 ♦♦\ LOT o LOT 212 _ � I I \ LOT 215 —Parkway- a LOT 229 - LOT x11 — — .. � I — LOT 225 // I LOT 213 LOT 217 L07 21 W. L07 227 / / 1 LOT 2N LOT 213 LOT 226 LOT 219 LOT 220 LOT 227 OT 222 LOT 223 I LOT M ----_— / 1D ♦—_---- ♦--------------/ .. '- Fred Waring Drive ATTACHMENT 2 maacn��oaa00000�aoma �3p�wy000OovM�°amm =O a w LD N N CD a 00 m < 0 lit Do y O M• CD C CD .3 vvro <ggmw v,o � oco C m O CD O 0 m e m Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes August 7, 2002 C. Site Development Permit 2002-749; a request of David F. Hauck/Ponderosa Homes for review of architectural plans for three residential p0ans to be constructed in Tract 29323 located on the northwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. 1. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit introduced Mr. David Hauck, Ponderosa Homes, who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Thoms complemented the applicant on the entry tower on Plan 2. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if they would have the same roof tile. Mr. Hauck stated there would be a variety of style and color. 4. Committee Member Thoms asked about the garage doors. Mr. Hauck stated it would depend on what was available. Committee Member Thoms asked if the entry landscaping would be brought back to the Committee. Staff stated when the applicant was ready it would come before the Committee for a recommendation. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the grade change and the existing homes in Bermuda Dunes Country Club. Staff explained it has been the City's position that there not be a grade differential of more than three feet to be compatible with the adjoining project. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the rear yard walls. Mr. Hauck stated they would be block, but he did not know what material would be used. 7. Committee Member Thoms stated his concern was the streetscape along Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. Staff stated it would be brought back to the Committee for their review and recommendation. 8. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what material would be used for the shutters. Mr. Hauck stated it would be a composite material. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if additional articulation could be added to the side elevations. ATTACHMENT 3 G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\8-7-02.wpd 5 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes August 7, 2002 9. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Member Thoms/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2002- 034 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2002- 749, subject to the conditions as submitted. Unanimously approved. D. Commercial Property improvement Program 2002-018; a request of Aug in and Francisca Martinez for funding of exterior improvements for the toperty located at 78-100 Calle Tampico. 1. Management Analyst Debbie Powell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development De artment and introduced Mr. �Xestint ne Martine,-�ciner o e property, who gave a t es`i t request. 2. Committee Member Thoms asked 'why this project was being brought to the Committee. Mr. Martinez stated the funding was to enhance the look of the building. Committee Member Thorns stated he did not think this would improve the building's appearance. Mr. Martinez stated their future plans are to convert the building to a restaurant. s 3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the building is an eyesore to begin with. If he was to allocate City money, it would not be for gates, but for architecture elements to enhance the building. As far as the patio cover, it needs to built out of a different material. 4. Committee Member Thorns s#ated he could not approve City funds for this proposal. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt agreed and suggested Mr. Martinez resubmit a plan that would enhance the look of the building. 6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Member Bobbitt/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2002- 035 denying CPIP 2002-018, but encouraged the applicant to resubmit with a different proposal. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None G:\WPD0CS\AR1.C\8-7-02.wpd 6 T4-,Yll 4 4a" MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 SUBJECT: ZONING ISSUE Staff is requesting Planning Commission direction regarding the following issue: A. Split Rail Fencing in Residential Front Yards: In the past split rail fencing was permitted in a residential front yard. Current regulations now prohibit them. Front yard fencing must consist of wrought iron, tubular steel, block, masonry or a combination of the two. Wood is prohibited. A new fencing product is being sold at local businesses. It consists of a white plastic/vinyl material, some with treated wood inside (see attached). Staff has received numerous questions whether or not this would be permitted in a front yard. Staff does not recommend using solid vinyl fencing, but rather the split rail type or open picket fencing. Does the Commission want to recommend a modification to the Zoning Code to permit either or both types of fencing material in the front yards? Lifetime Vinyl Fencing - superior fence at a discount for commercial developments, HOA.. Page 1 of 2 Wr . ,T v4 Lifetime Vinyl Fencing for Homeowner's Associations, Common Interest Development and Developers �-lome VIM_. FENCING AS DISC'OVE T E BENEFITS Fence Designs Homeowners' associations are quickly discovering the Post Caps benefits of investing in vinyl fencing. The proven reliability and lasting performance of a quality vinyl fence whir Vinyl Fencing? makes it the superior choice for the long-term needs of your community. `✓inyl Quality • Vinyl fencing saves you money by eliminating Vinyl Fencing FAQ your association's fence repair/replacement budget. I/inyl Fencing Installation . Adds lasting beauty and privacy to your entire community and individual homes. quick Quote • Provides a safe and secure barrier for pools, Specifications spas and restricted areas. How to Order Our customers find that investing in a quality vinyl fence from LIFETIME VINYL FENCINGTM pays for itself in 3 — "estimonials 5 years. News WE UNDERSTAND YO1J'R F I C'I (I NEEDS Company Profile Eaatalog / Brochure We are vinyl fence experts specializing in providing consulting services and vinyl materials to homeowner's Free Consultation associations nationwide. As vinyl fencing wholesalers, we understand the need to maximize your resources and Hiring a contractor invest your dollars wisely. This site has been constructed to introduce you to the many beautiful fence designs 111elated Sites available and answer your initial questions about vinyl fencing. i;ontact Us Once you have explored the information on vinyl fencing here, please Cull us for your personal consultation. We'll listen to your needs and concerns and help you bg :A E HERET Our company was founded providing personalized ser customers. We specialize i others beautiful their home properties while solving on - maintenance headaches. We sincerely want to mak decision making and buyin experience pleasant and uncomplicated. If there is a we can do to improve our s please let us know. That's continue to grow. Lifetime Viny http://www.lifetimevinylfencing.com/ 08/21 /2002 Lifetime Vinyl Fencing - superior fence at a discount for commercial developments, HOA.. Page 2 of 2 discover for yourself why LIFETIME VINYL FENCINGTM is the best resource for your fencing needs. et ©Copyright 1999-2001 All Rights Reserved. Lifetime Vinyl Fencing 1080 Broadway, San Jose, Ca 95125 800-213-2539 http://www.lifetimevinylfencing.com/ 08/21 /2002 Traditional vinyl picket fencing Page 1 of 2 �'" .yA, r Lifetime VinyI Fencing for Homeownees Associations, Common Interest Development and Developers Home 'T A YHONAL - VINYL, PIC" E'I' CAPE COD Fenra L . inn 3 FENCING A traditional picket fencing The ever -popular, traditional picket style with "pointed" picket Post caps fencing styles are available in carefree caps. vinyl from LIFETIME VINYL FENCING. PlYjj"-l��11y Vinyl Fencing? White only ° 'Jinyl Quality Styles vary from a traditional straight 3" wide pickets 217/16" spacing (:APE ��'� pointed picket fencing to an elegant Straight or Concave versions Vinyl Fencing FAQ concave version. Instructions COLONIAL Specifications A pinched picket fencing style Flow to Order Click on any of the small images to see a larger version in a new window. emulating wrought iron. White only Testimonials For detailed specifications on specific picket fencing styles, click the Specs 3" wide pickets NP-ws link below each photo. 2 17/16" spacing Straight or Concave versions r'OLO t,a Company Profile To page through each picket fencing style, use the Previous and Next arrows below. Catalog 1 Brochure YORKSHIRE A traditional picket fencing Free consultation style with dog-ear caps. -iirinct a Contractor White only 3" wide pickets ' ielated Sites 217/16" spacing Straight or Concave versions 4'OIiIoS1Hi :contact Us PROVIDENCE A traditional picket fencing style with 3" pointed pickets. i Meets most pool codes. White & Tan t 3" wide pickets 1 3/4" spacing PROVIDE Straight or Concave versions Pre -assembled sections http://www.li fetimevinylfencing.com/vinyl_fencing_traditional_fence.htm 08/21 /2002 Traditional vinyl picket fencing Page 2 of 2 CHARLESTON Atraditional picket fencing 1111 li�llrll style with "pointed" caps andtx 19 pickets per 6' section of fence. Straight White only CHARLES 1 1 /2" wide pickets 2" spacing Concave HUDSON b A traditional fencing style with `i E "pinched" pickets and 19 pickets per 6' section of fence. White only 1 1/2" wide pickets HUDSON 2" spacing Straight or Concave versions Return to Top P„ ravfous Nex� http://www.lifetimevinylfencing.com/vinyl_fencing_traditional_fence.htm 08/21 /2002 Semi -Private Styles Pagel of W11 A Lifetime Viny I Fencing for Homeowner's Associations, Common Interest Development and Developers Home SE; MI-PRII/A'FE FENCE STYI,ES IMPERIAL Fence Stvies A semi -private fence that meets The privacy fence styles most local pool codes. Post Caps shown here are totally sight White, Tan & Grey INliv Vinyl? obscuring. Whether you are 3" wide pickets seeking privacy for individual 9/16" spacing homeowners or simply need Vinyl Quality to "hide" something, IMPERIAL LIFETIME VINYL FENCING Vinyl Fencing FAQ offers sturdy and durable Vinyl Fencing choices. Installation Instructions MILLBROOK Cwick Quote Click on any of the small images to An attractive fence for home or see a larger version in a new business. Specifications window. Click on BACK to return to this page. White & Tan 6" wide pickets How to Order For detailed specifications on 5 1/8" spacing MOWN specific fence styles, click the Specs Testimonials link below each photo. MILLBRO News To page through each fence style, use the Previous and Next arrows Company Profile below. COLUMBIA Get the best of both worlds with C ataloq I Brochure the Columbia semi -private fence. Strategically placed offset pickets Free Consultation provide privacy while maintaining airflow. The optional lattice Hiring a Contractor accent adds attractive detail. ,Related Sites White only 6" wide pickets contact Us 5 1/8" spacing Columbia with lattice White only 6" wide pickets 5 1/8" spacing Previous http://www.lifetimevinylfencing.com/vinyl—fencing_semi-private_fence.htm 08/21/2002 Contemporary Vinyl Fence Pagel of 2 `. . - .. , Lifetime VinyI Fencing for Homeowner's Associations, Common Interest Development and Developers !some CNr " ;MP A Y F lE N('E BARON STY1.,ES Fence .'"tvlas The privacy fence styles shown here Simple, attractive styling makes a are totally sight obscuring. Whether Baron very versatile. Post caps you are seeking privacy for individual "hide" White, Tan &Grey Why Vinyl? homeowners or simply need to 3 wide pickets something, LIFETIME VINYL 3 7/8" spacing FENCING offers sturdy and durable BARON I/inyl duality choices. IJinyl Fencing FACE Instructions Vinyl Fencing COUNTESS Installation Click on any of the small images to sees a larger version in a new window. Features alternating pickets. . quick Quote For detailed specifications on specific White, Tan & Grey fence styles, click the Specs link below 3" wide & 1 1 /2" pickets p Specifications each photo. 2" spacing �- How to Order To page through each fence style, use the Previous and Next arrows below. ('()t'N'i'FSS __esti�nonials MONARCH Company Profile r White, Tan & Grey Cataloq / Brochure 3" & 1 1/2" wide pickets 3 5/16" spacing Free Consultation Hiring a Contractor VIONARC'H Related sites PRINCETON Contact Us x7 Narrow picket spacing for containing small pets White, Tan & Grey 1 1 /2" wide pickets 1 3/4" spacing���� http://www.lifetimevinylfencing.com/vinyl_fencing_contemporary_fence.htm 08/21 /2002 Contemporary Vinyl Fence Page 2 of 2 PRINCETON VICTORIAN Simple, yet elegant styling V x ,� makes Victorian a perfect choice for a variety of home styles. U% White, Tan & Grey 1 1 /2" wide pickets 3 5/8" spacing °�" rO�atfZN http://www.lifetimevinylfencing.com/vinyl_fencing_contemporary_fence.htm 08/21 /2002 Privacy-vinyl-fence-styles.htm Pagel of 3 S�a Lifetime Vinyl Fencing for Homeownei`s Associations, Common Interest Development and Developers -come PRIVACY VINY1, CHESTERFIELD FENCE STYL S This good -neighbor, Tongue -once Styles The privacy fence styles shown here & Groove privacy fence are total) sight obscuring. Whether Y ht 9 9 looks the same on both Post Caps you are seeking privacy for sides. 'Nhv Vinyl? y ' individual homeowners or simply "hide" White, Tan &Grey -- - need to something, LIFETIME 6" wide pickets c:�tr;STEut�I 1inyl Quality VINYL FENCING offers sturdy and Y Tongue & Groove durable choices. Vinvl Fencing Chesterfield with Lattice FAQ Instructions The beauty of lattice has been added to our popularChesterfield Vinyl Fencing Click on any of the small images to fence. Installation see a larger version in a new window. White only Quick Quote For detailed specifications on 6" wide pickets specific fence styles, click the Specs Tongue & Groove .specifications link below each photo. Chesterfield with How to Order To page through each fence style, Victorian Accent White & use the Previcus and Next arrows Tan Testimonials below. 6" wide pickets Dews Tongue & Groove GALVESTON 1'ompany Profile Did You Know? This good -neighbor privacy fence looks the same on Catalog I Vinyl fencing is virtually both sides. Brochure graffiti- proof. White & Tan .... Free Consultation 6" wide pickets Tongue & Groove c;ALVEs,ro idiring a Contractor Galveston with Lattice White & Tan Related sites 6" wide pickets Tongue & Groove ;ontact Us Galveston with Victorian Accent White & Tan http://www.lifetimevinylfencing.com/vinyl_fencing_privacy_fence.htm 08/21/2002 Privacy-vinyl-fence-styles.htm Page 2 of 3 6" wide pickets Tongue & Groove LEWISTON 1i A traditional fence style featuring interwoven fence rails. White & Tan Basketweave NORFOLK This good -neighbor privacy fence looks the same on both sides. White & Tan 6" wide pickets Tongue & Groove NORFOLK Norfolk with Lattice White only 6" wide pickets Tongue & Groove Norfolk with Victorian Accent White & Tan 6" wide pickets Tongue & Groove NORFOLK I This good -neighbor privacy fence looks the same on both sides. White & Tan 3" wide pickets Tongue & Groove Norfolk I with Lattice White only 3" wide pickets Tongue & Groove Norfolk I with Victorian Accent http://www.lifetimevinylfencing.com/vinyl_fencing_privacy_fence.htm 08/21/2002 PH A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-702, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: LA QUINTA CONGREGATIONS OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES REQUEST: REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A SECOND CHURCH HALL ON A 2.39 ACRE SITE LOCATION: EAST SIDE OF DUNE PALMS ROAD, BETWEEN THE COACHELLA VALLEY STORM CHANNEL AND WESTWARD HO DRIVE GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THE REQUEST IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (SECTION 15303 NEW CONSTRUCTION OR CONVERSION OF SMALL STRUCTURES). SURROUNDING ZONING/ LAND USES: NORTH: RL / RESIDENTIAL SOUTH: RL / MOBILE HOME PARK EAST: RL/VACANT WEST: MC / LA QUINTA HIGH SCHOOL BACKGROUND: The property, located on the east side of Dune Palms Road and zoned RL (Low Density residential), is presently vacant and surrounded by development on the north, south and west (Attachment 1). The original Site Development Permit was approved by the Planning Commission on July 10, 2001, and established the site plan layout with two halls and approved the design for the first 4,488 square foot hall near the front of the property. A Conditional Use Permit was also approved to permit the use of the property for a religious facility. To date, no construction has begun. P:\STAN\sdp 2001-702 amend#1 pc rpt.wpd PROJECT PROPOSAL: The applicants are proposing a second hall of approximately 4,280 square feet near the rear of the property, to the west of, and adjacent to a future Coachella Valley Water District well site. The site plan submitted has been approved for construction by the City. The attached staff report for the Planning Commission meeting of July 10, 2001, describes the original project (Attachment 2). The building will use almost the same footprint, but has been designed to look slightly different, while maintaining architectural compatibility with the first building (Attachment 3). The hall will have stucco walls with a red concrete tile roof. The stucco will be beige in color, and slightly different than the first buildings light tan color. The hall will have similar windows and flush plastered columns. A wainscot horizontal popout band will be provided on the front and rear sides of the hall. The original hall was approved with a hip roof, while the second hall is proposed with a "clipped" gable roof. ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC): The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of August 7, 2002, and recommended approval by adoption of Minute Motion 2002-033, subject to additional landscaping being provided to break up the expanse of the side walls of the hall (Attachment 4). PUBLIC NOTICE: This application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 31, 2001. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code. As of this writing, no comments have been received. PUBLIC AGENCY REVIEW: All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made part of the Conditions of Approval for this case. FINDINGS: The findings as required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the Zoning Ordinance, to approve this request can be made provided the recommended conditions of approval are imposed. 9 P:\STAN\sdp 2001-702 amend#1 pc rpt.wpd RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution 2002- , approving Site Development Permit 2001-702, Amendment #1 subject to the attached conditions. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Staff report excerpt for the meeting of July 10, 2001 3. Plan exhibits 4. Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee minutes for the meeting of August 7, 2002 Prepared by: Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner P:\STAN\sdp 2001-702 amend#1 pc rpt.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A SECOND CHURCH HALL ON A 2.39 ACRE SITE CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-702, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: LA QUINTA CONGREGATIONS OF JEHOVAHS WITNESSES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 3RD day of September, 2002, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing, to consider the request of the La Quinta Congregations of Jehovahs Witnesses to approve the development plans for a 4,280± square foot church hall in the RL zoning district, located on the east side of Dune Palms Drive, south of Westward Ho Drive, more particularly described as: APN 649-040-013 WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee, on the seventh day of August, 2002, at a regular meeting, adopted Minute Motion 2002-033, recommending approval of the architectural plans for the new building, subject to conditions; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of said Site Development Permit: 1. The General Plan designates the project area as Low Density Residential and a Conditional Use Permit has been approved to permit the use on the property. 2. The proposed building is designed to comply with the Zoning Code requirements including, but not limited to, height limits, setbacks and size. 3 The La Quinta Community Development Department has determined that the request is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Section 15303 New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures). 4. The architectural design of the project including, but not limited to, the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements are compatible with the surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the city. The building is well designed with articulation on the front and rear elevations. The project p:\stan\sdp 2001-702 amend #1 pc res.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Site Development Permit 2001-702, Amendment #1 La Quinta Congregations of Jehovahs Witnesses Adopted: uses architectural features, colors, and materials to be compatible with the first hall approved. 5. The previously approved site design of the project including, but not limited to, project entries, interior circulation, pedestrian amenities, screening of equipment and trash enclosures, exterior lighting, and other site design elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the city. 6. Project landscaping including, but not limited to, the location, type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant materials has been designed so as to provide relief, complement buildings, visually emphasize prominent design elements and vistas, screen undesirable views, provide a harmonious transition between adjacent land uses and between development and open space, provide an overall unifying influence, enhance the visual continuity of the project, and complement the surrounding project area, ensuring lower maintenance and water use. 7. The one building sign will be consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and will be in harmony and visually related to the proposed buildings, with approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2001-702, Amendment #1 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the attached c conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 3RD day of September, 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: p:\stan\sdp 2001-702 amend #1 pc res.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Site Development Permit 2001-702, Amendment #1 La Quinta Congregations of Jehovahs Witnesses Adopted: RICHARD BUTLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California n p:\stan\sdp 2001-702 amend #1 pc res.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-702, AMENDMENT #1 LA QUINTA CONGREGATIONS OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES SEPTEMBER 3, 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 development application or any application thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Prior to 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 Cc. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) 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. PROPERTY RIGHTS 3. 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. 4. Right of way dedications required of this development include: PUBLIC STREETS 5. Dunes Palm Road (Secondary Arterial) - 44-foot half of 88-foot right of way. P:\STAN\sdp 2001-702 amend #1 pc coa.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-702, AMENDMENT #1 LA QUINTA CONGREGATIONS OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 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. Dune Palms Road (Secondary Arterial) - 10-feet Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall dedicate blanket easements for those purposes. 7. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, and common areas. 8. 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. 9. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property owners IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 10. 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. "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. P:\STAN\sdp 2001-702 amend #1 pc coa.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- _ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-702, AMENDMENT #1 LA O.UINTA CONGREGATIONS OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 11. 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. 12. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions. If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. GRADING 13. Applicant shall correct discrepancies in pad elevations and contour lines using correct elevations, based on known datum elevations. 14. 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. 15. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 16. 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 P:\STAN\sdp 2001-702 amend #1 pc coa.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-702, AMENDMENT #1 LA QUINTA CONGREGATIONS OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 17. 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. 18. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each pad, the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the following: 19. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basin(s). Individual - lot basins shall meet the provisions of Chapter 13.24, LQMC. 20. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated, unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route. 21. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on site or passed through to the overflow outlet. 22. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leachfield approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leachfield shall be designed to contain surges of 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. (of landscape area) and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. 23. 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 parking lot. No fence or wall shall be constructed around basins unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. P:\STAN\sdp 2001-702 amend #1 pc coa.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-702, AMENDMENT #1 LA QUINTA CONGREGATIONS OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 24. 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&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. 25. 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 26. 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. 27. 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. 28. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 29. The applicant shall install an 8-foot sidewalk after the City improves Dune Palms. 4.9 P:\STAN\sdp 2001-702 amend #1 pc coa.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-702, AMENDMENT #1 LA QUINTA CONGREGATIONS OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 30. Parking lot design shall comply with the LQMC Chapter 9.150 31. 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). 32. 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. 33. 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. 34. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. 35. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the tract or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPING 36. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. P:\STAN\sdp 2001-702 amend #1 pc coa.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-702, AMENDMENT #1 LA QUINTA CONGREGATIONS OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 37. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit plans for approval by the Community Development Department prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking is complete, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for signature by the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 38. 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. 39. Landscaping of varying heights shall be provided on the sides of the rear hall to provide a breakup of the building wall expanses. PUBLIC SERVICES 40. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by Sunline Transit and approved by the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 41. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 42. 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. 43. 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. 44. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by P:\STAN\sdp 2001-702 amend #1 pc coa.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-702, AMENDMENT #1 LA QUINTA CONGREGATIONS OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 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 45. 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 46. 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. 47. Prior to completion of any approval process for modification of boundaries of the property or lots subject to these conditions, the applicant shall process a reapportionment of any bonded assessment(s) against the property and pay the cost of the reapportionment. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 48. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the building shall be moved outside the 20-foot frontyard setback. 49. Windows shall be provided on the western, northern, and southern elevations. The accent bands around each window shall be raised from the wall surface a minimum of 4 inches. 50. Landscaping within the parking lot shall be equal to or greater than 5 % of the total parking lot area. This shall be demonstrated on the final landscaping plan. 51. Berms ranging from three to four feet in height shall be included in the western and northwestern landscaping islands. 52. Final landscaping and irrigation plans shall be prepared and signed by a landscape architect licensed in the state of California. P:\STAN\sdp 2001-702 amend #1 pc coa.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- _ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-702, AMENDMENT #1 LA QUINTA CONGREGATIONS OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 53. An archaeological monitor shall be on site during all grading and trenching activities. The monitor shall be empowered to halt or redirect activities should an artifact be located. The monitor shall collect all resources in a manner prescribed by the City's Municipal Code. A final report shall be submitted to the Historic Preservation Commission for approval prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first building. 54. The applicant shall work with staff to reduce the height of the light poles to be similar to those recently approved for projects such as the Omri and Boni Restaurant. FIRE DEPARTMENT 55. Minimum fire flow shall be 1750 gpm, for a 2 hour duration at 20 psi residual pressure, which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. 56. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super fire hydrant (6"X 4"X2.5"X2.5" ) located not less than 25' or more than 165' from any portion of the building as measured along approved vehicular travel ways. 57. 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. 58. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, applicant shall furnish one blue line copy of the water system plans to the fire Department for review. Plans must be 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." 59. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, pamphlet #10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Travel distance between fire extinguishers may not exceed 75 feet. 60. Install a KNOX key lock box, model 4400, 3200 or 1300. Key lock box is to be installed, to the right side of the front door, six feet from top of box to finished grade. P:\STAN\sdp 2001-702 amend #1 pc coa.wpd ATTACHMENT # WESTWARD HIGHWAY 111 VICINITY MAP NO SCALE ATTACHMENT #2 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 10, 2001 CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-058, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-702 REQUEST: APPROVAL CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT CHURCH, A SECOND FUTURE CHURCH BUILDING, AND ANCILLARY FACILITIES ON 2.39 ACRES LOCATION: THE EAST SIDE OF DUNE PALMS ROAD, BETWEEN WESTWARD HO AND THE COACHELLA VALLEY STORM CHANNEL APPLICANT: KINGDOM HALL OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (SECTION 15303, NEW CONSTRUCTION 0 R CONVERSION OF SMALL STRUCTURES) GENERAL PLAN/ LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS: BACKGROUND: The proposed project was originally scheduled for Planning Commission hearing on May 22, 2001. As part of the application processing, the project was presented to the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee (ALRC) on the 8th of May. The ALRC recommended a number of conditions of approval to improve the design of the facility, which did not meet City standards. As a result of the ALRC recommendations, the applicant requested a continuance to this meeting date, in order to redesign the facility. The attached plans and elevations reflect these changes, and incorporate a number of the ALRC's recommendations, as discussed below. Site Background The project site is currently vacant. The overall site plan includes two buildings, but only one is proposed at this time. A separate site development permit will be required for the building on the eastern property line in the future. G:\WPDOCS\PCStfRptJevWit.WPD The project proponent is proposing a 4,488 square foot church on the west end of the property (with a second 4,488 square foot identical building on the east end of the property in the future). The building is sited along the roadway frontage, with parking to the east, hidden from public view. Parking for 133 vehicles, and limited landscaping is also proposed. Project Request Conditional Use Permit The proposed project occurs in the Low Density Residential zoning designation. The Development Code requires that churches be considered through a Conditional Use Permit in this designation. The proposed church building is proposed to be single story, and somewhat residential in character. The church activity will be limited to certain days of the week, and generally will occur during off-peak times. The location of the church on Dune Palms Road provides good access on a major roadway for the trips which the use will generate. Church activities occur during the day and early evening, and will not conflict with the activities of surrounding residential units. Therefore, the proposed land use is compatible with surrounding land uses, and the granting of the Conditional Use Permit is appropriate. Site Development Permit The Site Development Permit includes a request for the immediate construction of a 4,488 square foot church, 133 parking spaces, and associated landscaping. A future building, of the same size as the first, is proposed for construction in the future, and will require a separate Site Development Permit. The application includes a request for a six foot high, 20 square foot monument sign, to consist of engraved lettering on natural stone. The Development Code allows up to 24 square feet for non-residential land uses in a residential zone. The proposed signage meets the requirements of the Code. The proposed permit also includes plans for parking lot lighting, consisting of pole mounted mercury vapor lights on 18 foot poles, which is within the City's standards. The lighting will be required to conform to the standards in the Development Code at the time of issuance of building permits. Site planning and design issues associated with the project are further discussed below. 18 G:\WPDOCS\PCStfRptJevWit.WPD Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee: The ALRC reviewed the proposed landscaping and building elevations at their meeting of May 2, 2001, and reccmmended approval subject to conditions (Attachment 3). A number of issues were discussed by the ALRC, which are outlined below. Considerable redesign was undertaken by the applicant, which has satisfied some of the recommendations made by the ALRC, as follows: 1. Conditions #3, #6, #7 and #8 have been met. 2. Conditions #1 and #2 have been partially met. 3. Conditions #4 and #9 are still pending (see further discussion below). Public Notice This application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on April 26, 2001. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the Zoning Ordinance of the La Quinta Municipal Code. The Planning Commission continued the Public Hearing at its meeting of May 22, 2001. Public Agency Review All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made part of the Conditions of Approval for this case. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: The findings necessary to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit can be made, as noted in the attached resolutions with the exception of: A. Site Development Permit 1. Development Standards The building architecture has been considerably improved to comply with the ALRC recommendations made in May. However, the pilaster along the facade extends into the required 20-foot landscape setback. Condition #48 has been added requiring the building to be moved out of the 20-foot setback. The proposed project is located in an area designated for low density residential development, and should be designed to integrate into a residential neighborhood. Arched "window" elements have been added, but no windows are proposed. The arched elements will not be glass. This does not satisfy Condition #2, as G:\WPDOCS\PCStfRptJevWit.WPD t recommended by the ALRC. The Condition of Approval has been included as Condition #42. It is further recommended that the "accent band" depicted on the elevations be required to be raised from the building facade a minimum of 4 inches, in order to provide some architectural interest. 2. Parkina The Development Code calls for one parking space for every three seats in the church. The floor plans shows a total of 200 seats, which require 67 spaces. The requirement will be doubled by the construction of the second building in the future, for a total of 134 spaces required. The project must therefore provide one additional parking space. A condition of approval has been added which requires that the final plans include 134 parking spaces. 3. Landscape Design The minimum required parking lot landscaping is 5%. Although not dimensioned, the plan appears to fall short of the requirement by approximately 125 square feet. Condition #44 has been added which requires that final plans include a demonstration that 5% of the parking lot will be landscaped. The landscaping plan proposes a desert landscaping theme. Plant size and location has been added to the revised plans. No berming is shown however, to provide visual interest. Condition #45 is included to require berming in the final landscaping plans. CONCLUSION: The Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit, as conditioned, represent an appropriate use of the parcel on which they are proposed. The Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit, as conditioned, are compatible with surrounding development in the immediate area, and in conformance with City requirements. Findings for a recommendation for approval, as noted in the attached Resolutions, can be made. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, approving Conditional Use Permit 2001-058, subject to the findings and conditions. 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001- , approving Site Development Permit 2001-702, subject to the findings and conditions. G:\WPDOCS\PCStfRptJevWit.WPD Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Site Plan, Elevations and Landscaping plans 3. ALRC Minutes for May 2, 2001 Prepared by: Submitted by: Nicole Sauviat Criste, Consulting Planner Id Christine di lorio, Pla ning Manager G:\WPDOCS\PCStfRptJevWit.WPD �. ATTACHMENT #2 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes August 7, 2002 9. Committee Member Thorns reviewed the plans noting there is space on the site that could be developed for open space and he will recommending a secondary people space be added. 10. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he would like to see the final plant palette be brought back to the Committee. Mr. Haag asked if the final plan could come back to the ALRC. Staff stated they could. 11. Committee Member Thorns asked that between the peripheral wall and the parking spaces their is a nuisance area that should consist of a decomposed granite and the wall be a solid wall for sound attenuation. 12. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that if trees are to be added on the perimeter, the applicant should provide enough room to allow the tree to grow. Mr. Haag explained what they had proposed. 13. Committee Member Thorns stated that if they planted a substantial tree instead of two or three smaller ones, it can work better. He asked what the commercial uses would be. Mr. Haag stated the vision is retail on the first floor and residential on the second floor. Committee Member Thorns stated his concern that there wasn't much visibility from the street. 14. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2002-033 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2001- 007, subject to the conditions as submitted and amended: A. Secondary people spaces be added within the units. B. The south and east side walls be a solid wall with decomposed granite material between the parking spaces and the perimeter wall. C. The final planting concept drawings be brought back to the ALRC identifying the plant sizes and location at a 1 " = 20' scale. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2001-702. Amendment # 1; a request of La Quinta Congregations of Jehovah's Witnesses for review of architectural plans for a second church building located on the east side of Dune GAWPDOCSUUC\8-7-02.wpd 3 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes August 7, 2002 Palms Road, across from the La Quinta High School. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell explained the project and introduced Mr. Allen Elkins, Project Chairman for the project, who gave a presentation on the project. 2. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the second building was similar in design to the first building. Mr. Elkins, representing the applicant, stated the Planning Commission had directed them to have different roof lines. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the roof lines need to be differentiated to enhance the building and give interest. On the landscaping they need to add plant materials with differing heights to help break up the building. Some of the island wells need to be enlarged and he would suggest using a larger variety of trees. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what material would be used on the north and south perimeter wall. Mr. Elkins stated it would be a block wall with shrubs. The south has an existing chainlink fence that needs to be removed and they are working with the adjoining property owner to resolve the problem. 4. Committee Member Thoms questioned why the landscape plan was not included. Staff went over the history of the project and stated it had been approved with the first building submittal. Committee Member Thorns stated the elevations on the drawings do not reflect what was submitted in the Committee's packet. There is no articulation on the building and he would like to see something added. Mr. Elkins stated one side faces the well site and the other the retention basin. Committee Member Thorns stated there will be development to the north that will see the blank wall. Mr. Jeff Stofker, representing the applicant, stated it is more fully addressed on the site plan. Staff stated the original approval allowed the applicant to have staff approval. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Member Bobbitt/Thorns to adopt Minute Motion 2002- 033 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2002- 740, as modified. A. Landscaping added to break up the exterior building walls. Unanimously approved. G:\WPDOCS\AUC\8-7-02.wpd 4 PSI #C STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 CASE NO: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: T D DESERT DEVELOPMENT REQUEST: SUBDIVIDE APPROXIMATELY 3.62 ACRES INTO SEVEN SINGLE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ONE OPEN SPACE LOT AND A WELL SITE LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF CABRILLO WAY AND MISSION DRIVE WEST (RANCHO LA QUINTA). ENGINEER: WATSON & WATSON ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 90 WAS PREPARED AND CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN 1984 UNDER RESOLUTION 84-77, FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 84-004 (THE GROVE) WHICH INCLUDED THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT OF RANCHO LA QUINTA. TTM 30185 IS PART OF SPECIFIC PLAN 84-004 AND THERE ARE NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES FROM THE ORIGINAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW THAT WOULD TRIGGER ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, THEREFORE, NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION IS NECESSARY. GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) AND GOLF COURSE (GC)/ LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) AND GOLF COURSE (GC) PC stfrpt TTM 30185.wpd Page 1 of 3 BACKGROUND: In 1984, the City Council approved Specific Plan 84-004 (Rancho La Quinta) and Environmental Impact Report No. 90, under Resolution 84-77, which allows up to 1,500 homes with two championship golf courses on approximately 700 acres. Since, 1993, several tentative tract maps have been approved and recorded under SP 84-004 and Environmental Impact Report No. 90. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The current proposed subdivision is located at the southeast corner of Cabrillo Way and Mission Drive West, within the Rancho La Quinta development (Attachment 1). The applicant proposes to subdivide approximately 3.62 acres into seven single-family residential lots, one open space lot and a well site (Attachment 2). The residential lots range in size from ± 9,180 to ± 11,600 square feet. Access to the residential lots will be taken from Mission Drive West, a private street. The open space and well site lots are 1.49 acres and 0.54 acres in size, respectively. Drainage for the residential lots will drain to the west and south into the open space lot. The open space lot (Lot "A") will be landscaped and have a meandering walkway through the site and a fountain. A conceptual site plan for Lot "A" is attached (Attachment 3). The well site currently has a block wall along the western boundary and a chain link fence along the southern boundary. The chain link fence will be replaced with a block wall and the remainder sides will also have a block wall with gated access taken from Mission Drive West. Public Notice: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 22, 2002, and mailed to all property owners within 500-feet of the site. To date, no letters have been received. Any written comments received will be handed out at the meeting. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings to approve this request can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 30185, subject to findings and the attached Conditions of Approval. PC stfrpt TTM 30185.wpd Page 2 of 3 Prepared by: Martin Magana Associate Planner Attachments: 1. Site Location Map 2. Tentative Tract Map (Planning Commission only) 3. Conceptual Site Plan for Lot "A" PC stfrpt TTM 30185.wpd Page 3 of 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185 TO SUBDIVIDE ± 3.62 ACRES INTO SEVEN SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ONE OPEN SPACE LOT AND A WELL SITE, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF CABRILLO WAY AND MISSION DRIVE WEST WITHIN THE RANCHO LA QUINTA DEVELOPMENT CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185 APPLICANT: T D DESERT DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 3`d day of September, 2002 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by T D Desert Development to subdivide ± 3.62 acres into seven single- family residential lots, one open space lot and a well site, located at the southwest corner of Cabrillo Way and Mission Drive West within the Rancho La Quinta Development, more particularly described as follows: APNs: 646-331-028 and 649-460-022, WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map 30185 has complied with the requirements and rules to implement the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that Environmental Impact Report No. 90 for Specific Plan 84-004 (The Grove) was prepared and certified by the City Council on November 20, 1984, under Resolution 84-77, for the overall development of the Rancho La Quinta development. Final Environmental Impact Report No. 90 is still valid and binding on this development request. Therefore, no changed circumstances or conditions and no new information has been provided which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental analysis pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes; and WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify said Tentative Tract Map 30185: 1. The proposed map is consistent with the City General Plan and Specific Plan 84-004 in that the property is designated Low Density Residential (LDR) which permits single-family residential uses. 2. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the City General Plan and Specific Pan 84-004 in that all streets and improvements in the project conform to City standards contained in the General Plan and P:\Martin\TTM 30185-Rancho LQ\PC RESO TTM30185.wpd 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 Subdivision Ordinance as designed. All on -site streets will be private which is consistent with Specific Plan 84-004. Access for the single-family lots will be provided from an existing internal north/south street. The density and design for the tract will comply with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Specific Plan. 3. The design of the subdivision of the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife, or their habitat in that the subject site is physically suitable for the proposed land division. There currently exists development to the north, east, and south of the site. Therefore, this project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were completed at the time the site was disturbed as required by Specific Plan 84-004 and Environmental Impact Report No. 90. 4. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems in that the applicant of the subdivision, as conditioned, will be required to install urban improvements based on City requirements and be consistent with Specific Plan 84-004. 5. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision in that there is an existing street that will provide direct access to each single-family lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support necessary infrastructure improvements. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Tentative Tract Map; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusions of Final Environmental Impact Report No. 90, as certified by the City Council on November 20, 1984; 3. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Tentative Tract Map 30185 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. P:\Martin\TTM 30185-Rancho LQ\PC RESO TTM30185.wpd J PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 3`d day of September, 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 P:\Martin\TTM 30185-Rancho LQ\PC RESO TTM30185.wpd tj PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 3, 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 • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvements plans for City approval. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 4. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. 9. 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. 10. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 11. When an applicant proposes the vacation, or abandonment, of any existing road, public utilities, and pipeline easement shown in Parcel Map 25187, and open space and drainage easement shown on Lot E per TM 28640, which will diminish the rights to the property owned by others, the recordation of the tract map is subject to the Applicant providing an alternate road, public utilities, pipeline, open space and drainage easement, to those properties, or notarized letters of consent from the affected property owners. 12. 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 13. 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. 14. The following 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- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 A. On -Site Rough Grading Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal B. 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. Plans shall show all existing improvements for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions. "Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1- foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. "Precise Grading" plans for single family homes shall be submitted to the La Quinta Building Department for review and approval. The plans shall be prepared in accordance with the Precise Plan Guidelines. "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. The "Site Utility" plan shall have signature blocks for the Building Official and the City Engineer. 15. 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. 16. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order to reflect the as -built conditions. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 17. Prior to the conditional approval of any Final Map, or the issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall construct all on -site and off -site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City. 18. 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. 19. 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. 20. 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 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. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 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. 21. 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 22. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 23. 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. 24. 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. 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- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 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. 25. 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. 26. 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. 27. Building pad elevations shall conform substantially as shown in the approved tentative map. 28. 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. 29. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 DRAINAGE "Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report for Rancho La Quinta. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved manner." 30. 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. No on -site drainage will be allowed to drain to La Quinta Evacuation Channel unless otherwise approved by CVWD. 31. 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. 32. 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. 33. 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. 34. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 35. For on -site common retention basins, retention depth shall not exceed six feet and side slopes shall not exceed 3:1. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 36. 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. 37. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 38. 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. 39. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 40. When an applicant proposes discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City - or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to the issuance of any grading, construction or building permit, and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this tentative tract 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 for CC&Rs for meeting this potential obligations. UTILITIES 41. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.110 (Utilities), LQMC. TJ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 42. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, sewer and water laterals for the optimum placements for practical and aesthetic purposes. 43. 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. LANDSCAPING 44. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC. 45. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. 46. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit 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. 47. 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. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 QUALITY ASSURANCE 48. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 49. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate construction supervision. 50. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program, but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and other applicable regulations. 51. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by 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 52. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 53. 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 54. 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 M PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30185-TD DESERT DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. (If this subdivision falls within an existing assessment district or in an area that may be subject to an assessment district, add the following condition:) 55. Prior to completion of any approval process for modification of boundaries of the property or lots subject to these conditions, the applicant shall process a reapportionment of any bonded assessment(s) against the property and pay the cost of such reapportionment. COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 56. Any areas adjacent to the channel that are below 50 feet are subject to flooding in the standard project flood. The District will require an easement for flooding for any areas adjacent to the La Quinta Evacuation Channel below the 50 foot elevation. 57. Final grading plans shall be submitted to the district for review with regard to the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. 58. A portion of this project area is adjacent to the right-of-way of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. The applicant shall be required to install suitable facilities to maintain District access and to prohibit outside access to this right-of-way. 59. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the District prior to any construction within the right-of-way of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, including but not limited to, surface improvements, drainage inlets, landscaping, and roadways. 60. The applicant will be required to pay the District any fees associated with the project in accordance with the current regulations for service to the site. 61. Landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the District for review to ensure efficient water management practices. 1.3 ATTACHMENTS ATTACH M EN' LOCATION MAP EISENHOWER DI PH #E STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-542 SPECIFIC PLAN 98-032, AMENDMENT NO. 1 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30651 REQUEST: 1) CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; 2) REMOVE PLANNING AREA NO. 3 FROM THE QUARRY RETREAT SPECIFIC PLAN; AND 3) SUBDIVIDE 74.78 ACRES INTO 28 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND OTHER AMENITY AND COMMON LOTS APPLICANT: WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY OWNERS: QUARRY RANCH L.L.C. LOCATION: WEST OF JEFFERSON, SOUTH OF QUARRY LANE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-542 WAS PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 98-032, AMENDMENT NO. 1, AND TENTATIVE TRACT 30651 IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS RECOMMENDED THAT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BE CERTIFIED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR), UP TO 4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE ZONING: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) SOUTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) EAST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) BACKGROUND: The 74.78 acre site is vacant and located west of Jefferson Street, south of Quarry Lane. (Attachment 1). Applicant Requests Specific Plan 98-032, Amendment No. 1 Specific Plan 98-032, The Retreat at the Quarry, provides a resort residential opportunity adjacent to the Quarry Golf Course. A 2.2 acre portion of this Specific Plan is proposed to be incorporated into Tentative Tract 30651 (Attachment 2). This 2.2 acres, Planning Area No. 3, was approved for 23 resort residential units, and needs to be deleted from the Specific Plan. The Retreat at the Quarry, prior to consideration of approval of Tentative Tract 30651, a single family golf course development. Tentative Tract 30651 Tentative Tact 30651 proposes 28 single family lots with golf course, common lots, private street lots, and drainage for a total of 41 lots (Attachment 3). Residential lot sizes range from 13,375 to 42,921 square feet. All residential lots are proposed to have driveway access from a 33 foot width internal cul-de-sac road. Access to the project will be from Avenue 58/Jefferson Street with a realignment of Quarry Lane (the entrance to the the project). The City Engineer is requiring the ultimate access to this project and access to Lake Cahuilla County Park to be realigned with the future Jefferson Street alignment which is to be perpendicilar with Jefferson Street. The applicant is required to obtain a 74' right-of-way (Collector Street width) from Quarry Lane to future Jefferson Street and build 50 feet of improvements for the ultimate access to the project. The remaining improvements for this street will be a future capital improvement project. A homeowners' association will be formed to maintain retention basins, common landscaped areas, private roads, perimeter landscaping. Public Notice The case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 24,2002. All property owners within 500 feet of the entire development were mailed a copy of the public notice. Written comments received are attached (Attachment 4). Public Agency Review The project was sent out for comments to City Departments and affected public agencies on May 31, 2002. Agency comments received have been made a part of the Conditions of Approval. Environmental Assessment Based on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, staff prepared Environmental Assessment (EA)2002-452 for the project. Staff recommends certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: The applicant's request to remove Planning Area No. 3 from the Quarry Retreat Specific Plan, and to subdivide 74.78 acres of land for 28 residential lots and common and amenity lots is consistent with the General Plan and the Subdivision Ordinance provided the recommended Conditions of Approval are met. Findings necessary to approve this request can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ recommending to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 2002-452; and, 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002 recommending to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 98-032, Amendment No. 1; and, 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 30651, subject to the attached conditions. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Quarry Retreat Specific Plan 98-032, Amendment No. 1 Exhibit 3. Tentative Tract Map 30651 4. Letter(s) received Prepared by; Fred Baker, Baker, AICP Principal Planner c �� 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 NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 98-032, AMENDMENT NO. 1 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30651 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-452 APPLICANT: WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 3Id day of September, 2002, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 2002-452 for Tentative Tract 30651 and Specific Plan 98- 032, Amendment No. 1 herein referred to as the "Project" for Winchester Development; and, WHEREAS, said Project has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970"(as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2002-452) to evaluate the potential for adverse environmental impacts; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that said Project could have a significant adverse effect on the environment unless mitigation measures are implemented, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact could be filed; and, WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify recommending certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly or directly, in that appropriate mitigation measures have been imposed which will minimize project impacts. 2. The proposed Project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. AAPC RESO EA 2002-452.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Environmental Assessment 2002-452 Adopted September 3, 2002 3. Considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. 4. The proposed Project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals as no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified . 5. The proposed Project will not have environmental effects directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 6. The adopted Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) is attached hereto pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081.6 in order to assure compliance during Project implementation. 7. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect setforth in 14 CAL Code Regulations §753.5(d). 8. There is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record, including EA 2002- 452 and the comments received thereon, that the project will have a significant impact upon the environment. 9. EA 2002-452 and the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis. 10. The location and custodian of the record of proceedings relating to this project is the Community Development Department of the City of La Quinta, located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 92253. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2002-452 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the A:\PC RESO EA 2002-452.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Environmental Assessment 2002-452 Adopted September 3, 2002 Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum, on file in the Community Development Department and attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 3`d day of September, 2002, by the following 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 A:\PC RESO EA 2002-452.wpd Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Specific Plan 1998-032, Amendment No. 1, Tentative Tract Map 30651, Quarry Ranch 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Fred Baker, 760-777-7125 4. Project Location: Southeast corner of Cahuilla Park Road and Jefferson Street (extended) APN: 766-050-002, 776-050-008, 766-060-001, 766- 060-002, 766-060-013 through -017 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Winchester Development 1 Quarry Lane La Quinta, CA 92253 6. General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential 7. Zoning: Low Density Residential 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) The proposed Specific Plan Amendment removes a 2.2 acre parcel from the "Retreat at the Quarry" Specific Plan (No. 1998-032). The approved Specific Plan permitted up to 23 residential dwelling units on this 2.2 acres, under the Tourist Commercial land use designation. The proposed amendment is required because the property will now be used as the entry point and open space areas for proposed Tentative Tract Map 30651 (see below). The proposed Tentative Tract Map will divide 74.78 acres into 28 lots for single family residential development, lots for private streets and public roadway dedication, 50.49 acres of golf course area, and 5.01 acres of landscaped and/or drainage area. The residential lots range in size from 13,375 to 42,921 square feet, and will generally occur along the southern, eastern and northern edges of the property. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. P:\FRED\QuarryRanchChklstEA02- 452.wpd North: Bureau of Reclamation dike, Open Space lands South: Vacant desert lands, Low Density Residential lands West: Existing single family residential (The Quarry), Low Density Residential East: Jefferson Street (extended), Open Space lands 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Coachella Valley Water District P:\FRED\QuarryRanchChklstEA02-452.wpd ti 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 u 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. 1-1 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. El Signature Date P:\FRED\QuarryRanchChklstEA02-45 2. 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: a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance P:\FRED\QuarryRanchChklstEA02-452.wpd 4 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 30651) 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) IIL 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) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X X X X �V0 /:1 X X X X P:\FRED\QuarryRanchChklstEA02-452. wpd 5 d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Project Description) 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 Biological Assessment Quarry Ranch," VHBC, Inc., June 2002, Attached -Exhibit "A") 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 Biological Assessment Quarry Ranch," VHBC, Inc., June 2002) 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 Biological Assessment Quarry Ranch," VHBC, Inc., June 2002) 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 Biological Assessment Quarry Ranch," VHBC, Inc., June 2002) e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? ("General Biological Assessment Quarry Ranch," VHBC, Inc., June 2002) 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 Biological Assessment Quarry Ranch," VHBC, Inc., June 2002) 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? ("Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment..." Keith Co., June 2002) 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)?("Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment..." Keith Co., June 2002) X X X X X X X X ':\FRED\QuarryRanchChklstEA02-452.wpd 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? ("Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment..." Keith Co., June 2002) VL 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? ("Geotechnical Investigation..." Sladden Engineering, July 2002) d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? ("Geotechnical Investigation..." Sladden Engineering, July 2002) 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? ("Geotechnical Investigation..." Sladden Engineering, July 2002) 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'? (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) P:\FRED\QuarryRanchChklstEA02-452. wpd 7 X X X X X X X X X X X X 94 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.) 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) VIIL HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Hydrology... and Drainage Concept Study, Tettemer and Assoc., 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? (Hydrology... and Drainage Concept Study, Tettemer and Assoc., 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? (Hydrology... and Drainage Concept Study, Tettemer and Assoc., July 2002) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control? (Hydrology... and Drainage Concept Study, Tettemer and Assoc., 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) P:\FRED\QuarryRanchChklstEA02-452. wpd 8 X X X X X X g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede X or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 6.6) X 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.) X. 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.) XL 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? (General Plan p. 95) 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? (General Plan EIR p. III-144 ff.) 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) XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: ':\FRED\QuarryRanchChklstEA02-452. wpd X M X /:1 X X rd X I:1 X 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) X111. 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.) Xlv. 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.) ':\FRED\QuarryRanchChklstEA02-452. wpd 10 X X X X X X 09 X X X X 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)? (Tentative Tract Map 30651) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Tentative Tract Map 30651) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Tentative Tract Map 30651) g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Tentative Tract Map 30651) XVI. 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 needed9 (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.) XVII. 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? P:\FRED\QuarryRanchChkistEA02-452.wpd 11 X X X X X X X X X X X KI 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? XVIIL EARLIER ANALYSIS. X 04 X 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. No earlier analysis 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 the} address site -specific conditions for the project. See attached Addendum. ;®LJRCES: Oaster Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 2002. Jeneral Plan, City of La Quinta, 2002. :reneral Plan EIR, City of La Quinta, 2002. 3CAQMD CEQA Handbook. --ity of La Quinta Municipal Code Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment..., prepared by the Keith Companies, June, 2002. Gectechnical Investigation..., Prepared by Sladden Engineering, July 2002 P:\FRED\QuarryRanchChklstEA02-452. wpd 12 [ydrology, Hydraulics and Drainage Concept Study..., Prepared by Tettemer and Associates, July 2002 ersonal communication, Patti Schwartz, engineer, Coachella Valley Water District, July and August, 2002 P:\FRED\QuarryRanchChklstEA02-452. wpd 13 Addendum for Environmental Assessment 2002-452 I. a) &c) The proposed project is not located within a General Plan Image Corridor. The site is located at the base of the Coral Reef Mountains, and will not infringe on the mountainside. I. b) The project site is currently vacant. No significant outcroppings or other aesthetic features occur on the site. I. d) The project will generate a minimal amount of light, insofar as the City's dark sky ordinance will be implemented for all lighting plans. These requirements do not allow lighting to spill over to other properties. Furthermore, the project will ultimately result in the construction of only 28 homes, which will not require parking lot lighting or other significant lighting facilities. The potential impacts associated with light and glare are not expected to be significant. 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 Tentative Tract Map will result in the construction of 28 homes, which will generate up to 269 average daily trips'. Based on this trip generation, the proposed project will generate the following pollutants. Running Exhaust Emissions (pounds/day) PM10 PM10 PM10 CO ROC NOx Exhaust Brakes Tires 50 mph 8.34 0.32 1.71 -- 0.04 0.04 Daily Threshold* 550 75 100 150 Based on 269 trips/day and average trip length of 6 miles, using EMFAC7G Model provided by California Air Resources Board. Assumes catalytic light autos at 75°F, year 2005. * Operational thresholds provided by SCAQMD for assistance in determining the significance of a project and the need for an EIR. "Trip Generation, Sixth Edition," Institute of Transportation Engineers, based on single family detached home category. P:\FREMQuarryRanchAdd02-452.wpd 1 The proposed 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, since buiidout will generate only 28 homes. III. c) & d) The construction of the proposed 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 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 contractors of all homes on the site will be required to submit a PM10 Management Plan prior to initiation of any earth moving activity. In addition, the potential impacts associated with PM 10 can be mitigated by the measures below. 1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. 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. 8. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site. P:\FRED\QuarryRanchAdd02-452.wpd 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 PM10 Management Plan 2002, the impacts to air quality from buildout will not be significant. III. e) The construction of 28 homes will not generate any objectionable odors. IV) a)-fl A biological resource analysis was prepared for the proposed project2. The assessment found that although the project occurs in the potential habitat area for several species of concern, the habitat on the project site has been degraded by off -road vehicle use and illegal dumping, and these species are not expected to occur on the site. Impacts to biological resources are not expected to be significant. V. a), b) & d) A Phase I cultural resources survey was completed for the proposed project3. The survey found no historic structure on the site, but did identify a historic trash dump. The survey also identified a prehistoric site, in the form of sherd scatter. The Phase I study made recommendations for mitigation measures which were confirmed by the Historic Preservation Commission, as follows: 1 . An archaeologist shall be present on and off site during all grubbing and earth moving activities. The archaeologist shall be required to submit to the Community Development Department, for review and approval, a written report on all activities on the site prior to occupancy of the first building on the site. 2. A Phase II testing program for the historic and prehistoric sites identified on the project shall be completed and submitted to the City for review and approval prior to recordation of the final map. Z "General Biological Assessment Quarry Ranch," prepared by VHBC, Inc., July 24, 2002. "A Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory for the Quarry Ranch Development," prepared by the Keith Companies, June 12, 2002. P:\FRED\QuarryRanchAdd02-452.wpd 3 VI. a) i), ii) & iv) A geotechnical analysis was completed for the project site 4. The project site lies in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The site is not located within an Alquist Priolo Study Zone. The property, as with the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the event of a major earthquake. Structures on the site will be required to meet the City's and the State's standards for construction, which include Uniform Building Code requirements for seismic zones. These requirement will ensure that impacts from ground shaking are reduced to a less than significant level. VI. b) The site is not located in a blowsand hazard area, and will therefore not be subject to significant soil erosion from wind. The site is subject to flooding erosion, however. The project proponent will be required to secure approval from the Coachella Valley Water District for all flood control plans on the site. These plans will be required to include control of soil erosion. Please also see hydrology discussion below. VI. c)-e) The geotechnical analysis found that the soils on the site are not expansive, and that they will support the development proposed by the project proponent. The geotechnical analysis found that the soils on the site are loose and that caving occurred during borings. The soils on the site will not support foundation designs unless the following mitigation measure is implemented: 1. All building areas shall be watered and recompacted as described in the geotechnical analysis, resulting in 90% relative compaction to a depth of at least 2 feet below the existing grade or 3 feet below pad grade, whichever is deeper. VII. a)-h) The construction of 28 homes on the project site will not expose residents or neighbors to hazards or hazardous materials. The site is not located within an airport land use plan. The site is not located within a wildland fire area. All emergency responses will be implemented in accordance with the City's Emergency Response Plan, in cooperation with the County of Riverside. Vill. a), c), d) & e) The project site is located immediately south of the Bureau of Reclamation Dike No. 2, which is managed by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The site will be responsible for the drainage of on and off site flows tributary to 4 "Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Short Course Development The Quarry...," prepared by Sladden Engineering, July 31, 2002. P:\FRED\QuarryRanchAdd02-452.',vpd 4 Dike No. 2. Siltation and debris were also identified as issues in this area, due to its proximity to the Coral Reef Mountains. The proposed project improvements include an earthen ditch with flood wall at the southwest corner of the property, another along the southern boundary of the site, and a trapezoidal channel within the Jefferson Street right of way. CVWD required the preparation of a hydraulics, hydrology and drainage study for the proposed projects, to address flood control issues on the site. CVWD is still reviewing the materials at this writing, but has indicated that the proposed improvements, with some modifications, will reduce the impacts associated with drainage and flood control on the site to less than significant levels. In order to assure that this is the case, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1. The project proponent shall secure approval of all flood control improvements from the Coachella Valley Water District prior to any earth moving activity at the site. Vill. b) Buildout of the site will result in the construction of 28 homes which will utilize groundwater for domestic and landscaping. The Coachella Valley Water District provides domestic water to the subject property. All units will be required to implement the City's standards for water conserving plumbing fixtures and on - site retention, which both aid in reducing the potential impacts to groundwater. The proposed project will also meet the requirements of the City's water - conserving landscaping ordinance. These standards will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. 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 28 single family homes. X.a) & b) The project site occurs outside the MRZ-2 Zone, and is not expected to contain resources. XI. a) The project site is not located in an area of the City subject to high traffic noise levels. The location of 28 homes on the site will not generate significant noise levels. The impacts associated with noise are not expected to be significant. XI. c) The construction of the project will generate noise from construction 5 "Hydrology, Hydraulics and Drainage Concept Study for Quarry Ranch....," prepared by Tettemer and Associates, July 2002. PAFRED\QuarryRanchAdd02-452.wpd 5 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. XII. a)-c) The project site is currently vacant, and will result in the construction of only 28 residential units. 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 tax which will help offset the costs of added police and fire services. All homes within the tract map 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. XIV. a) & b) The buildout of the tentative tract area will result in an increase in population which will have a need for recreational facilities. The project site will include golf course areas which can be used by the residents for 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. P:\FRED\QuarryRanchAdd02-462.wpd 6 XV. a) & b) The buildout of the proposed project will result in 269 average daily trips. The proposed project falls well within the land use analysed in the General Plan EIR traffic study. The impacts associated with traffic are not expected to be significant. XV. c)-g) The project will not impact air patterns. The design of the map does not create any hazardous design features. The homes will be required to provide parking according to City standards. The map provides for two emergency access points. Alternative transportation in the form of trails will be implemented based on General Plan policies and programs. XVI. a►-f) Utilities are available at the project site. The project developer and individual homeowners 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:\FRED\QuarryRanchAdd02-452.wpd 7 d �.. o � z o H o O ' ° w � H 00 cd O ~ 9 v, o? U o 1� o H z a 't3 rn O O Cd O '3 U O (U a t" �! W � � d H d U� ® eHw z M w ova i U W W �.. o �v o zo °'® N a N cd N y w z � d 0-4 O d A d U W a d® wU W d A U�M �A a� o� �n O bA U U U CD bq O O O U Imo/ U U U U N U ate+ ti v . U 4 U Q»U U Ow V O vi O bq +U+ U 0 a a 0 Cd a a,a a,a ona a w� z� cd A cd cqj W U u U m U A m m Vl N z 75 o o o o d � a U -� U Uyy N cli cd n a N Lo a N 0 0 o� C cc `m a 0 cc LL a F d A U� �A aa, OU V Cd Cd 0 0 w H o 0 ll v En bn � 0 � bn � F � � bn b4 o H A a a w 0 occ zz A A Cd UA UA a3 z to bq o w U Y� CA to O O cd bq -fl o. a a 0 O E'+ �+ o cd a a o . U ca 'o V ,., xCd i 2 to a F d A U� �WAW a U OV 0 F � U � � �n u. G7 a o� F zz Cd to GC z O � � ~ N a� � o a O RS cl � C7 bo 5 oa w Q' A w� WA �AW �U OV H o d G7 F by 0 H O a a o�ti 0 zz ®o A Cd o a¢i U A O 0 0 F � o Cd O x Po ~ 5 lz U lz � o a N LO N O c 0 rn U C (0 Er Li 5 LC LL a W F d A U� �A aU �W Ox UU W F U U U U 04 0. W a � z o 0 0 H cn U U U A A A O� F z4 acc a a a A G A ® O .9 u � � o In 'O U Vi 0-4 N N± a z U yC C7 :=a w IL 01 EXHIBIT A General Biological Assessment Quarry Ranch La Quinta, CA - Martinez Mt. Quad, Section 29 UTM 11: 567334E, 3719637N APN: 766-050-002 SUMMARY FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPT: No signs of rare, threatened or endangered species were observed on the proposed Quarry Ranch project site while protocol surveys for the desert tortoise, bighorn sheep, flat -tailed horned lizard, Palm Springs ground squirrel, Palm Springs pocket mouse and burrowing owl were completed. The site does provide potential habitat for these species in the form of Palo Verde Woodland/Sonoran Desert Scrub and mountainside habitat. This habitat may be used for foraging and shelter by although no signs of the use of the site by these species were observed during the extensive surveys. Development of the project would eliminate 70 acres of lowland habitat and up to 1 acre of mountainside habitat which may be used by these species. Impacts to wildlife corridors are expected to be insignificant. Owner: Quarry Ranch, L.L.C. 41865 Boardwalk, Suite 214 Palm Desert, CA 92211 Survey Period: June 15 - July 21, 2002 Biologists: VHBC, Incorporated 6895 Ironwood Drive Riverside, CA 92506 Report Date 24 July, 2002 Prepared By: Victor M. Horchar, Senior VHBC Biologist Is TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary Introduction Biological Resource Evaluation Survey ]Findings Species -Specific Information . Conclusions Mitigation Literature Reviewed Appendix A: Botanical Resources Appendix B: Wildlife Resources Appendix C: California Natural Diversity Database. Appendix D: County Attachments (E-2, E-3, E-4, E-5, E-6) PAGE 3 4 5 9 10 17 17 18 20 22 24 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A comprehensive assessment of the biological resources on the Quarry Ranch site was completed between June 15, 2002 and July 21, 2002. No signs of rare, threatened or endangered species were observed on the proposed Quarry Ranch project site while protocol surveys for the desert tortoise, bighorn sheep, flat -tailed horned lizard, Palm Springs ground squirrel, Palm Springs pocket mouse and burrowing owl were completed. Development of the project would eliminate 70 acres of lowland habitat and up to 1 acre of mountainside habitat which may be used by these species. Survey timing is a primary limitation to these findings. Annual botanical resources were difficult to identify because they were dessicated, damaged or dead. Botanical surveys conducted during the spring would have resolved the identity of many annual species. Additionally, the air temperature during the first weeks of the surveys was excessive (ranging from 97F to 118 F). Surveys during late June and throughout July were conducted only in the early morning and late afternoon/early evening in order to increase the chances of observing active wildlife resources. 3 1* FIGURE 1 Project Location INTRODUCTION Quarry Ranch, L.L.C. proposes to construct 28 residential lots and a golf course on the proposed project site. The project site is located in southern La Quinta, California (Figure 1). The site includes an abandoned sand and gravel quarry (Figure 2) around which the residential lots are to be constructed. Two additional lots may be constructed on the southwestern portion of the site ("the panhandle" portion of the site). The proposed golf course is planned for the center of the site and the southwestern portion of the site. Because VHBC has extensive experience completing biological surveys in the area for the University of California, California Department of Fish and Game and private developers, Quarry Ranch, L.L.C. contracted VHBC, Incorporated to complete a Biological Assessment of the proposed project site. The goal of Quarry Ranch L.L.C. is to address any biological resource issues that may arise from the development of the project and resolve them prior to development. 6Qth Ave 4 FIGURE 2 Project Site Aerial BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE EVALUATION Prior to conducting surveys of the project site and extensive review of federal, state and local records of biological resources in the vicinity was completed. Data from the California Department of Fish and Game's Natural Diversity Database was obtained for the La Quinta USGS quadrangles. The literature review indict : that the following endangered, threatened or rare species occur in the vicinity and nave the potential to occur on -site: desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii), Deep Canyon snapdragon (Antirrhinum cyanthiferum), glandular ditaxis (Ditaxis clariana), California ditaxis (Ditaxis serrata californica), prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus), Coachella Valley giant sand -treader cricket (Macrobaenetes valgum), slender woolly -heads (Nemacaulis denudata gracilis), flat -tailed horned -lizard (Phrynosoma m 'calld), black -tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura), vermilion flycatcher (Pyrocephalus rubinus), crissal thrasher (Toxostoma crissale), Le Conte's thrasher (Toxostoma lecontei), and the Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard (Uma inornata). The County of Riverside includes the following additional species: bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis), Palm Springs ground 5 squirrel (Spermophilus tereticaudus chlorus), Palm Springs pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris bangsi) , and burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia). In order to determine if the aforementioned species occur on the project site, intensive biological surveys were completed using the 1992 federal survey protocol for desert tortoise surveys. This protocol required a detailed review of the entire site by walking 30-foot wide belt transects that spanned the length of the site (Figure 3). Additionally, the survey protocol required the evaluation of perimeter ("zone of influence") transects situated 100', 300', 600', 1,200' and 2,400' from the edge of the site where possible. The terrain around the site made it difficult to cover the extremely steep areas (Figure 4). FIGURE 3 Survey Transects The lines crossing the project site depict the location of survey transects. The lines outside of the site perimeter depict the location of "zone of influence" transects which were disrupted in several locations by the presence of the Coachella Canal, private property and insurmountable peaks and ridges. Z FIGURE 4 U.S.G.S. Topographic map of the project site and surroundings. The hillsides around the site were so steep that zone of influence surveys were interrupted. AVENUE 28 �y Pit W Oil LSWCahtfil .County Pa s �D 44 00 7 Weather Conditions Surveys were conducted over several weeks from June 15 through July 21, 2002. The weather conditions during the surveys follow and are averages based on three weather readings taken on -site during each survey day between June 15 and June 28. Afterwards, surveys were scheduled for early morning and late afternoon (instead of all day) and the data collected were averaged for both a.m. and p.m. surveys (from July 5 through July 21). Date Air Temperature Precipitation Cloud Cover Wind Speed June 15 34.6 C 0 clear 9.4 mph June 16 28.4 C 0 clear 7.6 mph June 17 31.5 C 0 clear 8.2 mph June 18 36.6 C 0 clear 9.1 mph June 19 37.1 C 0 clear 9.7 mph June 20 29.8 C 0 clear 8.4 mph June 21 34.5 C 0 clear 11.3 mph June 22 33.4 C 0 clear 9.4 mph June 23 36.3 C 0 clear 7.3 mph June 24 35.2 C 0 clear 7.9 mph June 27 37.2 C 0 clear 11.8 mph June 28 34.5 C 0 clear 6.2 mph July 5 23.1 C 0 clear 4.0 mph July 6 23.3 C 0 clear calm July 7 23.9 C 0 clear calm July 8 25.6 C 0 clear calm July 9 24.0 C 0 clear calm July 12 29.4 C 0 clear 4.0 mph July 13 29.0 C 0 clear calm July 14 29.4 C 0 clear 7.0 mph July 15 31.1 C 0 clear calm July 16 29.2 C 0 clear 4.6 mph July 19 28.3 C 0 clear 8.5 mph July 20 24.4 C 0 clear 12 mph July 21 21.7 C 0 clear 6 mph pz SURVEY FINDINGS After surveying a total of 36.7 linear miles of transects no signs of rare, threatened or endangered species were observed. The site includes habitat that is suitable for use by the following species: desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii), glandular ditaxis (Ditaxis clariana), prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus), flat -tailed horned -lizard (Phn,nosoma m'callii), black -tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura), vermilion flycatcher (Pyrocephalus rubinus), crissal thrasher (Toxostoma crissale), Le Conte's thrasher (Toxostoma lecontei), bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis ), Palm Springs ground squirrel (Spermophilus tereticaudus chlorus), Palm Springs pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris bangsi), and burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia). However, none of these species were observed on the project site during these extensive surveys. Plants Approximately 70 acres of the 78 acre site includes a mixture of Palo Verde Woodland and Sonoran Desert Scub (Figure 5 & Figure 6). The perennial botanical species that comprise the habitat on the project site include: blue palo verde (Cercidium jloridum), cat -claw acacia (Acacia greggii), ironwood (Olneya tesota), smoke tree (Psorothamnus spinosus), cheesebush (Hymenoclea salsola), sweetbush (Bebbia juncea), creosote (Larrea tridentata), Spanish needles (Palofoxia arida), saltbush (Atriplex polycarpa), tequilia (Tequilia plicata), desert lavender (Hyptis emoryi), pencil cholla (Opuntia ramocissima) and croton (Croton californica) among others. The annual botanical species included schismus (Schismus barbatus), chia sage (Salvia columbarea), red brome (Bromus rubens), Bermuda grass (Cyanodon dactylon) among others. A complete list of botanical resources is included herein as Appendix A. FIGURE 5 0 FIGURE 6 Animals The wildlife species observed on the project site included the following: desert iguana (Dipsosaurus dorsalis), western whiptail (Cnemidophorus tigris), zebra -tailed lizard (Callisaurus draconoides), side -blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), coachwhip (Masticophis flagellum), red diamondback rattlesnake (Crotalus ruber), glossy snake (Arizona elegans), coyote (Canis latrans), domestic dog (Canis familiaris), beechy ground squirrel (Spermophilus beechyi), stripped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), raven (Corvus corax), house finch (Carpodactus mexicanus), European starling (Sturnus vulgarus), Costa's hummingbird (Calypte costa), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), mockingbird (Mimus polyglottus), and western kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis). A complete list of wildlife resources is included herein as Appendix B. SPECIES SPECIFIC INFORMATION Desert tortoise (Gopherus aaassizii) Although the project site is within the range of the desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) as shown on the CVMSHCP map in Figure 7 below, no signs of this animal were observed on -site. Signs would have included any of the following: a live tortoise, scat, bones, scutes, burrows, tracks, etc. The human use of the site as is shown in Figure 8 wherein vehicle tracks, trails and debris may have eliminated the desert tortoise from the site. 10 FIGURE 7 Desert Tortoise distribution map provided by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). The project site location is noted on the map. FIGURE 8 11 Glandular ditaxis (Ditaxis clariana) This species of plant is known to occur in the La Quinta area. It is normally found in Sonoran Desert Scrub and would be detected during the spring of 2003 if it occurs on the project site. Detailed surveys of the site during this effort yielded only dead and dessicated specimens that could not even be identified as Ditaxis because of their condition. Prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus) This falcon is known to occur in very limited numbers in the Coachella Valley. The project site may be used as a place to forage. Nesting sites are possible, but surveys for nesting prairie falcons would have to be completed during their breeding and nesting season. Flat -tailed horned -lizard (Phrynosoma m 'callii) The common assumption about flat -tailed horned lizard is that it is restricted to aeoline sand deposits similar to those required by the Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard. However, this species of horned lizard has been observed in high abundance near El Centro where aeoline sand deposits are sparse. In 1990 we observed 24 flat -tailed horned lizards on the bombing range in El Centro wherein these animals utilized non-aeoline sand soils and existing rodent burrows for cover. Some of the soils utilized by this species included hard -pan and rocky substrates. The Quarry Ranch project site includes a variety of soil types ranging from coarse loamy sand to hard -pan and rocks. Aeoline sand dunes are not present on -site. Because of this, the surveys for this species were intensified and did not focus on only sandy areas. However, no signs of this species were observed. Black -tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura) This small bird is known to occur in the vicinity of the project site. It usually occurs in desert wash habitat and desert scrub habitat in the Sonoran Desert of Southern California. This species is typically found in winter although observations have been made throughout the year by these surveyors on other sites. Habitat for this species is present on -site although no live black -tailed gnatcatchers were observed during these surveys. Vermilion flycatcher (Pyrocephalus rubinus) The bird is not difficult to identify because of its striking coloration. Although CNDDB records document only one sighting of this species in the Indian Wells area in 1930, this species was observed immediately north of Deep Canyon Research Center in Palm Desert a few months ago by this surveyor. It was observed in Sonoron desert scrub similar to that which is on the project site. Although no signs of this species were observed during these surveys, the project site does include potential habitat for this species. Crissal thrasher (Toxostoma crissale) This species of bird occurs in riparian woodland plant communities such as wet wash areas and the surrounding areas. It has been observed in more xeric conditions while foraging. Recent sightings of this species have not included the La Quinta area although 12 the presence of artificial water sources and riparian areas on golf courses may attract this species. No signs of this bird were observed on the project site and typical habitat for this species is absent from the site. Le Conte's thrasher (Toxostoma lecontei) This species of bird occurs in open desert wash areas which include desert scrub, alkali scrub and/or desert succulent scrub according to the California Department of Fish and Game. This bird has been observed on several occasions in the La Quinta area by this surveyor although it was not observed on the project site. Habitat for this bird is present on -site. Desert Bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis nelsoni) The San Jacinto Mountains and Santa Rosa Mountains are known to be occupied by extremely limited numbers of the desert bighorn sheep. The San Jacinto population includes less than 35 sheep and the Santa Rosa population has no more than 50 bighorn sheep (Figure 9). A group of the Santa Rosa population is known to occur near the La Quinta area. Information on the exact location of the La Quinta population has been suppressed to prevent curious viewers and poachers from impacting them. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and The Bighorn Sheep Institute have the records on the La Quinta population. The project site is immediately adjacent to the eastern edge of bighorn habitat but the site is not within designated "Critical Habitat". Impacts to the lowlands of the project site wherein residential units and the majority of the golf course are planned may remove potential foraging habitat for this species, although heavy human use of the area from existing developments, vehicle use on -site and debris deposition appears to have eliminated their use of the site. FIGURE 9 Range of the desert bighorn sheep SOUTHERN CALW`ORFAA MORN > t SHEEP RANGE Habitat Area rot O�Is catnadellsis I*ftord PROJECT SITE 13 Palm Springs ground squirrel (Spermophilus tereticaudus chlorus) This ground squirrel is known to occur in the immediate vicinity of the project site (Figure 10). Although it was not observed during these surveys there is a chance that this species may utilize the site to forage. The desert scrub present on -site is typical of that which is used commonly by the Palm Springs ground squirrel. The species of ground squirrel observed on the project site is the Beechy ground squirrel (Spermophilus beechyi). FIGURE 10 Palm Springs Ground Squirrel Distribution Map • Known locations Palm Springs Ground Squirrel Distribution Model C' Cities �h An wi i � a i F �PRO.JECT 14 Palm Springs pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris bangsi) Because of the heavy humand impacts to the site (trash deposition, off -road vehicle use) the Palm Springs pocket mouse is not expected to occur within the borders of the proposed development. This species does occur in the La Quinta (Figure 11) according to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments and California Department of Fish and Game. FIGURE 11 Palm Springs Pocket Mouse Distribution • Kni 15 Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) The burrowing owl is the smallest North American owl. It is found typically utilizing ground squirrel burrows, abandoned pipes and abandoned structures for cover. Although no signs of this owl were observed on the project site it is known to occur in low numbers throughout North America and therefore the Coachella Valley (Figure 12). Burrowing owls were observed in the open space north of Avenida 58 northeast of the project site. FIGURE 12 Range of the burrowing owl in North America. 16 CONCLUSIONS Based upon the data collected during this extensive survey, the proposed development of the Quarry Ranch residential and golf course project is not expected to result in significant impacts to any rare, threatened or endangered species. The project will remove approximately 70 acres of potential disturbed and degraded foraging habitat for common species. Impacts to the glandular ditaxis or California ditaxis cannot be quantified at this time because these surveys were contracted during a time when these ditaxis species are dessicated, dead or dying. Habitat for the Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard, Deep Canyon snapdragon and Coachella Valley giant sand -treader cricket are not present on the project site. MITIGATION No mitigation should be required because of the degraded nature of the project site at this time. 17 LITERATURE REVIEWED Bainbridge, David A., Veronique M. Rorive and Robert M. Dixon. 1993. Imprinting to improve native plant establishment in and lands. Prepared for Caltrans, District 1 I as part of the Desert Revegetation Project. Bainbridge, David A. and Ross A. Virginia. 1991. Irrigation for remote sites. Prepared under contract to Caltrans, District 11. 1990. Restoration in the Sonoran Desert of California. Restoration and Management Notes 8(l):3-13. California Department of Fish and Game. 2002. Natural Diversity Database Printout, La Quinta Quadrangle. 5 pp. Coachella Valley Association of Governments. 2001. CVMSHCP Maps. 26 pp. Hickman, James C., Ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: higher plants of California. Univ. of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. 1400 pp. Holland, R.F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game. Horchar, V. 1995. Flat -tailed horned lizard home range on NAS El Centro bombing range. Unpublished report. 29 pp. Horchar, V. 1990. Home range dynamics of the Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard. Unpublished MA thesis. California State University, Fullerton. 72 pp. LSA Associates, Inc. 1993. The Reserve: biological assessment for desert tortoise, Peninsular Ranges bighorn sheep, Coachella Valley milk -vetch and triple -ribbed milk -vetch. Prepared for Bureau of Land Management, Palm Springs/South Coast Resource Area and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District. 1992a. The Reserve at Hidden Valley, evaluation of regulatory jurisdiction. Prepared for the Lowe Development Corporation. Mayhew, W. M. 1988. Vertebrates and their habitats on the Deep Canyon transect. Unpublished Report prepared by Philip L. Boyd Deep Canyon Desert Research Center, Univ. of California Natural Reserve System. 32 pp. Muth, A. and M. Fisher. 1994. Population dynamics of the Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard. Report prepared for the California Department of Fish and Game. 47 pp. Stebbins, R. C. 1985. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Houghton - Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts. 338pp. St. John, T.V. 1988. Soil disturbance and the mineral nutrition of native plants. In J.P. Reiger and B.K. Williams (eds.). Proceedings of the Second Native Plant Revegetation Symposium, San Diego, CA. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1993. Habitat mitigation and monitoring proposal guidelines. Los Angeles District, Regulatory Branch, Los Angeles, CA. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1992. Survey protocol for the Desert Tortoise. 24pp. VHBC, Incorporated. 1999. Biological Assessment of the Seawest Catellus site. 34 pp. VHBC, Incorporated. 2002. Biological Assessment of the Fairway Outdoor Advertising site. 21 pp. VHBC, Incorporated. 2002. Biological Monitoring Report Years 1 - 4: Lowe Development. 137 pp. 19 APPENDIX A FLORAL COMPENDIUM Key Y = yes N=no GYMNOSPERMAE CONE -BEARING PLANTS Ephedraceae Ephedra Family Ephedra aspera Mormon tea Ephedra nevadensis Mormon tea ANGIOSPERMAE Asteraceae Ambrosia dumosa Bebbia juncea Encelia farinosa Hymenoclea salsola Boraginaceae Amsinkia tessellata Cryptantha microantha Cactaceae Ferocactus acanthodes Opuntia bigelovii Opuntia brevifolia Opuntia echinocarpa Opuntia ramossimma Capparaceae Isomeris arborea Chenopodiaceae Atriplex polycarpa Grayia spinosa Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia albomarginata Euphorbia polycarpa Fabaceae Acacia gregii Cercidium jloridum Psorothamnus fremontii DICOTYLEDONES (Dicots Sunflower Family burrowbush sweetbush brittlebush cheesebush OBSERVED? Borage Family fiddleneck small -flower cyptantha Cactus Family California red barrel cactus teddybear cholla beavertail cactus golden cholla pencil cholla Caper Family bladderpod Saltbush Family saltbush hopsage Spurge Family rattlesnake weed sandmat Pea Family cat-calw acacia blue palo verde indigo bush Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 20 ANGIOSPERMAE DICOTYLEDONES (picots) Psorothamnus schottii dalea Psorothamnus spinosus smoke tree Geraniaceae Erodium cicutarium Lamsaceae Marrubium vulgare Salvia columbarae Salvia carduacea Loasaceae Petalonyx thurberi Onograceae Camissonia (boothii ?) Polygonaceae Eriogonum fasciculatum Eriogonum inflatum Eriogonum viridescens Zygophyllaceae Larrea tridentata ANGIOSPERMAE Poaceae Bromus rubens Poa ssp. Schismus barbatus Geranium Family storksbill Mint Family horehound chia sage blue sage Loasa Family sandpaper plant Primrose Family bottlebrush Buckwheat Family California buckwheat desert trumpet angle eriogonum Caltrop Family creosote bush OBSERVED? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y (dead) Y Y Y !! MONOCOTYLEDONES (Monocots) Grass Family red brome Y Poa grass Y (dead) schismus Y 21 APPENDIX B WILDLIFE COMPENDIUM Key E = Expected O = Observed OBSERVED/ REPTILIA REPTILES EXPECTED Colubridae Colubrid Snake Family Masticophis flagellum coachwhip E Gekkonidae Gecko Family Coleonyx variegatus desert banded gecko O Iguanidae Iguanine Lizard Family Callisaurus draconoides zebra -tailed lizard O Crotaphytus insularis collared lizard E Dipsosaurus dorsalis desert iguana O Urosaurus microscutatus small -scaled tree lizard E Uta stansburiana side -blotched lizard O Teiidae Whiptail Lizard Family Cnemidophorus tigris western whiptail lizard O Viperidae Pit Vipers & Rattlesnakes Crotalus ruber red diamondback rattlesnake O AVES BIRDS Cathartidae Vulture Family Cathartes aura turkey vulture O Columbidae Pigeon & Dove Family Zenadia macroura mourning dove O Corvidae Crow & Raven Family Corvus corax raven O Fringillidae Finch Family Carpodactus mexicanus house finch O Laniidae Shrike Family Lanius ludovicianus loggerhead shrike O 22 MAMMALIA Canidae Canis domesticus Canis latrans Heteromyidae Dipodomys merriami Leporidae Lepus californicus Sciuridae Spermophilus beechyi OBSERVED/ MAMMALS EXPECTED? Dog, Wolf & Fox Family domestic dog O coyote O Kangaroo Rat Family Merriam's kangaroo rat E Rabbit & Hare Family Black -tailed jackrabbit O Squirrel Family CA Ground squirrel O 23 APPENDIX C CALIFORNIA NATURAL DIVERSITY DATABASE PRINTOUT (Follows this page.) 24 z z m En w O w 3 Q x H 5 a w w d by woo E oa Fo v1 W Fq OWO WH Q W 04 Ena H QW p1E 'xm O q0 A �t1 E O a F+ m a 0 REwOz.tl cw� E. Ix W 0 �7 rt Enu w C9Qz�OHFx0 EwilH wH O W� W Q�Q aFW Q^agJ Z£V .7FV [Q� 0 O03z 0fpz VAN OtoQ�3z'J '+ O F W :4 lid z UNQuw4uo W a U 0w U wz H W Q Au Of40 En En Ef) EO a aFv D W q 7a 9 wHW0 A £ x tpa�G7 A+� 0 v s°W A wZOWQ f-O I c.4�3cp W rW17 .opp7 O�tU m0Q> U arz,> .H7a FmQazQa > q C q C C q G q C C ro ro to to to ro ro to ro to X X k 41 X % k % % % X w W W W w W W W w W u 'O R7 'O C v E v E v E v E v E v E v v E E v E v E W m 5 to m 7 7 7 7 C v S+ v 4+ v H m v 1+ m v Sr m v lE m v Sr m m v v N fE to v 34 m v H a a a a a a a a a a a m u N N 1C 1i ro A w 0 UI 0 m 0 1 0 �N .r x x N .i 0 0 LA 0 Ul 0 u -.+ r m o, m r T eo m � m X ao n1 m m r m r m z z En W s sQE F WaW W En Q Q zD zQ �UcoQaµ0En O 3 W WEn Aw0 xm QQ Li uQ@ u Q@ z z z q 3 L - - - wa{a{r�77a4" qzH pQH zIx Wa A ro O U FE>EFEh�zQ O tV) x En 0H: a EU EnE» 0W EnVaa w f En !lCy1cn to L Hzz a X En izi m W En .,14w � N as o b x z 4 'E 7.. 4 N Q z w a� q H M o H a -wZxja s4 0 U 7Qymm A o > c9 wy70 ro 01.. F 0W0 w C W E a� a z as maN a Gw haca z 0 7Qy v 0 0 .2 zo En EnU 0U wa oQ Am w V o., z W ouw EmA 0 a En En E. to to u o to v u 4) En v rn v C u ro v C ro O v C v C v C u m O z C w O z O z O z m 0 u ro 31 p N x v N 0 0 ri C/ N ro N rn C m d v C (a O W C v C W C 0 Gl O C O O O V w z w z z z C� ov x + v H � tmi m vv E Oz H w H A A rE O to q Q -4 a�i z o F F 0 O 44 wQ (a V H Ewa Q Q Q O 4 tzA C9 pVy Q .Q N 0 7 rz ro E o •ad a zoEn 'yy QO U W Cl)W Opp .ia QA �%y1 z�H+ V M E- H H 01-4 W L ca rt O W H Aa V) Qo a A� r ° or aOsO N OZEO o 0 oQ w wQcn 3 0 4 m W F V • C« O w FF O3.w-l0zz • OOHaa Q a m C Ha £ W E a (n W O'O µ7 C « C O'OW Old w as W aH Q HHQ0 O •.i m in W W a W .] z 3:.4 .4 i •.i Gl H C u m F O ro m > H C F O •.i m > +4 W u m H C u m ro m E O tt m 3 $ 014 �" W Q W £ qq y� 1% EU. W +� u Q W OQF m a H•.i E W v1L F� H HM mai E WH•.� E W Lr S� yr W w W W Q (,y 3OOH 1 4 Cq Q..7Z W 00 m �+ rnw w w aQrn �, zrooa W a zrooazrooa w uulu �, aW a ao HH £2 aoa HHH £2£ �CFEz F WuM cn Q (o�ffp EumEo Ouw i-]•'�1 m QuQw t Quow m« m ° W .-� Qa nj •.[i .7 •.C/ NH vHHa z9a5H b ro ro m ro rt m y m w W w w w W w •o w W i+ L A ro •O V 10 ro C m E E E E E E E E m m •+ m : m :3 a a :j m �4 m L O X W I./ m H m N $+ m N F4 m m N m it H m Y/ N Aim X m }� a a w a a a a a a a w a m ,j X o .oi o x x Q O O O O x O O O X O m aJ in o o m r r a m m in m to o m r •.� w m m .� m .. m , x x m H m .. m .1 m m H H aaP°o a� w2Q -°o co WEam''cnaC zvi4£aw `a�qo Quo U f0En nygy0 i w z�a✓viwam z99 U) x ov°iuui Q> o v°,uuiO o£cn ww m E �E-+ H F N zzc4i Q ro ., z to° aka W w k rwi oq Paz L A wz xH Fv�W> E WWm -a z�W W H OIn EW -O+ HFW cavil to xF •W+ x Ai zw oo°� goHH£a wQ� C , 2144 wQH.4 aq a�a°�iw us w w u m H o a m x� a H W zx� WUQ Q F O W M M El a[7. En H F aaa zAwx>v O Nzaa a uom�ou mU)cn A El) aoo m 0 m u m u a m u � ro m Ll n p1 G! 41 +� CO) O z O z O z O z v v a m m AAj ro v ro(d 1 U) ji W F N o ro o ro m \ it C7 G C C O \ zo a" o a _ ov Q m y ami u 01b z o > r. v Q Q u� i� w a q m ro z a a �u o 0 a FFFFq c 7 a F E ❑z O Q Oz,a4r•� a0° Q UHH u a UQ V cn3 •w]a E F W a ~ z W G co o w•� W �E7 W W Z HH O oPC W x a V a b 0 u (pa�� �, gP: U O W i> �a7 .ZJ p, W O qH z Q w o w Q (n N O N 3 41 J J ro m L W aJ W 7 7 m m v a v a x �+ x o X x Ln x x m + a w Azz 0 w ww w a�°ap�w w O U W Q £ vJ Q Nx °w Hg�a a �'Qa .pAH" awN13� col F .7 ^� W w F Q H Q rJ:aH WHF❑Z❑H ca Q rn pp Ha OW H X UwQS 0w V)3 v C 0 z y 0 U 0 w W O 3 N ry ao a7 m a u� a In to 3�J ul 0pa 3 a ao Q° +F�CU 7d a a x H Q ! z z W o v z 9 a a a Q Q r H i V H H H H co r 0 r.q C C r:00, to m to ro ro ro ro ro K X X X k X X X W W w W W W W W 0 0 E E E w w w m m m m m obi m m ci m a a a a a a a O N H H m b .•1 O O H N 'i K x M u1 an u1 N m x x 0 0 0 0 1+ o X x m V. v O N ON x x +m m M H x x m m m m m m x m vi w acaw� � a waQ Q w En `n wco i o 06 'za W co Q CD a�14 w a a a 3 Ha' E m q h E F W V) w a E W a z W 1H-1 y a w w" D O pppz z QOx,QH7��F �w.p� Q�Q1W1 pwC0� W U w(�QgzQQ OWzQF UH Ha H H H -vJ Hz H m m�G cc�� w>+Q.1U",�' OHS F W a 0 H m W EE a a a a a m w z A z (� " Q w £ H z F a HHaac� 2 w 4 w W E H QwPap; (IH F E a a as�p Q W W W Ecnxa ED F W H H z H w rj w W W� w W (�] W co a m W ^fn a to cn a uJ In H (n a (n OJ a u £ a > w w 8 a a -- z Q C'� H a o w o w H a a En a a w a w w o a Q m Q 0 w a Q V a w r O z w 0 z0 w 0 z W W 0 En x F 00 z a E Fy Z 0 U Qa O w x F a > Q M' s F z 5, 0 z�aca > z v a� rn 00 F..3F, aro WZ. m Qz FO w-0 U F0 Ow F .H qFF £aioz W Q3 �W OF W U3 u AJ Ln -0r7 Z W wF O Car+3 3QUQS W L U ro u aJ x x w � w u ro E E m m m 4 a 41 W x W a w a X N aJ o o ro m x n O o x 0 m ao >C m +� ID x a, m H ro L A ro x ro L 1 .-1 i p ro x ro N w C 41 C9 m 7 L ro W w 01 1J ro 1J w m iJ 4J w N O O -4 N ro s. � v y V o w v W o R Old G! m aJ H to N 'O O .t O w to u41 .n z v 0M 0 u L N O O > E �> It o E. m u a� w44 z (� o c0 o 41 qrz ♦J 0 0 vu, a Attachment E-2 APPENDIX D RIVERSIDE COUNTY ATTACHMENTS FOR BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE REPORTS Information Summary Item A Report Date: 24 July, 2004 Survey Period: June 15 — July 21, 2002 Item B Report Title: General Biological Assessment Quarry Ranch Item C Project Site Location: La Quinta, Riverside County, CA Martinez Mt. Quadrangle Section 29 UTM 11: 567334E, 3719637N Item D APN: 766-050-002 Item E Owner/Applicant: Mr. John Shaw, Quarry Ranch, L.L.C./Dave Dawson, TKC 41865 Boardwalk, Suite 214 Palm Desert, CA 92211 (760) 346-9844 (Quarry Ranch) (760) 250-9426 (TKC) Item F Principal Investigator: Victor Horchar, VHBC Incorporated Senior Biologist 6895 Ironwood Drive Riverside, CA 92506 (909) 789-1015 Item G Report Summary: No signs of rare, threatened or endangered species were observed on the proposed Quarry Ranch project site. The site does provide potential degraded foraging habitat in the form of Palo Verde Woodland/Sonoran Desert Scrub. Impacts to wildlife corridors are expected to be insignificant. Item H Name and Phone Number of Person Preparing Report: Victor Horchar (909) 789-1015 25 Attachment E-3 BIOLOGICAL REPORT SUMMARY SHEET (Must be attached to biological report) Applicant Name: yl * RRy 12owc-a , i., i-, c. Assessor's Parcel Number(s) (APN): 26 . b Srj ArP ee�i..� 1►'1 ax-ria r Z M-r, 0m,4aP_aHc-LF Site Location: Section: 2 9 Township: Range: Site Address: La Qji jTR . CA Related Case Num:ber(s):, PDJ11,Number: Check ITEM(S) Habitat Assessment Check ITEM(S) * Focused Survey SPECIES or HABITAT OF CONCERN (Circle whether a potential for significant impact to species or resource exists **) Arroyo Southwestern Toad Yes No Drainages/Waters of U.S. Yes No ✓ Coachella Valley Fringed -Toed Lizard Yes 000 Coastal California Gnatcatcher Yes No Coastal Sage Scrub Yes No Delhi Sands Flower -Loving Fly Yes No Desert Pupfish Yes No Desert Slender Salamander Yes No Desert Tortoise Yes o 1' Flat -Tailed Homed Lizard Yes o Least Bell's Vireo Yes No Oak Woodlands Yes No Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Yes No Riverside Fairy Shrimp Yes No Santa Ana River Woolystar Yes No San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Yes No V Slender Horned Spineflower Yes o StephensKangaroo Rat Yes No rVemal Pools Yes No Check ITEM(S) Habitat Assessment Check ITEM(S) * Focused Survey SPECIES or HABITAT OF CONCERN (Circle whether a potential for significant impact to species or resource exists **) Wetlands Yes No Riparian Habitat Yes No ✓/ Burrowing Owl Yes No Bighorn Sheep Yes o Red -legged Frog Yes No Other: .# Yes o Other: M c NSF. Yes Other: Yes No Other: Yes No IOther: Yes No * Focused Survey: a) Survey on a listed species performed per USFWS or CDFG protocol by licensed individual (i.e., CaGn, SKR, QCB), OR b) For non -listed spp., survey performed per protocol recognized by USFWS or CDFG, or other applicable agency (i.e., Burrowing Owl), OR c) For jurisdictional waters, wetlands, & riparian areas, following protocol of U.S.Army Corp of Engineers. ** Species of concern are any unique, rare, endangered, or threatened species; species used to delineate wetlands and riparian corridors; and any hosts, perching, or food plants used by any animals listed as rare, endangered, threatened or candidate species by either State or Federal regulations, or those tracked by the California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base (NDDB). I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided on this summary sheet is in accordance with the information provided in the biological report. / and Title V l y ZV , 200,2- Date Report Prepared 10(a) Permit Number (if applicable) I0(a) Permit Expiration Date Attachment E-3 Page 2 of 2 E-3.2 766-050-002 LPN *: LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE CHECKLIST FOR BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (Must he attached to report) Riverside County Case No.*: Vildlife & Vegetation Potentially Less than Significant Less than No Significant with Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact (Check the level of impact that applies to the following questions) QJCt r r yft� C L, LL C- Attachment E-4 (� QJiJ. EA Number: a) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state conservation plan? • 0 b) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any endangered, or threatened species, as listed in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (Sections 670.2 or 670.5) or in Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations (Sections 17.11 or 17.12)? V c) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Wildlife Service? OLoss of degraded foraging habit d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? • • • / . ) e) Have a substantial adverse effect 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 U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? • a f) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act or Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 0 g) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? O h) Create any impact which is individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects as defined in Section 15130 (14 Calif. Code of Regs). • • O • Loss of degraded foraging habit Required E-4.1 Attachment E4 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE CHECKLIST FOR BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Findings of Fact: Seventy (70) acres of Sonoran Desert Scrub/Palo Verde Woodland mix will be eliminated. Less than one (1) acre of rocky mountainside habitat will be eliminated. No rare, threatened or endangered species were observed on -site or are expected to be impacted significantly by this project. Loss of potential degraded foraging habitat will result. Impacts to this potential foraging habitat is not considered significant to these species. Proposed Mitigation: None Monitoring Recommended: None lk�Prepared By: `w Received by: Date: 212.'i/L County Use Only Related Case #: Date: Jun 10 02 10:59a rlrl VA" 0-i 001%1' U o CL w 0;( U) (L CC I (3 z The Keith Companies 760 346 9366 P.2 4 14N -in 7Yi Liv k It VIA 'S ., _ p wP w. 3, 1 j,r _ � _. I - �ro i { �_X wf:1 i � �<. � � �, t ���'�3 � � -' .� r � -� � i . � t �- -r.� � = °' � d � � s T �,.S.,wv.,r+wl� � �L, ''�� ' �"� �,;-fit ���� �' w �.� �� �..=,t. "� * � ��� act �� ar ��w . �� f � t �. ,�• �'" ` ..,+ � )i. +�1 4 CC�. '" �.. � - � . �. � _ t4 � w'"" %1 ti -� �..,.�' � s3 a I -^� .r8 � � max. _ � �, � } �3 S .'p ♦ t � jqj( ' � .... .. 'asr �`�b;7 p�� .xyy�: .. F �. .�. i", Mc =r g .. I .. ,♦♦ '4.; -. �. �� F � +� ..a-. 1 � , Looking West E-65 Imaae01 Looking West -Southwest r6 E- b j Looking South Imaoe03 View From NE Corner to the SE IMgnP.O9 NE Corner to the SSW ImanP1 n View From NE Corner to West IrnanP11 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC PLAN 98-032, AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO REMOVE PLANNING AREA NO. 3 CASE NO. SPECIFIC PLAN 98-032, AMENDMENT NO. 1 WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 3RD day of September, 2002, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Winchester Development to remove Planning Area No. 3 from Specific Plan 98-542 (The Quarry Retreat Specific Plan) generally located west of Jefferson Street alignment, south of Quarry Lane, more particularly described as: APN'S: 766-050-002, 766-050-008, 766-060-001, 766-060-002, 766-060-013, 766-060-014, 766-060-014, 766-060-015, 766-060-016 WHEREAS, said Specific Plan has complied with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (as amended), pursuant to the adoption of Resolution 83-68 by the City Council, in that the Community Development Director has conducted an Initial Study (EA 2000-395), and determined that the Specific Plan will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is recommended; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said Specific Plan: 1. That the proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan in that the property is designated Low Density Residential which permits the uses proposed for the property. 2. That the proposed Specific Plan will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting land uses and circulation will require Planning Commission and City Council review and approval of future development plans, which will ensure adequate conditions of approval. 2. That the Specific Plan is compatible with the existing and anticipated area development in that the project, as conditioned, provides adequate circulation. A:\PC.RESO SP 98-032. Amd No.l.wpd t Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Specific Plan 98-032, Amendment No. 1 Winchester Development Adopted September 3, 2002 2. That the proposed Specific Plan is conceptual; further review will be required under a Site Development Permit review process at which time project related conditions will be attached to mitigate impacts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend adoption of Environmental Assessment 2000- 395, a Mitigated Negative Declaration, indicating that the proposed Specific Plan will not result in any significant environmental impacts as mitigated by the recommended Conditions of Approval; 3. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described Specific Plan request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the adopted Conditions of Approval under City Council Resolution 98-97. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 3rd day of September, 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RICHARD BUTLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development City of La Quinta, California A:\PC.RESO SP 98-032. Amd No.l.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT 30651 TO ALLOW A 28 LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND SUBDIVISION AND MISCELLANEOUS COMMON AND GOLF COURSE LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 74.78 ACRES CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 30651 APPLICANT: WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 3RD day of September, 2002, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing and recommended approval to the City Council, to subdivide a 74.78 acre site into 28 single family lots and other common and golf course lots, generally located west of Jefferson Street alignment, south of Quarry Lane, more particularly described as: APN'S: 766-050-002, 766-050-008, 766-060-001, 766-060-002, 766-060-013, 766-060-014, 766-060-014, 766-060-015, 766-060-016 WHEREAS, said Tentative Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that an Environmental Assessment was completed for this project. WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify said Tentative Tract Map 30651: A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan. The project is a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions of the 2002 General Plan Update. Tentative Tract 30651 is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with the General Plan, and mitigation measures pursuant to Environmental Assessment 2002-452. The density and design standards for the tract will comply with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta Genera9 Plan and the Subdivision Ordinance. AAPC RESO TT30651.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Tentative Tract Map 30651 Winchester Development Adopted September 3, 2002 All streets and improvements in the project conform to City standards contained in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as designed. All on - site streets will be private. Access for the single family lots will be provided from an internal loop street planned under Tentative Tract Map. C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife, or their habitat. The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed land division. Therefore, this project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures will be implemented. D. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on City, State, and Federal requirements. E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support necessary infrastructure improvements. F. The design of the lot, or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems in that the Fire Marshall, Sheriff's Department, and the City's Building and Safety Department have reviewed the proposal for public health conditions and the project is conditioned as appropriate. G. The design of the lot, or type of improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision in that the proposed internal streets will be privately owned and maintained, and that there will be no publicly - owned improvements within the Tentative Tract Map. A:\PC RESO TT30651.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Tentative Tract Map 30651 Winchester Development Adopted September 3, 2002 WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map, the Planning Commission has considered the effect of the contemplated action on housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of La Quinta and its environs with available fiscal and environmental resources; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council of Tentative Tract Map 30651 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this the 3`d day of September, 2002 by the following 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 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 30651 - WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 3, 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 • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvements plans for City approval. P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 1 � 4. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES storm water 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 (Definitions), LQMC): 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. 5) Non -Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. E. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading, pursuant to this project. F. The approved SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. 5. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). PROPERTY RIGHTS 6. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 2 7. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map all public street right-of- ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 8. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Jefferson Street is a Secondary Arterial, 4 lanes undivided with no parking, that requires 88' of right of way. Based on the approved Jefferson Street alignment, the applicant shall dedicate all right of way as needed located within the tract boundary. 2) Cahuilla Park Road: The applicant shall acquire road easement 74 foot wide right of way, on behalf of The City for the extension of the road segment that connects to the approved Jefferson Street alignment. 9. Prior to recording a new map, the Home Owner's Association shall consent to the realignment of Quarry Lane. 10 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. 1 1. 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 tentative map. 11 Quarry Lane : The right of way width is 24 foot wide to accommodate two travel lanes with a width of not less than 23 feet, with on -street parking restricted on both sides, provided that the applicant makes provisions for ongoing enforcement of the restrictions. 2) Quarry Ranch Road: The right of way is 36 foot wide to accommodate two travel lanes with a width not less than 35 feet, with on -street parking restricted to one side provided there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors, and the applicant makes provisions for ongoing enforcement of the restrictions. P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 3 3) CUL DE SACS The cull de sac shall be according to the tentative map with a 38-foot curb radius or larger at the bulb measured at the gutter flow line. 12. Right-of-way geometry for property line corner cut -backs at curb returns shall conform to Riverside County Standard Drawings #805, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 13. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes and other features contained in the approved construction plans. 14. 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. 15. 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 AID. 16. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of- ways as follows: A. Jefferson Street (Secondary Arterial) is 10 feet from the R/W. B. Cahuilla Park Road (Collector) is 10 feet from the R/W. The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall design is approved, but the Applicant may provide a wider setback if desired. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, open space purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on the Final Map. 17. 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. P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 4 18. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. 19. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Tentative Tract Map and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer FINAL MAPS 20. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a standard AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD program. Where a Final Map was not produced in an AutoCAD format, or produced in a file that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept a raster -image file of such Final Map. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 21. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC. 22. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless 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 B. Perimeter Landscape Plan: 1 " = 20' Horizontal 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 ` P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 5 ) Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans and Signing & Striping Plans shall show all existing improvements for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions. "Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. "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. "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. The "Site Utility" plan shall have signature blocks for the Building Official and the City Engineer. 23. 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. 24. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order to reflect the as -built conditions. Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 25. Prior to the conditional approval of any Final Map, or the issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall construct all on -site and off -site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured and executed P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 6 -' Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City. 26. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of guaranteeing the completion of any improvements related to this Tentative Tract Map, shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC. 27. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include the removal of any existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the proposed improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monumentation. 28. Depending on the timing of the development of this Tentative Tract Map, and the status of the off -site improvements at the time, the applicant may be required to: (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. 29. 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 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. P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 7 Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant's detailed cost estimates. Security will not be required for telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V. improvements. 30. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development, or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 31. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 32. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 33. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer 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, Erosion Control Plan, and BMP's. All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the Final Map that a soils report has been prepared in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit. 34. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 8 35. 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. 36. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot from the building pads in adjacent developments. 37. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining properties and the lots within this development. Building pad elevations on contiguous interior lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots that do not share a common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 38. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 39. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 40. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through underground piping and/or retention facilities) from any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. 41. 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. P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 9 42. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 43. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 44. Storm water handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report for Quarry Ranch, LLC. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved manner." UTILITIES 45. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.1 10 (Utilities), LQMC. 46. 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. 47. 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. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 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. 48. Realignment of Quarry Lane shall join Cahuilla Park Road at right angle or at a minimum skew of 600 angle at centerline intersection. 49. 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 buildings) on the lot. 50. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 10 A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1. Jefferson Street - Secondary Arterial; 88' R/W Shall bond for all improvements located on the west side of the arterial core boundary along the frontage of the tract boundary. 2. Cahuilla Park Road - Collector, 74' R/W a. Street improvement from the intersection at Quarry Lane and stubbed out to 50' east. b. Curb and gutter shall be constructed 26 feet from street centerline. C. Six foot wide meandering sidewalk. d. Landscaping behind the curb. The remaining off -site improvements from the stub -out to Jefferson Street's alignment shall be bonded. 3. Storm Drain Facilities - Fair share for the construction of a portion of the storm drain facilities shall be bonded. B. ON -SITE PRIVATE STREETS 1. Lots A, B, and C : Construct full improvements within the 36-foot right-of-way, which shall be divided into two 17.5-foot traveled ways. 2. Lots D and E: Construct full improvements within the 24-foot right-of- way, which shall be divided into two 1 1.5-foot traveled ways. Lot D shall join Cahuilla Park Road at right angle or a minimum skew of 60' angle at centerline intersection. 3. PRIVATE CUL DE SACS Shall be constructed according to the tentative map with not less than 38- foot curb radius or larger at the bulb measured at the gutter flow line. 51. All gated entries shall provide for a two -car minium stacking capacity for inbound traffic; and shall provide for a full turn -around outlet for non -entry accepted vehicles. Where a gated entry is proposed, the applicant shall submit a detailed exhibit at a scale of 1 " = 10', demonstrating that those passenger vehicles that do not gain entry into the development can safely make a "U" Turn back out onto Cahuilla Park Road from the gated entry. P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 1 1 Two lanes of traffic shall be provided on the entry side of each gated entry, one lane shall be dedicated for residents, and one lane for visitors. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, 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. 52. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: Residential 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b Collector 4.0" a.c./5.00" c.a.b. Secondary Arterial 4.0" a.c./6.00" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 53. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Primary Entry at Cahuilla Park Road : Full turn movement. 54. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians, street name signs and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 55. 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. 56. Corner cut -backs shall conform to Riverside County Standard Drawings #805, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 57. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements. CONSTRUCTION 58. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and 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 P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 12' developments are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPING 59. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC. 60. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. 61. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 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. 62. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. QUALITY ASSURANCE 63. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 64. 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. 65. 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. P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 13 66. 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 67. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 68. 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 69. 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. FIRE MARSHALL 70. Approved standard hydrants, located at each intersection and spaced 330 feet apart with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPM for a 2-hour duration at 20 PSI. 71. 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. 72. Gate entrances shall be at least two feet wider than the width of the travel lanes, serving that gate. Any gate providing access from a road to a driveway shall be located at least 35 feet setback from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 40-foot turning radius shall be used. 73. Gates shall be equipped with a rapid entry system (KNOX). 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. Contact the Fire Department for an application. P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 14 74. Provide to the Fire Department, 2 sets of water plans for plan check prior to recordation. 75. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior tp any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. 76. Secondary access must be provided as the street exceeds 1,320 feet. The proposed 20 foot easement is approved but must be recorded on the final map. The emergency access road must be capable of supporting a live load of 60,000 lbs. Over two axels and have a vertical clearance of not less than 13.5 feet clear and unobstructed. SHERIFF DEPARTMENT 77. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall review plans with the Sheriff's Department regarding addressing, lighting, landscaping, fencing, parking, line of sight, and other law enforcement and public safety concerns. All questions regarding the Sheriff Department should be directed to the Senior Deputy at (760) 863-8950. P:\FRED\PC COA TT 30651.wpd 15 ATTACHMENT #' z 0 0 3 oz z � o LA QUINTA u- W AVE PGAWEST LAKE CAHUILIA� AVE QUARRY PROJECT/ I AVE 62 LOCATION l N PROJECT LOCATION MAP z Y Q ATTACHMENT #� n co / UJ P Z ON N / I U /Z�o,00, w IV) p O m D U N `(j Q � o o 0 z z 'b W z a I \ w O a U g \ \ $ o Q hN Z w fn 0 UX, CD c"J w I Ii. I I I ui Via _ 7 C 7 U m 'p R9 C � O Q m tm .+ C � p �O cu I ATTACHMENT A THE QUARRY A T L A 0 U d N 4 1, June 26, 2002 Stephanie Powers Quarry Homeowners Association 41865 Boardwalk #214 Palm Desert, CA 92211 Jerry Herman Community Development Department Director City of La Quinta Planning Commission P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253-1504 Dear Mr. Herman, The Board of Directors of the Quarry Homeowners Association has unanimously voted to support the Quarry Ranch project. We believe that the new project will only serve to enhance our community. We respectfully request that you approve this application. Sincerely, Step e Powers Manager Quarry Homeowners Association 9 —; June 30, 2002 William & Lois Morrow 9660 Easy Street Hayden Lake, ID 83835 Jerry Herman Community Development Department Director City of La Quinta Planning Commission P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253-1504 Dear Mr. Herman, As you know, the Quarry is currently in the process of developing an additional 70 acres immediately south of the existing homes and golf course. In addition to being a principal in the new development, I am also a homeowner with property across the street from the new project. am writing this letter to demonstrate that my enthusiasm for the project is not solely because of my financial interest in it, but also because I believe that it will be a positive addition to the Quarry community and the City of La Quinta as a whole. It is my opinion that the new project will serve to enhance the property of homeowners like myself. meowner, I respectfull erove the new project. As Ttio CC Very truly yours, Jack & Melody McDonald 1098 Vernier Place Stanford, CA 94305 July 1, 2002 Jerry Herman Community Development Department Director City of La Quinta Planning Commission P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253-1504 Dear Mr. Herman, Please consider our request that you approve the proposed Quarry Ranch project as soon as possible. We own a home directly across the street from the new project, and after reviewing the plans, we think that the new project would be a great addition to the City of La Quinta and the Quarry. Thank you for considering this request. Sincerely, Henry & Janne Burdick 101 Audubon Halley, ID 83333 June 29, 2002 Jerry Herman Community Development Department Director City of La Quinta Planning Commission P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253-1504 Dear Mr. Herman, I am writing in support of the new development project at the Quarry. I have been a homeowner at the Quarry for almost 10 years, and it is important to me that the new project fit in with the current community, as my home is directly across the street from it. My wife and I have reviewed the plans for the new project, and I am confident that it will be a positive addition to the Quarry and the City of La Quinta. Thank you for taking the time to consider this request. Very truly yours, Douglas M. Weitman Ellen L. Weitman 3727 Serra Road Malibu, California 90265 310-456-6884 FAX 310-456-3407 July 8, 2002 Jerry Herman Community Development Department Director City of La Quinta Planning Commission P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253-1504 Dear Mr. Herman, This letter is being written to urge you to approve the new Quarry Ranch project. Our home is across the street from the project and we have already seen the plans. We believe that the Quarry Ranch would enhance the setting of the existing homes, the golf course, and the City as a whole. Thanks for considering this request. Very truly yours Dou eitman rl ' Ellen Weitman _J J June 29, 2002 Curt & Gerry Pindler 264 W. Stafford Rd. Thousand Oaks, CA 91361 Jerry Herman Community Development Department Director City of La Quinta Planning Commossion P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253-1504 Re: Quarry Ranch project Dear Mr. Herman, We own a home at the Quarry that adjoins the new proposed development. We have reviewed all of the plans and have no objections or problems with the new project. On the contrary, we believe that the new project would be an enhancement to the Quarry and the City of La Quinta. Thank you. Sincerely, PH #F STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-043, AMENDMENT NO. 2 SIGN PROGRAM 2002-629 REQUEST: 1) APPROVAL OF THE DELETION OF SIGN PROGRAM PROVISIONS FROM THE SPECIFIC PLAN FOR POINT HAPPY COMMERCIAL CENTER 2) APPROVAL OF A SIGN PROGRAM FOR POINT HAPPY COMMERCIAL CENTER LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND WASHINGTON STREET APPLICANT: MADISON/ P.T.M. LA QUINTA, L. L. C. REPRESENTATIVE: RICK WILKERSON, MADISON/ P.T.M. LA QUINTA, L. L. C PROPERTY MANAGER: MADISON/ P.T.M. LA QUINTA, L. L. C. ZONING: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH: COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE - (CC) COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL SOUTH: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) EAST: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL WEST: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) WiTemU2110r4not The project site, located at the northwest corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Washington Street, consists of 7.834 acres. The project is bounded by the Whitewater Stormwater Channel on the north, Washington Street on the east, Highway 1 1 1 on the south, a restaurant on the west. .111 • ] • • The request is for approval to amend the "Point Happy Specific Plan", (Attachment No. 2) by removing the sign program provisions from the Specific Plan and approving a "stand alone" Planned Sign Program for the Commercial Center under the Zoning Code (Section 9.160.090 D). This will allow future planned sign program adjustments, requested by future tenets and the property manager, to be reviewed by the Planning Commission as a business item, thus not requiring a Specific Plan Amendment which necessitates a public hearing by the Planning Commission and the City Council. A list of allowed signs remains in the Specific Plan including a neon tubing letter as an addition to the currently approved Specific Plan Sign Program. Also requested to be added to the Sign Program are company logos in a variety of forms. 2. Planned Sign Program The proposed Sign Program (Attachment No. 2) allows each business to have a wall sign within their store front width compatible with exterior building colors, material, and finishes. Signs will be required to have individual illuminated letters with a channel letter, a reverse channel, letter, and/or neon tubing. Freestanding pads will be required to use letter sizes of 18" to a maximum of 24" in one line of copy and "In - line shops" will be required to use letter sizes of 9" to a maximum of 16" in one line of copy. If double line copy is necessary for "In -line shops" and freestanding pads the total height is not to exceed 25" or 10" character/letter height, double line. Sign lengths are not to exceed 80% of the leasehold business frontage width and/or 50 square feet. Non -illuminated awning and canopy signs will be allowed with limitations on locations and size. The proposed Sign Program also includes temporary signage which is consistent with Zoning Code requirements, and includes provisions stricter than Code requirements. Individual building signs are proposed to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (EA 2000-395) was certified by the City Council for "Point Happy Specific Plan" (SP 2000-043) under Resolution No. 2000-47 on May 16, 2000. 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. The project was sent out for comment to City Departments and affected public agencies on July 12, 2002, requesting comments returned by August 2, 2002. This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper and posted on August 24, 2002. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice. All findings can be made that the project is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan and Zoning Code. There are no issues. 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_, recommending approval of Pont Happy Specific Plan 2000-043, Amendment No. 2; and, 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending approval of the Point Happy Planned Sign Program 2002-629. ATTACHMENTS 1 . Point Happy Specific Plan, Amendment No. 2 2. Point Happy Planned Sign Program Prepared by: Fred Baker, Principal 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 THE DELETION OF SIGN PROGRAM PROVISIONS FROM THE SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THE COMMERCIAL CENTER AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND HIGHWAY 111 CASE NO. SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-043, AMENDMENT NO. 2 MADISON/P.T.M. LA QUINTA, L. L C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 3rd day of September, 2002, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider deleting provisions of the Specific Plan relating to building signs. The project area is located at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street, more particularly described as: PARCEL MAP 29736 WHEREAS, said Specific Plan 2000-043 has complied with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (as amended), pursuant to the adoption of Resolution 83-68 by the City Council. The Community Development Director has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (EA 2000- 395) was certified by the City Council for "Point Happy Specific Plan" (SP 2000-043) under Resolution No. 2000-47 on May 16, 2000 and an Environmental Addendum was certified on by the City Council for "Point Happy Specific Plan" (SP 2000-043, Amendment No. 1) under Resolution No. 2002-58 on April 16, 2002, and that 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. WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said Specific Plan: 1. That the proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan in that the property is designated Community Commercial which allows the uses proposed for the property. 2. That the proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting changes will require Planning Commission review and approval of future signs, which will ensure adequate review. A:\PC RESO SP 2000-043, Amd. No.2.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Specific Plan 2000-043, Amendment No. 2 Madison/P.M.T. La Quinta, L. L C. Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described Specific Plan Amendment request 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 3'd day of September, 2002, by the following 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 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-043, AMENDMENT NO. 2 SEPTEMBER 3, 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 permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Caltrans • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site. 3. This development shall be subject to the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of permit approval. A:\PC COA SP 2000-043, AMD. No. 2 .wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 2000-043, Amendment No. 2 September 3, 2002 PROPERTY RIGHTS 4. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. 5. The applicant may be required by Caltrans to furnish additional Highway 1 1 1 right of way to accommodate the proposed bus turnout and dedicated right -turn -in lane. If so, the right of way shall be deeded to the City in fee simple. 6. If the applicant cannot obtain permission from CVWD for location of the bikepath (required below) within the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall grant an easement across the north end of this property for that purpose. 7. The applicant shall dedicate or deed cross -access easements to all private lots or parcels existing or created on this property. The easements shall cover all parking and circulation areas and routes within the development. 8. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as follows: A. Highway 1 1 1 - 50 feet. B. Washington Street - 20 feet. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall dedicate blanket easements for those purposes. 9. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures. 10. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets from all frontage except access points described herein. 11. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur. 12. Prior to placement of any privately -owned buildings or other costly structures in the City's drainage easement along Washington Street, the applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit for that purpose. The permit will require that in the event the City finds it necessary to construct, reconstruct or maintain facilities therein, the applicant shall indemnify the City from expenses exceeding those which would have been incurred with hardscape or landscaping. A:\PC COA SP 2000-043, AMD. No. 2 .wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 2000-043, Amendment No. 2 September 3, 2002 IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 13. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and 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. "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. 14. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 15. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans for any public street improvements 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. A:\PC COA SP 2000-043, AMD. No. 2 .wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 2000-043, Amendment No. 2 September 3, 2002 IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 16. 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 after the date of approval of the original conditions of approval for this property, 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. 17. 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 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. 18. 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. 19. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (e.g., Site Development Permits), off -site improvements and common improvements A:\PC COA SP 2000-043, AMD. No. 2 .wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 2000-043, Amendment No. 2 September 3, 2002 (e.g., access drives, traffic signal improvements & perimeter landscaping) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first phase unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 20. 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 21. 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. 22. 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. 22. 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. 23. 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 and wind control measures soil stabilizing binders approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 24. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each pad, the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. A:\PC COA SP 2000-043, AMD. No. 2 .wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 2000-043, Amendment No. 2 September 3, 2002 DRAINAGE 25. 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&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. 26. If the applicant does not discharge stormwater to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, stormwater shall be retained on -site and disposed of in facilities approved by the City Engineer. 27. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in facilities approved by the City Engineer. UTILITIES 28. 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. 29. 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. 30. 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. A:\PC COA SP 2000-043, AMD. No. 2 .wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 2000-043, Amendment No. 2 September 3, 2002 STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 31. 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 AND BIKEPATH 1) Highway 1 1 1 - Complete construction of north side of the street. Construct eight -foot sidewalk/bikepath. Modify traffic signal, median, traffic signs, and traffic markings at the west access drive to accommodate a fourth leg on the intersection. 2) Washington Street (Major Arterial) - Construct eight -foot sidewalk/bike path. Modify traffic signal, median, traffic signs, and traffic markings at the north access drive to accommodate a fourth leg on the intersection. If a hotel use is selected as described in Alternative Use #2, the a applicant shall construct a right turn lane for south bound traffic from Washington Street onto Highway 111, including necessary modifications to the existing traffic signal, curbs and gutters, traffic signs and traffic markings. The design of the right turn lane shall be subject to Caltrans and the City Engineer's approval. Additional right of way may be required to accommodate the approved right turn lane design and shall be dedicated to the City and the State as necessary. 3) Bike path- Pay pro-rata share of Bike Path adjacent to project site. Prorate share shall not exceed $30 per lineal foot of 8-foot wide PCC bike path. 32. 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). 33. 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. A:\PC COA SP 2000-043, AMD. No. 2 .wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 2000-043, Amendment No. 2 September 3, 2002 34. 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" 35. 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. 36. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Highway 111 1) Full -access drive at existing traffic signal at the southwest corner of this property. 2) Right-in/Right-out drive centered approximately 435 feet east of the centerline of the westerly drive. B. Washington Street 1) Full -access drive at existing traffic signal at the northeast corner of this property. 37. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in landscape setbacks and in on - site areas as designated in the landscape plan for this Specific Plan. 38. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. A:1PC COA SP 2000-043, AMD. No. 2 .wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 2000-043, Amendment No. 2 September 3, 2002 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. 39. 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. PUBLIC SERVICES 40. The applicant shall provide an improved bus turnout with a City approved Bus Shelter design on Highway 111 as required by Sunline Transit and approved by the City Engineer and Community Development Director. The applicant shall provide an improved bus turnout with a City approved Bus Shelter design on Washington Street between the Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel and Washington Street, if needed by Sunline Transit and approved by the City Engineer and Community Development Director. The applicant shall install electric power connection to provide electricity to bus shelter on Highway 111. The electric power may be connected to an existing circuit owned by the City if there is one conveniently available in the vicinity, or at applicant's expense request IID to install a new electric meter to power the circuit. The City will accept the electric meter and power circuit when completed. QUALITY ASSURANCE 41. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 42. 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. 43. 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 A:\PC COA SP 2000-043, AMD. No. 2 .wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 2000-043, Amendment No. 2 September 3, 2002 evidence that construction materials and methods comply with plans, specifications and applicable regulations. 44. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all improvements constructed within City or Caltrans' right of way. 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 45. 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 46. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. FIRE MARSHAL 48. All water mains and fire hydrants providing required fire flows shall be constructed in accordance with the appropriate sections of the water district, subject to the approval by the Riverside County Fire Department. 49. Automatic fire sprinklers providing required fire flows shall be constructed in accordance with La Quinta City Ordinance 8.08.090. 50. All interior fire apparatus access roads shall be a minimum of 20 feet unobstructed width and ab unobstructed vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches. Any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of any building shall be located within 150 feet from apparatus access as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. A:\PC COA SP 2000-043, AMD. No. 2 .wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 2000-043, Amendment No. 2 September 3, 2002 51. Prior to issuance of a Site Development Permit , the final Conditions of Approval shall be incorporated in the Final Specific Plan document. Applicant shall work with staff to correct internal document inconsistencies prior to final publication of five copies of the Specific Plan document. 52. Prohibit Date Palms trees in high use activity locations including pedestrian corridors and courtyards. 53. Allow a street name change to "Point Happy Drive" on the east side of the property on Washington Street into the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center; a street name change to "Point Happy Drive" at the signal on Highway 1 1 1 at the south driveway into the property shall be allowed only after obtaining the express written permission (and presented to the City) from the La Quinta Plaza Shopping Center owners (the shopping center on the south side of Highway 1 1 1. 54. Within 90 days, applicant shall complete the approved revised bus shelter design plan for the Highway 1 1 1 bus shelter that is limited to additional sidewalk paving behind the shelter for transit user access, a landscaping plan (consistent with the Highway 111 Design Guidelines) that includes at least three additional shade trees and boulders appropriately placed for safety, and a color sample that matches the buildings in the Point Happy commercial center to be used to re -paint the bus shelter. A:\PC COA SP 2000-043, AMD. No. 2 .wpd 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 PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE COMMERCIAL CENTER AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND HIGHWAY 111 CASE NO. SIGN PROGRAM 2002-629 MADISON/P.T.M. LA QUINTA, L. L C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 3rd day of September, 2002, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider a Planned Sign Program for Point Happy Commercial Center. The project area is located at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street, more particularly described as: PARCEL MAP 29736 WHEREAS, said Specific Plan 2000-043 has complied with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (as amended), pursuant to the adoption of Resolution 83-68 by the City Council. The Community Development Director has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (EA 2000- 395) was certified by the City Council for "Point Happy Specific Plan" (SP 2000-043) under Resolution No. 2000-47 on May 16, 2000 and an Environmental Addendum was certified on by the City Council for "Point Happy Specific Plan" (SP 2000-043, Amendment No. 1) under Resolution No. 2002-58 on April 16, 2002, and that 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. WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said Sign Program: 1. That the proposed Sign Program is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan in that the property is designated Community Commercial which allows the uses and associated signs proposed for the properties. AAPC RESO Sign Program 2002-629.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Sign Program 2002-629 Madison/P.M.T. La Quinta, L. L C. Adopted September 3, 2002 Page 2 2. That the proposed Sign Program is consistent with the La Quinta Zoning Code (Section 9.160.090) in that the property is designated Community Commercial with more than three planned signs for proposed for the properties. 3. That the proposed Sign Program is consistent with the La Quinta Zoning Code (Section 9.160.090 E) in that sign adjustments for additional area, additional number, alternative placements, and alternative sign types can be granted by the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described Sign Program request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 3`d day of September, 2002, by the following 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 A:1PC RESO Sign Program 2002-629.wpd