Loading...
1998 02 24 PC-r 3 � Qum& OF�v PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California February 24, 1998 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 98-006 Beginning Minute Motion 98-004 I. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call II. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the Minutes for February 10, 1998 B. Department Report PC/AGENDA V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A I:1 A Item ...................... VILLAGE ON THE GREEN - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-349, SPECIFIC PLAN 97-031, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-055, TENTATIVE TRACT 28601, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97- 618 Applicant ............... Catellus Residential Group/La Quinta Redevelopment Agency Location ................ Northwest corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 48 Request ................. Approval and recommendation to the City Council for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract, and Site Development Permit for a 26 acre, 86 family residential lot subdivision, and 118 senior apartments with recreational amenities on 10 acres. Reduction of several street widths from the General Plan required 36-feet to 28- and 32-feet. The project is affordable from very low through moderate income levels. Action .................. Request to continue Item ..................... TRACT 28470, AMENDMENT #1 Applicant .............. Tradition Club Associates c/o Winchester Development Company Location ............... Southeast corner of the intersection of 5T' Avenue and Avenida Bermudas Request ................ Approval and recommendation to the City Council for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and revision of Tentative Tract 28470 Condition #79 reducing the 335-foot wide 17-foot maximum building height restriction corridor to a 150-foot wide corridor east of the ultimate right of way of Avenida Bermudas. Action .................. Resolution 98- Resolution 98- Item .................... GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-057 AND ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 97-057 Applicant .............. City of La Quinta Location ............... City-wide Request ................ Approval and recommendation to the City Council for certification of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact to amend Chapter 9.140 - Hillside Conservation Regulations, and the Land Use Element and Environmental Conservation Element of the La Quinta General Plan regarding Hillside Development Density Action .................. Resolution 98- , Resolution 98- , and Resolution 98- PC/AGENDA VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Item ..................... PRESENTATION ON THE DRAFT CULTURAL PLAN Applicant .............. Cultural Commission Location ............... City-wide Request ................ Review and comment Action .................. No action required B. Item .................... SIGN APPLICATION 98-415 Applicant ............. Royal Sign Company for The William Warren Group Location .............. 46-600 Adams Street, north of Highway 111 Request ............... Approval of a planned sign program including monument and wall signs for a self storage facility (Storage USA) Action ................. Minute Motion 98- VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Determination of a date for a joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting. B. Commission report on the City Council meetings of February 3 & 17, 1998. IX. ADJOURNMENT PC/AGENDA MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California February 10, 1998 I. CALL TO ORDER 2:30 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 2:30 P.M. by Chairman Butler who asked Commissioner Abels to lead the flag salute B. Chairman Butler requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Gardner, Kirk, Tyler, Woodard, and Chairman Abels. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Woodard to excuse Commissioner Seaton. Unanimously approved. C. Staff Present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA - A. Staff noted that the evening portion of the Planning Commission meeting had been canceled as the Business Items that had been agendized had been canceled. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to confirm the agenda as noted. Unanimously approved. III. PUBLIC COMMENT: None IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Chairman Butler asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of January 27, 1998. Commissioner Tyler asked the minutes be corrected as follows: Page 4, Item A.2. "...any changes to the allowable sign sizes..."; Pages 6 and 8, change the street vacation case numbers to reflect the year as "98-". There being no other changes, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Abels. Unanimously approved. B. Department Report: None PC2-10-98 I Planning Commission Meeting February 10, 1998 V. TOUR OF THE HILLSIDE: A. Chairman Butler recessed the Commission at 2:37 p.m. to attend a tour of the Hillside prepared by staff. B. Tour Notes: 1. St. Francis of Assisi Church. Subject: Add or remove blowsand adjacent to the hillside? a Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained the issue at this site was to determine where the toe of slope began. Two potential scenarios existed to determine the toe of slope: push the sand up or pull the sand away. The desire would be to make the site level at the highest elevation. b. Commissioner Woodard briefed the Commission on the project being planned by the La Quinta Arts Foundation and St. Francis of Assisi Church for this site. C. Discussion followed as where the toe of slope began. If the blowsand were removed, what would be found? Staff noted the question was to determine where the natural grade and hillside come together. Need to determine where the wind blown material begins versus where the actual toe of the slope starts. d. Questions were raised as to whether the purpose of retaining the hillsides was for the aesthetics, environmental, or functional purposes. 2. Avenida Montezuma. Subject: Should a alluvial fan/boulder field, having a slope gradient less than 20%, be allowed to be developed? a. Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained that this was an example of a slope consisting of a boulder field/alluvial fan having a 10% grade. Should the boulders be removed to allow building to occur? b. Discussion followed regarding where the actual toe of slope occurred. PC2-10-98 2 Planning Commission Meeting February 10, 1998 C. Questions were raised regarding removal of the boulders and what would be found; what would be the natural toe of slope? Whether the issues were aesthetics or environmental. Would the allowable building height of 17-feet block the view of the hillside from the adjacent residents? How, and whether access could be obtained across the wash to allow construction to occur. Mr. Meyer's Property -south of The Quarry. Subject: Should the property owner be allowed to build a road to gain access to construct homes on a boulder field? Should locations above the toe of slope, with a slope gradient less than the 15% or 20%, be allowed to be developed? If yes, then access to the area would most likely require passage through the hillside areas. a. Senior Engineer Steve Speer noted the issue at this site was whether to allow the property owner to construct a road across the ridge to build homesites on a boulder field which has a slope of less than 20%? b. Questions were raised by the Commissioners as to where, and whether or not, a road for access could be built. If the road didn't exceed the 20% grade, why shouldn't it be allowed to be built? Why not use the road that already exists within The Quarry development? C. Staff defined where Mr. Meyer's property began and where Mr. Green's property extended to. 4. Mr. Green's Property: Subject: Should the property owner be allowed to cut away from the toe of the ridge at the first site; should the property owner be allowed to cut away from the toe of the ridge at the second site; how far into the canyon can development occur; if a plateau exists and the access does not exceed a slope of 20%, is it buildable; how wide does a canyon need to be for development to occur? How far from the toe of slope can development occur? a. Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained there were three areas of concern. At one site the toe of slope again was hard to determine due to boulder fields and blowsand materials; the width at the mouth of the canyon; and determining whether or not development could occur on the plateau, and if so, should a road be allowed. Distinctions were noted regarding the obvious color changes in the rock material and vegetation. PC2-10-98 3 Planning Commission Meeting February 10, 1998 b. Discussion followed regarding where the 10%-20% grade occurred. What areas appeared to be hillside and which were created by blowsand material and how they were distinguishable. C. Questions raised were whether magnitude could be used to determine if a site was hillside or blowsand material. If the top of the hillside was flat, does that make it buildable, or is it still hillside? Whether the economics of constructing a road would prevent building on the hillside even if it did not exceed the 20% grade. How stormwater issues could be resolved in the canyon areas. 5. All sites brought up the question as to where the 20% grade occurred, whether the property owner could move sand to create the toe of slope or remove it to establish where the toe of slope started. The question was asked if a geological definition could be made to assist with the definition of where the toe of slope started. 6. Commissioners and staff returned to City Hall at 4:54 p.m. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None. VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Presentation on the Draft Cultural Plan; a presentation by the Chairman of the Cultural Commission on the Draft Plan. 1. Community Development Director Jerry Herman informed the Commission this item would be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 24, 1998. No action was taken by the Commission. B. Continued - Sign Application 97-410; a request of Wells Fargo (Quality Project Coordinating) for approval of a modification to the approved sign program to replace a bank mini -branch sign located on the south elevation of the Albertson's Supermarket. 1. Community Development Director Jerry Herman informed the Commission a letter had been received from the applicant requesting this item be tabled until further notice. PC2-10-98 4 Planning Commission Meeting February 10, 1998 2. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to table Sign Application 97-410 till further notice. Unanimously approved. VIII. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS. None IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a meeting of February 24, 1998. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 5:12 P.M. on February 10, 1998. PC2-10-98 5 PH #A MEMO RAND UM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: FEBRUARY 24, 1998 SUBJECT: REQUEST TO CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING Attached is a letter from Catellus Residential Group requesting a continuance of their Specific Plan and accompanying applications, to allow them time to resolve the issue of street widths. Staff is therefore, recommending this item be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of March 24, 1998. 0 CATELLUS FACSIMILE (760) 77"1-7101 February 19", 1998 Ms. Christi Di Iorio, Planning Manager City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, Ca 92253 Re: Notice of Public Hearing on February 24', 1998 Dear Ms. Di Iorio: Catellus Residential Group (CRG) in conjunction with the City of La Quinta( Redevelopment Agency has submitted applications for the approval of Village on the Green Specific Plan (97-031), Tentative Tract 28601, Site Development Permit (97-618), and General Plan Amendment 97-055. The issue of public versus private streets, and the width of the streets, is currently in the review process with the City and Catellus. CRG anticipates a final determination on the matter in early March, and requests a continuance of the public hearing to a time in mid to late March. If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, CAT ELLUS RESIDENTIAL CROUP John C. O'BAen Project Manager C-ATELLUS RE$IDENT IAL GROUP 5 PAikK PL.I,ZA, St:iTE 4CC, IRVItiE, CAL(F)C,,NIA 92614 (714) 251-610C FAX (714) 2i1-8837 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: FEBRUARY 24,1998 CASE NO: TRACT 28470 AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: TRADITION CLUB ASSOCIATES C/O WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT CO., LLC LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF 52ND AVENUE AND AVENIDA BERMUDAS REQUEST: REVISE CONDITION NO. 79 TO REDUCE THE 335-FOOT WIDE 17-FOOT MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT RESTRICTION CORRIDOR TO A 150 FOOT WIDE CORRIDOR EAST OF THE ULTIMATE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF AVENIDA BERMUDAS BACKGROUND: On April 1, 1997, the City Council approved Tentative Tract 28470 for the Tradition project. The final Conditions of Approval include No. 79, which restricts maximum building heights to 17 feet within a 335-foot wide corridor from the ultimate right-of-way line on Avenida Bermudas, east into the Tradition project. There are a total of 37 residential lots within the corridor. The City Council Minutes of the April 1, 1997 meeting are included as Attachment 1, along with the original Conditions of Approval (Res. 97-28). The applicant submitted a request (Attachment 2) to decrease the width of the height restriction corridor from 335 feet to 150 feet. The purpose of this request is to permit owners of lots paralleling Avenida Bermudas to design and build their custom homes with higher and varied roof lines within the Tradition Club. The applicant is requesting that beyond the 150 foot corridor, east of the right-of- way line, building heights be permitted to extend up to 24 feet. The project's RL Zoning District permits up to 28 feet for building heights. The applicant, per their CC&R's, has restricted the building height to 24-feet. DISCUSSION: The purpose for the height restriction condition was the concern that the mountain view would be blocked by a 24-foot high house, therefore, a 17-foot height restriction with a 335-foot wide corridor was approved. The distance of 335 feet was chosen because it is the furthest distance to the rear of a lot parallel to Avenida Bermudas. Environmental Assessment Staff prepared Environmental Assessment 98-354, to assess the environmental impacts of this request to decrease the height restriction corridor width. The environmental analysis determined the only potential impacts to be considered is Aesthetics. It also concludes that reducing the distance from 335 feet to 150 feet for the 17-foot height restriction will not have an adverse view impact on the mountains for those homes paralleling Avenida Bermudas. The applicant submitted cross -sections, line of sight studies (Attachment 3) at three locations (Lots 86, 182, and 218) along Avenida Bermudas to illustrate how the view impacts will be limited. The line of sight studies were used to assess the potential aesthetic impacts. Staff recommends a certification of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for this request as the incremental increase in aesthetic impacts is not significant. Analysis of Request The first line of sight study prepared for Lot 86, located near the northern corner of the Tradition Club development, begins on the west side of Avenida Bermudas in what would be the view from a front window of a house in the Cove Subdivision. The view to the east toward the Coral Reef Mountains take ones eye over the Tradition Club perimeter wall and on to the mountainside. If the Tradition Club were to develop using the Zoning designation for the Cove Subdivision (RC), this view would consist of 17-foot high houses with 20-foot front setbacks along the east side of Avenida Bermudas. However, the Tradition Club has graded pad locations at least 100 feet from Avenida Bermudas. As a result of the reduction of the height restricted corridor width shown in the study, illustrates that there is essentially the same line of sight to the mountains as a housing having an RC zoning designation. This is attributed to the increased distance differential showing that a 24-foot high house beyond 150-feet from Avenida Bermudas is proportional to a 17-foot high house, 20-feet from Avenida Bermudas. The second line of sight study is from Lot 182, located roughly midway along the Tradition Club project. This study also begins from the west side of Avenida Bermudas with a view eastward to the Coral Reef Mountains. Here again, the Tradition Club has house pads located at least 100 feet east of Avenida Bermudas. Within the 17-foot height 150-foot restriction corridor the study shows that there would be very little difference in the visual impact of the mountains with a 24-foot house because of the distance differential created by the 150-foot setback. The third line of sight study is from Lot 218, located near the southern corner of the Tradition Club development. This study shows that the pad elevations within the Tradition Club are approximately 10 feet lower than the pad elevation for houses directly across Avenida Bermudas in the Cove Subdivision. This difference in pad elevation, and the distance differential will prevent any significant visual impact to the Coral Reef Mountains with either a 17-foot, or 24-foot high house. To illustrate these assessments, the applicant will install poles at the 17- and 24-foot heights on Lots 86, 182, and 218, which will remain up until Tuesday. Tradition Design Guidelines The Design Guidelines for the Tradition project state that "the design of a residence must conform to the existing grades and allowable height elevations of the lot. Recognizing that the residence may have several levels, the elevation of the highest point of the roof structure must not exceed 24 feet for all lots as measured from approved pad elevation. The maximum amount of roofing that can project between 18 and 24 feet above approved pad elevation is 35%. All other elements must stay below an 18 foot height limit. Chimneys and other projections required by building codes will be examined on a case by case basis by the Tradition Design Review Committee. The City of La Quinta will review all construction plans prior to issuance of a building permit for compliance with City zoning and building codes. The applicant has submitted a narrative describing their design criteria and theory (Attachment 4). The residential setbacks for the Tradition project are 25 feet in front and 12 foot minimum on each side, which will provide a minimum of 24 feet between houses allowing for view corridors between structures. Public Notice Public Notice of the request was given via a mailing to the property owners within a 500-foot radius of the Tradition project, and a legal advertisement published on January 26, and February 10, 1998, in the Desert Sun newspaper. Public Comments The Community Development Department has received two letters as of February 19, 1998, regarding the request. These letters are included in Attachment 5. Agency Comments The Fire Marshal's response to the request does not contain any opposition or different requirements for the project. RECOMMENDATION: Move to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98- certifying Environmental Assessment 98- 354. Move to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98- approving the request to change Condition 79 for Tract 28470 to decrease the 335 foot wide 17-foot height restriction corridor to 150 foot east of the ultimate right of way of Avenida Bermudas. Attachments: 1. City Council Minutes, April 1, 1997 2. Letter of Request 3. Exhibits A, B, C (bluelines and photographs) 4. Narrative Comment letters Prepared by: ""/' ? - I , Z. -" t " ( Leslie Mouriq#and Associate Planner Submitted by: Christine di lorio Planning Manager ORIGINAL CONDITION Resolution 97-028 Tentative Tract 28470 April 1, 1997 72. Any minor changes in lot mix, sizes, lines, or shapes, or street alignments, shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to any final map approvals for recordation. 73. Prior to recordation of final map, hillside conservation easements on Lots 27, 28, 29 and 30 shall be dedicated to the City for all areas located inside the Hillside Conservation District. The same shall be done for -Lots 233, 234, and 235. 74. Prior to recordation of the final map, a Hillside Conservation Easement shall be dedicated to the City for all the remainder area, Lot 250, within the Hillside Conservation Overlay District or other options contained in Zoning -Code Section 9.140.40. N. 75. Class If bike lanes shall be installed on the east side of Avenida Bermudas adjacent to the tract and on both sides of 52nd Avenue between Washington Street and Avenida Bermudas. *76. The maximum pad elevation measured at the center of the building pads within 175 feet of Avenida Bermudas shall be: a) no more than one (1) foot higher than the top of the east curb on Avenida Bermudas, or b) no higher than the existing elevation at said location prior to December 1, 1996, whichever is higher. 77. The existing light pole and luminaire located at the 52nd Avenue/Washington Street intersection shall be removed when the traffic signal is installed. 78. The triangular island in the 52nd Avenue/Washington Street intersection shall belandscaped. /79.For a distance of 335 .feet east of the ultimate right-of-way of Avenida Bermudas, .single family residences shall be restricted to a maximum of 17 feet in height, excluding any roof projections (chimneys, etc.) which are subject to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, for Lots 85 - 94, 177 - 189, and 209 219. WALLS FENCING SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING CoaTMd 23 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-354 FOR TRACT MAP 28470, AMENDMENT #1 - LOCATED SOUTH OF 52ND AVENUE AND EAST OF AVENIDA BERMUDAS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-354 TRADITION CLUB ASSOCIATES, LLC WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 24th day of February, 1998, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing as requested by the Tradition Club Associates, LLC, on the Environmental Analysis for Tract 28470 Amendment 1, generally located at the southern terminus of Washington Street and east of Avenida Bermudas, more particularly described as follows: A PORTION OF SECTIONS 6 AND 7, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, said Amended Environmental Assessment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended, Resolution 83-63, in that the Community Development Director has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 98-354) and has determined that although the proposed tract amendment could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case because appropriate mitigation measures were made conditions of approval for Environmental Assessment 98-354, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, held on February 24, 1998, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make findings to justify the recommendation for certification of said Amended Environmental Assessment; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, said Amended Environmental Assessment was recommended for certification based on said findings and subject to certain mitigation measures; and, P:\I,ESI,IE\pc Res EA 98-354.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 98- WHEREAS, the La Quinta Planning Commission on February 24, 1998, did find the following facts to justify recommending certification of said Amended Environmental Assessment: 1. The condition change of proposed Tract 28470 is consistent with the Low Density Residential land use goals and objectives of the La Quinta General Plan, in that the proposed amendment is in keeping with Goal 2-1 to develop low density residential areas with generous areas of open space. 2. The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed change to the width of the 17-foot height corridor as contained in Condition 79 of the Tentative Tract 28470 Conditions of Approval. 3. Tract 28470 Amendment 1 is consistent with the development standards of the Municipal Zoning and Land Division Ordinance, as the portion of the project site affected by the amendment is zoned R-L (Low Density Residential), which permits a maximum height of 28 feet for structures. 4. The design of Tract 28470 Amendment 1 will not cause adverse environmental impacts to cultural resources as these resources have already been mitigated for this project. 5. Proposed Tract 28470 is not likely to cause public health problems as the project has been reviewed by the Fire Department and the Building & Safety Department for those specific issues. 6. The design of Tract 28470 Amendment 1 will not conflict with existing public easements, as the project has been designed around, and with consideration for, these easements. 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 in this case; 2. That it does hereby concur with the environmental determination and recommend certification of Environmental Assessment 98-354 Amendment 1 for the proposed Tract 28470 Amendment 1. P:\I.I:SI.IE\pc Res EA 98-354.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 98- PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 24th day of February 1998, 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:\LESLIE\pc Res EA 98-354.wpd ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Environmental Assessment No. 98-354 Case No.:TRACT 28470 Date:1/22/98 AMENDMENT #1 I. Name of Proponent: Tradition Club Associates, LLC Address: Agency Requiring Checklist: City of La Quinta Project Name (if applicable): Tradition - Tract 28470 - Amendment #1 CITY OF LA QUINTA Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 II. 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" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning Transportation/Circulation Public Services Population and Housing Biological Resources Utilities Earth Resources Energy and Mineral Resources Aesthetics Water Risk of Upset and Human Health Cultural Resources Air Quality Noise Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance M. DETERMINATION. On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A 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 significant effects) on the environment, but at least, 1) one effect 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, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potential significant unless mitigated". AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. Signature�l� Printed Name and Title: For: � L P:ILESLIE\EC98-354. WPD X r. 3.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a)Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source #(s): 3.2 3.3 b)Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c)Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? d)Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a Iow-income or minority community)? POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a)Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? b)Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension or major infrastructure)? c)Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? EARTH AND GEOLOGY. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a)Fault rupture? b)Seismic ground shaking c)Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? d)Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? e)Landslides or mudflows? f)Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill? g)Subsidence of the land? h)Expansive soils? i)Unique geologic or physical features? Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 91 X X R. M M X X X X X X X X X X PALESLIETC 98-354. WPI) -iii- t k { Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No impact Mitigated Impact Impact 3.4 Water. Would the project result in: a)Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or X the rate and amount of surface runoff? b)Exposure of people or property to water related X hazards such as flooding? c)Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of X surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? d)changes in the amount of surface water in any X water body? e)changes in currents or the course or direction of X water movements? f)change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? X g)Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? X h)Impacts to groundwater quality? X 3.5 AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a)Violate any air quality standard to contribute to an existing or projected air quality violations? X b)Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? X c)Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? X d)Create objectionable odors? X 3.6 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the project result in: a)Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? X b)Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible X uses (e.g. farm equipment)? PALESLIETC98-354. M -iv- Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact c)Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? X d)Insufficient parking capacity on site or offsite? X e)Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? X f)Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? X g)Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? X 3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project result in impacts to: a)Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? X b)Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? X c)Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? X d)Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? X e)Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? X 3.8 ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a)Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X b)Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? X 3.9 RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEALTH. Would the proposal involve: a)A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? X b)Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X c)The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? X PALESLIETC98-354. WI'll -v- 3.10 3.11 3.12 3.13 d)Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? e)Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a)Increases in existing noise levels? b)Exposure of people to severe noise levels? PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a)Fire protection? b)Police protection? c)Schools? d)Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? e)Other governmental services? UTILITIES. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems, or s-uhstantial alterations to the following utilities: a)Power or natural gas? b)Communications systems? c)Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? d)Sewer or septic tanks? e)Storm water drainage f)Solid waste disposal? AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a)Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? b)Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? c)Create light or glare? P ALE S LIE\EC 9 8-3 54. wPD -vi- Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant IInless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X X X X 1.1 .1 X X X X X X X X X 3.14 3.15 3.16 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal. a)Disturb paleontological resources? X b)Disturb archaeological resources? X c)Affect historical resources? X d)Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X e)Restrict existing religious of sacred uses within the potential impact area? X RECREATION. Would the proposal: a)Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? X b)Affect existing recreational opportunities? X MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a)Does the project have the Potential to degrade the quality of the environmental, 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? X b)Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? X 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 projects, and the effects of probable further projects). X d)Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X PALESLIETC 98-354. I'D -vll- EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a)Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b)Impacts adequately address. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed by the earlier document. c)Mitigation measures. For effects that are "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless mitigated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. PALESLIETC98-354MI'D -V111- INITIAL STUDY - ADDENDUM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-354 Tradition Project: Tract Map 28470 - Amendment 1 Applicant: Tradition Club Associates, LLC 78-150 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Prepared by: City of La Quinta Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Leslie Mouriquand, Associate Planner January 22, 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1 INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 Project Overview 3 1.2 Purpose of Initial Study 3 1.3 Background of Environmental Review 4 1.4 Summary of Preliminary Environmental Review 4 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4 2.1 Project Location and Environmental Setting 4 2.2 Physical Characteristics 5 2.3 Operational Characteristics 5 2.4 Objectives 5 2.5 Discretionary Actions 5 2.6 Related Projects 5 3 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 6 3.1 Land Use and Planning 6 3.2 Population and Housing 8 3.3 Earth Resources 10 3.4 Water 13 3.5 Air Quality 17 3.6 Transportation/Circulation 19 3.7 Biological Resources 22 3.8 Energy and Mineral Resources 24 3.9 Risk of Upset/Human Health 25 3.10 Noise 27 3.11 Public Services 28 3.12 Utilities 30 3.13 Aesthetics 32 3.14 Cultural Resources 33 3.15 Recreation 35 4 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 36 5 EARLIER ANALYSES 37 2 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW The purpose of this Initial Study is to identify the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Tract Map 28470 Amendment 1 request to modify Condition No. 79 of Tentative Tract 28470. The requested change is to reduce the width of the 17-foot building height restriction corridor from 335 feet to 150 feet for Lots 85-94, 177-189, and 209-219. The project site is located on Avenue 52, at the southern terminus of Washington Street, in La Quinta, California. The property is the historic estate known as the Marshall Ranch. The historic property is known as the Hacienda del Gato, which is listed on the State Historic Resources Inventory. Formerly the property had been ranched with dates and citrus. Several out -buildings and a workers house are also located on the property. The Applicant proposes to develop the estate into a private country club with golf course and custom home sites, and an administrative/sales center. The City of La Quinta is the Lead Agency for the project review, as defined by Section 21067 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Lead Agency is the public agency which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project which may have a significant effect upon the environment. The City of La Quinta, as the Lead Agency, has the authority to oversee the environmental review and to approve amendments to projects. 1.2 PURPOSE OF INITIAL STUDY As part of the environmental review for the proposed Tract Map amendment, the City of La Quinta Community Development Department staff has prepared this Initial Study. This document provides a basis for determining the nature and scope of the subsequent environmental review for the proposed amendment to Condition 79. The purposes of the Initial Study, as stated in Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines, include the following: To provide the Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for the tentative tract map, zone change, and development applications; To enable the applicant, or the City of La Quinta, to modify the project, mitigating adverse acts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; To assist the preparation of an EIR, should one be required, by focusing the analysis on those issues that will be adversely impacted by the proposed project; To facilitate environmental review early in the crafting of the amendment; To provide documentation for the findings in a Negative Declaration that the amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment; To eliminate unnecessary EIR's; and, To determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project. 1.3 BACKGROUND OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed amendment application was deemed subject to the environmental review requirements of CEQA in light of the intended development and potential impacts upon the property and surrounding area. This Initial Study Checklist and Addendum was prepared for review by the City of La Quinta Planning Commission and certification by the City Council. 1.4 SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This Initial Study indicates that there is a potential for adverse environmental impacts to aesthetics issues contained in the Environmental Checklist. The degree of this adverse impact is not significant. As a result, A Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be recommended for this project. An EIR will not be necessary. SECTION 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The City of La Quinta is a 31.18 square mile municipality located in the southwestern portion of the Coachella Valley, in Riverside County, California. The City is bounded on the west by the City of Indian Wells, on the east by the City of Indio and Riverside County, on the north by Riverside County, and federal lands to the south. The City of La Quinta was incorporated in 1982. M 2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed amendment is a request to modify Tentative Tract 28470 Condition of Approval No. 79 to reduce the 335-foot width of the 17-foot height building restriction corridor to 150 feet wide. Portions of whole houses beyond 150 feet will be 24-feet in height. This condition effects Lots 85-94, 177-189, and 209-219, which are located along the western project boundary paralleling Avenida Bermudas. The lots are graded and are ready for custom house construction. A six foot high perimeter project block wall and perimeter landscaping on a berm has been constructed. 2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed tract amendment would allow for increased house heights, up to a maximum of 24 feet, 150 feet east of the right-of-way line for Avenida Bermudas. The increase in house height would result in more variability in roof and house design. 2.4 OBJECTIVES The objective of the proposed amendment is to increase the maximum house height to 24 feet by reducing the width of the height restriction corridor from 335 feet to 150 feet wide. 2.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS A discretionary action is an action taken by a government agency that calls for the exercise of judgment in deciding whether to approve a project. For this project, the government agency is the City of La Quinta. The proposed tract map amendment will require discretionary recommendation of approval by the Planning Commission, and approval by the City Council. The following discretionary approvals will be required for this project: Certification of the Environmental Assessment 98-354; and, Approval of Tract Map 28470 Amendment 1. 2.6 RELATED PROJECTS The project consists of a proposed tract map amendment by modification of a condition of approval. 5 SECTION 3• ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the land use and subdivision design approval of the proposed amendment. The CEQA Checklist issue areas are evaluated in this addendum. For each checklist item, the environmental setting is discussed, including a description of the existing conditions within the City and the areas affected by the proposed amendment. Thresholds of significance are defined either by standards adopted by responsible or trustee agencies, or by referring to criteria in CEQA (Appendix G). 3.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING Regional Environmental.4etting The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, in the eastern portion of Riverside County. The valley is abundant with both desert plant and animal life. The topographical relief ranges from -237 feet below mean sea level (msl) to about 2,000 feet above msl. The valley is a part of the Colorado Desert region. Surrounding the valley are the San Jacinto Mountains, the Santa Rosa Mountains, the Orocopia Mountains, and the San Bernardino Mountains. The San Andreas fault transects the northeastern edge of the valley. Local Environmental Setting Tract 28470 is located at the southern terminus of Washington Street, at Avenue 52, east of Avenida Bermudas. The land is partially developed with a golf course, flood control facilities, club house, maintenance building, cart barn, and new custom homes. A. Would the project conflict with the general plan designation or zoning? No Impact. In 1996, through a city-wide Zoning Ordinance Update, the R-2 designation was reclassified as RL (Low Density Residential District), and the HC to Open Space (OS)_ That area included in the flood and drainage facilities on -site is designated as FP (Flood Plain District) on the City's Zoning Map, and W (Watercourse) on the General Plan. The portion of the project that is subject to the requested amendment is zoned RL and designated as Low Density Residential on the General Plan Land Use Diagram. Adjacent land uses and their designations consist of new Avenue 52 along the northern boundary, with scattered residential north of that, cove residential to the west, vacant natural areas and flood control facilities to the south, and ranch properties and steep hillsides to the east. At the northwest corner is a City park and a fire station. The adjacent land use on designations and zoning districts consist of RC (Cove Residential) to the west, OS (Open Space) to the south and southeast, RL (Low Density Residential) to the east and north, MC (Major Community Facilities) and PR (Parks and Recreation) to the northwest. These adjacent land uses and designations are compatible with the proposed land use of this project. B. Would the project conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? No Impact. The City of La Quinta has jurisdiction over this project. The primary environmental plans and policies pertinent to this project are identified in La Quinta's General Plan, the General Plan EIR, the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment, and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The proposed amendment does not exceed the maximum height allowed by the RL Zoning District, which is 28 feet (Source: Zoning Ordinance). C. Would the project affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? No Impact. The La Quinta General Plan does not contain an agricultural land use designation although there are agricultural land uses extant in the south and southeastern portions of the City. Historically, there has been farming activity in several sections of the City, however, that has largely been replaced by resort and residential development over the past 15 years. The property involved in this project has been disturbed by farming activities since 1902, and periodic flood events. Active farming of the property ceased several years ago in anticipation of development. There are only relic farming activities adjacent to the east of the project site. The historic ranch located adjacent to the east is not currently under cultivation. Thus, no impact on any agricultural resources or operations in the immediate area is likely to result from the proposed subdivision (La Quinta General Plan; Site Survey). D. Would the project disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income minority community)? No Impact. The project site will be developed with custom single family lots for general market sale. A private clubhouse and 271 acre 18-hole golf course will be developed, along with a clubhouse, maintenance building, cart barn, and a half -way house. The half -way house is a structure mid -way in the golf course that will have a snack bar and restrooms. Residential land uses are located in all directions of the project site, except for the mountains adjacent to the east and southeast, and the south where there are flood control dams, retention basins, etc.. The future development of these lots will not disrupt or divide the community. The 7 proposed amendment will not affect the physical arrangement of the existing neighborhoods (Sources: Site Survey; Line of Sight Exhibits). 3.2 POPULATION AND HOUSING Regional Environmental Setting Between 1980 and 1990, the population of La Quinta expanded 125%, as reported by the U.S. Census, making the City the second fastest growing city in the Coachella Valley. During that time period, the number of residents in La Quinta blossomed from 4,992 to 11,215. From 1990 to January of 1996, the population grew from 13,070 to 18,050. These figures are based upon information provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, the State Department of Finance, and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). La Quinta's population ranks sixth largest of the nine cities in the Coachella Valley. Annual average growth rate has been approximately 10% in recent years. The projected population of La Quinta by the year 2000 is anticipated to be 23,000 (Source: Community Development Department). The average age of a City resident is 32 years. Persons over the age of 45 make up 27% of the City's population (Source: 1990 Census). In addition to permanent residents, La Quinta has approximately 9,300 seasonal residents who spend three to six months in the City. It is estimated that 30% of all housing units in the City are used by seasonal residents (Source: Community Development Department). The total housing stock as of 1996, is listed at 9,352 units. Single family units make up 68 percent of the available housing stock. The housing unit breakdown is as follows: 8,624 detached single family, 481 multi -family units, and 247 mobile homes. The average number of persons per household is 3.15 (Source: Department of Finance 1996). Median home prices in La Quinta are approximately $112,000 which is lower than the average for Riverside County ($120,950), but less than other Southern California counties (Source: La Quinta Economic Overview 1996 Edition). Ethnicity information from the 1990 Census revealed that the composition of La Quinta's population is 70% Caucasian, 26% Hispanic, 2% Afro-American, 1.5% Asian, and 1.0% Native American. The 1990 Census indicates that 81 % of the La Quinta residents are high school graduates and 2 1 % are college graduates (Source: Census/Estimates). 0 Local Environmental Setting The project site consists of a 746.6 acre parcel with a developing private country club. The existing large hacienda (Hacienda del Gato) will be incorporated into the project as a sales and administrative office. A. Would the project cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? Less Than Significant Impact. The development planned for this project will ultimately result in the construction of 252 new custom built detached single family units. While the City's average population is 2.85 per dwelling unit, the proposed project is projected to have a lower per unit population given the fact that it will be a private country club with high -end custom home lots. Typically, people buying into this type of project are among the high income individuals, usually older, with grown children no longer living with them. Often they will be seasonal residents, as opposed to permanent residents. Using the factor of 1.94 people per unit, the potential build -out population for the project could be 467.54 new residents in the City. Temporary construction -related jobs will be created as the new units, clubhouse and other buildings are built. New permanent or temporary jobs will be created as a result of the project. There may be new jobs created for administration and maintenance of the country club and golf course, managers and servers for the half -way house and clubhouse, and security personnel for the country club. The number of new jobs generated by the project is estimated by the applicant to be 80 to 90. No jobs will be lost as a result of the project as no one is currently living on the property. New jobs will benefit the community, and result in a positive impact. The proposed amendment will have no effect upon the local or regional population projections as it pertains to building height. B. Would the project induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? No Impact. The proposed amendment will not impact major infrastructure as infrastructure has already been approved for and installed for the project. C. Would the project displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? 0 No Impact. The proposed condition amendment will not have an impact upon existing housing, including affordable housing, as the lots covered by the height restriction corridor are vacant. 3.3 EARTH RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta has a relatively flat, but gently sloping topography, except for the hillside area on the southern and western portions of the City. Elevations in the southeastern portion of the City reach 1,400 feet above msl. Slopes on the valley floor area of the City are gentle, except in the rolling sand dune areas. The alluvial soils that make up most of the City are underlain by igneous -metamorphic rock, as seen in outcrops in the Santa Rosa Mountains and the Coral Reef Mountains. Soils on the valley floor are made up of very fine grain unconsolidated silty sands. The Coachella Valley is underlain by hundreds of feet to several thousand feet of Quaternary fluvial, lacustrine, and aeolian soil deposits (Southland Geotechnical 1996:6). Local Environmental Setting The area where the parcel is located is in a historical part of the City. A review of historical aerial photographs indicates that the site has been farmed. The elevation of the property ranges from approximately 42 to 1,482 feet above mean sea level (Source: TTM 28470; USGS La Quinta Quad Map). A large portion of the project site will not be developed, as it is located in the steep, rocky Coral Reef Mountains. There is an inferred earthquake fault line located approximately 1 /2 mile to the south of the southern boundary of the parcel, and one 3/4 mile to the east. There has been no recorded activity along these fault lines, thus there is a low probability for such activity to occur. The City of La Quinta lies in a seismically active region of Southern California. Faults in the region include the San Andreas and Mission Creek faults located several miles to the north and west. The project lies within Groundshaking Zone III with Zone 12 being the most hazardous (Sources: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan; La Quinta General Plan; La Quinta MEA). A Preliminary Soil Investigation was conducted on the project site, in November 1984, by Buena Engineers, Inc. The report was prepared for Tract 20328, the Sand Pebble Country Club. This report identifies three soil types on the property, light brown slightly silty fine to course sand and gravel, light brown silt and very fine sand, and brown silty fine to medium sand with some gravel. The investigation included ten borings drilled in various portions of 10 the project site. The report states that the bearing soils showed expansion indices of zero when tested. All indications are that the soils on the site will allow for the proposed development, including single family houses irrespective of the height. A. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: fault rupture? No Impact. The proposed amendment to Condition No. 79 of Tentative Tract 28470 will not have any effect upon fault rupture issues. This issue was previously assessed in EA 96-333 for the entire project. Mitigation measures for this issue were made a part of the conditions of approval for the entire project. B. Would the project results in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismic ground shaking? No Impact. The proposed amendment to Condition No. 79 will not have any effect upon ground shaking issues. This issue was previously assessed in EA 96-333 prepared for the entire project, with mitigation measures required. C. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: ground failure or liquefaction? No Impact. The proposed amendment to Condition No. 79 will not have any effect upon ground failure or liquefaction issues. This issue was previously assessed in EA 96-333 prepared for the entire project, with mitigation measures required. Liquefaction is not considered a potential hazard since the groundwater is believed to be deeper than 50 feet (the maximum depth that liquefaction is known to occur) (Source: Southland Geotechnical 1996:8). D. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazard? No Impact. The City is located in an inland valley, separated from the Pacific Ocean by mountain ranges, and would not be subjected to a tsunami. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made reservoir located in the southeast portion of the City, might experience some moderate wave activity as a result of an earthquake and groundshaking. However, the lake is not anticipated to affect this project in the event of a levee failure or seiche because the lake is on the other side of the Coral Reef Mountains (Source: La Qumta MEA; La Quinta USGS 7.5' Quad Map). 11 E. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving landslides or mudflows? No Mitigated. No mudflows are anticipated for this project, as the adjacent hills and mountains are formed of rocky granitic material. The general area of the project site is protected from flood waters by earthen training dikes and retention basins that are located at the southern boundary of the project, and existing retention basins and drainage channels within the project site. Additional on -site retention basins are proposed for the project site that will be incorporated into the 18-hole gold course features (Source: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta USGS 7.5' Quad Map; TT 28470). The proposed amendment will not have any effect upon this hazard issue as the lots involved are hundred to thousands of feet away from the hillsides. F. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? No Impact. The proposed amendment will not have any effect upon erosion, excavation, grading or fill issues as the affected lots are completed. The amendment pertains to building heights and not earth -related issues. G. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving subsidence of the land? No Impact. The project site is not located in an area designated for subsidence hazards. Dynamic settlement results in geologically seismic areas where poorly consolidated soils mix with perched groundwater causing dramatic decreases in the elevation of the ground (Source: La Quinta MEA). The proposed amendment will not have any effect upon subsidence issues. H. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving expansive soils? No Impact. The underlying soils on the parcels have a low potential for expansion, thus future construction is not expected to be subject to problems from soil expansion. The City requires compliance with the Uniform Building Code and the recommendations of a soils investigation report prior to issuance of building and grading permits (Sources: U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Riverside County, California - Coachella Valley Area). The proposed amendment will not have any effect upon soil issues. 12 I. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving unique geologic or physical features? No Impact. The Coral Reef Mountains represent a unique geologic feature in the La Quinta area. This unique feature is located in the eastern portion of the project site. The proposed amendment pertains to building height for lots located near the western boundary of the project, and will not have any effect upon impacts to unique geological or physical features as the pad are graded. 3.4 WATER Regional Environmental.4etting Groundwater resources in the La Quinta area consist of a system of large aquifers (porous layers of rock material containing water) and groundwater basins separated by bedrock or layers of soil that trap or retain groundwater. La Quinta is located above the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin which is the major water supply for the potable water needs of the City as well as a significant supply for the City's nonpotable irrigation needs. Water is pumped from the underground aquifer via domestic water wells in the City operated and administered by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). La Quinta is located primarily in the lower Thermal Subarea of the groundwater basin. The Thermal Subarea is separated into the upper and lower valley sub -basins near Point Happy, located southwest of the intersection of Washington Street and State Highway 111. CVWD estimates that approximately 19.4 million acre feet of water is stored within the Thermal Subarea which is available for use. Water pumped from the aquifer is treated and distributed to users through the existing (potable) water distribution system. Water is also pumped for irrigation purposes to water golf courses and the remaining agricultural uses in the City. Water supplies are .augmented with surface water from the Colorado River transported via the Coachella Canal. The quality of water in the La Quinta area is highly suitable for domestic purposes. However, chemicals associated with agricultural production in nearby areas and the use of septic tanks in the Cove area affect groundwater quality. Groundwater is of marginal to poor quality at depths of less than 200 feet. Below 200 feet, water quality is generally good and water depths of 400 to 600 feet are considered excellent. Percolation from the tributaries of the Whitewater River flowing into La Quinta from the Santa Rosa Mountains provide a natural source of groundwater replenishment. Artificial recharging of groundwater will be a necessary in the near future. 13 Surface water in La Quinta is comprised of Colorado River water supplied via the Coachella Canal and stored in the Lake Cahuilla reservoir; lakes in private developments which are comprised of canal water and/or untreated groundwater; and the Whitewater River and its tributaries. The watersheds in La Quinta are subject to intense storms of short duration which result in substantial runoff. The steep gradient of the Santa Rosa Mountains accelerates the runoff flowing in the intermittent streams that drain the mountain watersheds. La Quinta is protected from this runoff by the existing flood control facilities located throughout the City. One of the primary sources of surface water pollution is erosion and sedimentation from development construction and operation activities. Without controls, total dissolved solids (TDS) can increase significantly from the development activities. The Clean Water Act requires all communities to conform to standards regulating the quality of water discharged into streams, including stormwater runoff. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) has been implemented as a two-part permitting process, for which the City of La Quinta participates. La Quinta is protected from storm water runoff by a stormwater system designed by Bechtel for the Coachella Valley Water District to protect currently developed and potentially developable areas of the City from damage during a major rainflood event. The system project was based on a flood control plan for the general area developed by Bechtel for the District in 1970. Construction was completed in November 1986 (Source: Bechtel Civil, Inc. 1989:1). Local Environmental Setting The project site does not have any natural standing water. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made reservoir is located approximately two miles to the southeast, on the other side of the Coral Reef Mountain. The Whitewater River channel is located slightly over 3 miles to the north of the project site, but is dry except during seasonal storms. The La Quinta Stormwater Channel is located approximately 1 mile to the north is a part of the community -wide network of flood control facilities. The City currently has only limited areas which are still subject to storm water flow or flooding. Flood prone areas are designated with a specific zoning district (Watercourse, Watershed and Conservation Areas: W-1). The intent of this zoning district is to allow development in flood prone areas based upon the submittal of a drainage and stormwater control plan. The City also implements flood hazard regulations for development within flood prone areas. Existing flood control facilities on the proposed project site are a part of the City-wide Stormwater Project - East La Quinta System. The facilities were designed by a previous 14 developer's engineer, with the design reviewed by Bechtel. Construction of these facilities was completed in mid-1988, by E. L. Yeager Construction Company. The East La Quinta System intercepts and controls runoff originating in the drainage area in the foothills east and southeast of Avenida Bermudas, and from the presently developed area of the City of La Quinta south of Calle Durango. The system consists of the Upper Training Dike, Calle Tecate Detention Basin, East La Quinta Channel, Avenida Bermudas Detention Basin, the proposed Tradition project site facilities, and a 60-inch diameter buried stormwater conduit. The detention basin on the project site has a storage volume of about 520 A.F. below El. 59, while maintaining a minimum one foot freeboard (Source: Bechtel Civil, Inc. 1989). A Hydrology/Hydraulic Report was prepared for the project site, in October 1996, by Keith International, Inc.. The project proposes areas north of the detention basin to provide for on site retention. Runoff from the residential, clubhouse, and golf course areas will be conveyed to depressions located within the golf course. The retention areas have been integrated into the golf course grading plan as golfing amenities. The basin sizing is based on the total run off from a 24 hour - 100 year event. Five basins are proposed with the following locations and capacities: Basin Hole # Basin Capacity 16 7.90 acre feet 2 Driving Range 83.50 acre feet 3 4 14.50 4 2 & 3 31.30 41.80 (lake) The hydrology study modeled the 100-year and 10 year storm events to determine which storm will generate the greatest storm volume. The results will be utilized to determine the size of the retention basins. It was determined that historic flows are retained onsite, thus the proposed development must retain all of the flows onsite (Source: Keith International. Inc. 1996). A. Would the project result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? No Impact. An approved drainage plan exists for the project. Grading and installation of the drainage facilities has been completed for the project. The proposed amendment will not have any effect upon the drainage system for the project. 15 B. Would the project result in exposure of people or property to water -related hazards such as flooding? No Impact. The project site is partially within the AO designated flood hazard area in the northeastern portion of the project site. The AO designation is the 100 year flood plain FIRM zone in which the hazard factors have been determined. There are existing on -site flood control or drainage facilities on the property, that were constructed by the Coachella Valley Water District as part of the East La Quinta Storm Drain system. These improvements were coordinated with an earlier planned golf course development, formally known as the "Heritage Country Club". The project intends to fully utilize these existing improvements and integrate them into the overall development and drainage system. The existing structures and basins will remain in place. The new design will maintain all structure capacities and volumes. The Tradition project is significantly less dense than the earlier "Heritage Country Club", reducing the runoff rate and flood volumes to these existing structures. The development has submitted a drainage plan which will include 5 additional retention basins and drainage improvements onsite (Source: Keith International, Inc. 1996). The proposed amendment to Condition No. 79 will not have any affect upon the drainage system or flooding issues. C. Would the project result in discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? No Impact. Runoff from the project site is required to be directed into the five proposed retention basins and be controlled by existing drainage facilities. There are no existing natural bodies of surface water on or adjacent to the project site. Five lakes have been constructed on the golf course which also function as retention areas (Source: Site Survey; Coachella Valley Water District; TT 28470). The proposed amendment to Condition No. 79 will not have any effect upon surface waters as the lots within the height restriction corridor are not near any surface water. D. Would the project result in changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? No Impact. There are no bodies of surface water on the lots within the height restriction corridor. The proposed amendment to Condition No. 79 will not effect any body of water. E. Would the project result in changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? 16 No Impact. The proposed amendment will not have any effect upon currents or water movements as the lots within the height restriction corridor are not near any body of water. F. Would the project result in changes in quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawal, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or by excavations? No Impact. Water supply in the City is derived from groundwater and supplementary water brought in from the Colorado River. The proposed development of the lots within the height restriction corridor will consist of single family units and the golf course. Potable water to service this development will most likely come from existing groundwater wells in the near vicinity and a new well to be located by the third green. The proposed amendment will not have any effect upon ground water resources or issues. G. Would the project result in altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? No Impact. The proposed amendment to house heights will not have any effect upon groundwater issues. H. Would the project result in impacts to groundwater quality? No Impact. Future development of the project site will include concrete and asphalt pavement of portions of the site, and golf course pathways. This pavement will reduce the absorption ability of the ground. Storm water runoff will be discharged into on -site basins channels, lakes, and pipes. Following a heavy rain, contaminates could be transported into the basins or into the nearby storm drains that could contribute to groundwater and/or surface water pollution. However, this potential impact is anticipated to be less than significant. The proposed amendment to house heights will not have any effect upon impacts to groundwater quality as house footprints are not likely to significantly change if house heights are increased. 3.5 AIR QUALITY Regional Environmental Setting The Coachella Valley is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and in particular, the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB) division. SEDAB has a distinctly different air pollution problem than the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). A discussion of the jurisdictional organization of SCAQMD and requirements is found in the La Quinta MEA. 17 The air quality in Southern California region has historically been poor due to the topography, climatological influences, and urbanization. State and federal clean air standards established by the California Air Resources Board and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are often exceeded. The SCAQMD is a regional agency charged with the regulation of pollutant emissions and the maintenance of local air quality standards. The SCAQMD samples air at over 32 monitoring station in and around the Basin. According to the 1989 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan, SEDAB experiences poor air quality, but of a lesser extent than the SCAB. Currently, the SEDAB does not meet federal standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter (PM-10). In the Coachella Valley, the standard for PM-10 is frequently exceeded. PM-10 is a particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter that becomes suspended in the air due to winds, grading activity, and by vehicles traveling on unpaved roads, among other causes. Local Environmental.4etting The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, which has an and climate, characterized by hot summers, mild winters, infrequent and low annual rainfall, and low humidity. Variations in rainfall, temperatures, and localized winds occur throughout the valley due to the presence of the surrounding mountains. Air quality conditions are closely tied to the prevailing winds of the region. The City of La Quinta is subject to the SCAQMD AQMD, a plan which describes measures to bring the SCAB into compliance with federal and state air quality standards and to meet California Clean Air Act requirements. The General Plan for the City contains an Air Quality Element outlining mitigation measures as required by the Regional AQMP. The City is located within Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30, which includes two air quality monitoring stations, one located in the City of Palm Springs, and the other in the City of Indio. The Indio station monitors conditions which are most representative of the La Quinta area. The station has been collecting data for ozone and particulates since 1983. The Palm Springs station monitors carbon monoxide in addition to ozone and particulate and has been in operation since 1985. A. Would the project violate any air standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? No Impact. The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon air quality issues. 18 B. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? No Impact. The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon sensitive receptors to pollutants. C. Would the project alter air movements, moisture, temperature, or cause any change in climate? No Impact. The subdivision was determined not to result in any significant impact upon this issue area in EA 96-333. All home sites will be required to meet height and setback requirements, maintaining a low profile. Moisture content may increase as the golf course and individual yards are planted and irrigated. Swimming pools would add to the moisture index of the area. There are no significant climatic changes anticipated with the future development of the parcels. The proposed height amendment will not have any perceivable effect upon climatic conditions. D. Would the project create objectionable odors? No Impact. The proposed amendment will not result in development which may create objectionable odors, such as waste hauling or chemical products. Vehicles traveling on nearby and internal project streets generate gaseous and particular emissions that may be noticeable on the project site. However, these would be short-term odors that should dissipate quickly (Source: Site Survey).The proposed increase in house height will not have any effect upon the creation of objectionable odors. 3.6 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Regional Environmental Vetting La Quinta is a desert community of over 18,600 permanent residents. The City is 31.18 square miles in size, with substantial room for development. The existing circulation system is a combination of early road work constructed in the 1930's by Riverside County and new roadways since incorporation of the City in 1982. Key roadways include State Highway 111, Washington Street, Jefferson Street, Fred Waring Drive, and Eisenhower Drive. Traffic volumes in La Quinta experience considerable seasonal variation, with the late -winter, early spring months representing the peak tourist season and highest traffic volumes. There is a relatively low incidence of automobile accidents at the intersection of Washington Street and Avenue 52. According to the City Engineering Department, there were 15 vehicular accidents at this intersection between 1988 and 1989 (Source: Traffic Collision Data, City of 19 La Quinta; La Quinta General Plan). Between January 1993 and December 1994, there were six accidents. In 1995, there were two accidents. And, in 1996, there was one accident between January and March (Source: SWITRS; Public Works Department). Existing transit service in La Quinta is limited to three regional fixed -route bus routes operated by Sunline Transit Agency. One bus route along Washington Street connects the Cove and Village areas with the community of Palm Desert to the west. Two lines operate along Ifighway 111 serving trips between La Quinta and other communities in the desert. There are only a few existing pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian facilities in La Quinta, however, these systems will be expanded as the City grows. These facilities, both existing and future, are designated in the La Quinta General Plan. Local Environmental.Setting The subject project site is located south of the southern terminus of Washington Street, east of Avenida Bermudas. Washington Street is classified as a major arterial with a 120 foot right-of-way. The intersection of Washington Street and Avenue 52 is currently controlled by 4-way stop signs. Avenida Bermudas is classified as a secondary arterial with an 80-foot right-of-way. Avenida Bermudas is located along the western boundary of the project site. It is designated as a bikeway corridor. The La Quinta General Plan gives design standards for the various street classifications. According to the standards for major arterials, the projected buildout traffic volume for Washington Street, north of the subject property will exceed the volume range. It is projected that Washington Street will experience a daily traffic volume of 52,600 south of Avenue 50, at buildout, providing a Level Of Service D (LOS-D). LOS-D has unstable flow with poor progression and frequent cycle failures. This is considered the limit of acceptable delay. LOS F has oversaturation with arrival flow rates exceeding the capacity of the intersection and is considered unacceptable to most drivers. A more detailed explanation of buildout traffic conditions and levels of service is found in the La Quinta General Plan. The current average daily traffic flows for Washington Street, south of Avenue 50 are 13,697 vehicles per day and 16,354 vehicles per day south of Eisenhower Drive. The existing traffic volume at the intersection of Avenue 52 and Washington Street is 7,982 vpd with 4,271 vpd entering or leaving Washington Street. This intersection has met warrants for a signal (Source: Public Works Department). A. Would the project result in increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? 20 9 No Impact. Housing units for this project site are less than what was used in the "build -out" traffic model for the 1991 La Quinta General Plan. The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon the traffic issues. B. Would the project result in hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? No Impact. There are no identified hazards from design features in the existing roadways or the proposed circulation system. Automobile, motorcycle, and golf cart traffic are the only types of vehicles that typically use private residential streets, with the exception of delivery trucks. A golf cart path system will be constructed within the country club (Source: TTM 28470). The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon the circulation design within the project. C. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access to nearby uses? No Impact. Development of the project site would not be permitted to obstruct emergency access to surrounding land uses. This requirement is a part of project conditions of approval. Review of development plans by the Fire Department did identify that a secondary access is required along Avenida Bermudas. Additional emergency accesses will also be required by the City for the project. The proposed height amendment will not affect emergency access issues. D. Would the project result in insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? No Impact. Parking will be required for each custom-built housing unit as it is constructed, which will consist of a two to three car garage, and tandem parking in the driveway. House height does not change this requirement, there for proposed amendment will not have any effect upon this issue E. Would the project result in hazards or barriers for pedestrian or bicyclists? No Impact. The east side of Avenida Bermudas and the east side of Washington Street are designated bikeway corridors. It is anticipated that hazards to bicyclists and pedestrians will not be increased significantly as a result of the proposed development because of the perimeter block wall around the Tradition Club and the lack of access onto Avenida Bermudas from the project (Source: La Quinta General Plan). The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon this issue. 21 F. Would the project result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. Bicycle racks are only required for commercial land uses. The proposed height amendment pertains to custom home sites and will not have any effect upon this issue. G. Would the project result in rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? No Impacts. There is no rail service in the City of La Quinta. The closest rail line is approximately six miles to the north of the project site. There are no navigable rivers or waterways, or air travel lanes or airports within the City. Thus, there will be no impacts upon these issues. The closest airports are the Bermuda Dunes Airport, a small private facility located just south of Interstate 10, approximately six miles north of the project site and the Thermal Airport, located approximately six miles southeast of the project, on Airport Boulevard in the Thermal area (Sources: La Quinta MEA; USGS La Quinta 7.5' Quad Map; Site Survey). The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon this issue. 3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Vetting The City of La Quinta lies within the Colorado Desert regional environment. Two ecosystems are found within the City, the Sonoran Desert Scrub and the Desert Transition. The disturbed environments within the City are classified as either urban or agricultural. A detailed discussion of these ecosystems is found in the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment (1992). Local Environmental.Setting The project site is located in the Sonoran Desert Scrub ecosystem. Typically, undeveloped land within this ecosystem is rich in biological resources and habitat. However, the project site has been disturbed by agriculture and mass grading in the distant and recent past. The Sonoran Desert Scrub is the most typical environment found in the Coachella Valley. It is generally categorized as containing plants which have the ability to economize water uses, go dormant during periods of drought, or both. Cacti are very common in these areas due to their ability to store water. Other plants root deeply and draw upon water from considerable depths. The variations of desert vegetation result from differences in the availability of water. The most dense and lush vegetation in the desert is found where groundwater is most plentiful. 22 The Sonoran Scrub areas are considered habitat for a number of small mammals. These animals escape the summer heat through their nocturnal and /or burrowing tendencies. Squirrels, mice and rats are all common rodent species in this environment. The black -tailed hare is a typical mammal. Predator species include kit fox, coyote, and mountain lion in the higher elevations. The largest mammal species found in this area is the Peninsular Bighorn sheep which is found at the higher elevations of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountain ranges. Birds and amphibians/reptiles can also be found in the Sonoran Scrub area. The Desert Transition areas are found in the alluvial fan areas and slopes of the surrounding mountains. The transition is gradual and involves an intermingling of vegetation types typically found in the Desert Scrub ecosystem and the Pinon-Juniper Woodland near the top of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The plant species in the desert transition zone benefit from slightly higher rainfall. Where creosote bush and bur -sage dominated in the desert scrub areas, cacti become more abundant and ocotillo dominate on the upper portions of alluvial fans, bajadas, and rocky mountain slopes. The La Quinta General Plan identifies the property as being within the habitat of the Fringe - toed Lizard. In addition, there have been sightings of the endangered plant, California ditaxis, in the general area of the project (Sources: Site Survey; La Quinta MEA). A. Would the project result in impacts to endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? No Impact. The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon biological resources as the grading is completed. B. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? No Impact. There are no locally designated biological resources within the City of La Quinta. All significant biological resources are designated by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Source: La Quinta MEA). The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon this issue. C. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? No Impact. There are no locally designated natural communities found in or near the project site. Some of the surrounding parcels are developed with homes, a golf course, or roadways. 23 The parcels have been disturbed by grading to the extent that there are no existing or relic plant communities left (Source: La Quinta MEA; Site Survey). The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon biological communities. D. Would the project result in impacts to wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? No Impact. There are no natural wetlands, marshes, riparian communities, or vernal pools on the project site or nearby. The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon wetland issues. E. Would the project result in impacts to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? No Impact. The project site is surrounded by developed parcels on these sides which have effectively cut off migration corridors to and from the project site except to and from the Coral Reef Mountains. Wildlife corridors are still open in the Coral Reef Mountains which provide access to the higher mountains to the south. (Source: La Quinta MEA; Site Survey).The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon wildlife corridors. 3.8 ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quetta contains both areas of insignificant and significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas (SMARA), as designated by the State Department of Conservation. There are no known oil resources in the City. Major energy resources used in La Quinta come from the Imperial Irrigation District (RID), Southern California Gas Company, and various gasoline companies. Local Environmental Setting There are no oil wells or other fuel or energy producing facilities or resources on or near the project site. While the project site is undeveloped, there is no significant resource to be mined, such as rock or gravel. The project site is located within MRZ-1 and MRZ-3. The MRZ-I designation is applied to those areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral despots are present or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. The MRZ-3 designation is for those areas containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data. The northern portion of the project is within an area of Prime Agricultural Soils (Source: La Quinta MEA; Site Survey). FM A. Would the project conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have an adopted energy plan. The proposed height will not have any effect upon this issue. B. Would the project use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? Less Than Significant Impact. Natural resources that may be used by this proposed project include air, mineral, water, sand and gravel, timber, energy, and other resources needed for construction and operation. Title 24 requirements shall be complied with for energy conservation. Any landscaping will also be required to comply with the City's landscape water conservation ordinance as well as the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District (Source: La Quinta MEA; Water Conservation Ordinance; Coachella Valley Water District).An increase in house heights would require additional building materials and supplies This increase is not anticipated to be significant. 3.9 RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEATH Regional Environmental Setting Recent growth pressure has dramatically increased the City's exposure to hazardous materials. Such exposure to toxic materials can occur through the air, in drinking water, in food, in drugs and cosmetics, and in the work place. Although large scale, hazardous waste generating employment is not yet present in the City of La Quinta, the existence of chemicals utilized in dry cleaning operations, agricultural operations, restaurant kitchen cleaning, landscape irrigation and exposure to large scale electrical facilities may pose significant threats to various sectors of the population. Currently, there are no hazardous disposal waste sites located in Riverside County, although transportation of such material out of, and around, La Quinta takes place. Local Environmental ,Setting In order to comply with AB 2948-Hazardous Waste Management Plans and Facility Siting Procedures, the City of La Quinta adopted Ordinance 184 consisting of a Hazardous Waste Management Plan. The project site has not been used for any type of manufacturing or industry, and there has not been any known dumping of hazardous substances on the property (Sources: Site Survey; Aerial Photos). 25 A. Would the project involve a risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including not limited to oil, pesticides, chemical, or radiation)? No Impact. There is a minimal risk of exposure from swimming pool chemicals and pesticides that may be used by residents of the future homes within the project. No other risks are anticipated by the land division, future custom homes, clubhouse, or other proposed structures. The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon this issue. B. Would the project involve possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. Construction activities will be confined to the project site, except for minimal off -site work as is necessary for project roadways, curbs, and gutters. These activities will not be permitted to interfere with emergency responses to the site or surrounding areas nor will it obstruct emergency evacuation of the area. Needed measures to divert and control traffic shall be implemented whenever required (Source: Site Plan). Emergency accesses will be required for the project to meet the requirements of the Fire Department. The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon emergency response issues. C. Would the project involve the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? No Impact. There are no anticipated health hazards associated with the proposed height amendment beyond those normally associated with a construction project (Source: Site Plan). D. Would the project involve exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? No Impact. There are no identifiable health hazards associated with the proposed height increase. E. Would the proposal involve increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? No Impact. The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon fire hazard issues. W 3.10 NOISE Regional Environmental ,Setting Noise levels in the City are created by a variety of sources within and outside the City boundaries. The major sources of noise include vehicles on City streets and Highway 111, and temporary construction noise. The ambient noise levels are dominated by vehicular noise along the highway and major arterial roadways. Local Environmental Setting The ambient noise level at the project site is dominated by vehicle traffic noise from Washington Street and Avenue 52. Residential areas are considered noise -sensitive land uses, especially during the nighttime hours. The nearest residential use is located adjacent to the east and north of the project site. The State Building Code requires that interior noise level in buildings do not exceed CNEL 45. The General Plan of the City of La Quinta requires that exterior noise levels do not exceed CNEL 60 (Sources: Site Survey). A noise study has been prepared for this project. A. Would the project result in increases in existing noise levels? No Impact. An acoustical study of the project site were conducted in December, 1996, by Gordon Bricken & Associates. The reports state that noise levels are dominated by vehicular traffic on Avenue 52 to the north, and Avenida Bermudas to the west. No other significant sources of noise were noted during the site visit. The report discusses the design of the proposed project and recommends mitigation measures to protect the proposed homes from street noise. Mitigation includes the construction of at least a 6 foot solid wall along the perimeter of the project, and constructing to meet certain criteria to ensure an outdoor -to - indoor noise intrusion of no greater than 45 dBA. These criteria are contained in the acoustical study and shall be made part of the Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the project (Source: Gordon Bricken & Associates 1996). The height of residential lot pads is subject to sound attenuation along Avenida Bermudas. In order to ensure compliance with the recommendation of the acoustical study, the pad elevations on several lots have been reduced. The proposed height amendment is not anticipated to have any effect upon noise impacts. B. Would the project result in exposure of people to severe noise levels? No Impact. The La Quinta General Plan regulates excessive noise and vibration in the City by establishing allowable noise levels for various land uses. Residential land uses should have 27 a maximum exterior noise level of up to 60 CNEL. The proposed increase in house heights is not anticipated to have any effect upon this issue. The proposed development will result in short-term impacts associated with construction activities. During construction, heavy machinery will be capable of generating periodic peak noise levels ranging from 70 to 95 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the source. These high noise levels are short in duration and temporary with the construction phases of the project. Such high noise levels are not anticipated nor permitted after construction, or during the "operation" of the development (Source: La Quinta General Plan). 3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES Regional Environmental Vetting La w enforcement services are provided to the City through a contract with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. The Sheriff's Department extends service to the City from existing facilities located in the City of Indio. There is a small substation located within City Hall. The Department utilizes a planning standard of 1.5 deputies per 1,000 population to forecast additional public safety personnel requirements in La Quinta at buildout. Based on this standard, the City should have a police force of 25.5 officers, but is currently underserved. Currently, there are three officers per shift with three staggered shifts per day to serve La Quinta. In addition to patrol, there is also a target team, Community Services Officer, and School Resources Officer assigned to the City (Source: 101-301 Police Services Supporting Information). Fire protection service is provided to the City by Riverside County Fire Department through a contractual arrangement. The Fire Department administers two stations in the City; Station #32 on Frances Hack Lane, west of Washington Street, and Station #70, at the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54. The Fire Department is also responsible for building and business inspections, plan review, and construction inspections. Based upon a planning standard of one paid firefighter per 1,000 population, the City is currently underserved (Source: La Quinta MEA). Currently, there are two paid firefighters per shift at each of the two fire stations in La Quinta. Volunteers supplement the paid staff (Source: La Quinta Building & Safety Department). Structural fires and fires from other man-made features are the most significant fire threats to the City. Hillside and brush fires are minimal as the hillside areas are virtually barren and the scattered brush on the valley floor is too sparse to pose a serious fire threat. ►0. Both the Desert Sands Unified School District and the Coachella Valley Unified School District serve the City. There is one elementary school, one middle school, and one high school within the City. Another elementary school is under construction within the City. The City is also within the College of the Desert Community College District. Library services are provided by the Riverside County Library System with a branch library located in the Village area of the City. The existing facility opened in 1988 and unadopted planning standards of 0.5 square feet per capita and 1.2 volumes per capita to forecast future facility requirements to serve the City. Utilizing this 1992 standard, the City was underserved in space but overserved in terms of volumes (Source: La Quinta MEA). Health care services are provided in the City through JFK Memorial Hospital in Indio, and the Eisenhower Immediate Care Facility in the 111 Center. The Eisenhower Medical Center is located in Rancho Mirage. The Riverside County Health Department administers a variety of health programs for area residents and is located in Indio. Paramedic service is provided to the City by Springs Ambulance Service. Local Environmental Setting The nearest City fire station to the project site is Station #32 located at the northwest corner of the project site. Governmental services in La Quinta are provided by City staff at the Civic Center, and by other County, state, and federal agency offices located in the desert area or region. The project site will be serviced by the local schools. A. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or altered governmental services in relation to fire protection? No Impact. The proposed height amendment is not anticipated to have any impact on governmental services for fire protection. B. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or altered government services in relation to police protection? No Impact. The proposed height amendment is not anticipated to have any effect upon the need for police protection. C. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to school services? 29 No Impact. The proposed height amendment is not anticipated to have any effect upon impacts to the school system. D. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to the maintenance of public facilities, including roads? No Impact. The proposed height amendment is not anticipated to have any effect upon public facilities or roads, as only privately -owned houses and roads will be within the height restriction corridor. E. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to other governmental services? No Impact. Building, engineering, inspection, and planning review needed for the project will be partially offset by application, permit and inspection fees charged to the applicant and contractors. The proposed height amendment is not anticipated to have any effect upon this issue. 3.12 UTILITIES Regional Environmental Services The City of La Quinta is served by the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) for electrical power supply and The Gas Company (TGC) for natural gas service. Existing power and gas lines and substations are found throughout the City. IID has four substations in La Quinta, with electricity generated by a steam plant in El Centro and hydroelectric power generated by the All American Canal. General Telephone Exchange (GTE) provides telephone services for the City. Colony Cablevision serves the area for cable television service. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides water and sewer service to the City. CVWD obtains its water from underground aquifers and from the Colorado Diver. CVWD operates a water system with potable water pumped from domestic water wells in the City. The wells range in depth from 500 to 900 feet. Potable water is stored in five reservoirs located in the City. The City's stormwater drainage system is administered by the CVWD, which maintains and operates a comprehensive system to collect and transport flows through the City. The City is served by Waste Management of the Desert for solid waste disposal. Nonhazardous, mixed municipal solid waste is taken to three landfills within the Coachella Valley. 30 Local Environmental Setting The project is adjacent to developed areas on the west, north, and east. The site is former farm land that has been under cultivation until recent years. In the last year, a golf course and several buildings have been constructed on the project site. Custom homes are also under construction within the Tradition Club. A. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to power and gas service? No Impact. The proposed height amendment is not anticipated to have any effect upon power or gas service. B. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to communication systems? No Impact. The proposed height amendment is not anticipated to have any effect upon communication systems. C. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? No Impact. The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon regional water treatment systems. D. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to sewer services or septic tanks? No Impact. The proposed height amendment will not result in the generation of any additional impacts to sewer systems. E. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to storm water drainage? No Impact. The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon the provision of storm water drainage, as the drainage system is completed for the Tradition Club project. F. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to solid waste disposal? 31 No Impact. The proposed project will require solid waste disposal services from Waste Management of the Desert, the current purveyor of solid waste collection. Solid waste may be transported to the three existing landfills in the Coachella Valley. The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon solid waste services for custom homes. uftll' *119 .131110.i Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta is partially located within a desert valley cove. There are hillsides to the west and south of the City. Views of the desert and surrounding mountains are visible on clear days throughout most of the City. Local Environmental Setting The project site is located in a predominately residential zoned area in the southern portion of the City. The Cove residential area immediately to the west, allows a maximum of 17 feet for a single family residence. The project site is in the RL district that allows up to 28 feet in height. Condition No. 79 of Tentative Tract 28470 applies to lots paralleling Ave. Bermudas with a 17 feet height limitation within a corridor 335-feet wide. The width of the corridor was determined by the distance from the ultimate right of way from Ave. Bermudas eastward to encompass all the lots paralleling that street. Views from the project site consists of the Santa Rosa and Coral Reef Mountains to the south and southeast, the alluvial fan area to the southwest, and the open valley floor to the north and northeast (Source: Site Survey; La Quinta MEA). A. Would the project affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? Less Than Significant Impact. The first line of sight study prepared for Lot 86, located near the northern corner of the Tradition Club development, begins on the west side of Avenida Bermudas in what would be the view from a front window of a house in the Cove Subdivision. The view to the east toward the Coral Reef Mountains take ones eye over the Tradition Club perimeter wall and on to the mountainside. If the Tradition Club were to develop using the Zoning designation for the Cove Subdivision (RC), this view would consist of 17-foot high houses with 20-foot front setbacks along the east side of Avenida Bermudas. However, the Tradition Club has graded pad locations at least 100 feet from Avenida Bermudas. As a result of the reduction of the height restricted corridor width shown in the study, illustrates that there is essentially the same line of sight to the mountains as a housing having an RC zoning designation. This is attributed to the increased distance differential showing that a 24-foot high house beyond 150-feet from Avenida Bermudas is proportional to a 17-foot high house, 20-feet from Avenida Bermudas. 32 The second line of sight study is from Lot 182, located roughly midway along the Tradition Club project. This study also begins from the west side of Avenida Bermudas with a view eastward to the Coral Reef Mountains. Here again, the Tradition Club has house pads located at least 100 feet east of Avenida Bermudas. Within the 17-foot height 150-foot restriction corridor the study shows that there would be very little difference in the visual impact of the mountains with a 24-foot house because of the distance differential created by the 150-foot setback. The third line of sight study is from Lot 218, located near the southern corner of the Tradition Club development. This study shows that the pad elevations within the Tradition Club are approximately 10 feet lower than the pad elevation for houses directly across Avenida Bermudas in the Cove Subdivision. This difference in pad elevation, and the distance differential will prevent any significant visual impact to the Coral Reef Mountains with either a 17-foot, or 24-foot high house. To illustrate these assessments, the applicant will install poles at the 17- and 24-foot heights on Lots 86, 182, and 218, which will remain up until Tuesday. B. Would the project have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed amendment will be required to comply with architectural and landscaping policies and ordinances of the City in effect at the time of development. The reduction of the width of the height restriction corridor will allow the height of custom houses to reach a maximum of 24-feet outside of the 150-foot setback, while maintaining 17-foot heights inside of the 150-foot setback. C. Would the project create light or glare? Less Than Significant Impact. Custom houses will include exterior security and low level landscaping lighting which will cumulatively contribute to the existing light and glare in the City. All such lighting fixtures shall be required to comply with the Dark Sky Ordinance and other policies of the City, in order to reduce the impact. The proposed amendment will not significantly create additional light and glare. 3.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting A portion of the prehistory of the La Quinta area is known through the archaeological record gained from various archaeological investigations over the past twenty years and from extensive ethnographic information. A discussion of the prehistory and history of La Quinta is provided in the Draft Historic Context Statement of the City of La Quinta. Other discussions are found in the La Quinta General Plan and the Master Environmental Assessment. Local Environmental Setting The project site is located in the southern portion of the City. There are recorded archaeological sites within a one mile radius of the project site as well as sites on the project site. The project site was previously surveyed for archaeological or historical resources, with both archaeological or historical sites recorded on the property. In 1984, the first archaeological investigation took place on the project site in conjunction with a similar proposed golf course/country club project. This Phase I investigation was conducted by UCR ARU. Six archaeological sites were recorded at that time. Local Native American consultation for these sites was included in the analysis and determination of mitigation measures to be required for the sites. As mitigation for the archaeological sites for the project under review at that time, an extensive Phase Il investigation was conducted in 1989, by UCR ARU, to test several of the sites and determine their perimeters and significance. Eleven human cremations were recovered from site Riv-1179, as well as numerous artifacts. The additional mitigation for this site was determined to be capping in order to preserve the remaining subsurface deposits and to memorialize the burial ground. The six sites found on the project site are connected with a prehistoric village area, located partially on the property. Over the past years there has been frequent looting of the sites and casual pothunting by people trespassing onto the property. In 1988, the Coachella Valley Water District undertook construction of a large detention basin, drainage channels, and related flood control facilities on the project site. In the Environmental Assessment prepared by CVWD, the archaeological resources were not given consideration (CVWD File No. 0121.3198). At least two of the archaeological sites were destroyed at that time by the water district's actions. There is no record of archaeological monitoring or other mitigation by CVWD at that time. Thus, two of the sites are lost. The remaining sites consist of bedrock milling stations located at the toe of the slope. These site can easily be preserved and incorporated into the project as cultural features, and thus preserved. Riv-1179 was capped by Keith Companies archaeologists Paul G. Chace, Ph.D., and Charles Reeves, J.D., in December 1996. The capping consisted of carefully placing at least three feet of clean, fine sand over the top of the designated site area. The heavy equipment did not touch the site area. The capping was photodocumented. Annual inspections of the capped site will be required by the City staff to ensure the stability and proper maintenance of the 34 capping. The capped site will be required to have a conservation easement placed on it with the deed going to the City in perpetuity. The site will be preserved for the sensitive memorial of the human remains and for future scientific study. A. Would the project disturb paleontological resources? No Impact. The proposed height amendment will not involve any additional grading or excavation that would reach the depths of paleontological resources. B. Would the project affect archaeological resources? No Impact. The archaeological resources for the Tradition project have been mitigated. The proposed height amendment would not have any effect upon these resources. C. Would the project affect historical resources? No Impact. The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon historic resources as these resources are located in another portion of the Tradition project and have been mitigated. D. Would the project have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic values? No Impact. There is no identifiable unique ethnic value to the proposed project site. The proposed height amendment will not have any effect upon such values. E. Would the project restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? No Impact. There are no known current religious uses or sacred uses on the proposed project site. The proposed height amendment is not anticipated to have any effect upon religious uses of the property within the height restriction corridor. 3.15 RECREATION Regional Environmental.Setting The City of La Quinta has an adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan that assesses the existing resources and facilities and the future needs of the City. The City has approximately 35 28.7 acres of developed parkland for Quimby Act purposes. The 845 acre regional Lake Cahuilla Park is not included in this count. There are also unimproved bike and equestrian corridors within the City and designated pedestrian hiking trails. Local Environmental Setting The project site is former farm land with an historic house and out -buildings. There is no evidence that there have been any organized or approved recreational uses on the property. The proposed project includes an 18-hole golf course that will provide recreation to the country club members. A. Would the project increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? No Impact. The proposed height amendment will not have any impact upon public or private recreation amenities as only residential lots are located within the height restriction corridor. B. Would the project affect existing recreational opportunities? No Impact. The proposed height amendment would not have any effect upon existing recreational opportunities as only residential lots are within the height restriction corridor. SECTION 4: MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The proposed height amendment will not have significant adverse impacts on the environmental issues addressed in the checklist and addendum. The following findings can be made regarding the mandatory findings of significance set forth in Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines and based on the results of this environmental assessment: The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, with the implementation of mitigation measures. The proposed project will not have the potential to achieve short term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful implementation of mitigation. The proposed project will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned for proposed development in the immediate vicinity. 36 The proposed project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect human, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of mitigation. SECTION 5: EARLIER ANALYSES A. Earlier Analyses Used. In 1992, EA 92-240 was prepared for Tentative Tract Map 27613. The current proposed project site is the same location encompassed by Tentative Tract 27613. EA 92-240 assessed the potential impacts to the environment from the project proposed at that time. That project consisted of 399 residential units and an 18-hole golf course, and was known as The Traditions. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was certified for that assessment. On April 1, 1997, the City Council certified EA 96-333 for the Tradition Club project. Also utilized in the current analysis was the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment (MEA), prepared in 1991, in conjunction with the 1992 General Plan Update and related EIR. The special studies prepared for the proposed project consist of: Line of sight studies for Lots 86, 182, and 218 of Tract 28470. B. Impacts Adequately Addressed. All potential impact/issue areas are considered to be adequately addressed with this environmental assessment. Certification of this EA by the City Council will confirm the adequacy of the environmental assessment. C. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures are not included for the proposed height amendment as there are none feasible. The proposed amendment will either be approved or denied. 37 Tradition Design Guidelines The Design Guidelines for the Tradition project state that "the design of a residence must conform to the existing grades and allowable height elevations of the lot. Recognizing that the residence may have several levels, the elevation of the highest point of the roof structure must not exceed 24 feet for all lots as measured from approved pad elevation. The maximum amount of roofing that can project between 18 and 24 feet above approved pad elevation is 35%. All other elements must stay below an 18 foot height limit. Chimneys and other projections required by building codes will be examined on a case by case basis by the Tradition Design Review Committee. The City of La Quinta will review all construction plans prior to issuance of a building permit for compliance with City zoning and building codes. The applicant has submitted a narrative describing their design criteria and theory (Attachment 5 ). The residential setbacks for the Tradition project are 25 feet in front and 12 foot minimum on each side, which will provide a minimum of 24 feet between houses allowing for view corridors between structures. Public Notice Public Notice of the request was given via a mailing to the property owners within a 500-foot radius of the Tradition project, and a legal advertisement published on January 26, and February 10, 1998, in the Desert Sun newspaper. Public Comments The Community Development Department has received two letters as of February 19, 1998, regarding the request. These letters are included in Attachment 6. Agency Comments The Fire Marshal's response to the request does not contain any opposition or different requirements for the project. RECOMMENDATION: Move to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98- certifying Environmental Assessment 98- 354. Move to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98- approving the request to change Condition 79 for Tract 28470 to decrease the 335 foot wide 17-foot height restriction corridor to 150 foot east of the ultimate right of way of Avenida Bermudas. Attachments: 1. City Council Minutes, April 1, 1997 2. Letter of Request 3. Exhibits A, B, C (bluelines and photographs) 4. Narrative Comment letters ;� y PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL, APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT #1 TO CONDITION 79 OF TENTATIVE TRACT 28470 TO REDUCE THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION CORRIDOR TO 150-FEET FOR LOTS 86, 182, AND 218 PARALLELING AVENIDA BERMUDAS WITHIN THE TRADITION CLUB CASE NO. TRACT 28470 AMENDMENT #1 TRADITION CLUB ASSOCIATES, LLC WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 24`' day of February, 1998, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider an amendment to Condition 79 of Tentative Tract 28470 to reduce the width of the 335-foot wide height restriction corridor to 150-feet wide, generally located at the south terminus of Washington Street and Avenida Bermudas; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did recommend to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 28470 on March 4, 1997; and, WHEREAS the City Council did approve Tentative Tract 28470 on April 1, 1997; and, WHEREAS, the request for a reduction in width of the height restriction corridor from 335-feet to 150-feet is supported by three line of sight studies that show there is a less than significant impact to the views of the Coral Reef Mountains; WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing held on February 24, 1998, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make findings to justify the recommendation for approval to the City Council of said amendment to Tentative Tract Map; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, said amendment was recommended for approval by the La Quinta Planning Commission based on said findings and subject to certain conditions, The design and improvements of the proposed Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment #1 are consistent with the current goals and objectives of the La Quinta General Plan in that the subdivision will result in the development of one story, single family detached custom homes on Lots 85 to 94, 177 to 189, and 209 to 219 within a 150-foot wide, 17-foot high height restriction corridor paralleling Avenida Bermudas; and, 2. Tentative Tract 28470, Amendment #1 is consistent with current standards of the Municipal Zoning Ordinance in that the existing Zoning District is RL (Residential Low Density) with a maximum permitted building height of 28 feet; and, Planning Commission Resolution 98- 3. Tentative Tract 28470, Amendment # 1 is consistent with the standards of the City's Subdivision Ordinance in that all proposed lots meet the required dimensions, slope gradients, and design for access and circulation. 4. The design of Tentative Tract 28470, Amendment # 1 and its related improvements, are not likely to cause serious public health problems, or adversely impact the general public welfare or safety, in that the Fire Department and the City's Building & Safety Department have reviewed the project for these issues with no significant concerns identified. 5. The design of the subdivision amendment, or the proposed improvements, are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially, and unavoidable injure fish or wildlife, or their habitat, in that Environmental Assessment 98-354, prepared for the amendment, did not identify any significant impacts for this issue. 6. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of said Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above described Tentative Tract Amendment, 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 24t' day of February, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Planning Commission Resolution 98- RICH BUTLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN Community Development Director PALESLIE\Res Tract 28470.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED TRACT 28470- AMENDMENT 1 TRADITIONS CLUB ASSOCIATES, LLC FEBRUARY 24, 1998 * Modified by Planning Commission on March 4, 1997 ** Modified by City Council on April 1, 1997 * * * Modified by Planning Commission on February 24, 1998 1 Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply. 2. Tentative Tract Map 28470 shall comply with the requirements and standards. of § § 66410-66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, 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 0 Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department 0 Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District • California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) 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. For projects requiring NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy of the applocation for the Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan for review by the Public Works Department. 4. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment I Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 City's adopted Infrastructure Fee Program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 5. All easements, rights -of -way and other property rights required of the Tentative Map or otherwise necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the development and functioning of improvements shall be dedicated, granted or otherwise conferred, or the process of said dedication, granting, or conferral shall be ensured, prior to approval of a final map or filing of a Certificate Of Compliance for Waiver of a Final Map. The conferral shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant easements to the City for access to and maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of all essential improvements which are located on privately -held lots or parcels. 6. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights -of - way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights -of -way or access easements to those properties. 7. T he applicant shall dedicate 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. Dedications required of this development include: A. 52nd Avenue from the west property boundary to Washington Street (Primary Arterial) - Fifty -five-foot right-of-way on south side of existing centerline. B. 52nd Avenue/Washington Street Intersection - As required by the City Engineer. C. 52nd Avenue from Washington Street to east property boundary (Major Arterial) - Sixty foot right-of-way on south side of existing centerline. D. Frances Hack Lane (Old 52nd Avenue) from'Avenida Bermudas to an easterly terminus to be determined by fire station access needs - right-of-way to accommodate applicant's half of a 32-foot-wide street with culde-sac plus an eight foot parkway. E. Avenida Nuestra from Calle Guatemala to Calle Kalima (Local Street) Right-of- way to accommodate the applicant's half of a 32-foot-wide street. Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment 1 Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 F. Avenida Bermudas (Secondary Arterial) - Fifty foot half -width right-ofway along the full frontage of this map. G. Avenida Bermudas - Easements, as required by the City Engineer, over the storm drainage system connecting Avenida Bermudas to the on -site regional stormwater system. H. A drainage easement to convey off -site storm water from the storm drain located on the south side of 52nd Avenue, near Fritz Burns Park, to the golf course retention area located inside Tract 28470. Avenida Bermudas, 52nd Avenue, and Lot '0' - Easements for emergency access drives. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, etc. If the City Engineer determines that public access rights to proposed street rights -of -way shown on the Tentative Map are necessary prior to approval of final maps dedicating the rights -of -way, the applicant shall grant temporary public access easements to those areas within 60 days of written request by the City. 8. The applicant shall dedicate 1 0 foot public' utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. 9. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks, or minimum width as noted, adjacent to the following street rights -of -way; A. 52nd Avenue - 20-feet B. Avenida Bermudas - 1 0-feet - with the exception of the southwest corner where minimal landscape will be provided between the sidewalk and the wall. * *C. Avenida Nuestra - as necessary to accommodate slope from south curbline to wall. * *D. Remove the existing sidewalk and replace with a new meandering sidewalk not less than five (5) feet wide and not to exceed six (6) feet wide. For developments with public interior streets,, perimeter setback lots shall be Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment I Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 dedicated to the City. For developments with private interior streets, perimeter setback lots shall remain in private ownership. Where public sidewalks are required on privately -owned setback lots, the applicant shall dedicate blanket sidewalk easements over the setback lots. 10. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights -of -access to 52nd Avenue, Avenida Bermudas, Frances Hack Lane, Avenida Nuestra, and the access drive from 52nd Avenue to the Fire Station. Access to these streets shall be restricted to access points approved by the City. 11. The applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 12. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval by the City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the property unless such easements are approved by the City Engineer. 13. Sixty days after recordation of any final map, the applicant/developer shall process a Lot Line Adjustment along the north property line where it is contiguous to Lot 5, Block 6 of the Desert Club Tract Unit #2, to provide a five foot setback for the existing home that abutts-the property line. The common address of the subject property is 51-485 Calle Guatemala. 14. As part of the filing package for final map approval, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete map, as approved the City's map checker, on storage media and in a program format acceptable to the -City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu choices so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. 15. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24' x 36' media in the categories of "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." Grading, street and drainage plans shall be prepared by professional engineers registered to practice in California. Landscaping plans shall be prepared by licensed landscape architects. All plans except precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment 1 Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 Director and the Building Official. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage' plans shall- normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, gates and entryways, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation, lighting, and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements -not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 16. 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. 17. When final plans are approved by the City, and prior to approval of the final map, 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 choices 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 including approved revisions to the plans. 18. 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 agendization of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a Certificate of Compliance for a waived Parcel Map. For secured agreements, security provided shall remain in effect until explicitly waived, reduced or released by the City regardless o t a passage o time, changes to or expiration of the improvement agreement or failure, of the secured party to make premium payments or fulfill other obligations to the surety. Reductions and releases of security shall conform with Chapter 13, La Quinta Municipal Code (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. 19. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of improvement costs. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment 1 Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 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 utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, tract 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. 20. If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the Conditions of Approval and secure those phases separately, a phasing plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations as set forth in the approved phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of ,permanent buildings within the phase unless a construction sequencing plan for that phase is approved by the City Engineer. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely manner or as specified in an approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, completion of final inspections on buildings, or otherwise withhold approvals related to the development of this project until the applicant makes satisfactory progress on the improvements or obligations or has made other arrangements satisfactory to the City. 21. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (Plot Plans, Conditional Use Permits, etc.), off -site improvements and development -wide improvements (i.e.: retention basins, perimeter walls & landscaping, gates, etc.) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final map unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 22. Prior to agendization of any final map within this development, the applicant shall pay cash or enter into a secured agreement,'approved by the City to pay for applicant's required share of improvements which have been or will be constructed by others (participatory improvements). Participatory improvements for this development include: A. Intersection of 52nd Avenue and Washington Street - 50% of the cost to design and construct traffic. signals. Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment 1 Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 B. Avenida Bermudas 50% of the cost of street and drainage improvements previously constructed by the City along the Avenida Bermudas frontage of this development. C. 52nd -Avenue - 1 00% of the cost of existing street improvements along the 52nd Avenue frontage of this development. The applicant's obligations for all or a portion of the participatory improvements may, at the City's option, be satisfied by participation in a major thoroughfare improvement program if this development becomes subject to such a program. 23. Graded, undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 24. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall obtain a Fugitive Dust Control Permit in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The application for the permit shall include a Fugitive Dust Control Plan and Security, in a form acceptable to the City, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 25. The applicant shall comply with the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. The applicant shall apply for Conditional Letters of Map Revision from FEMA for all lots near existing special flood hazard areas (SFHAS) within the development (as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps). Prior to issuance of any building permits for these lots, the applicant shall have received Belief Letters from FEMA for those lots. Prior to final inspection of homes on the lots, the applicant shall provide FEMA with the required as -built information to receive FEMA letters removing the structures from the SFHAS. 26. The applicant shall conduct a thorough preliminary geological and soils engineering investigation and shall submit the report of the investigation ("the soils report') with the grading plan. 27. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a grading plan meeting the approval of the City Engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the final map(s), if any are required of this development, that a soils report has been prepared- pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment I Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 28. The applicant shall obtain approval of the grading plan from Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). 29. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within this development, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. If the applicant is unable to comply with the pad elevation differential requirement, the City will consider and may approve alternatives that preserve community acceptance and buyer satisfaction with the proposed development. 30. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad elevation certifications which are stamped and signed by a California registered civil engineer or surveyor. The document shall list, by lot number, the pad elevations approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevations, and the difference between the two, if any., 31. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 1 00-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. *32. All storm water exiting the storm drain located on the south side of 52nd Avenue shall be routed to an acceptable retention area located i nside Tract 28470. 33. 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. 34. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 35. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. 36. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment I Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 route. This drainage shall include the current inflow to the on -site regional stormwater system from the developed area to the west. 37. If any storm water or nuisance water from this development is proposed to drain to off -site locations, the applicant may be required to design and install first -flush storage, oil/water separation devices, or other screening or pretreatment method(s) to minimize conveyance of contaminants to off -site locations. Drainage to off -site locations and methods of treatment or screening shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. 38. All existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. High -voltage power lines which the power authority will not accept underground are exempt from this requirement. 39. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to construction of surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. 40. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. If the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation of any final map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for any waived final map, the development or portions thereof may be subject to the provisions o the ordinance. If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the applicant shall be responsible for all street and traffic improvements required herein. *41. The applicant shall reimburse the successors or assigns of Landmark Land Company, upon written demand with proof of their rights (if any, for the purpose of this issue) in the amount of $ 1 1 8,27 5 for the improvements to 5 2nd Avenue which were previously installed west of the boundary of Tract 24889/24890. If Landmark Land Company or its successors or assigns, have been reimbursed by the City, the applicant shall reimburse the City for those Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment 1 Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 costs. If no notification is received within 90-days following the recordation. of the first final map, this condition no longer applies. 42. Prior to recordation of the first final map f or this development, the applicant shall reimburse or secure reimbursement of the City and/or its redevelopment district for costs incurred in improvements to 52nd Avenue ($149,040) and Avenida Bermudas ($246,525). The developer is eligible for credits equal to the cost of removing and replacing the sidewalk along Avenida Bermudas as required in Condition 9. The listed amounts include the cost of storm drain improvements associated with those street projects. If the applicant provides security in lieu of reimbursement, the applicant shall provide the actual cash reimbursement prior to recordation of any final map which by itself, or in combination with previously -recorded maps under this tentative map, creates lots or fifty or more percent (50%) of the dwelling units proposed for this development. The City shall have the option of accepting additional landscaping and related street improvements along 52nd Avenue adjacent to Fritz Burns Park, which would not normally be required as a condition of approval for this project, and providing a credit against the reimbursements otherwise required under this Condition in an amount equal to the value of the additional improvements approved by the City Engineer and installed by the applicant. 43. The following minimum street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: *B. OFF -SITE STREETS 1). 52nd Avenue from the west property boundary to Washington Street (Primary Arterial) - Install all remaining improvements for 86-feet curb to curb improvement plus sidewalk, walls along both sides of the street and a raised landscape median, and landscaping in setback areas. 2). 52nd Avenue/Washington Street Intersection - As required by the City Engineer. 3). 52nd Avenue from Washington Street to east property boundary (Major Arterial) - Install all remaining improvements for major arterial (51 -feet half street) on south side, remaining improvements to existing roadway on north side, sidewalk and Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment I Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 walls along both sides, raised landscape median, and landscaping in setback areas. 4). Frances Hack Lane (Old 52nd Avenue) from Avenida Bermudas to an easterly terminus to be determined by fire station access needs - Construct 32-feet curb -to -curb local street with landscaping in parkways. 5). Avenida Nuestra from Calle Guatemala to Calle Kalima (Local Street) - Construct the south side of a 32-feet curb -to -curb local street including landscaped setback. * *B. PRIVATE STREETS AND CULS-DE-SAC *1). Entry street - divided with two 24-feet lanes, unless reduced widths are approved by the Fire Department. *2). Primary circulation streets - 36-feet wide 3). Residential - 36 feet wide if double loaded (buildings on both sides), 32 feet if single loaded 4). Cul de sac curb radius - 38-feet Bus turnouts, turn lanes, acceleration/deceleration lanes and/or 'Other features contained in the approved construction plans may warrant additional street widths or other measures as determined by the City Engineer. *44. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted as follows: A. Main access drive at the intersection of Washington and 52nd Avenue - Unrestricted. The applicant shall provide stacking room in the guardhouse lane for a minimum of three entering vehicles. *B. Emergency access drives from Avenida Bermudas, Frances Hack Lane, and maintenance yard entry drive - as approved by the Riverside County Fire Department and the Director of Public works. *C. (delete) Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment I Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 *D. Maintenance yard access drive. The turning movements at the 52nd Avenue intersection shall be restricted to right turn movements only. 45. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and mailbox clusters approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 46. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond development boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street width transitions, or other incidental work which will ensure that newly constructed improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and conform with the City's standards and practices. 47. Improvement plans shall be prepared for all on- and off -site street and access gates. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted standard and supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. 48. Street right-of-way geometry for cul-de-sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut- backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 49. All streets proposed to serve residential or other access driveways shall be designed and constructed with vertical curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods to convey nuisance water without ponding in yard or drive areas and to facilitate street sweeping. 50. Street pavement sections shall be designed using the Caltrans procedure for a 20-year life and shall consider site -specific data including soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction and home building activity). If streets are initially constructed with only a portion of the full thickness of pavement, the following shall apply: A. The pavement design shall consider the effect of construction and other traffic loadings on the partial pavement for the maximum period of time the applicant desires to delay the final lift. Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment I Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 B. If the delayed lift is less than 1 - 1 /2-inches in thickness, the lift shall not be placed between October 15 and March 15 unless approved by the City Engineer. Minimum structural sections for A.C. pavement shall be as follows: Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" 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" The applicant shall submit current (no more than two years old) mix designs for base materials, Portland cement concrete and asphalt concrete, including complete mix design lab results, for review and approval by the City. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (no more than six months old at the time proposed for construction) aggregate gradation test results to confirm that the mix design gradations can be reproduced in production of the base or paving material. Construction operations shall not be scheduled until mix designs are approved. 51. Prior to occupancy of homes or other permanent buildings within the development, the applicant shall install all street and sidewalk improvements, traffic control devices and street name signs along open access routes to those buildings. If on -site streets are initially constructed with only a portion of the full thickness of pavement, the applicant shall complete the pavement when directed by the City but in any case prior to final inspections of any of the final ten percent of homes within the tract (see provisions of above condition on street pavement sections). *52. A. Prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the clubhouse, the applicant shall construct a minimum six foot high solid meandering masonry wall adjacent to Avenida Bermudas, along the south side of 52nd Avenue, and the portion of the east boundary not abutting the mountains. These walls shall be in compliance with the location, design, and materials as approved by the City Council. Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment 1 Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 B. Prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the first residential unit, a perimeter wall along the north property line shall be constructed utilizing the following design features: 1 The existing wall design located at the southern terminus of Washington Street, shall be continued along both sides of Washington Street and around the corners for a short distance to be determined by the Community Development Director. 2. Westward from Washington Street, along the north property line, the applicant shall utilize the approved perimeter wall design to be constructed along Avenida Bermudas, to the northwest corner, then proceed southward along the West boundary to the ultimate right-of-way on the north side of 52nd Avenue. * *3. Eastward from Washington Street, along the north property line, the applicant shall utilize the applicant's wall design found along the north side of 52nd Avenue to complete a perimeter wall. The location, design, and materials on the north property line wall shall be subject to review and approval of the Community Development Director prior to recordation of the first final map. *53. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the perimeter setback areas or lots along Avenida Bermudas, Avenida Nuestra, Frances Hack Lane, and both sides of 52nd Avenue. The applicant shall maintain the landscape improvements in the setbacks along 52nd Avenue, Avenida Bermudas and Frances Hack Lane in perpetuity, or may provide for a Homeowners Association (HOA) to maintain said land, except for the Avenida Nuestra Parkway. 54. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared for landscaped lots, landscape setback areas, common areas, medians, perimeter park -ways, and retention basins. The plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for plan checking. The plans are not approved for construction until they have been approved by the Community Development Department and signed by the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. 55. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights -of -way and 3:1 in landscape setbacks. Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment I Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 56. 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 five feet of curbs along public streets. 57. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. 58. The applicant shall provide public transit amenities as required by Suniine Transit and/or the City Engineer which may include a bus turnout and passenger waiting shelter. The location and character of the turnout and' - shelter shall be as determined by Sunline Transit and the City Engineer. 59. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 60. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing not included in the City's permit inspection program but which are required by the City as evidence that materials and their placement comply with plans and specifications. 61. The applicant shall utilize qualified California -Registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, or land surveyors, as appropriate, to provide, or -have their agents provide, sufficient supervision and -verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 62. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words' 'Record Drawings,' "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor. The applicant shall submit. revised AutoCad files of the improvements as constructed. 63. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment I Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1999 improvements by the creation of a Homeowner's Association (HOA). The applicant shall maintain off -site public improvements until final acceptance of improvements by the City Council. 64. The applicant shall provide a recommended maintenance booklet for streets, landscaping, perimeter walls, drainage facilities, and/or other improvements to be maintained by the Homeowners Association (HOA). The booklet should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist the HOA in planning for routine and long term maintenance. 65. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking- and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. 66. Schedule (A) fire protection approved Super fire hydrants, (6' x 4' x 2-1 /2') will be located at each -street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with any portion of any frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow will be (1,000) g.p.m. for a 2-hour duration at 20 psi. Additional fire flow will be required for multi -family or maintenance use. 67. Prior to recordation of the final map, applicant/developer will furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review/approval. Plans will conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system will meet the fire flow requirements. Plans will be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company with -the following certification: "I certify that the design of the, water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 68. The required water system including fire hydrant will be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. 69. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment 1 Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 construction of the model units only. Plans for a temporary water system must be submitted to the Fire Department for review prior to issuance of building permits. 70. This approval does not authorize the construction of a golf clubhouse, cart barn, half -way house, gatehouse, and a maintenance facility at the general locations shown on Exhibit A. These buildings' specific locations, design, height, and size shall be subject to separate Site Development Permit. 71. The development of custom, single-family lots shall be governed by the following: A. The applicant shall. establish a Design Review Committee to review and approve all development within Tentative Tract 28470. The main objectives of this Committee shall be to assure that building architecture, building materials and colors, building height and setbacks, and landscaping design follow appropriate design themes throughout the tract. Procedures and operation of the committee shall be set forth in the Tract's Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC & R's) to be administered by the Homeowner's Association (HOA). B. Applicant shall establish within the CC&R's site design standards appropriate to the residential lots, including but not limited to, front, side and rear setbacks, lot coverage, etc. Standards shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department as part of its review of the CC&R's, but to be no less restrictive than the R-L Zone Standards, as appropriate. C. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for any house within Tentative Tract 28470, landscaping/ground cover shall be installed and appropriate9y maintained. Type of planting, method of installation, and maintenance techniques shall be subject to plan approval by the Community Development Department. D. All roof -mounted equipment shall be screened from view at all sides by design of the house. All ground -mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from view by methods approved by the Community Development Department. Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment I Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 E. The minimum dwelling unit (living area) size for all residential units she 11 'be 1,200 square feet (excluding attached or detached parking garage). F. All dwelling units shall have a minimum two car garage measuring 20- feet by 20-feet- in overall size. The garage can be either attached or detached. G. The architectural style of the project shall be Spanish Colonial, Southwest Adobe, Pueblo, or other styles approved by the development's Design Review Board. H. All roofing material within the project shall be clay or concrete tile barrel. The color of the roof tiles shall consist of desert hues. 72. Any minor changes in, lot mix, sizes, lines, or shapes, or street alignments, shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to any final map approvals for recordation. 73. Prior to recordation of final map, hillside conservation easements on Lots 27, 28, 29 and 30 shall be dedicated to the City for all areas located inside the Hillside Conservation District. The same shall be done for -Lots 233, 234, and 235. 74. Prior to recordation of the final map, a Hillside Conservation Easement shall be dedicated to the City for all the remainder area, Lot 250, within the Hillside Conservation Overlay District or other options contained in Zoning -Code Section 9.140.40.N. 75. Class 11 bike lanes shall be installed on the east side of Avenida Bermudas adjacent to the tract and on both sides of 52nd Avenue between Washington Street and Avenida Bermudas. *76. The maximum pad elevation measured at the center of the building pads within 175 feet of Avenida Bermudas shall be: a) no more than one (1) foot higher than the top of the east curb on Avenida Bermudas, or b) no higher than the existing elevation at said location prior to December 1, 1996, whichever is higher. 77. The existing light pole and luminaire located at the 52nd Avenue/Washington Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment 1 Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 Street intersection shall be removed when the traffic signal is installed. 78. The triangular island in the 52nd Avenue/Washington Street intersection shall belandscaped. 79. * * *For a distance of 150 feet east of the ultimate right-of-way of Avenida Bermudas, -single family residences shall be restricted to a maximum of 1 7 feet in height, excluding any roof projections (chimneys, etc.) which are subject to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, for Lots 85 - 94, 177 - 189, and 209 - 219. 80. Applicant/Developer shall submit final landscape plans for all golf course landscaping, which shall be designated to feature drought tolerant plant species, and the latest water conserving irrigation technology. The plan(s) shall be subject to initial review by the Community Development Department, with subsequent final review and acceptance by the Coachella Valley Water District prior to landscape construction. Evidence of CVWD acceptance shall be submitted to the Community Development Department. 81. Adequate provision shall be made for continuous. maintenance of all landscaping and related features by the Homeowner's Association (HOA). 82. All lighting facilities shall comply with Chapter 9.2 1 0 (Outdoor Light Control) and be designated to minimize light and glare impacts to surrounding property. All lighting to be installed shall be subject to review and approval -by the Community Development Department. 83. The existing trees on the site shall be incorporated into the landscape plan as required by Certificate of Appropriateness 96-00 1, and Site Development Permit 96-599. A tree retention plan shall be submitted to staff as part of the final landscape plan and prior to any site grading. Citrus trees in the vicinity of the Hacienda del Gato shall be preserved. 84. Prior to the recordation of the final map, the Applicant shall submit to the Community Development Director the following documents which shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that the open space/recreation areas, common areas, and private streets and drives shall be maintained in accordance with the intent and purpose of this approval. Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment I Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 A. The document to convey title; B. Covenants, Conditions, and, Restrictions to be recorded; and, The approved Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions shall be recorded at the same time that the final subdivision map is recorded. A Homeowner's Association, with the unqualified right to assess the owners of the individual units for reasonable maintenance costs, shall be established and continuously maintained. The association shall have the right to lien the property of any owners who default in the payment of their assessments. Such lien shall not be subordinate to any encumbrance other than a first deed of trust, provided that such deed of trust is made in good faith and for value and is of record prior to the lien of the homeowners association. 85. Appropriate approvals shall be secured prior to establishing any construction or sales facilities, and/or signs on the, subject property. 86. All historical plaques or monuments which are erected on the property shall be approved by the La Quinta Historic Preservation Commission prior to installation. The project CC & R's shall include information on the historical nature of the site and identify the three subject sites (CA-RIV-1179, CA-RIV- 2823, and CA-RIV-2826) plus information about the Hacienda del Gato residence. 87. The applicant shall provide verification to the Community Development Department of the completion of the capping of archaeological site CA-RIV- 1179 by the project archaeologist. A conservation easement for preservation in perpetuity shall be dedicated to the city of La Quinta shall be recorded over the capped site. 88. The applicant shall submit plans for street lighting along roads, if any, for review and approval by the Community Development Department. 89. The requirements of the City's Off -Street Parking Ordinance shall be met concerning all supplemental accessory facilities (e.g., clubhouse, cart barn, maintenance facility, etc.). 90. The applicant shall work with Waste Management of the Desert to implement provisions of AB 939 and AB 1462. The Applicant is required to work with Waste Management in setting up the following programs for this project: Planning Commission Resolution 98- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Tentative Tract 28470 Amendment 1 Tradition Club Associates, LLC February 24, 1998 A. Developer shall prepare a plan to provide enlarged trash enclosures for inclusion of separate facilities for storage of recyclables such as glass, plastics, newsprint and steel and aluminum cans. B. Developer shall provide proper on -site storage facilities within the project for green waste associated with golf course and common area maintenance. Compost materials shall be stored for pick-up by Waste management, or an authorized hauler for transport to an appropriate facility. C. Curbside recycling service shall be provided in areas where no centralized trash/recycling bins are provided or utilized. 91. All residences/dwellings are required to have illuminated building address numbers per the La Quinta Municipal Code. 92. Property lines and perimeter walls for all residential units shall be located at the top of the graded slope for each parcel. 93. The California Fish and Game Environmental filing fees shall be paid. The fee is $1,250 plus $78.00 for the Riverside County document processing. This fee shall be payable to "Riverside County Clerk". The fee shall be paid to the Community Development Department within 24 hours after review by the City Council. 94. The applicant shall pay park fees in -lieu of parkland dedication per Chapter 13.48 of the Subdivision Ordinance. *95. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan attached to Environmental Assessment 96-333. *96. During grading activities, the project site shall be monitored by a professionally qualified archaeological monitor. The monitor is authorized to temporarily divert or stop equipment in order to investigate and mitigate exposed cultural deposits. A final report of the monitoring activities shall be submitted to the City's Historic Preservation Commission for review. 97. Developer agrees to indemnify; defend and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the city's approval of the MND; the Conditional Use Permit, and/or the Tract Map for this project. ATTACHMENT 4 City Council Minutes 13 April 1, 1997 1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-031, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28470, CHANGE OF ZONE 96-081, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 96-599, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS 96-001, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-333 - FOR SUBDIVISION OF 747 ACRES INTO 242 CUSTOM RESIDENTIAL LOTS, AN 18-HOLE GOLF COURSE, CHANGE TO A PORTION OF THE EXISTING RL ZONING TO GC (GOLF COURSE), A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW SIX RESIDENTIAL LOTS, TWO GOLF TEE BOXES, TWO STREETS IN THE HILLSIDE CONSERVATION ZONING DISTRICT, AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A -CLUBHOUSE, MAINTENANCE BUILDING, CART BARN, AND HALF -WAY HOUSE TO SERVICE THE GOLF CARTS - PROJECT LOCATION IS SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF WASHINGTON STREET AND EAST OF AVENIDA BERMUDAS. APPLICANT: TRADITION CLUB ASSOCIATES, LLC. Mayor Holt advised that this is a continued public hearing and, although, the public hearing was closed at the last meeting, public comments would be received. Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that on March 18, 1997, Council asked the applicant and staff to address three different issues with the first being the location of the wall along Avenida Bermudas. In reviewing the applicant's illustrations, he advised that the setback for the meandering wall would range from 8-49 feet except for a 5-foot setback at the southerly end of the project, noting that the sidewalk increases from 5 to 8 feet wide at Calle Colima. The wall will include 6-7-foot sections made of wrought -iron -fencing wherever the wall meanders. Council Member Adolph advised that he didn't like the 120-foot stretch of wall up against the sidewalk and asked if it could be softened, possibly with a living fence. Mr. Herman advised that a retaining wall or berming would be necessary to move the wall back. Ms. Honeywell, City Attorney, advised that living fences are not allowed in the fencing ordinance. Mr. Herman then described the typical landscaping which includes groundcover, grass, trees, shrubs, etc., and he showed a picture of a typical white wall with squeeze joints and a cap on top. The second issue raised by Council was the pad heights along Avenida Bermudas and he showed a cross City Council Minutes 14 April 1, 1997 section that depicted the slopes in various areas of the project. The last issue also dealt with pad heights. He advised that the centerline of those lots match the elevation of the existing Cove lots on the west side of Avenida Bermudas. However, because the proposed lots are much wider than the existing Cove lots (120-180 feet vs 50 feet), the north edge of the proposed lots may be slightly higher than the Cove lot directly across from. the north edge of the proposed Tradition lot. For example, the longitudinal slope of Avenida Bermudas varies from 1 % to 2.7%, which means in the steepest location along Bermudas, the "stepping" effect for the Cove lots is 1.35 feet from lot to lot, and the "stepping" effect for Tradition lots varies between 1.2 feet to 4.8 feet. The net effect is the north ,edge of the Tradition lots can theoretically be as much as 1.1 feet higher than the cove lots across the street, however, in most cases the height differential is less than one foot. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Herman advised that a retaining wall is required whenever the final grade is more than 18 inches unless there's sufficient property to have an adequate slope. In regard to the pad heights around the retention basin, he advised that a few of the interior lots are 3-10 feet higher than the lots on Avenida Bermudas, but most of them are the same or lower. The lots along Avenue 52 are 4 feet higher than the street. Council Member Adolph asked if the City Code specifies maximum height above the center line of the street and Mr. Herman advised that pad -height requirements in tracts are related to the interior lots and their relationship to each other. He noted that in non -gated communities, a 1 % slope from the rear lot to the front lot is required to insure adequate drainage to public streets, but the drainage from this project will be maintained on -site. He further advised that the lot heights are handled on a case -by -case basis. Council Member Sniff asked about the drainage of flood -waters from the mountains to the retention basin. Mike Rowe, 41-865 Boardwalk, Suite 101, Palm Desert, of Winchester Development, representing Cienna Corporation (Tradition Club Associates, LLC), felt that the town meeting held Monday evening resulted in some compromises and better understanding between the developer and the public. In regard to the three issues from the last meeting, he pointed out that the wall setbacks along Avenida Bermudas are not measured from the curb, but rather from the back of the sidewalk which adds an additional 8 feet to the setback, resulting in a 55-foot setback from the curb at one point in the wall which is more generous than any other part of the valley. Wrought -iron fencing will be used at each meandering section to help break up the looks of the wall and he advised that turf is proposed for the perimeter landscaping, but will use desert City Council Minutes 15 April 1, 1997 landscaping if that's the desire of the community. Regarding the pad heights along Avenue 52, he advised that the grade along Avenue 52 is .03% and in order to have proper drainage, the grade along the interior streets is .05%. In reviewing the drainage plan, he advised that the drainage along Avenue 52 will be redirected to the project's retention basin to help alleviate flooding along Avenue 52, but in order to protect the homes in the project, the pads are stair - stepped with grade differentials being kept at a minimum and yet maintaining the integrity of the flood -control facilities. The interior pads are the same elevation or lower than the pads along Avenida Bermudas. In regard to the six lots in the Hillside Conservation Zone, he advised that the line of sight from the southerly end of the project is above the upper elevation of the those pads which are no higher than the existing pads on the west side of Avenida Bermudas. He pointed out that the six homes will not be built on the hillside, but rather in the Hillside Conservation Zone, noting that the developer is allowed to build 28 homes in exchange for the 280 acres of Hillside Conservation Zone property that they are deeding over as open space and when that amount is added to the six residential pads, the amount increases to. 29 homes. The developer is only building six homes that will not be detrimental to the line of sight to the hillsides. The six pads are actually a reduction in both number and elevation from the previously -approved project and they're an integral part of the project. Council Member Henderson felt that the fencing and landscaping proposed by the developer would be fruitless as long as the straight sidewalk exists and suggested replacing it with a meandering sidewalk that is consistent in width and landscaped on both sides. She felt that it would go a long way in enhancing the visual look. Mr. Rowe agreed that the straight sidewalk would detract from the meandering of the wall, but pointed out that the project is conditioned to pay for the cost of the existing sidewalk (Condition No. 43) and they can't agree to pay for it twice. They're willing to take out portions of the sidewalk in order to meander the rest of it if they're allowed to use the funds they owe the assessment district for the existing sidewalk. Council Member Henderson felt that the developer should be able to use a fair share of that cost for the sidewalk. In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Rowe advised that the wall setback is reduced to 8 feet in some areas to show some architectural depth and the sidewalk in those areas is 8 feet wide. He further advised that a 6-foot high wall will be constructed on a 2-foot high berm in two areas where the lots are closer to the street to accommodate the Noise Study requirement for an 8- City Council Minutes 16 April 1, 1997 foot high sound barrier. They're also proposing to use a 2-foot high berm for visual effect wherever necessary throughout the entire length of the wall and he noted that it would also assist the drainage, especially in the 50-foot setback areas. In the southwest corner, the lots are about 15 feet below Avenida Bermudas and he advised that they would try to keep the wall back away from the sidewalk at the most southerly end of the project. Council Member Henderson referred to Condition No. 9 which allows minimum widths to be used as average widths in meandering the wall and she advised that she wouldn't want to meander it any closer than 10 feet from the sidewalk to which Mr. Rowe advised that the southerly end is the closest that the wall will be to the sidewalk. She agreed with looking for fairness in Condition No. 43 for exchanging the funds to replace the sidewalk along Avenida Bermudas and felt that most of the other issues have been addressed, noting that the pad sites within 335 feet of Avenida Bermudas are limited to a 17-foot high building. She referred to Condition No. 53 and suggested that the wall on the north side of Avenue 52 from Washington Street to the Citrus Golf Course, match the wall on Avenida Bermudas, instead of matching the Citrus wall which she didn't find attractive. Mr. Rowe advised that they wouldn't have a problem with that and noted that the wall on both sides of Avenue 52 from Washington Street to Avenida Bermudas will match the wall on Avenida Bermudas. He further advised that they could meander the wall on both sides of Avenue 52 if the setbacks will allow it. In response to Council Member Adolph, Mr. Rowe advised that none of the interior homes will be higher than the perimeter homes because the interior lots are 13 feet lower in elevation. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Rowe advised that the line of sight for the six -lots, were taken from the pads on the west side of Avenida Bermudas, with the assumption that any further back, the line of sight would be blocked by existing homes, but residents traveling down Avenida Bermudas will be able to see farther into the project. He then presented a picture to show that mature landscaping on either side of the wall would not block the mountain view and pointed out that the mountains on the west side of the Cove are visible above the mature landscaping of the houses between there and Avenida Bermudas. He advised that the purpose of the wrought -iron fencing is to break up the linear look of the wall and as the landscaping matures, it will block some of the view through the fencing. He stated that they are cognizant of the fact that the mountains are a part of the. Cove as City Council Minutes 17 April 1, 1997 residents travel along Avenida Bermudas and he believed that they would still be seen over this project. Council Member Sniff felt the view of the mountains should be retained as much as possible and asked if the retention basin would be able to hold run-off from the Cove and the detention basins south of Calle Tecate to which Mr. Rowe advised that the basin would handle a 100-year storm, which is 520-acre feet of water, and even more. Council Member Adolph briefly reviewed what has transpired with the project so far and felt that, although Council can't undo what has already been done, they can tighten up the controls on the Hillside Conservation Zone regulations. He pointed out that the grading permit was issued last December in an effort to be a user-friendly City, but advised that he would not approve grading permits in the future without seeing a grading plan, noting that Council did not receive a grading plan until a month ago. It was his understanding that only the golf course would be pre -graded, but it's obvious that the developer did much more than that. He asked about the location of the six sensitive areas that weren't to be graded until a final grading plan was approved. Mr. Speer, Senior Engineer, advised that the six areas are: 1) the area of the six lots, 2) the toe of the slope near the six lots, 3) the alluvial fan where the golf tees are proposed, 4) another area at the toe of the slope for golf tees, and 5 and 6) at the point of the rock near old Avenue 52. He advised that none of these areas have been graded, noting that the dirt piled higher than the toe of the slope is not against the rock. Council Member Adolph pointed out the differences between the Tradition project and the previously -approved tract map, which is still valid and needs no further approval, noting that the density of the Tradition project is lower and that six homes are proposed in the hillside area instead of eight. In response to Council Member Adolph, Ms. Honeywell advised -that the Council does not have a right to revise the existing approved tract map unless it's requested by the developer. Council Member Adolph believed the intent of the Hillside Conservation Ordinance is to protect the hillsides and ambience of the area and he noted that the developer has been asked to take that into consideration. He felt that he must respect the rights of both the developer and the community and hoped that this wouldn't set a precedent that would go beyond the intent of the ordinance. City Council Minutes 18 April 1, 1997 Kay Wolff, 77-227 Calle Ensenada, spoke in reference to the telephone poll reported in the Desert Sun which stated that 75% of those polled supported the project. She advised that her husband was one of those polled and that she felt the poll was misleading and in some ways fraudulent because he was never directly asked if he was in favor or against any portion of the project and was told that the poll was representing the "registration of voters." They asked him to rate the performance of the individual Council Members and answer whether or not he felt that property owners should be able to build on their own property. They also asked if he was familiar with the Hillside Development Zone, the Arnold Palmer Traditions, and the issue of the six home sites. He was asked to respond to a series of questions about the project that called for indirect answers instead of yes or no and with threatening implication, they asked if he was cognizant of the fact that the City could face litigation if the Council didn't vote a certain way. She urged Council to vote no on the six home sites. Joan Rebich, 53-810 Avenida Cortez, was disappointed in the developer's disregard of the people in regard to the preservation of La Quinta's mountain landscape. She felt that the survey questioned the competence of the Council whom she had confidence in that they would listen to the electorates' disapproval of the six lots. She felt that the mountains should be preserved for the community's grandchildren and that approval of the six lots would set a precedent. She urged Council to listen to the people. Arthur Attenbach, 52-985 Avenida Bermudas, understood that there would only be a 10-foot setback from the park to half way up Avenida Bermudas and noted that if it's measured from the curb, it would only leave 18 inches for landscaping which he felt was insufficient. He was definitely against putting anything in the hillside conservation area and advised that -he was unaware of the previously -approved project and felt that the Council had done a disservice to the people by not reporting it. He commented on the noise that would bounce off the development's wail and across to the west side of the street and felt that the speed limit on Avenida Bermudas should be reduced. Lastly, he felt that the project should have to maintain the same lighting standards as the rest of the Cove to preserve the dark sky. Jack Wilson, 53-960 Avenida Montezuma, felt most of the issues could be properly mitigated, but urged Council to not succumb to subtle threats, but rather unconditionally, reject the six lots in the hillside area. He further urged Council to support the intent of the City Code, even if it's a bit shaky legally. Jeff Smith, 54-631 Avenida Alvarado, referred to one of the poll questions that asked "wouldn't you rather have six lots instead of the eight lots that are City Council Minutes 19 April 1, 1997 already approved." He urged Council to resist the pressure of their threats to go ahead with the eight lots and to take back the acreage of unused hillside zone property that they donated. He felt the community would support Council in preserving the hillsides that are not interpreted as such by the developer. He believed that it's a quality project and that the compromises on the wall are an improvement, but felt that the developer has gone too far with the hillside development which is the most important issue. Fred Wolff, 77-227 Calle Ensenada, congratulated the Council Members who were responsive to their electorates at the last meeting and stated that he's rarely seen a stronger feeling from the community than he's seen on this issue. He felt that the developer's efforts to sway the community were unethical and urged Council to stand firm against the six lots. He further felt that the only option the community will have left if the Conditional Use Permit is approved, is to draft a referendum and seek an injunction against the project. Dennis Chappel, 74-856 Joni Drive, Suite A, Palm Desert, President of Desert Contractors' Association, advised that he respects and shares the compassion of those who love the hillsides, but felt that regulations should be in place before a project gets to this point. Otherwise, the developer, in good faith, spends a lot of money putting a plan together and after receiving Council approval, receives opposition from the community that may stop the development, which he believed was unfair. He believed the developer has met all of the requirements and urged Council to approve the project. George Gemette, 49-614 Avila Drive, of Desert Contractor's Association, spoke in support of the project. Ty Broadhead, 53-395 Avenida Bermudas, advised that he lives directly across from the proposed six lots and felt that it's a "no brainier" that this project should go forward and felt that the proposed plan is better than the old one. He believed that the project is an asset to the community and that the six lots that are prime property, will help make the project. successful. He pointed out that the developer has been kind enough to let the community hike in this area for years, but he owns the property and has the right to develop it, much like anyone else who might wish to build a house on their lot in the Cove that may block the neighbor's mountain view. He urged Council to not let the threats detour them from doing what's right, pointing out that a number of people make up the silent majority and that a lot of people didn't come to this meeting because they're not concerned about this project. Dan Thillens, 52-920 Avenida Rubio, spoke in favor of the project and the revisions that have been made and felt that it would be nice to looj at beautiful City Council Minutes 20 April 1, 1997 landscaping on the east side of Avenida Bermudas as opposed to cars parked on lawns, garbage cans, and other unsightly things that are seen on the west side of the street. He and his family are looking forward to anything that will enhance and beautify the City. Diana Garcia, 78-825 Nolan Circle, felt that not all of the citizens are against the project, but rather believed that most of them are concerned about responsible progression within the City. She felt. that the developer has met the established guidelines and has tried to dispel the rumors as well as doing everything they can to mitigate the concerns. She supported the project and felt that it will help beautify the Cove. Jeff Hayden, 79-310 Spalding, Bermuda Dunes, Vice President of Desert Contractors' Association, felt that the developer has exercised a lot of compromise in this project and advised that he supports it. Mike Wales, 52-870 Avenida Montezuma, spoke in support of the mitigation measures that have been made and felt that with a few more changes, it would be a great project for everyone and he thanked Council for their careful consideration of the project. Joseph De Francesco, 54.185 Avenida Madero, spoke in opposition to the six lots and felt this matter should be continued until the drainage plan is confirmed by State engineers. Fred Wilson, 77-270 Calle Chihuahua, spoke in support of the project and the developer, but didn't understand why the six lots are such an integral part of the project and felt that the project could go forward without them. He felt that the developer's current plans are designed to maximize a return on their investment and that it boils down to money and a willingness to go against the wishes of the people. He believed that probably 97% of the people approve of 97% of the project and agreed that the developer has an opportunity to make a grand gesture by yielding on the six lots. He felt that if the developer would look at the big picture and evaluate the options, they will see that elimination of the six lots will be their best economic decision should the Council stand firm as it has in the past and he urged Council to do the right thing. Katie Barrows, 53-298 Avenida Montezuma, agreed that most of the community strongly supports this project and advised that she's looking for Council's support for the elimination of the six lots which she felt are not necessary to the project. She referred to the large opposition of the six lots at the last meeting and felt that Council may have legal cause to approve the City Council Minutes 21 April 1, 1997 project, but pointed out that they also have an opportunity to deny the six lots as requested by the people. She didn't feel that the developer would carry through with their threat of moving forward on the previously -approved project because she didn't believe that they would build a project that's not economically viable and good for the community. She hoped that Council would do what's good for the community and believed the Hillside Conservation Ordinance should be reviewed again for needed improvements. Peggy Gordon -Lyon, 52-920 Avenida Montezuma, a real estate broker for 35 years, felt that most of the those who bought homes in La Quinta weren't aware that the Hillside Conservancy area is privately owned and didn't expect any building to ever be done in those areas. She also felt that there's a lack of communication between the Council, Planning Commission, real estate brokers, and the homeowners who purchased homes here because of the mountains. She believed that it's a good project and that removing six lots wouldn't change its viability, but rather would cause the community to support it. John Guenther, 53-235 Avenida Bermudas, referred to some pictures and a letter that he sent to Council as well as his experience in this type of business and stated that he's delighted with the developer's plans. He believed that the completion of this project would further enhance the community. He felt it would be great if the area could be retained as desert property, but pointed out that that's not pcssible because it's private property that the developer has a right to develop and he felt that no matter how it's developed, it's not going to please everyone. Unless the Council has a legal right to deny the six lots, he believed they have the fiduciary responsibility to allow the developer to continue with this project. Doug Hassett, 54-800 Avenida Rubio, asked if Council could deny the six lots without a legal battle and he commented on the community involvement in this issue, noting that they only want what is best for the community. He felt that it's going to be a wonderful project, but was concerned about retaining the conservancy area. He questioned the value of the six lots to the project, pointing out that when animals come down from the mountains, they cause a lot of landscaping problems that he, personally, wouldn't want to deal with. He felt the hillside area should be preserved for the animals that live there and advised that he didn't understand why the previous approval is still good and not a thing of the past. Janet Hamilton, 54-528 Oak Tree, felt that approval of the six lots would set a precedent and was concerned about the developer being able to rely on a City Council Minutes 22 April 1, 1997 prior tract map that she felt was probably a mistake and could be argued in court. She urged Council to rely on the Hillside Conservation Ordinance. Cynthia Casio, 52-370 Avenida Juarez, expressed compassion for the developer in having to deal with a Council that she felt was out of touch with the community and she questioned why she didn't receive a public hearing notice. She was concerned about the traffic issue not being addressed as well as the Indian burial ground that she understood exists on the site. She urged Council to deny the six lots and asked Mayor Holt to abstain from voting on this issue since she's not a full-time resident of the City. Craig Bryant, 41-865 Boardwalk, Suite 101, Palm Desert, of Winchester Development, advised that the six lots are not in the hillside and pointed out that 30% of the Cove is higher in elevation than those lots. He felt that those who know anything at all about development could understand why the six lots are extremely germane to the success of the project. John Ivancich, 53-600 Avenida Montezuma, was concerned about how the increased traffic at Washington Street and Highway 111 would be handled and questioned the allowance of a six-foot wail on top of a two -foot berm, noting that no one else is allowed to build an eight -foot high fence. He suggested placing the wall behind the berm and felt that there should be more open spaces along the wall. He agreed that the sidewalk should undulate with the wall. Ms. Honeywell addressed two legal issues brought up during public comment, advising that the normal life span of a final tract map is two to three years and up to two, one-year extensions are sometimes granted by the City. However, due to the economy, the State has also granted automatic extensions to tract maps during the last four or five years which has affected the expiration date of the existing tract map. In regard to the relationship of this project and the Hillside Conservation Ordinance, she advised that the intent of the ordinance was to protect the hillsides to the greatest degree possible, considering both Federal and State Constitution provisions against taking private property without just compensation. She advised that adoption of the ordinance was very controversial for some because it allowed private property owners to develop residential houses (1 per '10 acres) in the hillside areas where the grade is below 20%, but the purpose of that provision is to protect the ordinance from being attacked as unconstitutional. Since the six lots are in an alluvial fan, they require a Conditional Use Permit analysis, but she pointed out that they are mostly below the toe of the slope. The ordinance provisions for lots below the toe of the slope, allow one lot per 10 acres and the transferring of those lots to a more dense area if they're not built above the toe of the City Council Minutes 23 April 1, 1997 slope. The developer is giving 280 acres of hillside property into a conservation easement that can never be built on, which she pointed out is the main purpose of the ordinance. She advised that in return, the six lots will be clustered in a more dense phase than the one per 10 acres that's allowed, noting that the ordinance would allow them to cluster up to 28 lots, in theory. Staff has determined by the analysis, that the project meets the basic requirements and intent of the ordinance by preserving 280 acres. The preservation of the 280 acres requires approval .of the six lots, but staff and Council are comfortable that this exchange meets the constitutional allowance for a fair return on the developer's investment of their private property. In response to Mayor Holt, Mr. Herman advised that the developer is required to prepare an archeological report and have monitors. on site and added that the mortars and Indian areas, including the cremation site, will be preserved on -site. He further advised that a major portion of the Indian artifacts were destroyed by CVWD during construction of the flood -control facilities in the area of the six lots. He advised that CVWD, who is responsible for the flood - control facilities, has reviewed the project's grading plan for compliance with regulations. In regard to traffic, he advised that the General Plan requires Washington Street to eventually be developed into six lanes which will accommodate the traffic from this project and any remaining developable properties in the City. Regarding the eight -foot high wall, he advised that under the 1985 and 1992 General Plans, noise studies are required for all new developments in an attempt to limit the noise impact on surrounding properties. The noise study for this project requires an eight -foot high wall in some areas which will consist of a six-foot high wall on a two -foot high berm, such as has been required in other parts of the City. In response to Council Member Adolph, Mr. Herman advised that the General Plan defines open space as areas including outstanding and significant natural and/or manmade features that contribute to the preservation of natural resources, the management production of resources, the reservation of areas for outdoor recreation, including the demands for trail -oriented uses and the protection of public health and safety. He noted that the green area on the map is designated as open space, with the majority of it being a part of the Hillside Conservation Overlay District. Regarding the definition for toe of the slope, he advised that one or more of the four criterias in the Hillside Conservation Ordinance may apply for determining the toe of the slope. The first criteria used is the point where water -borne alluvial material, not exceeding 20% slope, begins to collect at a depth of one foot or more which means that anything above 20% slope is not buildable except for hiking trails, etc. The second criteria used is the dividing line between the steeper rock formations and the more gently sloping alluvial fan. The third and fourth City Council Minutes 24 April 1, 1997 criterias are where the slope grade exceeds 20% and where areas are unprotected from flooding potential, i.e an area above the uppermost flooc- control structure that intercepts runoff and diverts it to a stormwater channel. The six lots in this development are allowed by the ordinance because they're below the 20% slope and have an engineered flood -control system around them to handle water runoff. In regard to the definition of alluvial fans, he advised that they are fan -like land surfaces of deposited material created from the results of rain water that are level or gently sloping, flat, or slightly undulating. In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Herman confirmed that the project must comply with the Dark Sky Ordinance and that the 10-foot setback along Avenida Bermudas is measured from behind the sidewalk or City right-of- way, not from the curb as mentioned from the audience. He pointed out that Avenida Bermudas, Avenue 52, and Jefferson Street are all four -lane facilities and confirmed that Washington Street is no where near buildout. As development occurs, the project is conditioned to install the portion of improvements that are adjacent to the project, but it cannot be required to make improvements at Washington Street and Highway 111. Council Member Perkins felt that the traffic at Washington Street and Highway 111 would move very well when the current improvements are completed and further felt that the only blockage on Washington Street is the bridge that's south of Avenue 50 and the Council is in the process of addressing that. He asked about the distance of the six lots from Avenida Bermudas which Mr. Herman advised is 2000+ feet. Council Member Perkins pointed out that the roof tiles of the six homes would be desert hue colors and some distance from Avenida Bermudas. Council Member Sniff read some of his comments from the City Council Minutes of September 19, 1989 in which he didn't support the Hillside Conservation Ordinance and he advised that his feeling haven't changed as it is not clear enough or strict enough. He felt the project would be a major asset to the City, but was hoping that the developer would withdraw the six lots. He also questioned how the six homes would be protected from runoff from a major storm or from the effects of an earthquake and advised that he felt the six* homes would be put at significant risk. He believed that withdrawal of the six lots would be a very positive action. Mr. Rowe advised that provisions are being made for the safety of the six lots by providing the necessary grading to make a true analysis of what's being built and by providing a setback and rock wall to protect them from rock slides. The runoff will be contained in a channel routed around the homes and down City Council Minutes 25 April 1, 1997 into the existing flood -control facilities and he pointed out that the water would come down the mountain in intervals, not all at once. The flood -control facilities are designed to handle the peak flow and the retention basin is designed to hold the total volume. He advised that the engineers from CVWD have checked their plans and are making sure that all necessary criteria is being met to insure the safety of those homes. He didn't know the individual depths of the channels around the homes because they vary according to the amount of water they will carry, but advised that the information is contained in the Hydrology Report. He advised that the main retention basin will hold 520-acre feet of water and an additional 220-acre feet can be retained in other basins on the property. In regard to the runoff from the Cove, he advised that two major stormdrain pipes carry runoff from the Cove onto their property and that CVWD has determined that the design of the flood -control facilities have not changed except to increase in protection. He then referred to the requested information from the Hydrology Report and advised that the channel around the six lots is 20 feet wide and 2 feet deep and would carry runoff from a 100-year storm (200 CFS or cubic feet per second) which is four inches of rain per hour. Additional runoff is collected at the bottom of the channel which is 20 feet wide and 2 Y2 feet deep and carries 400 CFS. Council Member Adolph read excerpts from the Hillside Conservation Ordinance and stated that he wasn't sure that the regulations are being enforced. He didn't view the location of the six pads as an alluvial fan, but rather many years of rock debris, filled in with gravel and debris from the hillside. He felt that in many cases there's more than a 20% slope and he has a problem with determining that it's not part of the hillside. He's fully in favor of the project, but has a problem with the City approving the six lots when there's so many grey areas in the ordinance. He advised that he was in a state of trying to balance the rights of the developer to proceed, yet do it in the intent of the ordinance to protect the hillsides. He wasn't sure that it would be proper to approve the project, noting that it could be brought up again, and felt that it's obvious that the City's ordinances need to be tightened up. In response to Council Member Perkins, Ms. Honeywell advised that the only way the City could be responsible for risk to the six homes is if it's shown that the City relied unreasonably on engineering that had some design defect. She advised that the Council is responsible for relying on the professional facts presented to them and pointed out that a 100-year storm is a well -recognized standard. u ATTACHMENT NCHE-`-,-� i EZ development company, LLC D F V F l () F) M E N T M A N A C. E R S December 31, 1997 Mr. Jerry Herman Community Development Director City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Tract 28470 Condition # 79 revision request Dear Mr. Herman: E \V/ I JAN 0 5 1998 ;J CITY OF LAQUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT, The attached condition change request allows this development the flexibility in its housing element while still protecting the integrity of the surrounding neighborhood. Our request is to have this condition revised to reflect the same distance and building height restriction approved by the Planning Commission (see attached Condition No. 81). - This restrictive condition was number 81 during the first City Council meeting on March 18, 1997 when m•. t we were going through our processing. There were additional numerous major concerns brought up by the p&ic during this meeting. The council's decision was to continue the meeting to April to allow an opportunity to address their issues. A "Town Hall" meeting was set with the concerned citizens during tilariage 5 this continuance period. This building height issue for lots parallel to Avenida Bermudas wasn't brought up as a concern since the condition essentially stated the same restriction that exists on the adjacent h r)w,dcr5 of side of Avenida Bermudas. As you can see on the attached exhibit, the 150' restriction set in the original condition actually extends into the next row of houses. America 5 Condition (no. 81) was somehow subsequently changed before the April 1st meeting and re -numbered as condition 79 without highlighting that there had been a change from the previously approved tine,t go,f conditions. We are now requesting revising condition no. 81 back to the same as was previously approved. The attached Tentative Map exhibit shows the limits of the two restrictions. Our CC&R's restrict the building heights within the project to a maximum height of 24', which is below the allowed cur5e5 height in this area. Due to the size of the anticipated buildings for the affected lots, our design flexibility is being restricted. We would essentially be forced to have a series of flat roofs at the same elevation which we were originally trying to avoid in discussions at previous meetings. This was the why the e5'dent'a' original condition restriction was extended to 150' after we placed PVC poles on the lots depicting building heights. With the original condition, we can vary the architecture for aesthetic reasons while properties reasonably preserving the mountain views. Please notify me if there are any questions on this matter at your earliest possible convenience. I will be available to discuss any additional material that may be prepared or provided to help explain this issue if you feel it is necessary. Sin r ly, Mike Rowe Project Director 41-8E5 Boardwalk Suite )oi s Dalm Desert, California 92211 .619) 340-3575 • Fax (619) 346-9368 fec to Receivedeived By REQUEST FOR CONDITION CHANGE Please complete this application form. The fee to process this request is $600.00. All approvals of change of conditions must be consistent with the pertinent elements of the I Quinta General Plan and must conform to the current schedule of improvements specified by tl City's Land Division Ordinance. For the purpose of public hearing mailing labels will be required within 500 feet of the propert Application Number = ? S y 2G - 141E e n d.n e" -1- -7*-- 7 Location/Address Southerly end of Washinqton Street at Avenue 52 769-161-001 thru 004 & 162-001,002 & 170-001,003 004 & Assessors Parcel Number 172-001, 002 & 180-001 thru 007 & 190-001 thru OOJ Section/Township/Range Sec 6 & Sec 7 T6S, R7E, S.B.M. Applicant's Name Tradition Club Associates c/o Winchester Development Co., LLC Mailing Address 41-865 Boardwalk, Ste. 101 alm Des er Ca 92211 Phone: F6q 340-3575 Signature� Mike Rowe, Project Director Owner's Name Tradition Club Associates Mailing Address 78-505 Old Avenue 52 La Quinta, Ca 92253 Signature Phone: (760) 564-3355 Please state basis for condition change and include any supportive evidence. Please indicate th number of the specific condition which is being requested for change. OFFICE USE ONLY: General Plan Improvements Initial Approval Request Denied Approved subject to the attached revised conditions. Fonn411 ATTACHMENT 4 Tradition Golf Club Submittal package for City of La Quinta Planning Commision Architectural considerations regarding the current 17 foot height restriction at 335 feet from Avenida Bermudas right of way. City of La Quinta requires that homes be designed using Spanish Colonial architecture as is primary theme. The Traditions has embraced this style as their dominate architectural concept for homes at Tradition. The Architectural Guidelines specifically call for this in the Design Guidelines. Excerpt from the opening statements in the Tradition Guidelines. rnGT(►a;:fiiGUU14. TFTitdM'i1A}Yii}!' :;f$S��P;f ::�y6titdls;.�:::. `.'.�:•.'. �::: The Tradition Golf Club has establisihed design criteria specifically for exterior of homes that reflects the adopted architectural style for La Quinta and the Tradition Community. Page 1 of 7 Tradition Golf Club Submittal package for City of La Quinta Planning Commision MINEVIUm.FLOOR AREA AND LOT COVERAGE 1. Custom lfor:u: Sits dY Villa Sites Tice minitnuin ttoor aura of e»ch dweiling shall he 30W sgttuw feet for all custom homesikis of gteatcr than 17000 soWre fact and 2000 square feet of diving aren on villa sites of 'oss duu; 17000 :square feet. 'rais area ziujl ;je t nclo.wd cniiMy withir..ncc. building s--t Nick diraitatinns +pecitled and .ball not include the ama z:acdorCA:l for garage.^,, polclzcs. patiou, tetr•,.ccs, att•:ums aril other firnilar area. The maximum lot covenzl a shall not exceed forty l n:nut {40%) of total gi-mi lot zuru. I lit coverage ;?raid also conl-()rm tr ',Ck of 1„ Quinta 5wndards as approwd for :his lard usu. Lot coverage shalt ba calculate i an :he hasis of totul conditioned Tieing ;puco plus enclost-Vi garago and utildty spaces: ($efir to l?xitlhlt 1't) This requirement necessitates the ability to use all of the design tools available to the professional Architects and designers. Examples of the types of homes anticipated at Tradition Golf Club Large (3000 sf +) homes with a large variety of roof shapes, building masses and materials. Landscaping and site features with large, mature planting. The traditions has a minimum living (conditioned) floor area for each home at 3000 sf.. The average home at Traditions is anticipated to be between 3000 sf and 5000 which is in excess of the City standards. These minimum areas do not include garage areas and or covered patio. This requirement has been implemented to encourage larger custom estate homes of award wining design. Page 2 of 7 Tradition Golf Club Submittal package for City of La Quinta Planning Commision ...Tradition has set l.. ::.::.....';:...:.:.:....... velopmen ands which help to ensure the de t stand p^ '-i'. t:Cdvrtuxat�xicxitatloxx .:. '. ::..:.. • :.': �::' . ':. :�,.iK,: : ...... : .:.:::...:.:. development of new homes will .E conform to the design �. �. ` y,•�' �', � �-.:' •:: .": syx'CFN�iBua�e: �:::':. _ gn �. �'�:: •�... ... .ua1ih-xpm�x' 4r'Siaf:Y-. `3^ .: s £' standards set forth in the �'? Ma�Yo�ow:.Lniricl.�p.:l'I:t100'sY`.:.: Design Guidelines. .a' c . � � • \,:'i6 \':r � i; : Psoeie�gmiNM:arGti>: �� 2;.a95f ` .. 2 . :}i::• :<�.::�;;:.' • flc4i:� 1.uYco'veii§t.aNall�alxd•coi:Cuin! to. . Maximum lot coverages have been established to f '�"°'°':�°"�'"°':• guarantee that lots will not ;;o,f• .:. q�' e over developed. a :.._..... _ _ ...:... �aufi:,xlse::��v,r>� . b In a :.. ':...... . �..; ':> �: ; < : . .' . ' : •-..' . � ' an effort of protect the>>>�«:::»::>::::>:>::.;:<:. :;:'::`::.' ::: .: ' n desi n concept p g t of the 1 ear y California architecture there is a YeA? i E3.. ,5o . Via. N �.::::.. l 1 � design standard that g ,y 1 .M - :• ... l�t?i�•: 1 .- to t � .1.��}�;1i�.t:::al; . requires that a minimum >>< <�I3Mn '":' > < »........: Mn- `: ':. ::. r- • . of 40% of a homes roof ................. . '<>>° ';:` ;:: x :: k. • . lI..�G € llht ;..:> Ii is A. ese 1t11�1r�liles; : :Any vd4:a ' . use a sloped roof style. :.ro ... ....:......:: • .......... 1Y11 This allows the design to << <::•'::q 5 1 ? : Y 1 I1 es from •fit' . . incorporate both flat and sloping roof styles P g without an over use of the flat style of roof, which is not encouraged. All sloping roof are to use the two piece, clay Spanish style roofing system. Page 3 of 7 Tradition Golf Club Submittal package for City of La Quinta Planning Commision All these tools the designer can use with great success. The use of a higher roof element throughout the majority of home design is not encouraged and would probably be sent back to the architect and or designer to be restudied. Tradition Golf Club Submittal package for City of La Quinta .Planning Commision Tall ceilings sometimes very high pitched, inside lower pitched roofs were done to create a significant effect. Ceilings as well as exterior roof and massing elements are what give the Early California Spanish design the intrigue that it is so noted for. To not allow the variety in these elements would be to take away one of the most basic elements of this design that makes it what it is. Page 5 of 7 .I J ►� Tradition Golf Club Submittal package for City of La Quinta Planning Commision Analysis of room sizes available using 17' height limit and a variety of preferred ceiling heights for interior spaces. 9�' ►��ic 1W� , —T 54) W^ Secondary Bedrooms � 4 Hallways 7 Bathrooms cw Utility rooms. lot Master Bedroom Kitchens Morning rooms Family rooms Den/Media rooms if 1fa.. 17` 4 w� u� tuti P&I Gib • itr Page 6 of 7 Tradition Golf Club Submittal package for City of La Quinta Planning Commision 14� Gun r� kw► OT Family Rooms Living Rooms Entry Foyers Dining Rooms Vestibules Living Rooms Family Rooms Dining Rooms i6 L lw�1T U.fa T Entry Foyers+ wK� k -- Vestibules„�-�- Page 7 of 7 w CHARLES AND DEBBIE CRANE RECEIVED 78-365 HWY. 111 BOX 312 LA QUINTA , CA. 92253 ' 98 FEB I2 Phi 12 `t9 CITY OF Lrr��AQUINTA IN THE REVISE COND #79 OF RES. 9728 TO CHANGE THE 17 FOOT MAX. WX Z�FOaO't' FFMAX- WITHIN A 150 FOOT CORRIDOR EAST OF AVE BERMUDAS WE OWN A HOME IN LAQUINTA ON 52-565 AVE BERMUDAS AND DO NOT WANT TO SEE THIS CHANGE IN THE MAX. HEIGHT. WHY DO THEY COME IN AND THINK THEY CAN CHANGE WHAT'S ALREADY A COVE LAW? WHY DONT YOU THINK OF THE PEOPLE THAT NOW LIVE HERE OFF AVE BERMUDAS AND THE WHOLE COVE? WE ARE NOT FOR THIS CHANGE IN HEIGHT> LET THEM BUILD AS IT WAS TO BE WHEN THE PERMITS WERE FIRST ISSUED. THANK YOU C CHARLIE AND DEBBIE CRANE 760-564-0333 C�e� a January 26, 1998 Mayor and City Council Members City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Case Tract 28470 Amendment #1 Tradition Lot Number 86 Dear Gentlemen: ,,ECEIVED ' 98 JRN 30 Fn 1214 CITY OF LA QU',NTA CITY CLERK We recently purchased the above mentioned lot at the Tradition Country Club. We understand there is a height limitation of only 17 feet for building a home on our lot. We respectfully request you grant us the ability to construct a home with the height of 24 feet. To build the kind of single story, spanish style home we desire, we will need a 24 foot height restriction. our lot is in front of the park and tennis courts, therefore the house will not block any views. Since we are planning to build very soon, we will need your ap- proval as soon as possible. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, C4_ Dick and,Sandy Sladek 2461 Southview Dr. Alamo, CA 94507-2315 PH #C PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: FEBRUARY 24,1998 CASE NOS.: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 98-056 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT 97-057 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA LOCATION: CITYWIDE - HILLSIDE CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT REQUEST: TO AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 9.140.000 HILLSIDE CONSERVATION REGULATIONS, AND THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION ELEMENTS REGARDING HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT DENSITY TRANSFER BACKGROUND: At the direction of the City Council, staff has reviewed Chapter 9.140.000 Hillside Conservation Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance, and proposes the attached code amendment (Attachment 1). The City Council and Planning Commission hillside field trips visited several potential hillside development scenarios, namely single family residences and roads on the hillside, defining toe of slope, etc. (Attachments 2 & 3). In addition, it is necessary to make certain amendments to the La Quinta General Plan to provide consistency between it and the Zoning Ordinance. After the hillside field trips with the Planning Commission and City Council it became apparent that the various development scenarios and constraints were numerous due to the varying topography, making it difficult to develop a set of detailed development standards that would address all possibilities. Therefore, staff recommends rather than creating development standards for all scenarios, that development be reviewed during the Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit processes. This will allow for better addressing site specific concerns. Criteria specific to ensuring sensitive hillside grading must be met for a recommendation of approval. General Plan Amendment The proposed General Plan amendments consist of reducing the density allowance for the Open Space designation from 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres to 1 dwelling unit per 20 acres, and allowing for a 20% density maximum of the General Plan density designation for density transfers as mitigating measures for hillside development impacts. The General Plan Resolution contains the proposed amendments to the General Plan. Zoning Code Amendment The proposed amendments to Chapter 9.140.000 Hillside Conservation Regulations are contained in the Zoning Code Amendment Resolution. The key changes include a statement of purpose, definitions of several important geomorphological terms (most importantly toe of slope), clarification of permitted uses above the toe of slope within areas less than 20% slope, and the procedure for review and approval, grading criteria, development standards, and transfer of development rights from hillside parcels. The primary goal of the proposed amendments is to simplify and clarify hillside development issues and requirements. Submittal of applications for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit will be required for development in the hillsides. The basic procedure for a development application in the hillsides consists of the following steps: 1) Delineation of the toe of slope for the project using a method specified in the Zoning Ordinance for hillside area. Any area above the toe of slope including canyons and boulder fields are within the hillside overlay district. 2) Submit project design compatible with toe of slope delineation and stated hillside development criteria, including architectural review. Submit all special engineering studies such as hydrology and drainage, soils survey, geologic suitability study, seismic analysis, access plan, grading plan, and utility plan. Submit biology and cultural resource studies for review. The cultural resource report is reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission with recommendations given to the Planning Commission and City Council. An Initial Study Environmental Assessment is conducted by staff to identify environmental impacts and appropriate mitigation measures. 3) Staff reviews all information and prepares for Planning Commission and City Council public hearings. Normally the CUP process only requires Planning Commission approval, however, the Hillside Conservation Regulations also require City Council approval for development applications. RECOMMENDATIONS: l . Move to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-_ recommending to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 98-351; and, 2. Move to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-_ recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 98-056; and, 3. Move to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-_ recommending to the City Council approval of Zoning Code Amendment 97-057. Attachments: 1. City Council Minutes, Dec. 2, 1997 2. City Council Field Trip Minutes, Jan. 21, 1998 3. Planning Commission Field Trip Minutes, Feb. 10, 1998 Prepared by: Submitted by: Lislie Mouriqu Christine di Iorio Associate Plannibr Planning Manager RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-351 PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 98-056, AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENT 97-057 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-351 CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 24th day of February, 1998, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 98-351, General Plan Amendment 98-056, and Zoning Code Amendment 97-057; and, WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment and Zoning Code Amendment have 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 98-351); and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that said General Plan Amendment and Zoning Code Amendment will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and that a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and, WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify recommending certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zoning Code Amendment will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly or directly, in that no significant impacts can be identified beyond those associated with the current General Plan policies and Zone Code standards. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zoning Code Amendment 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 Planning Commission Resolution 98- Environmental Assessment 98-351 February 24, 1998 levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory, as no new impacts beyond those associated with the current General Plan and Zone Code have been identified. 3. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zoning Code Amendment do not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. No significant effects on environmental factors have been identified. 4. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zoning Code Amendment will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the Amendments. 5. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zoning Code Amendment will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 98-351 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum, attached hereto, and on file in the Community Development Department. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 24th day of February 1998, by the following vote, to wit: P:\LESLIE\pc Res EA 98-351.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 98- Environmental Assessment 98-351 February 24, 1998 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RICH BUTLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\LESLIE\pc Res EA 98-351.wpd ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ]FORM Environmental Assessment No. 98-351 Case No.:ZTA 98-057 Date:1/14/98 GPA 98-056 I. Name of Proponent: City_ of La Quinta Address: 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 92253 Phone. 760-777-7125 Agency Requiring Checklist: City of La Quinta Project Name (if applicable): Hillside Conservation Regulations and Policies CITY OF LA QLIINTA Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 II. 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" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning Population and I lousing X Earth Resources Water Air Quality Transportati on/C irculation X Biological Resources Energy and Mineral Resources Risk of upset and Human Health Noise X Mandatory Findings of Significance 71 III. DETERMINATION. On the basis of this initial evaluation: Public Services X Utilities X Aesthetics X Cultural Resources Recreation I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A 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 significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least, 1) one effect 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, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potential significant unless mitigated". AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. Signature. Printed Name and Title: For: City of La Quinta, Community Development Department Date 1/14/98 0 RTESLEF,TC 98-35 L WPI) -11- Potentially Potentially Significant I,= Than Significant Unless Significant No impact Mitigated Impact impact 3.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a)Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? X (Source #(s): b)Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? X c)Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? X d)Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or nunority community)'' X 3.2 POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a)Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? X b)Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension or major infrastructure)? X c)Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? X 3.3 EARTH AND GEOLOGY. Would the project res-ult itt or expose people to potential impacts involving: a)Fault rupture? X b)Seismic ground shaking X c)Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? X d)Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? X e)Landslides or mudflows? X f)Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil X conditions from excavation, grading or fill? g)Subsidence of the land? X h)Expansive soils'? X i)Unique geologic or physical features? X P:ILESLIEUT98-351. WPI) -In- 3.4 3.5 3.6 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Sigmficant. No fmpact Mitigated impact fmuaci Water. Would the project result in: a)Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? X b)Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? X c)Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X d)changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e)changes in currents or the course or direction of water movements? X f)change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability'? X g)Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? X h)lmpacts to groundwater quality? X AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a)Violate any air quality standard to contribute to an existing or projected air quality violations? X b)Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? X c)Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or X cause any change in climate? d)Create objectionable odors'? X TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the project result in: a)lncreased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? X b)Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? X PALESLIETC98-35 L WPI i -iv- Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact impact c)lnadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? X d)lnsufficient parking capacity on site or offsite? X e)Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? X f)Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? X g)Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? X 3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project result in impacts Jo: a)Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? X b)Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? X c)Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? X d)Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? X e)Wildlife dispersal ;Ir migration corridors? X 3.8 ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the prolecl: a)Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X b)Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? X 3.9 RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEALTH. Would the proposal involve: a)A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? X b)Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan'? X c)The creation of ally health hazard or potential health hazards`? X PALESLIBEC98-35 1.W11D -v- 3.10 3.11 3.12 3.13 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant IWess Significant vo Impact Mitigated Impact Impact d)Exposure of people to existing sources of potential X health hazards? e)Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? X NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a)Increases in existing noise levels? X b)Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a)Fire protection'' X b)Police protectiun'? X c)Schools9 X d)Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X e)Other governmental services? X UTILITIES. World the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilitle.s: a)Power or natural gas? X b)Communications systems? X c)Local or regional water treatment or distribution X facilities? d)Sewer or septic tanks? X e)Storm water drainage X f)Solid waste disposal? X AESTHETICS. World the proposal: a)Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? X b)Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? X c)Create light or Aare? X PALESLIEVT98-1�;1 WN) -vl- 3.14 3.15 3.16 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significan Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated impact Impact CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a)Disturb paleontological resources? X b)Disturb archaeolo,peal resources) X c)Affect historical resources? X d)Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X e)Restrict existing religious of sacred uses within the X potential impact area? RECREATION. Would the proposal: a)Increase the dernand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? X b)Affect existing recreational opportunities? X MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a)Does the project have the Potential to degrade the quality of the environmental, 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 ofthe major periods of California history or prehistory? X b)Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? X c)Does the project 1�ave impacts that are individually limited, but cumulialvely considerable? ("cumulatively cor- derable" means that the incremental effects ofa project are considerable when viewed in c„ inection with the effects of past projects, the effects oF other current projects, and the effects of probable tilrther projects). X d)Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either direct y or indirectly? X R\LESLIBEC98-351 Will) -vii- EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a)Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b)Impacts adequately address. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed by the earlier document. c)Mitigatioin me.;�;ures. For effects that are "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless mitigated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. PALESLIMEX98-3 5 1. Will) -V111- INITIAL STUDY - ADDENDUM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-351 Zoning Code Amendment 97-057 and General Plan Amendment 98-056 Hillside Conservation Regulations Applicant: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Prepared by• City of La Quinta Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Leslie Mouriquand Associate Planner January 15, 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1 INTRODUCTION....................................................3 1.1 Project Overview ................................................... 3 1.2 Purpose of Initial Study .............................................. 3 1.3 Background of Environmental Review ................................... 4 1.4 Summary of Preliminary Environmental Review . ................. 4 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................. 4 2.1 Project Location and Environmental Setting ............................... 4 2.2 Physical Characteristics .............................................. 4 2.3 Operational Characteristics ............................................ 4 2.4 Objectives........................................................5 2.5 Discretionary Actions ................................................ 5 2.6 Related Projects ................................................... 5 3 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ..................................... 5 3.1 Land Use and Planning .............................................. 5 3.2 Population and Housing ............................................. 7 3.3 Earth Resources ................................................... 8 3.4 Water..........................................................12 3.5 Air Quaaity ...................................................... 3.6 Transportation/Circulation .......................................... 3.7 Biological Resources ............................................. 19 3.8 Energy and Mineral Resources ....................................... 21 3.9 Risk of Upset/Human Health ........................................ 22 3.10 Noise..........................................................23 3.11 Public Services ................................................... 24 3.12 Utilities........................................................26 3.13 Aesthetics......................................................28 3.14 Cultural Resources ................................................ 29 3.15 Recreation......................................................31 4 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE .......................... 31 5 EARLIER ANALYSES ............................................... 32 Page 2 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW The purpose of this Initial Study is to identify the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Zoning Code Amendment 97-057 to Chapter 9.140.000 Hillside Conservation Regulations, and General Plan Amendment 98-056 for the City of La Quinta. The proposed amendments affect all areas within the City of La Quinta that are within the Hillside Conservation (HC) Overlay District. The City of La Quinta is the Lead Agency for the project review, as defined by Section 21067 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Lead Agency is the public agency which has the principal responsibility for adopting Zoning Code Amendments and General Plan Amendments, which may have a significant effect upon the environment. The City of La Quinta, as the Lead Agency, has the authority to oversee the environmental review and to adopt Zoning Code and General Plan text amendments. 1.2 PURPOSE OF INITIAL STUDY As part of the environmental review for the proposed amendments, the City of La Quinta Community Development Department staff has prepared this Initial Study. This document provides a basis for determining the nature and scope of the subsequent environmental review for the proposed amendments. The purposes of the Initial Study, as stated in Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines, include the following: To provide the Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for the amendments; To enable the applicant, or the City of La Quinta, to modify the amendments, mitigating adverse acts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the amendment to qualify for a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; To assist the preparation of an EIR, should one be required, by focusing the analysis on those issues that will be adversely impacted by the proposed amendments; To facilitate environmental review early in the crafting of the amendments; To provide documentation for the findings in a Negative Declaration that the amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment, To eliminate unnecessary EIR's; and, To determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the amendments. Page 3 1.3 BACKGROUND OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed Zoning Code and General Plan amendments were deemed subject to the environmental review requirements of CEQA because of the potential for land use, density, and aesthetic impacts resulting from development in the hillsides. An Initial Study Checklist and Addendum were prepared for review by the La Quinta Planning Commission and certification by the La Quinta City Council. 1.4 SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This Initial Study indicates that there is potential for adverse environmental impacts for five issue areas contained in the Environmental Checklist. These issue areas are Land Use and Planning, Earth Resources, Biological Resources, Aesthetics, and Cultural Resources. Mitigation measures have been recommended for the proposed amendments which will reduce any identified potential impacts to less than significant levels. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be recommended for this project. An Environmental Impact Report will not be necessary. SECTION 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The City of La Quinta is a 31.18 square mile municipality located in the southwestern portion of the Coachella Valley, in Riverside County, California. The City is bounded on the west by the City of Indian Wells, on the east by the City of Indio and Riverside County, on the north by Riverside County, and County, federal, and state lands to the south. The City of La Quinta was incorporated in 1982. The proposed Zoning Code and General Plan Amendments will apply to all areas within La Quinta designated in the Hillside Conservation Overlay District, or are indirectly affected by these regulations. 2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed Zoning Code and General Plan Amendments do not have physical characteristics, but rather are portions of regulatory documents for the City of La Quinta, California. However, their adoption and implementation could have a physical manifestation within the City. 2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed tent amendments would regulate development within the Hillside Conservation Overlay Districts within the City of La Quinta. The amendments would serve as the "local law" regarding hillside development. If approved, the proposed General Plan amendment would reduce the land use density in the Hillside Conservation Overlay District from 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres to 1 dwelling unit per 20 acres, and that a density bonus for hillside parcels may be granted not Page 4 exceeding 20% of the General Plan designation. The proposed Zoning Code Amendments would provide a clarified and simplified guide to hillside development standards and procedure for review. 2.4 OBJECTIVES The objective of the proposed Zoning Code Amendment is to maintain development in the Hillside Conservation Overlay District at the 20% slope gradient, in order to provide the same level of preservation consideration to natural and cultural resources found within the hillsides. In addition, there are newly proposed definitions to clarify concepts and issues. The proposed General Plan amendment would reduce the land use density from 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres to 1 dwelling units per 20 acres, and provide for density bonuses from hillside parcels not exceeding 20% of the General Plan density designation. 2.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS A discretionary action is an action taken by a government agency that calls for the exercise of judgment in deciding whether to approve a project or regulatory document. For the proposed amendments, the government agency is the City of La Quinta. The proposed amendments will require discretionary approval and adoption by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2.6 RELATED PROJECTS There are no other currently related projects to the proposed Zoning Code and General Plan Amendments. SECTION 3: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the land use compatibility and zoning consistency considerations of the proposed text amendments, for both the Zoning Code and the General Plan. The CEQA Checklist issue areas are evaluated in this addendum. For each checklist item, the environmental setting is discussed. including a description of the existing conditions within the City and the areas affected by the proposed amendments. Thresholds of significance are defined either by standards adopted by responsible or trustee agencies, or by referring to criteria in CEQA (Appendix G). 3.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING Regional Environmental.Setting The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, in the eastern portion of Riverside County. The valley is abundant with both desert plant and animal life. The topographical relief ranges from -237 feet below mean sea level (msl) to about 2,000 feet above msl. The valley is a part of the Colorado Desert region. Surrounding the valley are the San Jacinto Mountains, the Santa Rosa Page 5 Mountains, the Chocolate and Orocopia Mountains, and the San Bernardino Mountains. The San Andreas fault transects the northeastern edge of the valley. Local Environmental Setting The proposed amendments will directly affect all areas of the City within the Hillside Conservation Overlay, and possibly indirectly affect areas in residential zoning districts (such as those properties that receive density credits from other parcels). Currently those areas within the Hillside Conservation Overlay District are also within the Open Space designated areas on the City's General Plan. The Hillside Conservation Overlay areas are within the hillside areas of the City as defined by the 20% toe of slope. A. Would the project conflict with the general plan designation or zoning? Less Than Significant Impact. The Zoning Code Amendment includes the proposal to maintain the slope gradient level at 20% as the line of demarcation to define the toe of slope in the hillside areas of the City. A General Plan Amendment is proposed to increase in the land use density allowance from I dwelling unit per ten acres to 1 dwelling unit per twenty acres for the Hillside Conservation Overlay District. This proposed density reduction will serve to further protect the hillsides from unsightly development, and impacts to natural habitat and cultural resources. Thus, there is no identifiable significant adverse impact anticipated from the proposed amendments. B. Would the project conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? Less Than Significant Impact. The City of La Quinta has jurisdiction over the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan. The primary environmental plans and policies pertinent to this proposed amendment are identified in La Quinta's General Plan, the General Plan EIR, and the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment. The proposed amendments have been transmitted to various agencies for review and comment regarding conflicts with environmental plans or policies. No conflicts have been identified. C. Would the project affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? No Impact. The La Quinta General Plan does not contain an agricultural land use designation although there are a few locations with agricultural land uses extant in the south and southeastern portions of the City. Historically, there has been farming activity in several sections of the City, however, that has largely been replaced by resort, commercial, and residential development over the past 15 years. There has never been any agriculture in the local hillsides, except for the lower areas on alluvial fans, as they are too steep and rocky. The proposed amendments would not affect any agricultural land uses or policies. Page 6 D. Would the project disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income minority community)? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed amendments would define the existing 20% slope gradient as the toe of slope for application of hillside development regulations. The proposed amendment might result in the slight increase of the residential density of some parcels below the 20% slope line from the transfer of density credits from acreage above the 20% slope areas for a particular landholding or development proposal. Proposed is a provision to allow a density bonus not exceeding 20% of the General Plan density designation. This possibility will be reviewed for each development proposal by the Conditional Use Permit process required for hillside development. 3.2 POPULATION AND HOUSING Regional Environmental Setting Between 1980 and 1990, the population of La Quinta expanded 125%, as reported by the U.S. Census, making the City the second fastest growing city in the Coachella Valley. During that time period, the number of residents in La Quinta blossomed from 4,992 to 11,215 permanent residents. From 1990 to January of 1996, the population grew from 13,070 to 18,050. During peak tourist seasons, the population of La Quinta swells to several times the permanent resident population figure. These figures are based upon information provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, State Department of Finance, and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). La Quinta's population ranks sixth largest of the nine cities in the Coachella Valley. Annual average growth rate has been approximately 10% in recent years. The projected population of La Quinta by the year 2000 is anticipated to be 23,000 (Source: Community Development Department). The average age of a City resident is 32 years. Persons over the age of 45 make up 27% of the City's population (Source: 1990 Census). In addition to permanent residents, La Quinta has approximately 9,300 seasonal residents who spend three to six months in the City. It is estimated that 30% of all housing units in the City are used by seasonal residents (Source: Community Development Department). The total housing stock as of 1996, is listed at 9,352 units. Single family units make up 68 percent of the available housing stock. The housing unit breakdown is as follows: 8,624 detached single family, 481 multi -family units, and 247 mobile homes. The average number of persons per household is 3.15 (Source: Department of Finance 1996). Median home prices in La Quinta are approximately $112,000 which is lower than the average for Riverside County ($120,950), but less than other Southern California counties (Source: La Quinta Economic Overview, 1996 Edition). Ethnicity information from the 1990 Census revealed that the composition of La Quinta's population is 70% Caucasian, 261/6 Hispanic, 2% Afro-American, 1.5% Asian, and 1.0% Native American. The Page 7 1990 Census indicates that 81 % of the La Quinta residents are high school graduates and 21 % are college graduates (Source: Census/Estimates). Loeal Environmental. Setting The local hillside areas are not currently populated. A. Would the project cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed amendments do not include specific development, but rather regulate future development in the Hillside Conservation Overlay District. Development density allowances could be transferred from the area above 20% at a factor of 1 dwelling unit per each twenty acres. If density transfers were approved, there could be a slightly higher density in the project areas below 20% slope than normally would be permitted by the General Plan designation for some residential land use designations. This potential increase in residential density is not anticipated to create significant adverse impacts upon the environment. B. Would the project induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed amendments will make only a cumulative impact to the existing major infrastructure within the developed areas of the City, which could be altered or required to be extended to service particular project sites. This impact is not anticipated to be significant, as there is existing infrastructure in place. Each utility provider is requested to comment on new development proposals as they are before the City for approval. Expansion of infrastructure is reviewed on a project -by -project basis. C. Would the project displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? No Impact. The proposed amendments do not have any identifiable direct affect upon affordable housing issues and does not include the displacement of existing housing units. Thus, there is no identifiable adverse impact to the supply of affordable housing. 3.3 EARTH RESOURCES Regional Environmental .Setting The City of La Quinta has a relatively flat, but gently sloping topography, except for the hillside areas on the southern and western portions of the City. Elevations in the southeastern portion of the City reach 1,400 feet above msl. Slopes on the valley floor area of the City are gentle, except in the rolling sand dune areas. The alluvial soils that make up most of the City are underlain by igneous - metamorphic rock, as seen in outcrops in the Santa Rosa Mountains and the Coral Reef Mountains. Soils on the valley floor are made up of very fine grain unconsolidated silty sands. The Coachella Page 8 Valley is underlain by hundreds of feet to several thousand feet of Quaternary fluvial, lacustrine, and aeolian soil deposits (Southland Geotechnical 1996:6). Slopes on the hillsides extend to the very steep, exceeding 40 and 50% in certain places. Local Environmental Setting The areas where the Hillside Conservation Overlay Districts are located consist of hillside portions of the City. A. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: fault rupture? Less Than Significant Impact. There are inferred fault lines located within the City of La Quinta. These fault lines are considered potentially active, although no activity has been recorded for the last 10,000 years. A major earthquake along these faults would be capable of generating seismic hazards and strong ground shaking effects in the area. None of the inferred faults in La Quinta have been placed in an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. All structures developed on the City are required to be constructed to current Uniform Building Code (UBC) seismic standards in order to mitigate risk of collapse to the extent feasible (Sources: Riverside. County Comprehensive General Plan; City of La Quinta General Plan; La Quinta MEA; UBC). The proposed amendments are not anticipated to significantly impact fault rupture issues as development in the hillsides would be reviewed on an individual project basis. Site suitability studies prepared by qualified geologists are required to be submitted with each proposed hillside development proposal. While accurate earthquake predictions are not possible, significant geologic information and statistical analysis have been complied, analyzed, and published intensely by various agencies over the past 25 years. It has been reported that a 22% conditional probability occurrence for the 30-year period from 1994 to 2024 that a magnitude 7.5 event or greater would occur along the Coachella Valley segment of the San Andreas Fault. The primary risk to the City is from the San Andreas Fault. The Coachella Valley Segment of the fault comprises the southern 115 km of the fault zone. This segment has the longest elapsed time of any portion of the San Andreas Fault, last experiencing an event about 1690 AD based on USGS dating of trench surveys near Indio. The San Andreas Fault zone is considered to have characteristic earthquakes that ruptures each fault segment. The San Andreas Fault may rupture in multiple segments producing a higher magnitude earthquake (Source: Southland Geotechnical 1996). Fault rupture is anticipated to occur at areas near the well -delineated regional fault lines as shown on United States Geological Survey and California Division of Mines and Geology maps. However, because the City is located in a region of high tectonic activity, the potential for surface rupture on undiscovered or new faults that may underlie the City can not be discounted (Source: USGS; Cal Div. of Mines and Geology). B. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving Page 9 seismic ground shaking? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. All areas within the City are subject to ground shaking hazards from regional and local events. Any habitable structure constructed in the City will be required to meet current seismic standards of construction for the Seismic Zone that they are located in, to minimize or reduce to the extent feasible, the risk of structural collapse; this includes structures built in the Hillside Conservation Overlay District (Sources: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta General Plan). The proposed amendments are not anticipated to have any adverse effect upon ground shaking issues. The primary seismic hazard in the City is strong ground shaking from earthquakes along the San Andreas and San Jacinto (Source: La Quinta MEA; Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan). Strong ground motion resulting from earthquake activity along the nearby San Andreas or San Jacinto fault systems is likely to impact all structures during the anticipated lifetime of such structures. C. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: ground failure or liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact. The La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment indicates that there are areas with a recognized liquefaction hazard. However, the majority of the City has a very low liquefaction susceptibility due to the fact that ground water levels are generally at least 100 feet below the ground surface. Areas within the Hillside Conservation Overlay Districts are typically not within the liquefaction hazard zones, as these hazard zones are on the flatter desert floor areas of the City and Hillside Conservation Overlay Districts are in the higher elevations (Source: La Quinta MEA; Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan). The proposed amendments are not anticipated to result in any significant adverse impact from ground failure or liquefaction events. D. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazard? No Impact. The City is located in an inland valley separated from the Pacific Ocean by mountain ranges, and would not be subjected to a tsunami. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made reservoir located in the southeast portion of the City, might experience some moderate wave activity as a result of an earthquake and ground shaking. Areas within the Hillside Conservation Overlay District are at higher elevations and would not likely be impacted by these kinds of natural events (Source: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta USGS 7.5' Quad Map). The proposed amendments are not anticipated to have any significant adverse effect upon the hazards from seiches, tsunamis, or volcanic episodes. E. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving landslides or mudflows? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The terrain of Hillside Conservation Overlay District areas is typically rocky hillsides, but can include alluvial fans, some with boulder fields. There is a Page 10 potential danger to structures and people from landslides and rockfall at any slope gradient. No mudflows are anticipated in the area, as the adjacent hills and mountains are formed of rocky granodioritic material that typically does not go into solution from rainfall. Much of the developed area of the City is protected from flood waters by earthen training dikes and retention basins that are located throughout the City. Development within the hillsides at any slope gradient could be subject to landslides or rockfall. It is a requirement of development applications to submit a report prepared by the Registered Geologist assessing the stability of a project site, and the hillsides. (Source: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta USGS 7.5' Quad Map). F. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? Less Than Significant Impact. Any proposed hillside development is anticipated to result in potential impacts involving erosion, changes in topography, and possibly unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading and fill. Soil studies and site suitability studies are required to be submitted with each development application. These studies are used to determine physical constraints for a project which affect the design of a development. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to increase the impacts from erosion and other unstable soil conditions beyond the level of impacts that currently exist. G. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving subsidence of the land? Less Than Significant Impact. Dynamic settlement results in geologically seismic areas where poorly consolidated soils mix with perched groundwater causing dramatic decreases in the elevation of the ground. Hillside Districts are not located in areas designated with subsidence hazards, thus there is no significant impact anticipated from the proposed amendments. (Source: La Quinta MEA). H. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving expansive soils? Less Than Significant Impact. The City requires compliance with the Uniform Building Code and the recommendations of a soils investigation report prior to issuance of building and grading permits for hillside development at any slope gradient (Sources: U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Riverside County, California - Coachella Valley Area). All proposed hillside development is required to submit a soils study for review. These studies are used to determine physical constraints and the appropriate grading and excavation techniques required for a specific area. Each development project is reviewed on an individual basis. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to have any adverse impact on the requirement for stable soil. I. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving unique geologic or physical features? Page 11 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The local mountains represent unique geologic features in the La Quinta area. There could be direct significant adverse impact on these resources from hillside development. Each proposed hillside development application will be reviewed for impacts to the geologic features present on specific project sites, with determinations and recommended mitigation measures. 3.4 WATER Regional Environmental Setting Groundwater resources in the La Quinta area consist of a system of large aquifers (porous layers of rock material containing water) and groundwater basins separated by bedrock or layers of soil that trap or retain groundwater. La Quinta is located above the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin which is the major water supply for the potable water needs of the City as well as a significant supply for the City's nonpotable irrigation needs. Water is pumped from the underground aquifer via domestic water wells in the City operated and administered by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). La Quinta is located primarily in the Lower Thermal Subarea of the groundwater basin. The Thermal Subarea is separated into the Upper and Lower Valley Sub -Basins near Point Happy, located southwest of the intersection of Washington Street and State Highway 111. CVWD estimates that approximately 19.4 million acre feet of water is stored within the Thermal Subarea which is available for use. Water pumped from the aquifer is treated and distributed to users through the existing (potable) water distribution system. Water is also pumped for irrigation purposes to water golf courses and the remaining agricultural uses in the City. Water supplies are augmented with surface water from the Colorado River transported via the Coachella Canal. The quality of water in the La Quinta area is highly suitable for domestic purposes. However, chemicals associated with agricultural production in nearby areas and the use of septic tanks in the Cove area affect groundwater quality. Groundwater is of marginal to poor quality at depths of less than 200 feet. Below 200 feet, water quality is generally good and water depths of 400 to 600 feet are considered excellent. Percolation from the tributaries of the Whitewater River flowing into La Quinta from the Santa Rosa Mountains provide a natural source of groundwater replenishment. Artificial recharging of groundwater will be necessary in the near future. Surface water in La Quinta is comprised of Colorado River water supplied via the Coachella Canal and stored in the Lake Cahuilla reservoir, lakes in private developments which are comprised of canal water and/or untreated groundwater, and the Whitewater River and its tributaries. The watersheds in La Quinta are subject to intense storms of short duration which result in substantial runoff The steep gradient of the Santa Rosa and Coral Reef Mountains accelerates the runoff flowing down to the intermittent streams that drain the mountain watersheds. The majority of La Quinta is protected Page 12 from this runoff by the existing flood control facilities located throughout the City. There are some hillside areas where there is no protection at lower elevations from flood waters. One of the primary sources of surface water pollution is erosion and sedimentation from development construction and operation activities. Without controls, total dissolved solids (TDS) can increase significantly from the development activities. The Clean Water Act requires all communities to conform to standards regulating the quality of water discharged into streams, including stormwater runoff. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) has been implemented as a two-part permitting process, for which the City of La Quinta participates. Most of La Quinta is protected from storm water runoff by a stormwater system designed by Bechtel for the Coachella Valley Water District to protect currently developed and potentially developable areas of the City from damage during a major rainflood event. The system project was based on a flood control plan for the general area developed by Bechtel for the District in 1970. Construction was completed in November 1986 (Source: Bechtel Civil, Inc. 1989:1). Local Environmental.Setting The City does not have any natural standing bodies of water in the hillsides, other than Army Corps designated blue -line streams. Lake Cahuilla is a man-made reservoir located in the southeastern portion of the City and is part of the CVWD water supply system. The Whitewater River channel transects the northern part of the City, but is dry except during seasonal storms. The La Quinta Stormwater Channel is a man-made flood water evacuation channel that transects the City in a northeast to southwest trend, and is a part of the community -wide network of flood control facilities. The local hillsides provide watershed to the desert cove area on a seasonal basis A. Would the project result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoM. Less Than Significant Impact. There usually are changes in absorption rates, and sometimes drainage patterns or surface runoff as a result of proposed development projects. The absorption rate will be altered by the paving of streets, construction of buildings, and landscaping. The drainage patterns can be altered by man-made drainage facilities designed to serve a particular project. The City typically requires that stormwater falling on a development site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm shall be retained on site to protect adjacent properties from flood damage. Each project is reviewed on an individual basis, with review by the Army Corps as necessary. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to significantly alter this requirement. The proposed reduction to 15% slope limit for development will result in less disturbed area at higher elevations which will preserve more area for natural absorption. B. Would the project result in exposure of people or property to water -related hazards such as flooding? Page 13 Less Than Significant Impact. Plans for stormwater protective works shall be submitted to the CVWD for review and approval for every proposed development project, including hillside projects. Mitigation for flood hazard is project specific within the context of the community -wide flood protection system. The proposed reduction from 20% slope to 15% slope is not anticipated to significantly effect the current requirements for flood protection. For projects areas including blue -line streams, review by the Army Corps is required. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to have a significant effect upon this review process. C. Would the project result in discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? Less Than Significant Impact. Storm and nuisance runoff will be required to be retained and disposed of on site in an approved percolation device. Plans for such devices are submitted on a project by project basis. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to result in any significant adverse impact to the existing policies and standards for storm and nuisance runoff. D. Would the project result in changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? Less Than Significant Impact. It is possible that a specific development project could propose a change in the amount of water of a body of water. This issue would be assessed on a project by project basis with appropriate mitigation, if feasible, recommended for the project. There are vary few bodies of water in La Quinta. The proposed amendments permitting hillside development at any elevation or slope gradient is not anticipated to impact this issue. E. Would the project result in changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? Less Than Significant Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have any existing natural bodies of standing water or year-round rivers that would be affected by the proposed amendments. There are many small man-made lakes and ponds on golf courses within the City. The La Quinta Evacuation Channel is a man-made stormwater channel that is usually dry except for runoff from seasonal storms. Future development of hillside areas at any slope gradient could affect, to a significant degree, existing drainage corridors (Source: La Quinta MEA). A drainage plan is required for all proposed developments. This issue is considered on a project by project basis under the Conditional Use Process. F. Would the project result in changes in quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawal, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or by excavations? Less Than Significant Impact. Water supply in the City is derived from groundwater and supplementary water brought in from the Colorado River. Potable water to service hillside development will most likely come from existing groundwater wells in the near vicinity. The Page 14 Coachella Valley Water District furnishes domestic water and sanitation service to the City (Sources: La Quinta MEA). All development applications are reviewed by CVWD for water -related issues. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to have a significant effect upon domestic water issues, other than to result in less expansion of water service into the hillsides. G. Would the project result in altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? Less Than Significant Impact. As with any project using substantial amounts of water, there will be cumulative impacts to quantity of groundwater resources. It is not anticipated that there will be any significant alteration to the direction of flow of the groundwater supply from hillside development, however, the rate of flow may be impacted due to high demand for water by large developments. Groundwater is reported to be below 100 feet in the City (Source: Application materials; Sladden Engineering, November 4, 1997). Each project is considered separately by the City and CVWD for water -related issues. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to have a significant effect upon ground water issues. H. Would the project result in impacts to groundwater quality? Less Than Significant Impact. Development of a project site at any slope gradient will include concrete and asphalt pavement of portions of the site. This pavement will reduce the absorption ability of the ground. Storm water runoff is to be discharged into approved retention areas. Following a heavy rain, contaminates could be transported into the retention areas or into the City's storm drain system that could contribute to groundwater and/or surface water pollution. However, this potential impact is anticipated to be less than significant in most instances. A review of the drainage plan for a proposed development project should identify potential problems that will affect groundwater quality. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to have a significant affect upon impacts to groundwater quality. 3.5 AIR QUALITY Regional Environmental .Setting The Coachella Valley is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and in particular, the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB) division. SEDAB has a distinctly different air pollution problem than the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). A discussion of the jurisdictional organization of SCAQMD and requirements is found in the La Quinta MEA. The air quality in Southern California region has historically been poor due to the topography, climatological influences, and urbanization. State and federal clean air standards established by the California Air Resources Board and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are often exceeded. The SCAQMD is a regional agency charged with the regulation of pollutant emissions and the maintenance of local air quality standards. Currently, the SEDAB does not meet federal standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter (PM-10). In the Coachella Valley, the standard for Page 15 PM-10 is frequently exceeded. PM-10 is a particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter that becomes suspended in the air due principally to winds, grading activity, and by vehicles traveling on paved and unpaved roads. Wind currents can carry the PM-10 into the atmosphere and into the hillside areas. PM-10 has been proved to be a health hazard to humans. Local Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, which has an and climate, characterized by hot summers, mild winters, infrequent and low annual rainfall, and low humidity. Variations in rainfall, temperatures, and localized winds occur throughout the valley due to the presence of the surrounding mountains. Air quality conditions are closely tied to the prevailing winds of the region. The City of La Quinta is subject to the SCAQMD AQMD, a plan which describes measures to bring the SCAB into compliance with federal and state air quality standards and to meet California Clean Air Act requirements. The General Plan for the City contains an Air Quality Element outlining mitigation measures as required by the Regional AQMP. The City is located within Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30, which includes two air quality monitoring stations, one located in the City of Palm Springs, and the other in the City of Indio. The Indio station monitors conditions which are most representative of the La Quinta area. The Palm Springs station monitors carbon monoxide in addition to ozone and particulate. A. Would the project violate any air standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less Than Significant Impact. The South Coast Air Quality Management District CE A Air Quality Handbook indicates that the threshold for significance for a single family housing development is 170 units. This threshold is applicable for hillside development as well. Given that hillside development is currently permitted at a density of 1 unit per 10 acres for areas above the toe of slope, a hillside project would have to consist of 1700 acres before an air quality study would be triggered by the threshold. If the proposed amendment is approved to increase the density to 1 dwelling unit per 20 acres, then a development would have to consist of 3400 acres before the threshold was reached. It is doubtful that a specific hillside development project would include 1700 or 3400 acres of hillside in La Quinta. This would involve several sections of land in contiguous ownership for which the current ownership of hillside land is typically not more than one section per one owner. The current ownership of hillside land includes private, state and federal. With most sections owned by one entity. State and federal owned land is not designated for development, but rather various types of conservation and preservation management designations which would preclude development. Each development application in the Hillside Conservation District will be reviewed and assessed for air quality impacts during an Initial Study. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to create any significant adverse impacts on air quality issues. B. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? Page 16 Less Than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors include schools, day care centers, parks and recreation centers, medical facilities, rest homes, and other land uses that include a concentration of individuals recognized as exhibiting particular sensitivity to air pollution. The Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) are designed to protect that segment of the public most susceptible to respiratory distress or infection, referred to as "sensitive receptors." (Sources: La Quinta General Plan; La Quinta MEA; Draft SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook),If a proposed project exceeds the significance threshold for air quality impacts, there could be adverse impacts to sensitive receptors. It is not anticipated that proposed hillside development at any slope gradient will exceed the threshold. Therefore, anticipated impacts from the proposed amendments are less than significant for hillside single family development. However, each development application will be assessed on an individual basis under the Conditional Use Permit process. C. Would the project alter air movements, moisture, temperature, or cause any change in climate? No Impact. Hillside development is not anticipated to result in any significant impact to climatic issues at any slope gradient. There are no known significance thresholds for this topic area in which to assess impacts to the climate, thus no definitive statements can be made on this issue regarding impacts and their significance. D. Would the project create objectionable odors? Less Than Significant Impact. Vehicles traveling on nearby streets generate gaseous and particular emissions that may be noticeable on project sites. However, these would be short-term odors that should dissipate quickly. Projects might store small quantities of chemicals (cleansers and disinfectants) for which their could be odors, but storage of such chemicals is limited to inside buildings. Each project will be assessed on an individual basis. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to result in any significant adverse impact from odors on the environment at any slope gradient. 3.6 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Regional Environmental.Setting La Quinta is a desert community of over 18,600 permanent residents, and approximately 9,500 seasonal residents. The City is 31.18 square miles in size, with substantial room for development. The existing circulation system is a combination of early road work constructed in the 1930's by Riverside County and new roadways since incorporation of the City in 1982. Key roadways include State Highway 111, Washington Street, Jefferson Street,. Fred Waring Drive, and Eisenhower Drive. Traffic volumes in La Quinta experience considerable seasonal variation, with the late -winter, early - spring months representing the peak tourist season and highest traffic volumes. Page 17 Existing transit service in La Quinta is limited to three regional fixed -route bus routes operated by Sunline Transit Agency. One bus route along Washington Street connects the Cove and Village areas with the community of Palm Desert to the west. Two lines operate along Highway I I I serving trips between La Quinta and other communities in the desert. There are only a few existing pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian facilities in La Quinta, however, these systems will be expanded as the City grows. These facilities, both existing and future, are designated in the La Quinta General Plan. Local Environmental.4etting Hillsides around La Quinta vary from alluvial fans to rocky mountain faces. The potential for road construction in hillside areas varies with project design and physical constraints. Roadways may not exceed 15% grade per the Fire Marshal's standards. Currently there are very few roadways at the 15% slope gradient in the hillside areas within the City A. Would the project result in increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? Less Than Significant Impact. Vehicles trips and traffic congestion is assessed on a project by project basis to determine impacts and mitigation. Density transfers from higher elevations could increase traffic in areas that receive transferred units. The proposed change from 20% slope to 15% slope are not anticipated to have a significant adverse impact upon traffic congestion. B. Would the project result in hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? Less Than Significant Impact. It is possible that hazards to safety from design features could result from proposed development projects in the hillsides. Impacts and mitigation will be determined on a project by project basis. C. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access to nearby uses? Less Than Significant Impact. Proposed projects are not permitted to obstruct emergency access to surrounding land uses. This issue will be assessed on a project by project basis for impacts and mitigation. It is not anticipated that there would be significant impacts from the proposed amendments. D. Would the project result in insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? Less Than Significant Impact. Parking needs and requirements are reviewed on a project by project basis in accordance with Zoning Code Chapter 9.150 Off -Street Parking Requirements. It is not anticipated that there would be significant impacts from the proposed amendments. Page 18 E. Would the project result in hazards or barriers for pedestrian or bicyclists? Less Than Significant Impact. It is not anticipated that hazards to bicyclists and pedestrians will not be increased significantly as a result of the proposed amendments (Source: La Quinta General Plan). This issue will be assessed on a project by project basis for impacts and mitigation. F. Would the project result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Less Than Significant Impact. The need for alternative transportation is reviewed on a project by project basis. It is not anticipated that there would be a significant impact from the proposed amendments. There are no adopted policies requiring alternative transportation for developments unless there are over 100 employees. G. Would the project result in rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? No Impact. There is no rail service in the City of La Quinta. The closest rail line is approximately nine miles to the north of the project site. There are no navigable rivers or waterways, or air travel lanes or airports within the City. Thus, there are no anticipated impacts upon these types of transportation from the proposed amendments. The closest airports are the Bermuda Dunes Airport, a small private facility located just south of Interstate 10, approximately one mule north of the City boundary, and the Thermal Airport, located approximately 3.5 miles southeast of the City boundary, on Airport Boulevard in the Thermal area (Sources: La Quinta MEA; USGS La Quinta 7.5' Quad Map). This issue is considered for each development application on a project by project basis. 3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental ,Setting The City of La Quinta lies within the Colorado Desert regional environment. Two ecosystems are found within the City, the Sonoran Desert Scrub and the Desert Transition. The disturbed environments within the City are classified as either urban or agricultural. A detailed discussion of these ecosystems is found in the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment (1992). Local Environmental Setting The hillsides are located in the Desert Transition ecosystem. The Desert Transition areas are found in the alluvial fan areas and slopes of the surrounding mountains. It is a transition from the Sonoran Desert Scrub ecosystem and the Pinon-Juniper Woodland at higher elevations. The transition is gradual and involves an intermingling of vegetation types typically found in the Desert Scrub ecosystem and the Pinon-Juniper Woodland near the top of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The plant species in the desert transition zone benefit from slightly higher rainfall. Where creosote bush and bur - Page 19 sage dominated in the desert scrub areas, cacti become more abundant and ocotillo dominate on the upper portions of alluvial fans, bajadas, and rocky mountain slopes (Source: La Quinta MEA). A. Would the project result in impacts to endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. There are designated habitats of endangered, threatened, or rare species known to be within the hillside areas in La Quinta (Source: La Quinta MEA). Development projects are transmitted for comment to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and Department of Fish and Game. Each project is assessed on an individual basis. Biology studies are required for development projects in hillside areas. Appropriate mitigation is required for any impacts identified. B. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? No Impact. There are no locally designated biological resources within the City of La Quinta as there is no ordinance in place with which to designate local species. All significant biological resources are designated at the state and/or federal level by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game are transmitted to for review and comment on each development application. Appropriate mitigation is required for significant impacts, which may include undevelopable habitat easements placed on portions of higher elevations (Source La Quinta MEA).The proposed amendments are not anticipated to have a significant adverse impact upon locally designated species, but rather result in a protective result by reducing the slope gradient of development. C. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? No Impact. There are no locally designated natural communities found in or near the hillside areas. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game are transmitted to for review and comment on each individual project. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to have a significant adverse impact upon natural communities. D. Would the project result in impacts to wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? No Impact. There is no known wetland habitat in the Hillside Conservation area. The U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game are transmitted to for review and comment regarding this issue for each proposed development project. There is no anticipated significant impact from the proposed amendments on wetland habitats. E. Would the project result in impacts to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? Page 20 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. Wildlife corridors are open in the Coral Reef and Santa Rosa Mountains which provide access to the higher mountains (Source: La Quinta MEA). The U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game are transmitted to for review and comment for each proposed development project. There are no anticipated significant impacts from the proposed amendments to wildlife corridors. Increasing non -buildable hillside area by reducing slope will increase wildlife corridors. 3.8 ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta contains both areas of insignificant and significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas (SMARA), as designated by the State Department of Conservation. There are no known oil resources in the City. Major energy resources used in La Quinta come from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), Southern California Gas Company, and various gasoline companies. Local Environmental.Setting There are no oil wells or other fuel or energy producing facilities or resources in the City. Most hillside areas are within the MRZ-3 Mineral Resource Zone. The MRZ-3 designation is applied to those areas containing mineral deposits the significance of which can not be evaluated from available data (Source: La Quinta MEA). Each development project is assessed for energy and mineral resource significance individually. There are no anticipated significant impacts to this issue area from the proposed amendments to the Hillside Conservation Overlay District Regulations. A. Would the project conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have an adopted energy plan, however, the City's General Plan Housing Element contains requirements for efficiency in construction and materials with the goal of reducing energy consumption. Future hillside development will be required to meet Title 24 energy requirements as is all development in the City (Sources: La Quinta General Plan; UBC). This issue is assessed on a project by project basis. There is no anticipated significant impact to energy conservation plans. B. Would the project use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? Less Than Significant Impact. Natural resources that may be used by development projects include air, mineral, water, sand and gravel, timber, energy, and other resources needed for construction. Title 24 (of the Uniform Building Code) requirements shall be complied with for energy conservation. Any landscaping will also be required to comply with the City's landscape water conservation ordinance as well as the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District (Source: La Quinta MEA; Water Conservation Ordinance; Coachella Valley Water District; UBC). Each development project is Page 21 reviewed for impacts on an individual basis. There are no anticipated significant impact from the proposed amendments. 3.9 RISK OF UPSET[HUMAN HEALTH Regional Environmental.Setting Recent growth has increased the City's exposure to hazardous materials. Such exposure to toxic materials can occur through the air, in drinking water, in food, in drugs and cosmetics, and in the work place. Although large scale, hazardous waste generating employment is not present in the City of La Quinta, the existence of chemicals utilized in dry cleaning operations, agricultural operations, restaurant kitchen cleaning, landscape irrigation and exposure to large scale electrical facilities may pose significant threats to various sectors of the population. Currently, there are no hazardous disposal waste sites located in Riverside County. Local Environmental Setting In order to comply with AB 2948-Hazardous Waste Management Plans and Facility Siting Procedures, the City of La Quinta adopted Ordinance 184 consisting of a Hazardous Waste Management Plan. There are no known hazardous waste dump sites in the City's hillside areas. A. Would the project involve a risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including not limited to oil, pesticides, chemical, or radiation)? Less Than Significant Impact. There is minimal risk of exposure from chemicals and pesticides used within the typical residential development project. Use of any chemicals during the construction phase or on -going operations shall be by trained personnel only according to local Riverside County Health Department, OSHA, and EPA requirements. Each development project is reviewed on an individual basis. There are no anticipated significant impacts to this issue from the proposed amendments. B. Would the project involve possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less Than Significant Impact. Construction activities will be confined to project sites, except for minimal off -site work as permitted for project roadways, curbs, and gutters. These activities will not be permitted to interfere with emergency responses to the site or surrounding areas nor will it obstruct emergency evacuation of the area. Needed measures to divert and control traffic shall be implemented whenever required. Traffic diversions are subject to inspection by the City's Public Works Department. C. Would the project involve the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? Page 22 No Impact. There are no anticipated health hazards associated with the development in the hillsides beyond those normally associated with a construction project, which consist primarily of accidental injuries. This issue is reviewed for each development application. There are no significant impacts from the proposed amendments to this issue. D. Would the project involve exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? No Impact. There are no identifiable significant health hazards related to the proposed amendments to the Hillside Conservation Overlay District. All development will be required to conform to zoning standards and all applicable health and safety codes. Each development project is assessed individually. There are no anticipated significant adverse impacts to this issue from the proposed amendments. E. Would the proposal involve increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? Less Than Significant Impact. There is a very low fire potential from the brush, grass, or trees in the rocky hillsides or sandy alluvial fans as there is sparse vegetation. The construction of buildings will increase fire hazards for which the Fire Marshal requires conditions of approval specifying type of construction and materials. This issue is reviewed for each development project individually. There are no significant impacts anticipated from the proposed amendments to the fire hazard issue. 3.10 NOISE Regional Environmental .Setting Noise levels in the City are created by a variety of sources within and outside the City boundaries. The major sources of noise include vehicles on City streets and Highway 111, and temporary construction noise. The ambient noise levels are dominated by vehicular noise along the highway and major arterial roadways. Local Environmental Setting The ambient noise levels at development project sites is typically dominated by vehicle traffic noise from nearby roadways. Residential areas are considered noise -sensitive land uses, especially during the nighttime hours. The State Building Code requires that interior noise level in residential buildings do not exceed CNEL 45. The General Plan of the City of La Quinta requires that exterior noise levels do not exceed CNEL 60 for residential land uses (Sources: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta General Plan). The existing noise level in the hillsides is very low. A. Would the project result in increases in existing noise levels? Page 23 Less Than Significant Impact. Vehicular noise would result from residents and visitors arriving and departing the residential developments. Walls typically serve as mitigation from sound affecting and originating from proposed development project. Any hillside development will cumulatively add noise to the area. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to significantly impact this issue. B. Would the project result in exposure of people to severe noise levels? Less Than Significant Impact. The La Quinta General Plan regulates excessive noise and vibration in the City by establishing allowable noise levels for various land uses. Residential land uses should have a maximum exterior noise level of up to 60 CNEL. If the ambient noise level is higher than this standard, then it will serve as the standard. Proposed development in hillside areas will result in short-term impacts associated with construction activities. During construction, heavy machinery will be capable of generating periodic peak noise levels ranging from 70 to 95 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the source. These high noise levels are short in duration and temporary with the construction phases of the project. Such high noise levels are not anticipated or permitted after construction (Source: La Quinta General Plan). 3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES Regional Environmental Setting Law enforcement services are provided to the City through a contract with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. The Sheriff's Department extends service to the City from existing facilities located in the City of Indio. There is a small substation located within the La Quinta City Hall. The Department utilizes a planning standard of 1.5 deputies per 1,000 population to forecast additional public safety personnel requirements in La Quinta at buildout. Based on this standard, the City should have a police force of 25.5 officers, but is currently under served. Currently, there are three officers per shift with three staggered shifts per day to serve La Quinta. In addition to patrol, there is also a target team, Community Services Officer, and School Resources Officer assigned to the City (Source: 101-301 Police Services Supporting Information) Fire protection service is provided to the City by Riverside County Fire Department through a contractual arrangement. The Fire Department administers two stations in the City, Station #32 on Frances Hack Lane, west of Washington Street, and Station #70, at the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54. The Fire Department is also responsible for building and business inspections, plan review, and construction inspections. Based upon a planning standard of one paid firefighter per 1,000 population, the City is currently under served (Source: La Quinta MEA). Currently, there are two paid firefighters per shift at each of the two fire stations in La Quinta. Volunteers supplement the paid staff (Source: La Quinta Building & Safety Department). Page 24 Structural fires and fires from other man-made features are the most significant fire threats to the City. Hillside and brush fires are minimal as the hillsides are virtually barren and the scattered brush on the valley floor is too sparse to pose a serious fire threat Both the Desert Sands Unified School District and the Coachella Valley Unified School District serve the City. There are two elementary schools, one middle school, and one high school within the City. The City is also within the Desert Community College District. Library services are provided by the Riverside County Library System with a branch library located in the Village area of the City. The existing facility opened in 1988 and county planning standards of 0.5 square feet per capita and 1.2 volumes per capita are used to forecast future facility requirements to serve the City. Utilizing this 1992 standard, the City was under served in space but over served in terms of volumes (Source: La Quinta MEA, La Quinta Library staff). Health care services are provided in the City through JFK Memorial Hospital in Indio, and the Eisenhower Immediate Care Facility in La Quinta on Hwy. 111. The Eisenhower Medical Center is located in Rancho Mirage. The Riverside County Health Department administers a variety of health programs for area residents and is located in Indio. Paramedic service is provided to the City by Springs Ambulance Service. Local Environmental Setting Public services would be extended to hillside areas as development occurs there. Governmental services in La Quinta are provided by City staff at the Civic Center, and by other County, state, and federal agency offices located in the desert area or region. A. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or altered governmental services in relation to fire protection? Less Than Significant Impact. Development will increase the need for fire protection due to the construction of structures. Development shall comply with the fire flow and fire safety building standards of the Riverside County Fire Code to prevent fire hazard on -site and to minimize the need for fire protection services. Unobstructed fire access is required through the design of the project streets and setbacks between structures. Other code requirements (such as sprinkler systems, construction materials, etc.) shall be complied with. The comment letter from the Fire Department shall be made part of the Conditions of Approval for Site Development Permits. B. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or altered government services in relation to police protection? Less Than Significant Impact. Traffic collisions, patrol requests, and calls for service generated by development will impact the Sheriffs Department. This will generate a cumulative need for additional Page 25 staff in the future. Each project is reviewed by the Sheriffs Department with recommendations provided on a project by project basis. C. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to school services? Less Than Significant Impact. School overcrowding is a District -wide concern for the Desert Sands and Coachella Valley Unified School Districts. These District's ability to meet the educational needs of the public with new schools has been seriously impaired in recent years by local, state, and federal budget cuts that have had an impact on the financing of new schools. The school mitigation fee that is currently collected on all new development at the time building permits are issued is required of development project as mitigation for impacts. D. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to the maintenance of public facilities, including roads? Less Than Significant Impact. There is a potential for the need for new or altered government services from hillside development, especially landscape and road maintenance. Hillside development will be reviewed on a project by project basis for impacts. Hillside development will be reviewed on a project by project basis under a Conditional Use Permit. E. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to other governmental services? Less Than Significant Impact. Building, engineering, inspection, and planning review needed for proposed projects will be partially offset by application, permit and inspection fees charged to the applicant and contractors. It is not anticipated that there will be a significant impact to City staff from proposed hillside projects. The proposed amendments would result in hillside development being kept at lower elevations around the City and potential for greater density. 3.12 UTILITIES Regional Environmental Services The City of La Quinta is served by the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) for electrical power supply and The Gas Company (TGC) for natural gas service. Existing power and gas lines and substations are found throughout the City. IID has four substations in La Quinta, with electricity generated by a steam plant in El Centro and hydroelectric power generated by the All American Canal. General Telephone Exchange (GTE) provides telephone services for the City. Media One serves the area for cable television service. There are several wireless communication companies that provide services in the La Quinta area. Page 26 The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides water and sewer service to the City. CVWD obtains its water from underground aquifers and from the Colorado River. CVWD operates a water system with potable water pumped from domestic water wells in the City. The wells range in depth from 500 to 900 feet. Potable water is stored in five reservoirs located in the City. The City's stormwater drainage system is administered by the CVWD, which maintains and operates a comprehensive system to collect and transport flows through the City. The City is served by Waste Management of the Desert for solid waste disposal. Nonhazardous, mixed municipal solid waste is taken to the only open landfill (Edom Hill) within the Coachella Valley. Local Environmental Setting There are no utilities available in the hillside areas. The extension of utilities is dependent upon development. A. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to power and gas service? Less Than Significant Impact. Power, water, sewer, and natural gas lines have been brought in to the community and are available to the urban areas of the City. Project developers will have to coordinate with III) and The Gas Company for the timely provision of utilities to hillside developments. Each development is reviewed on an individual basis. B. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to communication systems? Less Than Significant Impact. It is possible that hillside development would result in a need for new systems. Each project will be reviewed on an individual basis. Any proposed development will require telephone communication. The developer will be required to coordinate the installation of telephone service infrastructure with GTE. Media One is the current provider of cable television services for which developers will have to coordinate with if a project is to have cable television service. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to have a significant impact on the environment, that can not be mitigated to an insignificant level. C. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. It is not anticipated that the project will result in a significant adverse impact upon the water resources of the area. No significant impacts are anticipated by the proposed amendments. Rather, the amendment would serve as a mitigating effect by limiting where development could be located in the hillside area; thus, reducing the need for expansion to water distribution facilities. Page 27 D. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to sewer services or septic tanks? Less Than Significant Impact. Proposed hillside development will generate sewage which will have to be transported and treated by CVWD. Developer are responsible for the cost of connection and installation of an on -site sewer system. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to significantly impact sewer systems but rather would have a mitigating effect by limiting where development could be located in the hillside areas. E. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to storm water drainage? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. It is possible that hillside development could require additions or changes to the existing stormwater drainage system in the City. However, this issue will be reviewed on a project by project basis. The proposed amendments could result in significant impacts on this issue fi-om a specific development project. A careful analysis would be required with appropriate mitigation measures implemented to lessen the impact to an insignificant level. F. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to solid waste disposal? Less Than Significant Impact. Development projects require solid waste disposal services from the current franchisee. Solid waste is transported to the one existing landfill in the Coachella Valley. This landfill is reaching capacity and may be closed in the near future. Development must comply with the City's Source Reduction and Recycling policies. Any on -site programs will be coordinated with Waste Management. All projects will cumulatively impact solid waste systems and facilities. Each project is assessed for impacts individually. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to have a significant effect on waste disposal. 3.13 AESTHETICS Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta is located within a desert valley cove with boundaries extending to the desert floor and up into the local mountains. There are hillsides to the west and south of the City. Views of the desert and surrounding mountains are visible on clear days throughout most of the City. Dominate architectural styles found in the City are Mediterranean and Spanish Revival, with a relatively low profile for residential structures and for most commercial structures. Local Environmental Setting The hillside areas are located in the south and western portion of the City. Views to the hillsides consists of the Santa Rosa and Coral Reef Mountains to the west and south, the Guadalupe Page 28 Creek/Devil's Canyon alluvial fan area to the west, and the open valley floor and San Bernardino Mountains beyond to the north and northeast (Source: La Quinta MEA). A. Would the project affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? Less Than Significant Impact. Viewsheds are designated by the City's General Plan. The vistas with the City include the Coral Reef Mountains adjacent to the west, the Santa Rosa Mountains to the south, and the valley floor and San Bernardino Mountains to the northeast and east. Each project is reviewed for impacts to viewsheds and vistas on a project by project basis. The proposed amendments would restrict development to slopes 20% or less above the toe of slope, which would serve to, at least, mitigated aesthetic impacts of hillside development. B. Would the project have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? No Impact. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to result in negative impacts to aesthetic issues in and of themselves. Hillside development will be required to comply at the time of development with current architectural and landscaping policies and ordinances of the City. Negative aesthetic effects will be assessed for each individual development application, with mitigation to be project -specific. C. Would the project create light or glare? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to result in significant impacts to the area from light or glare. All development proposals create light and glare. Mitigation consists of compliance with the Dark Sky Ordinance and the requirements of the Lighting Ordinance for residential land uses. Each project is reviewed individually for impacts and appropriate mitigation measures. 3.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting A portion of the prehistory of the La Quinta area is known through the archaeological record pieced together from various archaeological investigations over the past twenty years and from extensive ethnographic information collected by various anthropologists. A discussion of the prehistory and history of La Quinta is provided in the Draft Historic Context Statement of the City of La Quinta, La Quinta General Plan, and the Master Environmental Assessment. Local Environmental .Setting There are recorded archaeological sites in many locations of the City, including the hillsides. Project sites are surveyed in conjunction with the environmental assessment prepared for individual projects. Page 29 Approximately 1 /3 of the Current City area has been surveyed in conjunction with development proposals. A. Would the project disturb paleontological resources? Less Than Significant Impact. It is known that marine -associated paleontological resources are found at elevations below 42 feet above mean sea level. The hillside areas are located at higher elevations. Each project is reviewed on an individual basis. However, there are no known paleontological resources in the local hillsides. The proposed amendments would serve to protect paleontological resources, if they exist, in areas above 10% slope. B. Would the project affect archaeological resources? Less Than Significant Impacts. There are several recorded archaeological sites within the local mountains. A moderate potential remains for the discovery of archaeological resources in the hillsides where hunting blinds, sheep fences, trails, astronomical rock alignments, rock art, camp sites, and resource procurement sites have been found. Proposed development projects would be required to have an archaeological survey conducted to locate, identify, determine the significance, and recommend mitigation for any such resources on a project site. The proposed amendments would keep development at 20% slopes or less above the toe of slope, serving as protective mitigation for archaeological resources in the steeper sloped areas. C. Would the project affect historical resources? Less Than Significant Impacts. There were no known historic resources located in the hillsides as there have been very few surveys in these areas to locate such resources. The possibility exists that there are historic resources in the hillsides that could be significantly impacted by hillside development. The proposed amendments would restrict development to slopes not exceeding 20% above the toe of slope, which may serve to protect resources at steeper slopes and higher elevations. This issue is assessed for each development proposal on a project by project basis D. Would the project have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic values? Less Than Significant Impact. There is no identifiable specific unique ethnic values associated with the hillsides, except the desire to view the hills and keep them undeveloped as expressed by La Quinta residents during the public hearings for the Tradition project and other projects in the past. Thus, there is no significant impact to this issue area from the proposed amendments. E. Would the project restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Page 30 No Impact. There are no publicly known current religious uses or sacred uses in the hillsides. The proposed amendments would serve to keep development at lower sloped areas which may result in the protection of unknown religious uses of the hillside areas. 3.15 RECREATION Regional Environmental .Setting The City of La Quinta has an adopted Parks and Recreation Element and Master Plan that assesses the existing resources and facilities and the future needs of the City. The City has approximately 28.7 acres of developed parkland for Quimby Act purposes. The 845 acre regional Lake Cahuilla Park is not included in this count. There are also unimproved bike and equestrian corridors within the City and designated pedestrian hiking trails. Local Environmental Setting Hiking and equestrian trails are the only organized recreation amenity in the local hillsides. There are informal trails and formal trails. The known recreation activities in the hillsides are hiking, rock climbing, and horse back riding. A. Would the project increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed amendments will not significantly impact the need for additional park and recreation facilities. Each development project is reviewed for impacts and the appropriate mitigation, usually consisting of dedication of park lands or payment of an in -lieu fee to the City for development of public park and recreation facilities. B. Would the project affect existing recreational opportunities? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed amendments is not anticipated to significantly affect existing parks and recreation facilities in the hillsides, as there are very few such facilities in the hillsides. This issue will be reviewed for impacts and mitigation on a project by project basis. SECTION 4• MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The proposed amendments will not have unmitigable significant adverse impacts on the environmental issues addressed in the checklist and addendum. In some instances, the proposed mitigation will serve to reduce potential impacts from the existing hillside development regulations and General Plan policies. The following findings can be made regarding the mandatory findings of significance set Page 31 forth in Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines and based on the results of this environmental assessment: • The proposed amendments will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, with the implementation of mitigation measures. • The proposed amendments will not have the potential to achieve short term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful implementation of mitigation. • The proposed amendments will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned for proposed development in the immediate vicinity. • The proposed amendments will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect human, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of mitigation. SECTION 5: EARLIER ANALYSES A. Earlier Analyses Used. Utilized in the current analysis was the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment (MEA), prepared in 1991, in conjunction with the 1992 General Plan Update and related EIR. Other references include: 1. Bechtel Civil, Inc., 1989, 2 Draft SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 3. Southland Geotechnical, 1996. 4. City of La Quinta Historic Context Statement (Draft- Dec: 1996). B. Impacts Adequately Addressed. All potential impact/issue areas, are considered to be adequately addressed with this environmental assessment. Certification of this EA by the Planning Commission and the City Council will confirm the adequacy of the environmental assessment. C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed with the Zoning Ordinance Amendment or General Plan Amendment. The amendments will be either approved and adopted or denied. Mitigation for specific development project in the Hillside Conservation Overlay District will typically be a part of project approval. Page 32 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION ELEMENTS REGARDING HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT DENSITY TRANSFER CASE NO. GPA 98-056 CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 24th day of February, 1998, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider amendments to the City's General Plan to add language to Policy 2-1.1.3 and change language to Page 6-1 as contained in Exhibit "A"; and, WHEREAS, the amendment is internally consistent with those goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan which are not being amended; and, WHEREAS, approval of the amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare as indicated by the environmental assessment prepared for General Plan Amendment 98-056; and, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission for 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 in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend adoption of the General Plan Amendment; Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made part of; 3. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect humans, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of this proposal. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 24th day of February 1998, by the following vote, to wit: Planning Commission Resolution 98- AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RICH BUTLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\LESLIE\pc Res GPA 98-056.wpd EXHIBIT "A" Amendment 1: (Policy 2-1.1.3, add after the existing paragraph on Page 2-8) For parcels within the Hillside Conservation Overlay District, development rights (1 unit per 20 acres) may be transferred to any area in the City which has been zoned for residential purposes provided the increase does not exceed 20% percent of its General Plan density designation. Amendment 2: (Replace wording on Page 6-1, second column, under "Topography/Hillside Areas", beginning with line 14) per 20 acres. The following uses within the Hillside Conservation Overlay District shall be permitted in areas of less than 20% slope gradient, located above the toe of slope: golf courses (including above -ground structures, fairways, greens, tees, and golf -cart paths), flood -control structures, parks and lakes, water wells, pumping stations, and water tanks (if screened properly), power, telephone, and cable substations and transmission lines (if screened properly or undergrounded), T.V., cable and radio antennas, hiking, bicycle, and equestrian trails, single family residential uses, accessory uses to the permitted uses, and access roads. Objective 2-1.1 The General Plan shall identify residential land use categories on the land Use Policy Diagram which provide for a variety of residential product types, densities and development characteristics. Policy 2-1.1.1 The General Plan shall define residential density according to the formula presented below. D = du A-(c+i+a) Where D = Residential density A = Total site area (acres) c = Total commercial land area (acres) i = Total industrial land area, including electrical substations, well sites and watercoursellood control facilities (acres) a = Arterial street rights -of -way (acres) du = Dwelling Units Policy 2-1.1.2 All new development shall conform to the building intensity (as defined by the density range) shown on the Land Use Policy Diagram. The maximum density of the development shall not exceed the maximum density for the site, except where a density bonus for the provision of particularly desirable design amenities is allowed. Policy 2-1.1.3 Sites considered for density bonuses shall be evaluated on an individual basis considering such factors as adjacent land use compatibility, available services, infrastructure, traffic impacts, provision of affordable housing opportunities, enhanced urban design standards, provision of significant open space, on -site historic or cultural resource preservation, and similar issues. A density bonus may be granted for incorporating particularly desirable design amenities into a project This bonus shall not exceed 10 percent. Policy 2-1.1.41 A Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) category shall be established on the Land Use Policy Diagram. The density standard for this category shall range from 0-2 dwelling uniWacres (DU/AC). The maximum density shall be 2 DU/AC, the general residential product type shall be characterized by one to two- story, single-family detached homes on large lots or clustered one to two-story, single-family attached (condominium) units in projects with generous amounts of open space, subject to conditions for varying residential use guidelines as specified in Policy 2-1.1.8. Appropriate locations of VLDR uses shall include areas adjacent to LDR uses, within planned communities which provide a variety of residential dwelling unit types, in environmentally sensitive areas and in areas where equestrian uses are allowed or where a rural character is desired. Specific areas appropriate for VLDR uses include the portions of the City east of Jefferson Street and south of Avenue 50. Policy 2-1.1.5 A Low Density Residential (LDR) category shall be established on the Land Use Policy Diagram. The density standard for this category shall range from 2-4 DU/AC. The maximum density shall be 4 DU/AC. The general residential product type shall be charac- terized by one to two-story, single-family detached homes on large or medium size lots and/or clustered one to two-story, single-family attached units in projects with generous amounts of open space, subject to conditions for varying residential use guidelines as speed in Policy 2-1.1.9. Appropriate locations of LDR uses shall include all areas of the City except the Village, along Highway 111 and in open space areas. Policy 2-1.1.6 A Medium Density Residential (MDR) category shall be established on the Land Use Policy Diagram. The density standard for this category shall range from 4-8 DU/AC. The maximum density shall be 8 DU/AC. The general residential product type shall be charac- terized by one to two-story, single-family detached homes on medium and small lots and/or one to two- story, single-family attached units in projects with open space, subject to the conditions for varying residential use guidelines as specified in Policy2-1.1.9. Appropriate locations of MDR uses include the Cove area, near transportation arteries and in planned communities. The BRW, Inc. Chapter 2 - Land Use Element City of La Quinta uw-70MLOAA T 2-8 General Plan Chapter 6 Environmental Conservation Element INTRODUCTION The Environmental Conservation Element of the La Quinta General Plan identifies and establishes the City's official policy relative to the identification, establishment, preservation and management of natural resources in the City. The purpose of the element is to establish official City policy which: • Identifies areas in La Quinta with substantial natural resources which shall be managed to prevent waste, destruction or neglect. • Identifies policies related to permissible uses development standards within conservation areas, as well as programs to ensure the conservation of resources. Identifies desired courses of action/strategies which provide the means to implement the community's conservation policies. The Environmental Conservation Element is organized in the following manner: • Existing Setting - Includes a general overview of the existing natural resources and their function in La Quinta • Summary of Key Planning Issues •- Includes a brief discussion of the key planning issues which are addressed in the Environmental Conservation Element. • Environmental Conservation fusion State- ment - Includes a statement describing the future state of natural resource conservation in La Quinta desired by the citizens and elected officials of the City. The development policies in the Environ- mental Conservation Element are designed to bring this vision to fruition. • Relationship to Other Elements - Includes a statement describing the relationship of the Environmental Conservation Element to the other General Plan elements. • Overview of Environmental Conservation Policy Diagram - Includes a description of the Environmental Conservation Policy Diagram and an overview of the spatial distribution of the various natural resource conservation areas in the City. Environmental Conservation Development Goals, Objectives and Policies - Includes a description of the City of La Quinta's official development policies relative to the identification, location, management and development of natural resources in the City. Environmental Conservation Element Implementation Measures - includes a summary of the various actions, programs and strategies the City of La Quinta should take to implement the Environmental Conservation Element goals, objectives and policies. EXISTING SETTING Topography/Hillside Areas Approximately 30 percent of the City is comprised of the undeveloped Coral Reef and Santa Rosa Mountains, which are located in the south central region of the City and extend north along the western incorporated area boundary. These mountains contribute significantly to the City's visual, wildlife and archaeological resources. The mountains provide a dramatic framing element for the City as a result of their close proximity, steep topography and varied vegetation. Development in these areas is regulated by the City's Hillside Conservation Zone Ordinance. Generally, very low density development such as single family residential uses less than 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres; golf course fairways, tees and greens; parks and other passive recreation facilities; and water wells, pumping stations and water tanks are allowed in areas with slopes less than 20%. Uses permitted in areas with slopes greater than 20% are limited primarily to hiking and equestrian trails and access roads. Archaeological Resources Information provided by the Archaeological Research Unit at the University of California, Riverside, concluded that the most likely locations of prehistoric cultural resources in La Quinta were along the foot of the Santa Rosa and Coral Reef Mountains. These cultural resources are most likely tethered to sources of water or to locations where specific resources were available in quantity on a seasonal basis. The most BRIM, Inc. Chapter 6 - Environmental Conservation Element City of La Quinta W_,„" 6-1 General Plan PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO AMEND CHAPTER 9.140.000 - HILLSIDE CONSERVATION REGULATIONS ZONING CODE AMENDMENT 97-057 CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 24th day of February, 1998, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider a Zoning Code Amendment for Chapter 9.140.000 - Hillside Conservation Regulations; and, WHEREAS, the Zoning Code Amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan for development in the hillsides as defined by the criteria in Exhibit "A"; and, WHEREAS, approval of the Zoning Code Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare as indicated by the environmental review conducted for ZCA 97-057; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission for 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 in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Zoning Code Amendment 97-057 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as noted in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part of. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 24th day of February 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Planning Commission Resolution 98- RICH BUTLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\LESLIE,\pc Res ZCA 97-057.wpd EXHIBIT #A 9.140.040 HC Hillside Conservation Regulations. A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is as follows: 1. Ensure that development is consistent with the goals, policies, and criteria of the General Plan; 2. Protect and preserve public and private open space as a limited and valuable resource; 3. Preserve significant features of the natural environmental including watersheds, watercourses, canyons, knolls, ridge lines, boulder fields, and rock outcrops and minimize disturbance to the natural terrain; 4. Protect significant native vegetation and wildlife; ZOUPDATE-supspcpurmp 2 S. Protect significant cultural resources; 6. Limit development to a level consistent with available public services and road access that can be reasonably provided to and within the parcel, 7. Ensure that development will not create or increase fire, flood, slide or other hazards to public health and safety; 8. Protect the health, safety, general welfare and property of people in the vicinity of steep Hillside building sites; This chapter establishes procedures and standards for the review of land divisions and the construction of buildings, structures, and improvements necessary to meet this purpose. Development in the Open Space Hillside areas is described in the Land Use Element of the La Quinta General Plan, specifically Figure LU-1 and the written policies and standards. The delineation of the Hillside Conservation Overlay District has been generally identified in the Zoning Ordinance and is adjustable dependent upon more detailed boundary information submitted to the City. The final determination of the hillside land use boundary will be made by the Community Development and Public Works Department staff, Planning Commission, and City Council. AB. Applicability. 1. The HC Hillside Conservation Overlay District applies to a4 land within the City designated in the General Plan as "open space" and shown on the Official Zoning Map as "HC." More specifically, the HC Overlay District and the provisions of this Section apply to land meeting the criteria for hillside and/or open space ," as defined in th r.fffm qL ZOUPDATE-supspcpurregs � � �I/•49i)•SI/IlLII/itA�I,Rii.�i11/I}•=iI/�LI// See :• __ _ : _ __ :_ __ _ _ __ __ __ �:.. :... f_ _ RlAf _ 01 S - a go I : - G Iirk : i 1. Hillside open space is defined as all land, except for sand dunes, with a topographic gradient steeper than twenty percent (20%). In general, the toe of slope shall be the boundary line between hillside open space and developable land. However, it is acknowledged there are some flatter areas above the toe of slope that have topographic gradients which are less than twenty percent (20%). These flatter areas maybe developed pursuant to the requirements in Section 9.140.040 2. The toe of slope boundary line is the lower elevation of a twenty-five foot (25 foot) wide calculation band where the topographic gradient within the banded area exceeds twenty percent (20%). The topographic gradient within the banded area may be calculated by manually, or with a computer and software capable of producing the desired analytical documents. The calculation method and analytical documents for each method shall be as follows: ZOUPDATE-supspcpurregs 4 Manual Method Using the slope formula specified herein, the topographic gradient calculation must be calculated using a map with five foot intervals between contour lines on a 40-scale map 0 11=40 ) and the maximum size subarea for calculation purposes must not exceed 2,500 feet (0.057 acre); see Attachment I for an example of the graphic technique used to implement the manual analysis method S = 0.00229 x I x L S=average cross slope of ground in percent A I = contour interval in feet L = combined length of all contours (in feet) A = area of the calculation subarea in acres Note: When the analysis subarea is confined to 2,500 square feet in a 25 feet by 100 feet configuration using five-foot contour intervals, the maximum allowable length of contour lines passing through the analysis area (banded area) totals 100 feet. The applicant shall submit the 40-scale contour map and calculations for each subarea in the in the toe of slope band for review and approval by the City Engineer. If requested, the applicant shall provide on the land in question, up to one survey stake per one hundred feet of toe of slope boundary. Computer Method Use computer software capable of calculating topographic gradient from digitized contour data and then outputs the calculation results by shading the map areas that have topographic gradients exceeding twenty percent (20%). The shaded calculation results shall be plotted onto two different backgrounds: 1) an 80-scale rectified color aerial photograph, and 2) an 80-scale topographic contour map with five feet contour intervals. The applicant shall submit the two 80-scale analytic documents specified herein for review and approval by the City Engineer. If requested, the applicant shall provide on the land in question, up to one survey stake per one hundred feet of toe of slope boundary, and a computerfile of the analytic documents in a digitized graphic format suitable for viewing on city -owned computers. 3. Canyon areas less titan 200 feet wide are designated as open space. The 200 feet width is determined in the following manner. A canyon centerline, that approximates the reasonable center of the canyon, shall be drawn on 100 scale (I "=100 ), topographic map, or larger (ie., 1-inch equals less than 100 feet) . The approved toe of slope shall also be drawn on the map. A 200 foot long line lying perpendicular to the canyon centerline shall be advanced into the canyon, allowing for lateral adjustment as needed, until its two ends are touching the toe of slope line on each side of the canyon. ZOUPDATE-supspcpurregs 5 ATTACHMENT # SCALE 1 Is = 40' 4. In general terms, a boulder field is nominally defined as any area regardless of topographic gradient in which there is an abundance of large loose boulders lying on the ground surface exposed to sight and possessing the visual appearance and geologic character of other rocky material readily visible on nearby hillside open space areas. Boulder fields are analytically determined by first requesting the City Engineer or appointed representative visit the site and confirm the visual and geologic character of the potential boulder field by making a generalized comparison of the boulders in the potential boulder field with the rocky material readily visible on nearby hillside open space. If the visual and geologic character of the potential boulder field is confirmed, the applicant shall prepare a detailed analytical document in which a proposed boundary is shown on a 40-scale rectified color aerial photograph. The City Engineer shall review the document and proposed boundary for appropriateness. In general, but detailed calculations are not required, an area shall be considered a boulder field if a eighty percent (80%) of the squares in continuous grid of 10 feet by 10 feet squares are occupied by at least one boulder, or if at least eighty percent (80%) of the squares in the grid network have a third, or more, of the ground surface containing an exposed rock outcropping. For the purposes of this section, a large loose boulder is defined as any rock material identified in the first phase of the boulder field determination, that is detached from its place of origin and its largest caliper dimension is two (2) feet or larger. The City Engineer's boundary review and analytical confirmation shall be the basis of a recommendation to the City Council for final approval At the time of the City Council shall have final approval authority of the boulder field boundary and may make any adjustments to the boundary it deems appropriate. S. Topographic Aberrant -Unique or potentially significant topographic or geologic feature which is different in character with the balance of developable land and is not above the toe of slope. 6. Sand Dunes -a sand dune is defined as amount or ridge of loose sand piled up by the wind D. Permitted Uses in HC Overlay District. ZOUPDATE-supspcpurregs 6 The following uses within the HC Overlay District shall be permitted in areas of less than 20% above the toe of slope . a. Golf courses (not including above -ground structures), including fairways, greens, tees, and golf -cart paths to access them; b. Flood -control structures; c. Parks and lakes, md passive reereation faeiiities; d. Water wells, pumping stations, and water tanks (if properly screened); e Power, telephone, and cable substations and transmission lines (if properly screened or undergrounded); f. T.V., cable, and radio antennas; g.. Hiking, bicycle and equestrian trails not permitting motorized vehicles; h. Single family residential uses; i. Accessory uses necessary to establish and maintain the permitted uses, such as roads, gate -houses, on -site subdivision signs, parking lots, noncommercial community association, recreation, and assembly buildings and facilities. bj. Access roads which shall be non -visible unless applicant can prove to the satisfaction of the City that the only access to a non -visible area must traverse a visible area. (Ownership or non -ownership of property is not sufficient proof of reason to place a road in a visible area.) Roads shall not exceed 15 percent grade. E. Conditional Use Permit Required. In addition to the requirements of this Section, all development within the HC Overlay District shall require approval of a conditional use permit pursuant to Section 9.210.020, including City Council approval. F. Site Development Review Required. All development in the shall be subject to site development review by the Pimining Gornmtissio pursuant to Section 9.210.010. "Development" in this context shall include the following: grading, building, grubbing, or permitting any heavy equipment (equipment whose function is digging, clearing, earth -moving, grading, or a similar function disruptive to the natural terrain) access to the HC Overlay District property. G. Criteria for Review of Grading Plans. The Plamirig Commission and Gity Gotmeii site Consideration shall be given to the following matters ertiettiar eeneerri in reviewing of grading proposals in the HC Overlay District. Conditions may be attached to the approval of grading plans so as to achieve the purpose and intent of this Section and the following objectives: 1. The health and safety of the public; ZOUPDATE-supspcpurregs 7 2. The preservation of vegetation and animal habitat, designation of stream courses as open space, preservation of habitat corridors, encouraging revegetation with drought -tolerant native species; 3. The avoidance of excessive building padding or terracing and cut and fill slopes to reduce the scarring effects of grading; 4. The encouragement of sensitive grading to ensure optimum treatment of natural hillside and arroyo features; 5. The encouragement of imaginative grading plans to soften the impact of grading on hillsides, including rolled, sloping, or split pads, rounded cut and fill slopes, and post and beam construction techniques; and 6. The maximum retention of vistas, and natural topographic features including mountainsides, ridgelines, hilltops, slopes, rock outcroppings, arroyos, ravines, canyons, and boulder fields. 7. The addition of soil against the hillsides shall meet the City Codes for completed fill (if filling on slope), slopes shall be graded to conform with the surrounding hillsides, mimicking the natural topography including swales, knolls, ridges, etc., in accordance with the Grading Ordinance. H. Engineering Reviews Required. For every home site or for every subdivi 1 4 all development within the HC Overlay District, the following reports shall be prepared by a California -licensed engineer (licensed in the appropriate discipline), and filed with the City Engineer, tmiess speeifieaRy waived by the City Engineer based ort a -visit to the proposed site: 1. Hydrology, drainage, and flooding report for all sites; 2. Soil survey of the sites proposed attesting to stability of all sites and the appropriateness of the construction method proposed; 3. Underlying geology/engineering report attesting to stability of all sites; 4. Seismic analysis attesting to the stability of the site(s) and addressing the potential of material above the site(s) impacting the site(s); 5. Access plan showing the preliminary engineering for roads giving access to the proposed site(s); 6. Grading plan for the construction site(s) and access routes; and 7. A utility plan demonstrating the feasibility of providing water for domestic and fire suppression purposes, sewer, power, and other utilities, especially with regard to the scarring effects of the grading necessary to install such utilities. I. Other Studies Required. The following studies shall be filed with the Community Development Department as a part of the application process: ZOUPDATE-supspcpurmp 8 1. All development in the HC Overlay District shall be subject to a report by a qualified biologist addressing the following: a. Natural vegetation and native plants which may be affected by the project; b. Wildlife habitats, migratory routes (e.g., for Bighorn sheep), and native animal species; and c. Plan to maintain corridors for wildlife habitat and movement of animals within HC Overlay District. 2. All development in the HC Overlay District shall be subject to a review by a qualified archaeologist addressing the following: a. A review of the literature and records for any known and/or recorded historic or prehistoric resources; b. A survey of the project site for historic or prehistoric resources; and c. A final report of findings and recommended mitigation and resource treatment shall be submitted to the Historic Preservation Commission Gatrffnwtity Development Bireete for review. "mot- t%•:�i�w:w�.:aasa�R•a:�:�.i.�a:�:a.ie: 41 3. A viewshed study, including plans and sections, showing visibility of proposed project and grading as viewed from surrounding properties located at lower elevations. �=�I�i!.f�f� !•���g�ilil�I �a S7iiiffl�l %f��fi�Ri�ifft l2�. Mee so i : :: : :• : _ _ _ _ __ _ . : _ :• _ ZOUPDATE-supspcpurregs 9 moot _ _ r•.. _ _ _ . _ :. : _ : Opp 10111011 MINN' a, J. Development Standards. Akmitprum Density an Minimum Lot Size. In the HC Overlay District, the maximum density permitted shall be one residential unit per " 20 acres. On a contiguous parcel which includes areas both above and below the "toe of the slope," residential units may be clustered together below the "toe of the slope" to take advantage of buildable areas with lower slope angles thereby, allowing for exceeding the density allowed per the General Plan provided the .3IIl&t%.. 1 LLuu.•, v., .aa.sa ♦a.a a..a.a .— A—V... b ....a --- — »...............,.. ., ., ..Z_.—_ ----- 2. Maximum Building Height. No structure shall be placed in such a way that its outline is visible above a ridgeline, and not exceed 28 feet in height. ZOUPDATE-supspcpu egs 10 3. Parking. Off-street requirements shall conform to Chapter 9.150. 4. Roof Equipment. No roof -top equipment for heating, cooling or other purposes shall be permitted. jif 5. Utilities. All utilities shall be placed underground , K. Land Divisions in HC Overlay District. In order to assure compliance with the provisions of this Section, the following requirements shall apply to the proposed division of any property which is partially or completely within the HC Overlay District: A preliminary grading plan prepared in accordance with the provisions of Municipal Code Title 13 and this Section shall be submitted (together with other requirements of this Section) with every conditional use permit, tentative subdivision map or parcel map filed for approval. The preliminary grading plan shall show at least one practical, usable, and accessible building site which can be developed in accordance with the provisions of this Section within each proposed lot or parcel. L. Transfer of Development Rights. 1. Transfers of development rights shall follow the procedures and standards set forth in Chapter 9.190. 2. Any owner of property within the HC Overlay District may transfer development rights from the HC Overlay District on the basis of one residential unit per #ems 20 acres. ZOUPDATE-supspcpurregs 11 3. Development rights may be transferred as follows: a. Transferred to a subdivided portion of the same property below "the toe of the slope," as presented in a conditional use permit; or b. By means of sale to any area of the City which has been zoned for residential purposes, provided the increase for any particular parcel does not exceed 20 percent of the General Plan density designation. a. Development rights may be retained by an individual. b. Transfer rights may be further sold as provided in Chapter 9.190. 4. Any owner of property within the HC Overlay District may sell, bequeath or transfer the development rights of the property, in accordance with this Section and Chapter 9.190 to any governmental jurisdiction or any properly organized nonprofit organization whose charter allows for the ownership of public open space. The governmental jurisdiction or nonprofit organization may retain or sell or transfer acquired development rights in accordance with Chapter 9.190. a MR WIN WN - otJOA.1.1 egg - M. Ownership and Maintenance of RecreationlOpen Space. 1. Those areas located within a hillside development controlled by this Section which are to remain as undeveloped open space, such as undevelopable slopes and natural landmarks, may be offered for dedication for game preserve, recreation, or open space purposes. Such areas may be offered to a public agency or to a nonprofit land trust conservancy or similar organization whose charter allows for the ownership of recreation and open space which will preserve the natural open space in perpetuity. 2. If an offer of dedication un4er PaMraph N 1 of this Seetio or if such an offer is not accepted, the developer shall make provisions for the ownership and care of the open space in such a manner that there can be necessary protection and maintenance thereof. Such area shall be provided with appropriate access and shall be designated as a separate parcel or parcels which may be maintained through special fees charged to the residents of the subject development or through an appropriate homeowner's association or maintenance district. ZOUPDATE-supspcpurregs 12 - / I • • III- _• - - - il.. I• •i,wii4,jI • •• • • I - • • • 4,iiiwi May . .. _ i • _ _ _ ZOUPDATE-supspcpunegs 13 ATTACHMENT #1 City Council Minutes 12 December 2, 1997 Council concurred on taking up Study Session Item No. 3 at this time. 3. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE HILLSIDE CONSERVATION AREAS AND REGULATIONS. Ms. di lorio, Planning Manager, advised that in April 1997, Council directed staff to research the City's Hillside Conservation Ordinance. Staff has found that a majority of other cities, who tend to focus on permitting hillside development as opposed to conserving the hillsides, use the slope -averaging method instead of the toe -of -slope method. She noted that the hillside ordinances of Rancho Mirage and Indian Wells are more restrictive than La Quinta's ordinance. The opportunities for annexation are possible if the conservation goals are compatible with agency goals and there's a potential public relations benefit. In reviewing the City's hillside boundaries, she noted that many of the hillsides surrounding La Quinta are private property or within the boundaries of other agencies such as BLM and the City of Indian Wells. Council Member Sniff suggested looking into annexing the hillside area controlled by BLM. Council Member Henderson noted that they're stricter than La Quinta and Mayor Pena .pointed out that La Quinta controls access to those areas as well. Ms. di lorio then proceeded to review two case studies: the Green Specific Plan, which is located south of Lake Cahuilla and the Quarry development; and the Richard Meyer property, which is north of the Green property. She advised that the Green property has 20% slopes to be graded into terraces that could result in sharp lines of demarcation and scarring. The Meyer property, under the City's existing ordinance, could be developed above the toe of slope similar to the six lots at the Tradition Club. She noted a conflict in the ordinance, advising that Section (B)(2) states that "....shall determine the boundary between developable and undevelopable by toe of slope," and Section (13)(1) states that, "In general, alluvial.fans not exceeding 20% slope are developable....." Mr. Speer, Senior Engineer, then presented some aerial photographs of the land south of the Quarry, pointing out the Green and Meyer property locations; and he showed the grading plan for the Meyer property which is above the toe of slope. He also demonstrated two different methods of determining the location of the toe of slope -- the boulder field method and canyon width method. He noted that there's enough latitude in the current ordinance to allow property owners to cut down some of the area above toe of slope. City Council Minutes 13 December 2, 1997 In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Herman, Community Development Director, advised that the ordinance is intended to not allow development above 20% slope. That percentage is completely discretionary and can be changed. He cautioned, however, that reducing the percentage too much would restrict development in the Cove. In response to Mayor Pena, Mr. Speer advised that the Cove is about 4% slope at the steeper portion. 1. In response to Council Member Adolph, Mr. Speer advised that he recommends using the alluvial fan side of the analysis block as opposed to the mountain side to determine the toe of slope. He further advised that an exception may need to be made for wind-borne, alluvial materials and noted that compaction of wind -born materials would be difficult in steeply -sloped areas. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Speer confirmed that the accepted analysis of toe of slope is where the alluvial fan meets the rock. Council Member Sniff felt the toe of slope should be the natural contour, not an elevated contour achieved by placing fill against the mountain as has been done in some instances. He wished to see the ordinance tightened up wherever legally possible and some consideration given to annexing the mountains adjacent to the Indian Wells boundary. He asked if the mountain slopes could be considered for historical preservation, given the presence of bedrock mortars and traveling by Indians years ago. Ms. di lorio advised that such sites are recorded and could receive a national designation if they meet the criteria, or the City could establish local landmark status for archaeological sites with certain criteria. She confirmed that the trails also have the potential for historical preservation. Council Member Sniff suggested looking into changing the 20% slope to a smaller number. Mayor Pena agreed and asked if the City has any advantage in dealing with the other agencies since it's a Charter City to which Ms. Honeywell advised that charter status has no impact on Federal regulations. Council Member Adolph supported the City taking a look at the ordinance to protect not only the hillsides, but also the rights of the property owners and to make it more compatible with what the community wants. City Council Minutes 14 December 2, 1997 Council Member Sniff felt the City's public safety prerogatives should be looked at as well as it relates to locating sites in high -risk areas. Ms. di lorio then reviewed what appears to be the Council's issues as follows: 1) staff to define boulder fields and canyon widths and make recommendations for possible development; 2) use an understandable formula to identify the toe of slope; 3) look into annexation; 4) develop a section regarding wind-borne materials; and, 5) look at reducing the 20% slope -figure. Council concurred on the above issues. Staff also asked for clarification. on how development should be allowed above the toe of slope. In response to Mayor Pena, Ms. di lorio advised that access roads, not exceeding 15 % grade, are allowed, but must not be visible if at all possible. Mr. Herman noted that developers can receive credit if development is limited in the hillside and forced down into developable areas. Council Member Sniff felt the use of fill material against the mountains should also be considered as well as the public safety issue. Council Member Adolph asked if the number of alluvial fans in the City is recorded to which Ms. di lorio responded no, but noted that it's a requirement for analysis by the developer. Mayor Pena suggested Council take a tour of the hillside areas. Bob Ross, RBF Engineering, felt the "boulder fields" definition was somewhat subjective and very conservative and suggested the slope be considered. Mayor Pena suggested he work with staff on a definition. Council Member Henderson complimented staff for their hard work on this issue. Mr. Herman advised that staff would address the points raised by Council and, upon conclusion of the site visits in January, present a revised ordinance to the Planning Commission in February and to the Council in March. City Council Minutes 15 December 2, 1997 Council Member Henderson suggested the tour invitation be extended to the Planning Commission as well. Council concurred. 2. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE VILLAGE PLAN. Ms. di lorio, Planning Manager, advised that in March 1997, staff met with business and property owners of The Village to discuss the Village Specific Plan. Various solutions were discussed as follows: 1)retain an art focus and establish a permanent Arts Festival location; 2) make the Frances Hack Park a major focus for Village activities; 3) create a Village Stakeholder Committee; 4) enhance the Mainstreet Marketplace; and, 5) be consistent in use approvals. She noted that the Cal Poly Pomona Study verified the most previously - identified problems and issues and it concurred that The Village needs a special draw to compensate for the lack of traditional commercial development precursors. It also presented a bold plan for a resort/hotel and spa. She advised that staff is looking for direction regarding the Village Specific Plan and presented the following options for Council's consideration: 1) eliminate the existing plan and zoning in favor of more flexible, conceptual guidelines; 2) establish a program to address interim improvements; 3) purchase the Frances Hack Park; 4) focus on attracting events and activities to draw people to The Village; 5) limit requirements placed on temporary events; 6) reduce required parking and/or allow alternative means; 7) provide interim streetscape enhancements; and, 8) increase attention to The Village area concerns. Council Member Sniff felt a bold stroke should be considered, but wasn't sure the idea of a resort/hotel and spa was the answer. He suggested a tower with an elevated restaurant and shops on the ground level and wished to see a historical/cultural plaza in concert with the La Quinta Historical Museum. He felt the City should stop waiting for something to happen and develop a comprehensive plan of its own. He suggested land banking and breaking up the area into sub -zones to make development easier to accomplish, cutting down the massive cost of infrastructure. Mayor Pena felt a realistic approach should be taken, noting that more and more activities are being lost to the Highway 1 1 1 Corridor and that the arts focus is moving out of The Village. He was disappointed that none of the property owners were present to help determine the destiny of The Village, noting that that has always been part of the problem. He felt some short-term incentives would help, such as lessening some of the requirements and possibly enhancing ATTACHMENT #2 LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 21, 1998 Special meeting of the La Quinta City Council was called to order at 10:00 am by Mayor Pena followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENT: Council Members Henderson, Sniff, Mayor Pena ABSENT: Council Members Adolph, Perkins BUSINESS SESSION - None • ►. 1. DISCUSSION AND TOUR OF HILLSIDE AREAS IN RELATION TO HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT. Ms. di lorio explained that this is the first of two tours — that the Planning Commission will also be scheduling one. Council proceeded to board a bus with the following staff members: City Manager, Tom Genovese; City Clerk, Saundra Juhola; Planning Manager, Christie di lorio; and Senior Engineer, Steve Speer; and the following members of the public: Cheryl Ward, Richard Meyer, Dennis Cooney and Bob Ross with Mainiero, Smith & Assoc. The Council's first stop was the area around St. Francis of Assisi Church where they were joined by Stewart Woodard, Fred Simon and the Pastor of the Church, in discussing the proposed development of the La Quinta Arts Foundation and the parking lot for the Church. The general scope of discussion centered around whether or not to allow the dirt to be moved around, but not added to and whether or not the building for the Arts Foundation could be built on a plateau. The second stop was along Montezuma where there was discussion regarding the slope gradient of an alluvial fan/boulder field. City Council Minutes Page 2 January 21, 1998 The third stop was within The Quarry to view Mr. Meyer's property and discuss whether or not a boulder field should be developed or not. Also, whether locations above the toe of slope with slope gradient less than 15% or 20% be allowed to be developed. Also discussed, was development of roadways. The next stop was that of Mr. Green's property where there was discussion about cutting and filling being allowed within the Hillside Conservation area and how wide the canyon can be for development to occur and how far from the toe of slope can development occur. The meeting concluded about 12:30 pm with Council Members Sniff/Henderson moving to adjourn the meeting. Resooctfully submitted, SAUNDRA L. JUnOLA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: February 24, 1998 CASE NO.: Sign Application 98-415 APPLICANT: Royal Sign Company (for The William Warren Group) REQUEST: Approval of planned sign program for permanent signs for self storage facility (Storage USA) LOCATION: 46-600 Adams Street, north of Highway 111 (Attachment 1) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: The La Quinta Community Development Department has determined this Sign Application is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15311, Class 11 of the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act. ZONING: CR - Regional Commercial District BACKGROUND: SITE DESCRIPTION Storage USA, under construction on the east side of Adams Street, across from Wal- Mart received Planning Commission approval on December 10, 1996. Approval of the planned sign program for the permanent signs by the Planning Commission is required. REQUEST: The applicant wishes to install one monument and one building mounted sign adjacent to Adams Street (Attachment 2). The monument sign is proposed on the south side of the southern most driveway entry in a landscape area five feet behind the street right-of-way. The proposed sign will be double faced and installed perpendicular to the street. The monument structure will be an aluminum cabinet, finished in stucco matching the building color. The top would have an arch and double rounded corners, a similar design to those used above the gates leading into the project. C:pc rpt sa 98-415 The length of the monument would be ten feet, with the height five feet at the top of the arch and the width two feet for a total of approximately 39 square feet. The copy would be on two lines and read, "STORAGE USA" and "SELF STORAGE". The letters will be routed out of the cabinet and internally illuminated. Except for "USA" which is red, the copy would be blue plexiglas. The actual letter heights are nine inches, with the overall copy size 1 `-1 1'/4" high by 7'-4 %" long or 14.3 square feet. The building mounted sign is proposed on the first floor level fascia facing Adams Street. The sign reads "STORAGE USA" and would be 2'-'/4" high by 15 feet long or 30.3 square feet. The letters would have plexiglas faces and be internally illuminated channel letters with "STORAGE" blue and "USA" red in color. The trim cap and returns would match the face color. The sign would be centered on the fascia. The total square footage of the two signs would be approximately 44.6 square feet. The Zoning Code allows a maximum 50 square foot monument sign and maximum 50 square foot building sign facing the street frontage. REQUIRED FINDINGS: The findings necessary to approve this planned sign program are as follows: 1. The sign program is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Code. 2. Both signs are in harmony with and visually related to: A. Each other in that they are visually identical and utilize the same design and colors. B. The signs are compatible with the building including the use of matching stucco on the monument background. C. Since there is no development to the north, south or east these signs will not adversely affect surrounding properties or signs. These signs are compatible with those within the shopping center across Adams Street. 3. The location of the monument sign will not create any vehicular obstructions nor hinder vehicular visibility. CONCLUSION: The findings necessary to approve this sign application can be made. The signs will provide adequate identification, be architecturally compatible, and have no negative impacts on the surrounding properties. C:pc rpt sa 98-415 RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 98-_, approving Sign Application 98-415, subject to submitting final plans and obtaining a building permit. Attachment: 1. Location Map 2. Sign plan exhibits Prepared by: S�*K'6.50AM — Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner Submitted by: Christine di lorio, Planning Manager C:pc rpt sa 98-415 A TT A CT.JA=XTT l