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