Loading...
1998 11 24 PCz 5 �OFTN� PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California November 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 98-082 Beginning Minute Motion 98-011 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 Id. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the Minutes for November 10, 1998 B. Department Report PC/AGENDA V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Case ..................... ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-369, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28982, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98- 631, AND TRACT 24230-AMENDMENT #1 Applicant ............... Mainiero, Smith and Associates, Inc. for A. G. Spans Corporation Location ................ Southwest corner of Adams Street and 4 rh Avenue Request ................. Approval and recommendation to the City Council for Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-369 and approval of a 160 unit airspace condominium subdivision project on 10.17 acres; review of the building elevations and development plans; and the elimination of Condition #41 of Tract 24230 requiring affordable housing units within the project. Action ................... Resolution 98- Resolution 98- Resolution 98- , Resolution 98- B. Case ..................... CONTINUED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28964 Applicant ............... Oliphant and Williams Associates, Inc. Location ................ North side of 5yh Avenue, approximately 1,600 feet west of Jefferson Street. Request ................. Approval and recommendation to the City Council for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-365 to subdivide 39 acres into 78 residential lots and other common lots. Action ................... Recommendation for 30-day continuance. C. Case ..................... TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27519 Applicant ................ Century -Crowell Communities Location ................. Approximately 100-feet south of Desert Stream Drive and west of Dune Palms Road. Request ................... Approval and recommendation to the City Council for Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-370 and approval of a 70 lot subdivision and other common lots on 17.6 acres in the RL Zone District. Action ................... Resolution 98- and Resolution 98- PC/AGENDA D. Case ..................... PLOT PLAN 94-543, AMENDMENT #1 Applicant ............... David Chapman Location ................ 50-981 Washington Street at the northwest corner of Washington Street and Calle Tampico in the La Quinta Village Shopping Center. Request ................. Approval of building elevation modifications for a 550+ square foot expansion of an existing building (formerly Sesame') for use as a restaurant. Action ................... Resolution 98- E. Case ..................... TRACT 28545-2, AMENDMENT #1 Applicant ............... KSL Desert Resorts, Inc. Location ................ Generally west of Eisenhower Drive and south of Avenida Fernando, in the La Quinta Resort homes area Request ................. Approval and recommendation to the City Council of an Amendment to Tract Map 28545-2 to reconfigure the shape of the condominium lots to include the patio area and other minor changes. Action ................... Resolution 98- VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Discussion regarding the regular meeting dates for the Planning Commission meetings in December. B. Commission report on the City Council meeting of October 20, 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, CA November 10, 1998 I. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:04 P.M. by Chairman Tyler who asked Commissioner Butler to lead the flag salute. B. Chairman Tyler requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. Unanimously approved. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: A. Chairman Tyler requested the agenda be reorganized to take the Business Item first and Public Hearing Items B and C second. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Kirk and unanimously approved. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Tyler asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of October 13, 1998. Commissioner Robbins asked that Page 7 corrected as the spelling of his name was incorrect. There being no other correction, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Robbins to approve the minutes as corrected. B. Chairman Tyler asked that the Minutes of October 27, 1998, be corrected on Page 4, Item 7 to replace the word "upgraded" with "refurbished" and delete Item 11; Page 6, Item 9, on the sixth line, it should read, "...guarantee there will be no loft on two story units on this lot." There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Robbins to approve the minutes as corrected. Commissioner Abels abstained. C. Department Report: None. CAMy Documents\WPD0CS\pc11-10-98.wpd Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Cove Residential Master Design Guidelines 98-001; a request of Esquiel Coronel, Coronel Construction for approval of Master Design Guidelines for homes to be built throughout the Cove. Community Development Director Jerry Herman presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Commissioner Robbins asked staff to explain the Maser Design Guidelines process. He had no objection to any of the designs as submitted. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated these guidelines would be used by staff for all future homes built in the Cove by this developer. Currently any home built in the Cove goes through a staff review process meeting certain design guidelines. Staff reviews the elevations and determine whether or not the house meets the standards for the Cove. Commissioner Robbins asked if there was anything to prevent the builder from using the design anywhere in the Cove. Design standards require the front elevation of each house to be different within 200 feet of each other. 3. Chairman Tyler asked if anyone wanted to speak regarding this item. There being none, the public participation was closed. 4. Chairman Tyler asked that on Pages 21 and 22 there is a reference to two story units. As two story units are not allowed in the Cove this should be deleted from the developers guidelines. 5. Commissioner Kirk stated the presentation and photo approach was very effective. He suggested that Page 3, where one of the elevations shows a bay window, this should be one of the window treatments that should be considered as an alternative. In regard to the window treatments, the builder did a fairly good job on Pages 11 and 12, but he would suggest adding a bay window. On Page 10 he would suggest the developer zoom in on the window treatments, rather than a full elevation. 6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Kirk/Abels to adopt Minute Motion 98-010, approving Master Design Guidelines 98-001, as submitted. Unanimously approved. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-10-98.wpd 2 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Tentative Tract Map 29004; a request of KSL Land Corporation for approval and recommendation to the City Council for an 11 lot single family residential subdivision on 3.75 acres within the PGA West Jack Nicklaus Resort Course area, along the east side of Southern Hills at its intersection with Oakmont. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Chris Berg, MDS Consulting, civil engineers representing the applicant, stated he had no objections to the recommendations/conditions as presented by staff. 3. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-076 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 29004, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES; None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. B. Site Development Permit 98-637; a request of Hall and Foreman, Inc., for WalMart for approval of a 26 foot by 143.6 foot expansion to Wa1Mart's outside Garden Center. 1. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and requested the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Commissioner Butler asked if the landscaping issues had not been resolved and if not, could they be addressed at this time. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio noted the issues had been corrected to staff s satisfaction. 3. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcI1-10-98.wpd 3 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 4. Chairman Tyler asked if the series of pillars that along the Garden Center would remain. Staff stated it was unknown whether they would be moved or reconstructed, but it is to remain the same as it is now. Staff did add a condition that on the back side of the Auto Center they are required to be the same column design. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-077 approving Site Development Permit 98-637, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as submitted/amended: C. Environmental Assessment 97-029-Amendment # 1, Site Development Permit 97- 603-Amendment # 1 Development Agreement 97-002-Amendment # 1; a request of Stamko Development Company for approval and recommendation to the City Council for Certification of the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report; approval of "The Centre at La Quinta" Specific Plan Amendment creating development guidelines and standards for a multi -phased Mixed Regional Commercial complex with three planning areas having four development scenarios; approval of a Site Development Permit Amendment including the building elevations, site, landscaping, and lighting plans for three auto dealerships; and approval of the Development Agreement Amendment, for the property located south of Highway 111 between Adams Street and Dune Palms Road. 1. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and stated he was deeply disturbed about the adversarial overtones that are discernable in the various attachments to the staff report prepared for this hearing. To some extent these also surfaced during the previous portion of this public hearing on October 13, 1998. There should be no question in anyone's mind that this project is a significant project for our City. The fact that the City Council previously approved this key project -- including the Development Agreement -- in July, 1997, indicates the City's strong support for the project. The fact that the developer, Stamko Development, along with the initial cadre of auto dealers, have persevered through all the obstacles placed in their way by various and sundry parties, clearly indicates their continued interest in moving forward with the project at this time. In our deliberations tonight, therefore, we fid two willing parties, both of whom wish to proceed with this project in all due haste. This should be a "slam dunk". What we have been considering in this public hearing are alterations to various documents which result from changes suggested by the City and the applicant. For the City, the majority of these changes relate to the Highway I I I Landscape Design Guidelines that were codified subsequent to the previous City approval of this project. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-10-98.wpd 4 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 For the applicant, changes became necessary due to the restructuring of the initial auto dealership complement and the postulation of three planning areas with four possible development scenarios. In reviewing all the materials contained in the staff report, there are still a few unresolved terms and conditions that need to be settled tonight. It is my hope and intent that tonight's public hearing will be concluded in a professional, non -adversarial manner, and that we can mutually resolve any and all outstanding issues in an expedient fashion. 2. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff clarified that the Condition #14 should state the recommendation is for 68 trees in the Highway I I I setback, not 14 trees. 3. Chairman Tyler asked if any comments had been received on the SEIR. Staff noted no significant comments had been received. 4. Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained the drawings that had been given to the Commission. He stated the elevation drawings were derived from two sources: the landscaped area they are illustrated in the specific plan and the grading plan that is currently in plan check. Discussion followed on each of the cross section drawings. Figure A: Highway 111, 120 feet east of Adams Street. 6. Figure B: Highway 111, 120 feet east of Adams Street same view but giving a closer view. a. Commissioner Robbins noted that the elevations were taken from the outside lane and if you moved to the inside lanes you would not be able to see the cars. Staff stated as you move farther to the north there is more of a slope. Especially at this location as it is a super elevated street. b. Chairman Tyler asked if public parking was allowed along the curb. Staff stated it is not posted and typically used only for a breakdown. It is governed by Caltrans as it is a State Highway. 7. Figure C: Highway 111, 120 east of Adams Street, same view except it shows a pedestrian on the sidewalk. Staff is trying to show the relative depth from the pedestrian's perspective to the bottom of the retention basin is about a 13- foot differential. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc1 I-10-98.wpd Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 a. Commissioner Robbins asked what the difference was between the display pad and the bottom of the retention basin. Staff stated it is about two and a half feet. The bottom of the retention basin to the sidewalk is eight feet. 8. Figure D: Highway I I I at the west end of Display Pad #2. The line of site from Highway 111 allows the display pad to be visible. a. Commissioner Robbins noted there could be no retention basin at this location and asked staff to identify what they were trying to point out. Staff stated it displays the depth into the retention basin. It is four feet lower than the display pad. You are only allowed to retain in the Highway I I I setback water from the right of way and the landscaped setback area itself. This figure shows what the elevation differentials will be if the project is approved as proposed. 9. Figure E: Highway 111, at the west end of Display Pad #2 is the same location except it shows the pedestrian next to the retention basin. This shows a 13 foot depth elevation differential from the pedestrian's eye level to the bottom of the basin. 10. Figure F: Highway 111, Dealer Pad #2, parked vehicles. Has a one and a half foot high berm and hides about half of the vehicle. It has a 5:1 slope down to the pad as well as a modest swale about a half foot deep. a. Commissioner Robbins stated this could be a three foot berm. As you look up from the display pad, from where the display vehicle is, to the top it would be a four foot berm. Staff noted the ordinance stated a berm is measured from the curb. 11. Figure G: Highway 222, Dealer Pad #2, parked vehicles, but if landscape guidelines were implemented. This is with a three foot berm and hides more of the regular vehicle display area. a. Commissioner Kirk asked if these were guidelines, or part of the Ordinance. Planning Manager Christi di Iorio clarified that as discussed in the staff report on Page 5, Item 4.b. it outlines that the Zoning Code adopted that portion of the Highway I I I Guidelines which included specific design guidelines for setbacks, particularly storm water retention. This was added to the guidelines at the time of adoption because of the concerns with the Home Depot landscaping. It became apparent the landscaping was not CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcI 1-10-98.wpd 6 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 accomplishing the desired look along Highway 111. The second issue was the Lapis project which puts all its retention on Highway 111. When Lapis came back for a revision to their specific plan, the Guidelines were imposed. The majority of the drainage is now out of the Highway I I I setback and a part of the project on site. The third item is that the applicant has stated the development standards within the Zoning Code may be modified under a specific plan. However, this specific plan amendment includes the removal of the six foot screen wall which was identified in the EIR as being necessary to screen the auto mall loading, storage, parking, and lower building elevation as viewed from Adams Street and Highway 111. Therefore, the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) analyzed the berming as an alternative to the wall and found that it does not adequately screen the vehicle display areas along Highway 111. Therefore mitigation measures for the Aesthetic section required adequate berming to screen the regular display areas and allow them to keep their special display areas for visibility to Highway 111. b. Commissioner Kirk stated his question was that he wanted clarification for the maximum and minimum. Staff stated the Design Guidelines have a minimum and maximum height with the objection of screening the cars. In addition, there is the mitigation measure which states what is necessary to screen the cars. C. Commissioner Robbins asked why staff was not taking into consideration the landscaping and berming. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated he was only showing elevations. The point is that staff wants the Commission to make a fully informed decision based on the elevations. 12. Figure H: Adams Street. Statements have been made that the site is 12 feet lower than the Highway and that is true in its native condition. In its improved condition, the elevation differential from the top of curb at the pad to the top of the curb at the street is 4.9 feet. It is a gentle slope with a 32 foot wide landscaped setback area combined with the right of way and you can mitigate that downslope of 5:1 as it is enough area to meander the sidewalk. a. Chairman Tyler asked staff to identify this location. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated it was an Adams Street curb at the end of the curb return as it turns off the Highway going south. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc11-10-98.wpd 7 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 b. Chairman Tyler asked if there was a similar one at 90 degrees at the Highway I I I curb. Staff stated no, but it would be similar because the elevation on the Highway is similar. It could be better mitigated because the landscape setback on the Highway is 62 feet from the curb. Commissioner Robbins asked if the applicant was proposing a straight wall along Adams Street. Staff stated that was true. 13. Figure I: Adams Street next to Avenue 47. The dealers pad is higher than Adams Street by 2.6 feet and has a gentle up sweep. 14. Chairman Tyler asked what the applicant was proposing in regard to the on site retention. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated they were proposing the car dealers retain some of the storm water on their site slightly encroaching into the public right of way on the south side and a considerable amount of the storm water from their site would be drained northerly to the setback area on Highway 111. There is no common retention basin serving the three dealer pads and no retention basin down by the C.V.W.D. well site. When the Water District develops the well site and it is brought on line, the Water District discharges its water before it is introduced into the domestic water system and that water needs to go somewhere. Staff is finding it more desirable to have the retention basin next to the well site. 15. Commissioner Robbins asked what percentage of the drainage relative to the entire site is flowing into the retention basins along Highway 111. Staff stated it was unknown. 16. Chairman Tyler asked if staff thought what the applicant was proposing was adequate to meet the requirements for water retention. Staff stated their retention basins will hold the water, but they do not comply with the City's Ordinance. They do have the right to take that exception within the specific plan. Staff s responsibility is to point this out to the Commission so the Commission is aware of what exceptions are being taken and to what degree. 17. Commissioner Robbins asked if staff s concern was that they were draining water into the setback or that there is not adequate screening of the cars. It appears they are being considered together and he believes they should be considered separately. Staff stated they are bringing to the Commission's attention the City's Guidelines and Ordinances that the City Council and Commission reviewed and approved so the Commission is aware of the deviations the applicant is taking. Planning Manager Christi di Iorio stated CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcI 1-10-98.wpd 8 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 they do come together because of the amount of storm water retention staff is assuming does not allow for the berming as what was demonstrated by the Figures that were shown to the Commission at this meeting. Also, in regard to the mitigation measure, to see that the berming would accomplish the same objection as the six foot wall. This is how they are integrated and this is how staff has addressed it and how the EIR has addressed the issues. It is both Hydrology and Aesthetics. Commissioner Robbins stated that if the screening issue could be settled, then the water draining into the setback would not be an issue. Staff stated that if they can accomplish berming to adequately screen the vehicles, then it would be a decision of the Council to allow them to have more drainage than just the Highway I I I drainage and the incidental drainage. The applicant has stated drainage would not occur from the street but would be taken further down on the project past La Quinta Drive. 18. Commissioner Kirk stated that when the Guidelines were developed the drainage in the Highway 111 was an aesthetic issue. Council did want to see basins along Highway 111. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated they did not want to see the basins as they left a hole that would allow you to see into the project area. It was their desire to screen the parking from Highway 111 and create an image corridor that would serve as an identity of La Quinta. When you analyze the 50 foot setback and their request for drainage staff did see that part of it could be placed in the setback, but it would be limited to either run off from the road or incidental. This lead staff to the Zoning Ordinance which included Highway 111 and the analysis of the 20 foot setbacks for the arterials. They found that nothing could be retained in the setbacks to accomplish the objection of berming to not only buffer cars, but to soften the impact of the walls being proposed for mitigation for subdivisions. 19. Chairman Tyler stated that during the last hearing there was discussion as to where the water drained from Highway 111 and it seemed that it ran to the north and did not impinge on this area. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated that is true for the first pad, it gets back to a normal crown shape by the time you get down to the second pad. 20. Commissioner Robbins stated then there is no street water draining from Highway I I I into these retention basins. Staff stated it was being carried easterly back into a retention basin either in front of this pad or the future retail pads. 21. There being no further public comment, the matter was open for Commission discussion. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc11-10-98.wpd 9 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 22. Ms. Christine Clark, representing Stamko Development, introduced Mr. Shepardson the landscape architect for the project, to explain the thought process that went into the Highway I I I landscape design. As a result of the last meeting they had revised the panoramic view to incorporate on site landscaping. 23. Mr. Chuck Shepardson, Horton Shepardson Associates, landscape architects for the project, showed how they believed they were in conformance with the Design Guidelines. Their intent was to provide an undulating design for the softscape grading. In some areas they were viewing into the display pads and the areas where they were trying to screen the new parking areas they raised the berms. On the west side of the project, at the corner of Adams Street and Highway 111, Pad #1, they have display areas and the greatest differential in height between Highway I I I and any one of the pads. Approximately 8 feet of difference between Highway I I I and the corner. They are creating a straight slope. Staff is showing a 2:1 slope which may be an interpretation of the contours, but they are trying to maximize it to 3:1. Going east where there is a bank of new vehicle parking, between this area the berms average in height from the grade of the street, adjacent to the curb, is approximately two and a half to three and a half feet. This will cause an undulating affect as required in the Guidelines. The berms are two to three feet and the cars are five feet below street grade. This is a three foot berm, the cars are down five feet, and most of the cars will not be seen. At the intersection of Auto Center Drive North and Highway I I I the display pads and the grade are lowered to allow visibility. Pad #2 has another bank of new vehicle parking and they have berms of two and a half to three feet. Additional screening will be provided by the signage as well. Between Pads #2 and #3 the grade on Highway I I I and the grade to the pads start to catch up with each other. Then between the display areas they have berms of about two feet. They are trying to create the undulating natural affect. The last pad, Pad #3, is the next area of new vehicles. The pads here average three to four feet, with a grade of 66 along the street, with a berms up to 70 feet at high points. The reason they are doing this is because the grade is starting to catch up with each other and they are provide higher berming in the areas they find necessary. 24. Commissioner Kirk asked if they had done any cross sections as staff had prepared. Mr. Shepardson stated staff s were very accurate except it should go slightly higher because of their high points. They will go higher than the last contour shown on the map. 25. Mr. Shepardson displayed the landscape plan superimposed on the contour grading plans. He stated they wanted to keep their display pads visible. The small symbols represented a species of plant material that make up a lot of CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-10-98.wpd 10 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 accent or textured material that stays low to not block visibility. Palm trees are being planted in between the display pads to provide accent or focal points. In front of the new vehicles area they have the massing of trees to provide screening and shrub material that grows five and six feet tall to provide additional screening of the new vehicle cars. The turf area is along the curb and walkway which is according to the Design Guidelines. The Architectural Landscaping and Review Committee (ALRC) discussed these items and agreed with their proposal. Staff s request to double the trees was not agreed to by the ALRC, but they did want additional trees in front of the new vehicle display areas. 26. Commissioner Robbins asked how many trees were proposed for the setback area. Mr. Shepardson stated 36 not counting the trees in the median. They are Mesquite trees, because the dealer has a problem with flowering trees as they can cause a mess with the new cars. The ALRC also agreed with them on this issue as well. If the trees are pushed further out to Highway I I I then they are in the area of the display signs which would block the signage. 27. Chairman Tyler asked if this was the landscaping plan shown to the ALRC. Mr. Shepardson stated no and showed the current plans which indicated they had additional trees. Chairman Tyler asked if Palm trees were proposed. Mr. Shepardson stated they were flanking all sides of the display pads. The Palm trees indicate the focal point. He went on to show the landscape elevation plans. 28. Commissioner Robbins asked the size of the trees that will be planted first relative to what is being shown on the plans. Mr. Shepardson stated Mesquite trees (24-36 inch box) grow very rapidly and would reach maturity within five years and indicated where they would be planted. 29. Commissioner Robbins asked about the landscaping along Adams Street. Mr. Shepardson stated they currently have a sidewalk that is adjacent to the curb and they are considering a meandering sidewalk. They do not believe berming can occur in the first section where they have some differential in the grade between Adams Street and Highway 111 on the first pad. There is opportunity for berming further down from the corner. 30. Commissioner Robbins asked staff if there was any discussion regarding berming on Adams Street. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the City Ordinance calls for berming on all arterial streets. The applicant is correct, however, that 270 feet south of the Highway is where the pad and street are at equal grade. From there south, which is half way between Highway I I I and 47`h Avenue, the pads are higher than the street. This is where the Ordinance requires berming. CAMy Documents\WPD0CS\pc11-10-98.wpd I I Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 31. Ms. Clark stated that on Adams Street on Pad # 1 there is a six foot wall coming down which is not on the lower pad because they are not constructing it. But, because Pad #1 has its storage on the west side, there is a six foot wall coming down. They are therefore, berming it up so it does not look distorted as it is a 12 foot drop. In Figure I it does not show the existing wall. It starts approximately 50 feet down Adams Street to enclose the area and is 32 feet from the curb. Discussion followed regarding the location of the wall. 32. Commissioner Robbins asked if a retaining wall could be added. Mr. Shepardson stated it would be an added expense and would be up to the dealers. 33. Ms. Clark introduced Mr. Schultz who would address retention. First she would like to discuss the entire site which is an 87 acre site. They are asking to retain 12.5 acres. The initial phase is 12.5' acres including the street and 50% will be on site so when you look at the specific plan or the entire 87 acres they are only putting in this particular area 7.5 percent. They are actually retaining 92.5% of the site. 34. Mr. Chris Schultz, Keith International, stated the low points on Highway 111 are only in the special display areas. As a by product of the low points they provide a good location for drainage and retention. This concept is consistent with the originally approved Specific Plan. In regard to retention basins staff reduced the berm heights and he did not believe this was true. Retention basins are only in those areas in front of the special display pads. Adequate berming has been provided in front of the regular display pads. In regard to how much of the three parcels direct run-off to Highway 111, it is about a 60-40 split or 60 percent of the three pads run off to Highway 111. The other 40 percent retains along the interior street areas. 35. Commissioner Robbins asked if the decision of the Planning Commission and City Council was to say they could not drain into the Highway I I I setback and they had to redesign the site, it appears the applicant is left with two extremes: 1) you could either hold the grades at the Highway I I I setback that exists now through the pads and lower the remainder of the site, which does not work unless you wanted to get rid of a lot of dirt to cause it to drain to the rear; or, 2) you could raise the display pads so it would drain to the back which would raise the display pads and increase the view of the vehicles from the street. Mr. Schultz stated the majority of the site is paving and building. To substantially redesign would require to find similar areas that would be pervious to provide retention. It would impact the number of spaces and parking lot configuration. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcI I-10-98.wpd 12 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 36. Ms. Clarke stated that from a layman's view point, to extend the setback of Highway I I I creating a moat effect so they would extend the landscaping ten feet. She did respond in writing to the Specific Plan comments and did not respond to the Site Development Permit because it was redundant. In regard to the Specific Plan, Condition 42 and 43 have been addressed. Condition #7 needs to note on which street where the curb, gutter and sidewalk will not be constructed. Condition #9 has been covered, Condition #12 is in the text; Conditions #13 and #14 were covered by Mr. Shepardson; Condition #15 has not been addressed. They are asking that if there is an auto mall and retail center they want a sign at 47`' and Adams Street. If there is no auto mall constructed and it becomes all retail, no sign will be requested at this location. Condition #16 they would like the single free standing sign as it was in the original specific plan. In regard to the signage for the auto dealers, they are asking for building signs on Highway I I I indicating the car dealer. There are a potential of nine signs because this is the ultimate buildout and they are stubbing out for all nine signs. In regard to Adams Street, they did not know the City wanted a meandering sidewalk. If they are required to install the meandering sidewalk it will take additional plan checks. As to the berming on Adams Street they are willing to do so on Development Scenario 4, but in regard to Development Scenario 1,2,3, they needs the same flexibility as they have on Highway I I I for the special display pads if this is to be an auto mall. Overall most of the issues in the Site Development Permit conditions are repetitive and they did not see a need to repeat them. As to Condition #36, CVWD has not indicated where the well site will be located. In Condition #47 the only part they can accept is B.1. 37. Ms. Clarke noted that the mitigation measure for the original specific plan regarding the six foot wall was due to the view of the vehicles on Highway 111. Under this plan they have been turned and to say you have to do the berming when in fact the berming is not needed because of the six foot wall. As to Figures A-E these are for special display areas that are meant to be seen. Some of the exhibits are not to scale as in Figure E. To get to the end of the sidewalk is 12 feet, but for the human to get to the car is 50 feet. 38. Commissioner Kirk asked why the applicant was objecting to all parts of Condition 47, except B.I. Ms. Clarke stated they are trying to keep the buildings clean and the trellis creates more clutter. As you see you can only see half of the building and the trellis will not be seen, they would prefer landscaping. Tiles become difficult because if you pull it around to the front of the building it will conflict with the signage. 39. Commissioner Kirk asked why the applicant was not informed of the meandering sidewalk on Adams Street until the third plan check review. Staff stated they would need to look at the tract conditions for the original CAMy Documents\WPD0CS\pc11-10-98.wpd 13 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 specific plan. The staff report for the initial specific plan did describe the sidewalk on Adams Street and Highway I I I as being meandering. The approved specific plan street detail show it against the curb and the landscaping plan shows a meandering sidewalk. It was an error that needs to be clarified. Ms Clark stated there was an error in the original specific plan. The specific plan conflicted as it showed meandering on the landscaping plans and on the street cross section exhibits next to the curb. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated this issue came to the forefront at the last Planning Commission meeting. Staff therefore, compiled the exhibits shown at this meeting to confirm whether or not a meandering sidewalk could be constructed on Adams Street, and it is possible. Commissioner Kirk asked if the ordinance called for meandering sidewalk, Staff stated it does. 40. Commissioner Butler stated he was confused and wanted to know why she would accept Development Scenario 4 and not 1,2,3. Ms. Clark stated that Scenarios 1, 2, and 3 are for an auto mall. Scenario 4 is for a mixed retail use and is different. If an auto mall extends into Scenarios 2 and 3, displays are needed on the Adams Street setback line. Commissioner Butler stated this would create another problem as the cars would be seen by the neighbors on Adams Street. Ms. Clarke stated the residents of Lake La Quinta were concerned with the noise and lighting and therefore they moved the entrances and shielded the lights on Adams Street. The residents wanted light and yet did not, so they agreed to landscaping lighting. They were able to mitigate their concerns. 41. Chairman Tyler asked if there would be a continuous six foot wall along Adams Street. Ms. Clarke stated only for the Chrysler building. They have to keep the service entrance on the north, south and east. 42. Commissioner Butler stated that if a meandering sidewalk is not on Adams Street how would they buffer the storage. Ms. Clarke stated they would install a wall. The site development permit would control how the buildings would be setback. The specific plan describes the orientation of the buildings. As to the wall, if Pad #4 becomes an auto mall with nine dealers she is uncertain how they would handle their storage. 43. Chairman Tyler asked about the building mounted signs facing Highway 111 and trading off for the secondary signage for the monument signs. Ms. Clarke explained that the secondary signs were signs such as "service" or "used cars". The dealers have instead asked for dealer identification signs on Highway 111. Chairman Tyler stated secondary signs will be needed to direct the traffic to these areas. Ms. Clarke stated these signs are on the interior. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc11-10-98.wpd 14 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 44. Commissioner Robbins asked staff to clarify when the meandering sidewalk and berming came to light on Adams Street. Mr. Schultz stated the original design based on the approved specific plan showed a straight sidewalk, it was submitted to the City and after the third plan check the comment was made to meander the sidewalk. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated this was correct. Staff was plan checking the plans under the old specific plan. They are now in for an amendment. This is now before the Commission under this amendment to see whether or not the specific plan will be required to meet the Design Guidelines. It has been stated by the applicant several times that Adams Street is too steep to build a meandering sidewalk, however, after compiling the cross section, staff determined it was possible. It is an option for the Commission and Council to determine whether or not they want it meandered. 45. Commissioner Robbins asked if any of the final grading plan had been submitted. Staff stated they had submitted a grading plan that showed building footprints. Staff asked them to remove the building footprints. Staff has agreed to a mass grading plan that does not identify or anticipate any permanent storm water retention basins at any specific location. Knowing they were coming in for a revision to the specific plan, staff is holding back on the retention plans until Council approval. 46. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the applicant had taken exception and indicated she would not do complete street improvements on La Quinta Centre Drive and Auto Centre Drive North and Auto Centre Drive. It is staff s position that curb and gutter be constructed on the south side of the street as well as sidewalk. Eagle Hardware was required to install both sides of the street. 47. Commissioner Robbins clarified there would be no on -site parking for employees or customers. Mr. Tom Walker architect for the project, stated they have provided adequate parking for employees and customers on site. They do not want to encourage parking on the street as it is unsightly and can block the cars. Staff noted it was marked on the plans. 48. Mr. Schultz stated that on the street improvements, in discussions with staff, it was determined that when development occurred on the opposite side of the street the curb and gutter would be installed. 49. Commissioner Abels stated he would like to see the project move forward. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-10-98.wpd 15 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 50. Commissioner Kirk stated he was struck by Chairman Tyler's opening statement. From an economic development and political standpoint the project should be a "slam dunk", but maybe not from a planning standpoint. The Highway 111 Design Guidelines were created to hide cars and this plan is in contradiction to this. Staff is interpreting the ordinance and the applicants are trying to stress their point of view. He does not like meandering sidewalks, berms, nor a great amount of turf. However, in looking at the applicant's request and the Guidelines, they do not agree. Staff may have gone to far by even allowing the display areas. He was confused as to how the Commission could proceed. From a planning perspective, staff may not have presented it in the best light, but staff is interpreting the ordinance as written. The Commission can either follow staff s recommendation, or reject the request. 51. Commissioner Butler stated his concern comes from the fact that the original specific plan was approved and now is back for an amendment and under different building scenarios. Basically, they can come to some conclusion as to displaying the vehicles from Highway 111. As to signage he has some concerns that have not been addressed. The meandering sidewalk is required. This project has to move along and everyone has to accept conditions that are compatible to both sides. 52. Commissioner Robbins stated he agreed that the project needs to go forward. Two items in the Design Guidelines are applicable to what is being done. The Guidelines speak of not stifling creativity, but serve as useful tools for the design professionals engaged in site specific designs for the Highway 111 corridor. This plan is creative and the Design Guidelines do stifle that creativity. The Guidelines are specific in regard to display areas. He would challenge anyone to stand 20 feet from a Mesquite or flowering Acacia tree when they are not blooming and be able to tell the difference. He therefore, agrees with the applicant in regard to the use of flowering trees. He takes issue with the way that it appears the recommendation of the ALRC was disregarded. Staff ignored their recommendation and put forth their own and should have identify why they disagreed with the Committee's recommendation. He agrees with requiring the Adams Street meandering sidewalk. Lastly, he supports staff in their attempt to have curb and gutter on both sides of the streets. 53. Chairman Tyler stated his major issues were due to parking facilities or displays. New car displays are covered under a conditional use permit process. Parking facilities are covered by the Zoning Ordinance. The whole purpose of the auto dealership is to sell cars. To require berming or screening is contrary to the purpose of the business. The distance from the street to the CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc11-10-98.wpd 16 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 display areas will be 62 feet. They will not be displayed at the curb. He agrees it is not a highly used pedestrian sidewalk along Highway 111. Screening should be compatible, but not be so dense as to hide the car. In regard to the Highway I I I Design Guidelines, the City Attorney has stated they are the desire of the City Council, but they does have some flexibility. In regard to the flowering trees and the applicant's plant palette, anyone who has parked under a flowering tree knows the problems related to this and he would concur with the applicant's selection. The ALRC recommended increasing the number of trees, not doubling. He would agree with the applicant. The main issue they were trying to avoid was the moat effect. If there is water retention it will be behind the berming so it will not be a situation of looking down into a moat. In his opinion, it is a reasonable compromise. 54. Commissioner Abels stated this project has been a long time coming and both sides have worked to get a good project on the City's main corridor. It is a project the City needs. 55. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-078 recommending to the City Council Certification of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report prepared for Specific Plan 97-029 Amendment # 1, Site Development Permit 97-603 Amendment # 1, and Development Agreement 97-002 Amendment # 1. 56. Staff stated the Commission would have to address the two mitigation issues identified in the SEIR in regard to Hydrology, to require retention on site, and Aesthetics, or adequate berming to accomplish screening into the site. These measures have to be addressed. Commissioner Robbins amended the motion to change the wording "fully screened" to "adequately screened". 57. Commissioner Kirk stated the mitigation measure requires it to be screened. 58. Commissioner Robbins stated that the reason was because of the Design Guidelines. If the Guidelines did not exist, it would not be required. Staff stated the initial mitigation measure required a six foot wall. Now that they are removing the wall it is necessary to provide adequate screening of the auto mall area, loading, storage, parking and lower building exteriors as viewed from Highway III and Adams Street. Commissioner Robbins amended his amendment to say "effective screening". Community Development Director asked the Commission what they were trying to CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcI1-10-98.wpd 17 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 achieve. Commissioner Robbins stated he was not sure that a six foot wall would meet the requirement of "fully screened". By changing the wording to "effective" it would allow the Commission to get to the conditions and define "effective". In regard to the storm water retention, you can effectively screen the display areas and still have storm water retention in those areas and the two are not necessarily tied together. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated a finding must be made that the applicant's proposal adequately screens the regular display area, or define what adequate means. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the mitigation measure that is part of the SEIR needs to specifically say what has to be done to mitigate. 59. Commissioner Robbins asked if the mitigation measures as proposed to "effectively screen" would provide the mitigation. Community Development Director stated it has to describe what that means, a three foot berm, or what. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the applicant is asking for their proposal and staff is saying it needs to go further. You can pick either side, but the Commission needs to define what adequately mitigates this environmental concern. 60. Chairman Tyler asked if they reach the conclusion that the presentation by the applicant adequately screens what would need to be done? City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated they should make that finding and it will go to the City Council stating it is their finding. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the Commission was saying, their finding is that the screening, as submitted by the applicant, of the regular display areas adequately screens. 61. Commissioner Robbins stated the applicant has presented a plan that shows the regular display areas will not be seen from Highway 111. Would the applicant have any problem if along those areas the berm is raised six inches to a foot to raise the berm higher to reach a mid point between the staff s recommendation and the applicant. Ms. Clarke stated there are a couple areas where some berms could be lifted six inches to a foot, but not on Pad # 1. 62. Ms. Carol May, attorney for the applicant, stated that in terms of compromise, what you see tonight is a compromise. What the Commission needs to do is make a finding that either the applicant is right, or staff, or make a new finding. Any new changes will require significant time and money and the applicant has already spent enormous amounts of time and money which will work against the City to get the project they need. All of these things are good to do, but at some time economics and reality have to intervene. 63. Commissioners Abels and Robbins withdrew their motion. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcI 1-10-98.wpd 18 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 64. Commissioner Robbins stated he would like to poll the Commission and see how they feel. In his opinion, he agreed with the applicant's landscaping proposal. 65. Commissioner Butler stated his concern was that the new car areas where the Mesquite trees will be used. He did not believe they would not adequately screen anything in the beginning. Therefore, the screening will not be effective until five years down the road. Maybe they should request larger trees upon initial planting. 66. Commissioner Kirk asked if Commissioner Robbins was suggesting that the applicant's proposal, as presented, adequately screened to meet the mitigation 67. Commissioner Robbins stated he backed off of that and agrees that when the trees matured there will be adequate screening. 68. Commissioner Kirk stated he did not like the Guidelines, but as presented, the project does not meet the Guidelines. It is not the role of the Commission to consider the economic or timing of what the applicant has gone through. As to planning issues, the project does not adequately screen the vehicles from Highway 111. Maybe they should change the Ordinance, but there is no time to do this. He supports staff s recommendation on the SEIR. 69. Commissioner Abels stated he has listened to all the Commissioners, but they have to come to a decision. He would agree with Commissioner Robbins. 70. Chairman Tyler agreed with Commissioner Robbins. Staff restated that the Commission's finding is that the applicant's proposed landscaping and berming adequately addresses the screening of the regular vehicle display area. 71. Commissioner Robbins suggested approving the landscaping as presented by the developer for Highway 111. He did not believe there is adequate room to retain water on Adams Street and he did not think it effects the screening. If it is adequate the way it is bermed, you cannot see it from Highway 111 and is not the "moat" concept. 72. Commissioner Butler stated he agreed with Commissioner Robbins. 73. Commissioner Kirk stated this is a special use, both for the applicant and for the City and this will be setting a precedent. He would have to agreed with the applicant. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcI1-10-98.wpd 19 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 74. Following discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-078 recommending to the City Council Certification of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report prepared for Specific Plan 97-029 Amendment #1, Site Development Permit 97-603 Amendment #1, and Development Agreement 97-002 Amendment #1 with the findings that the landscaping and berming as proposed by the applicant is adequate to screen the regular vehicle display are along Highway 111. The storm water runoff from the norther portion of Parcels 1, 2, and 3 into the Highway I I I landscape setback as proposed by the applicant and not along Adams Street. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES; Commissioner Kirk. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 75. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-079 recommending to the City Council approval of "The Centre at La Quinta" Specific Plan Amendment #1, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as amended. A. Condition #1, no change. B. Condition #2 needs to be clarified. C. Condition #3 revised that a deviation would be accepted for drainage of Pads #1, #2, and #3 and retained as by the applicant. D. Condition #7 as proposed by staff with the exception of the sidewalk. E. Condition #9 as submitted by the applicant in the specific plan in regards to the screening of the regular display areas. F. Condition 12 check for accuracy. G. Condition #13 changed to as applicant requested in the Specific Plan Amendment. H. Condition 14 trees as proposed are acceptable and not required to change except at the corners. I. Condition #15 one monument sign per dealership pad will be allowed. Wall signs for the dealers on the north building elevation will not be allowed. J. Condition # 16 as recommended by staff. K. Condition 418 to be deleted. L. Condition 21 revised to be retained as proposed by the applicant. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES; None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN: None. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcI I-10-98.wpd 20 Planning Commission Meeting November 10, 1998 76. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-080 recommending to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit 97-603 Amendment #1, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as amended. A. Condition #6 "if the project is phased." B. Condition #22 Adams Street runoff may not be retained. C. Condition #29 per CVWD requirements. D. Condition #30 delete sidewalk on the south side of Auto Centre Drive and east side of La Quinta Drive. E. Condition #34 remove last sentence and add, "As per the City Engineer". F. Condition #36 per the applicant's proposal. G. Condition #37 change to the applicant's proposed plan. H. Condition #47 delete everything except B.1. for Torre Nisson regarding window treatment. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES; None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN: None. 77. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commissioner Resolution 98-081 recommending to the City Council approval of Development Agreement Amendment #1 as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES; None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Chairman Tyler gave a report of the City Council meeting of November 3, 1998. IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Abels to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held November 24, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 10:31 P.M. on November 10, 1998. CAMy Documents\WPD0CS\pc11-10-98.wpd 21 PH #B STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 1998 (CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 27, 1998) CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28964 (RANCHO FORTUNADO) REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF A 78 SINGLE FAMILY LOT SUBDIVISION MAP ON 39 ACRES, AND CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-365). LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF 50TH AVENUE APPROXIMATELY 1,600 FEET WEST OF JEFFERSON STREET APPLICANT: OLIPHANT AND WILLIAMS ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED PROPERTY OWNER: RANCHO LA QUINTA AVENUE (50 PARTNERS LIMITED), A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ENGINEERS: ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) ZONING DESIGNATION: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: VACANT (PORTION OF THE FUTURE RANCHO LA QUINTA COUNTRY CLUB) SOUTH: VACANT ACROSS 50TH AVENUE SOUTHWEST: ESTANCIAS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (TRACT 26524) ACROSS 50TH AVENUE EAST: VACANT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WEST: VACANT (PORTION OF THE FUTURE RANCHO LA QUINTA COUNTRY CLUB) STPCTr28964Con2-28 Page 1 of 2 BACKGROUND: Project Request The applicant requests approval of a 78-lot single family subdivision with lots ranging in size from 15,000 square feet to over 22,000 square feet on private streets (Attachments 1 and 2). Staff Comments The Community Development Department requests that the Planning Commission continue this application for a 30-day period to permit the developer additional time to complete the cultural resources assessment for the project, including those items required by the City's Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) on November 19, 1998. Once the report is completed and submitted to staff, the HPC will convene and consider a recommendation to the Planning Commission. RECOMMENDATION: Continue the public hearing for Tentative Tract Map 28964 to December 22, 1998. Attachments 1 . Location Map 2. TTM 28964 Exhibit (Reduced) I?ieparod by: reg' T, ousdell, Associate Planner Submitted by: Christine di lorio, Planning Manager STPCTr28964Con2-28 Page 2 of 2 Case: TTM 28964 VACANT (PROPOSED COLT COURSE DEVELOI&CW) t - jz� r +� CAD Im D .0 s—iZ 1mD CO 0 k -, xz s � . rmn it BK o.D T-� A O -O�iO n O �ZN N IA N N ...�,� j I J bt AIR ei �]{ Hit A all i PH #, STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 1998 CASE NUMBERS: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28982, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-631, TRACT 24230 (AMENDMENT #1) AND EA 98-369 REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO CERTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-369 APPROVING A 160-UNIT AIRSPACE CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION PROJECT ON 10.17 ACRES; REVIEW OF THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS; AND ELIMINATION OF CONDITION #41 OF TRACT 24230 REQUIRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS WITHIN THE PROJECT. LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ADAMS STREET AND 47T" AVENUE APPLICANT/ ENGINEER: MAINIERO, SMITH AND ASSOCIATES, INC. PROPERTY OWNER: A. G. SPANOS CORPORATION GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (12-16 DWELLINGS PER ACRE) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT COMPLIES 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 (EA 98-369) AND HAS DETERMINED THAT ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THERE WOULD NOT BE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT IN THIS CASE BECAUSE APPROPRIATE MITIGATION MEASURES ARE MADE CONDITIONS OF SRPSpanos98-28 Page 1 of 7 APPROVAL, AND A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SHOULD BE FILED. SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: ACROSS 47T" AVENUE, VACANT COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AND A CVWD WELL SITE SOUTH: ACROSS DULCE DEL MAR, VACANT AND DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IN LAKE LA QUINTA EAST: ACROSS ADAMS STREET, VACANT COMMERCIAL PROPERTY (FUTURE LA QUINTA AUTO MALL) WEST: VACANT AND DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IN LAKE LA QUINTA BACKGROUND: Site History The 10.17 acre vacant, previously graded site is located at the southwest corner of 47th Avenue and Adams Street (Attachment 1). The site also backs onto Dulce Del Mar, a private street in Lake La Quinta. Parkway landscaping improvements exist on the perimeter streets, and masonry block wall exists on Adams Street and along the west property line. Lake La Quinta History Lake La Quinta, a gated community, to the south and west of the subject site, consists of approximately 281 single family home sites oriented around a 24-acre lake and other common lots. Tract 24230, the initial subdivision map for Lake La Quinta included commercial lots along Washington Street, was approved by the City Council on July 5, 1989 (i.e., Resolution 89-85). Approximately 160 residential houses exist or are under construction. Lake La Quinta houses are single -story, up to 22' in height excluding tower elements, ranging in size from approximately 1,804 square feet to over 3,700 square feet. Generally the existing houses have flat barrel or S-tile concrete roof tiles with stucco walls. Windows have stucco surrounds and many are multi -pane. Roof eave treatments are also varied (e.g., exposed rafter tails, box stucco, etc.). Two story houses are not allowed pursuant to requirements of the Homeowner's Association (HOA). In addition to the Lake La Quinta housing units, Tract 24230 divided approximately 22.58 acres along Washington Street, generally located between 47t' Avenue and 48th Avenue, and to the north of the subject site, for retail/office development when the Lake La Quinta development was approved by the City Council in 1989 (i.e., SRPSpanos98-28 Page 2 of 7 Change of Zone 89-037►. This area is vacant except for an existing two story (28' high) bed and breakfast facility on Caleo Bay (i.e., Two Angels Inn). Project Request During the approval of Tentative Tract Map 24230 (Lake La Quinta) in 1989, this site was designated high density residential allowing multiple family development up to sixteen 0 6) units per acre. The applicant requests approval of 160 airspace condominium units on the 10.17 acre parcel (Attachment 2 - Reduced Site Plan). Proposed are ten types of buildings, each with different floor plans and building elevations. Floor plans are one- and two -bedrooms ranging in size from 792 square feet to 1,121 square feet. All buildings are two stories, with a maximum 30'-2" height and 4:12 roof pitch. Perimeter building setbacks are typically 10-feet or larger from property lines. Each proposed building type's roof will be covered with flat concrete tiles and walls will be clad with stucco. Proposed roof styles are a combination of modified hip and gable. Desert color tones are proposed (e.g., beige, etc.). The color material sample board will be available for viewing at the meeting. Multi -pane windows are proposed, on the first floor, with single pane single hung sash windows on the second story. The proposed first floor windows will have stucco surrounds. All proposed windows including the sliding glass doors will have aluminum frames. Each of the proposed units have covered outdoor patios or balconies. Project access is limited to two access driveways on 47th Avenue, an existing two lane public street. Automatic swing gates are to be used to control access into the project. No access is proposed on Adams Street and Dulce Del Mar. Private on -site access lanes are typically 28-feet in width, accommodating two-way traffic. The looping street pattern provides access to each building complex. Parking for the condos vary from open parking for guests to covered parking (carports and garages) for residents. Attached garages are proposed for several of the building types. Carport structures are freestanding and constructed of prefabricated metal. Support posts are located toward the front of the parking stall area. The design of the detached garages was not submitted for review. The total number of parking spaces for the project is 322, with 276 spaces being covered. This is a ratio of two parking spaces per unit. The recreation complex, proposed within the northeast corner of the project area, will be single story (3,144 square feet) and a maximum 23'-9" in height (i.e., 7:12 roof pitch). Proposed are two buildings attached with an open air breezeway. Each building will have a hip roof covered with flat concrete tiles. A six-foot building offset is proposed. The proposed walls will be clad in stucco to match other on -site SRPSpanos98-28 Page 3 of 7 buildings. Fixed pane and multi -pane windows are provided. Solid, flat roofed patio covers are provided at each of the four building entrances. A pool/spa, fountain and basketball court (two half courts) are also proposed. Nine open parking spaces are provided at the recreation building to accommodate sales activities and temporary guest parking. Pedestrian sidewalks connect the buildings to the parking and recreation areas. Landscaping plans reflect a varied plant palette for the project. Palm trees, varying in height from 10' to 20', will accentuate the project entrance at the recreation building. Trees are spread throughout the development in clusters or a linear pattern depicted along the west property line. Other trees consist of African sumac, California pepper and Bottle for parking areas, and other types for interior common areas. Trees are generally 15 gallon in size and spaced at 20-foot to 120-foot intervals. New walls and open fencing is proposed along the frontages of 47th Avenue and Dulce Del Mar. The on -site lighting plan is attached to the landscaping plan, and consists of various type of lighting (i.e., landscaping, parking, game courts, etc.) throughout the project. Entry signs are proposed for the primary access entrance into the project on 47th Avenue. The two signs, measuring approximately 30-inches high by 8-feet long (20 square feet), are mounted to terraced plaster walls ranging from 22" to 72" high. The sign panel is constructed using marble and ceramic tiles, and has the words "Spanos La Quinta" in 10-inch high letters on the sign with indirect lighting. The applicant has also requested to eliminate Condition 41 of Tract 24230 requiring 5% of the units to be set -aside for low and moderate income families. Public Notice A public hearing notice was published in the Desert Sun Newspaper on November 1, 1998, and mailed to all affected property owners within 500-feet informing them of the hearing. Letters received from Lake La Quinta residents opposing the project have been delivered to the Planning Commission. Those property owners are opposed to the proposed two story buildings, project density, and/or other issues. There has also been concern that rental apartment units will be built on the site. The subject of apartment units being built occurred when the property owner met with the Lake La Quinta HOA prior to submitting the request to the City for approval. The developer has met with the La Quinta residents to discuss their concerns. Public Agency Review Staff mailed a copy of the applicant's request to all public agencies on September 11, 1998, for response by September 30, 1998. All comments have been incorporated into the attached draft Conditions of Approval, as appropriate. SRPSpanos98-28 Page 4 of 7 Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) On November 20, 1998, the ALRC recommended approval of the project's architectural and landscaping plans on a 2-0 vote. The Committee recommended minor design changes to the exterior building elevations, enhancements to the perimeter landscaping, and increased the height of the Dulce Del Mar wall. Plan changes shall be made prior to building permit issuance. Conditions recommended by the Committee have been included in the attached material (i.e., Site Development Permit Conditions). A copy of the Draft Minutes is attached (Attachment 3). FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL Pursuant to Sections 13.12.120 and 9.210.010 of the Subdivision and Zoning Code, the following findings are provided: General Plan/Zoning Code Consistency This site is designated High Density Residential (HDR) by the General Plan which permits 12-16 units per acre. Under General Plan Policy 2-1.1.8 (Land Use), HDR designated properties shall be adjacent to major transportation and employment areas. This site is adjacent to the Highway 111 Corridor, the City's Regional Commercial area with retail developments such as Jefferson Plaza (Home Depot), One Eleven -La Quinta Shopping Center, Washington Square (Eagle Hardware and Garden), Plaza La Quinta, and other commercial centers. Therefore, the plans are consistent with existing General Plan Policies. Site Development Permit Buildings are laid out clustered to provide varied building elevations and increase open space areas. Second story building features are generally located 20-feet to 80 feet from south and west property boundaries, while balconies generally face interior common areas to be sensitive to outdoor privacy at Lake La Quinta residents. Glass block windows are provided where lighting is desired, but privacy to surrounding houses is necessary. Mature landscaping is to be installed around the project perimeter to enhance the development. Buildings along Dulce Del Mar are in a north/south orientation, lessening the visual impact of the two story structures. The proposed setbacks for the various buildings comply with RH Zone District standards. In order to facilitate noise screening for future residents and preserve visual openness, Chapter 9.50 (Residential Development Standards) of the Zoning Code requires structures along Adams Street, a Secondary Image Corridor, to be one-story in height (22') within 150-feet of the edge of the right-of-way. The height of the recreation building is recommended to be reduced in height to comply with these requirements. The proposed residential buildings have been laid out beyond the 150' setback along Adams Street. SRPSpanos98-28 Page 5 of 7 The applicant's plans propose an architectural style which uses concrete the roofing and exterior cement plaster walls with desert color tones. Architecturally, the proposed plans are consistent in character to surrounding Lake La Quinta houses in terms of exterior materials and textures. Covered and uncovered parking is required for this project. A minimum of 355 parking spaces is required according to the provisions of Table 1501 of Chapter 9.150 (Parking) of the Zoning Ordinance. The number of parking spaces required within the development may be reduced if supportive data is provided pursuant to Section 9.150.070 (Shared Parking) of the Zoning Ordinance. The property owner requests a reduction of 33 parking spaces (10 percent), based on research they have done on properties they own or manage and from other sources, concluding two parking spaces per unit is adequate. This information has been delivered to the Planning Commission under separate cover and is on file with the Community Development Department. Information taken from an Urban Land Institute Shared Parking Report states 1.6 spaces per unit is a reasonable peak demand value for residential parking, and that the time of year does not play a significant factor in parking demand. On -site parking is at its greatest demand between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Tentative Tract Map Existing perimeter public streets and interior private streets conform to the requirements of the General Plan Circulation Element, Zoning Ordinance, and Subdivision Ordinance with the exception that the applicant is obligated to install median improvements on Adams Street. The draft Conditions require site improvements for this project to comply with the Zoning Code and Subdivision Ordinance provisions and other public agency standards. Tract 24230 (Condition Amendment) The City's Housing Element contains several components to achieve a variety and diversity of housing in the City. These components include the provision of adequate housing sites through land use and zoning regulations, land banking, and density bonuses. Provisions for affordable housing are provided by a redevelopment set -aside fund, first-time home buyer down payment assistance programs, mortgage revenue bonds to support the development of owner and rental multiple and single family housing, Section 8 rental assistance, equity sharing, Section 202 elderly or handicapped housing, second units, mortgage credit certificate programs, and other financing and tax credit programs. Because of the many programs listed above and as defined further in the Environmental Assessment, the need to uphold conditions placed on this subdivision prior to the adoption of the current Housing Element requiring set -aside housing is no longer necessary. The amendment of Tract 24230 to eliminate Condition 41 should result in no impacts regarding affordable housing in the City. SRPSparos98-28 Page 6 of 7 CONCLUSION: The City currently has a limited number of properties designated for high density residential uses. These sites are located in close proximity to employment areas and transit corridors pursuant to policies in the General Plan. This site being one of the sites because it is located near Highway 111 with access not only to mass transit, but also employment and shopping activities. Conditions are proposed that comply with the existing provisions of the General Plan, Municipal Zoning Code and Subdivision Ordinance. Site preparation work was completed during initial construction on Lake La Quinta project. Therefore, no physical constraints prevent the development of the site as proposed. Findings for a recommendation of approval are included in the attached Resolutions. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-_, recommending to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 98-369 for Tentative Tract Map 28982, Site Development Permit 98-631 and Tract 24230 (Amendment #1); and 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98- , recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 28982, subject to Findings and Conditions of Approval as attached; and 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit 98-631 for Tentative Tract Map 28982, subject to Findings and Conditions of Approval as attached; and 4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-_, recommending to the City Council approval of an amendment to Tract 24230, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Site Plan 3. Draft ALRC Minutes of November 20, 1998 4. Architectural Plans, Petition Letters, etc. (Commission only) Prepare�by: Gr "Tho ll, Associate Planner Submitted by: Christine di lorio, Planning Manager SRPSpanos98-28 Page 7 of 7 I MEMORANDUM DATE: NOVEMBER 20, 1998 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: LESLIE MOURIQUAND, ASSOCIATE PLANNER VIA: CHRISTINE DI IORIO, PLANNING MANAGER SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR ITEM A The Environmental Assessment for TTM 28982, SDP 98-631, and TM 24230 Amendment 1 is still being reviewed by the City Attorney. It will be delivered to you the first part of next week. C: Greg Trousdell P:\pcmemonAventine. wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28982 TO ALLOW A ONE CONDOMINIUM LOT FOR 160-UNITS ON 10.17 ACRES, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 47T" AVENUE AND ADAMS STREET CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28982 APPLICANT: MAINIERO, SMITH AND.ASSOC., INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission for the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 24th day of November, 1998, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to review the request for a one lot (airspace) condominium subdivision for 160 units on 10.17 acres located at the southwest corner of 47" Avenue and Adams Street, more particularly described as: Assessor's Parcel Number 643-090-014; Portion of SE 1 /4 of Section 30, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, County of Riverside, California WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970", as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development Director has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 98-369) and has determined that although the proposed project could have an adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case because appropriate mitigation measures are made a part of the Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map 28982, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be filed. WHEREAS at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said Tentative Tract Map 28982: A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan, Zoning Code, and Subdivision Ordinance. The property is designated High Density Residential (HDR) by the General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2.0) permitting attached single family projects of 12 to 16 units per acre pursuant to Policy 2-1.1.8. The proposed density is consistent with the HDR requirements. Airspace condominium developments are allowed pursuant to Table 401 of the Zoning Ordinance. The RH District (High Density Residential) permits attached AAResopcTTMSpanos.wpd (28) single family housing not exceeding three stories in height. Two story buildings are proposed in compliance with City standards. B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan. New on -site streets and development improvements for the project conform to City standards as outlined in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance. All on -site streets are private and designed in accordance with Chapter 3.0 of the General Plan Circulation Element. C. The design of the subdivision, or the proposed improvements, are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The vacant, previously disturbed site is suitable for high density residential development based on the recommendations of Environmental Assessment 98- 369. Development will not cause substantial environmental damage, or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat provided mitigation measures are met. Urban improvements are adjoining the property making it conducive for residential development. D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on City, State, and Federal requirements. Infrastructure improvements are readily available adjacent to the site. New improvements required for this project will be compatible with the development improvements to the south and west (i.e., Lake La Quinta development). E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of property within the proposed subdivision. Off -site infrastructure improvements are not required for this project. The proposed on -site streets are planned to provide direct access to each residential unit and the accessory parking areas. The project improvements will benefit surrounding properties. The design of Tentative Tract Map 28982 will not conflict with existing public easements, as the project has been designed around, and with consideration for, these easements. A:\ResopcTTMSpanos.wpd (28) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 28982 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 241h day of November, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California AARcsopcTTMSpanos.wpd (28) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28982 NOVEMBER 24, 1998 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply. 2. The subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this tentative map or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. 3. Tentative Tract Map No. 28982 shall comply with the requirements and standards of § §66410 through 66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC). 4. The tentative map shall expire within two years unless an extension of time is applied for and granted by the City Council pursuant to Subdivision Code requirements. 5. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) The applicant (subdivider and subdivider's successors in interest in the property) is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the Notice of Intent received from the CWQCB prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure A:TondTT28982Span os.wpd Page 1 of Planning Commission Resolution 98-_ Tentative Tract Map 28982 November 24, 1998 that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site. PROPERTY RIGHTS 6. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall acquire or confer all easements and other property rights required of the tentative map or otherwise necessary for construction and use of the proposed development. 7. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures and common areas. 8. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets and properties from all frontage along the streets and properties except access points shown on the approved tentative map. 9. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur. 10. 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. FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAPS) 11. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, on storage media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. If the map was not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the map. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 12. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers, surveyors and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be 0CondTT28982Spanos.wpd Paget of Planning Commission Resolution 98-_ Tentative Tract Map 28982 November 24, 1998 submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans shah have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development 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. 13. 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 the standard materials. 14. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as - constructed conditions. If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 15. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 16. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of improvement costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. A:\UondTT28982Spanos.wpd Page 3 of Planning Commission Resolution 98-_ Tentative Tract Map 28982 November 24, 1998 Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, 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. 17. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (site development permits, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site and perimeter improvements shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first phase unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase and subsequent phases unless a construction phasing plan is approved by the City Engineer. 18. 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 or final building inspections or otherwise withhold approvals related to the development of the project until the applicant makes satisfactory progress on the improvements or obligations or has made other arrangements satisfactory to the City. 19. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security for applicant's required share of improvements which have been or may be constructed by others (participatory improvements). Participatory improvements for this development include: A. Adams Street landscape median - 50% of total cost for the length of the applicant's frontage. 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. GRADING 20. The applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and a grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist. The plan must be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. A statement shall appear on final maps (if any are u\CondTT28982Spanos.wpd Page 4 of Planning Commission Resolution 98-_ Tentative Tract Map 28982 November 24, 1998 required of this development) that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 21. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting properties and between separate tracts and lots within this development. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within a tract, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. If compliance with this requirement is impractical, the City will consider and may approve alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 22. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 23. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 24. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by a civil engineer or surveyor. The certifications shall list approved pad elevations, actual elevations, and the difference between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 25. Stormwater and nuisance water handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan for the Lake La Quinta development. UTILITIES 26. Existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv are exempt from this requirement. 27. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. \:\CondTT28982Spanos.wpd Page 5 of Planning Commission Resolution 98-_ Tentative Tract Map 28982 November 24, 1998 STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 28. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. Any property within this development which has not been subdivided in accordance with this tentative map 60 days after the program is in effect shall, at the City's option, be subject to the program. 29. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Avenue 47 - Sixty -foot -wide primary access centered approximately 335 feet west of the centerline of Adams Street. B. Avenue 47 - Alternate access for emergency vehicles only near the west end of this development. 30. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. 31. The applicant shall design pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20- year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). The minimum structural section for streets and parking areas is 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. or equivalent. 32. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. 33. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. QUALITY ASSURANCE 34. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. A:\CondTT28982Spanos.wpd Page 6 of Planning Commission Resolution 98-_ Tentative Tract Map 28982 November 24, 1998 35. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program but required by the City as evidence that construction materials and comply with plans and specifications. FEES AND DEPOSITS 36. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. 37. The applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 38. Within 24 hours after review by the City Council, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Community Development Department two checks made out to the County of Riverside in the amount of $78.00 and $1,250.00 to permit the filing and posting of the Notice of Determination for EA 98-369. 39. Prior to building permit issuance, the developer shall pay school mitigation fees to the Desert Sands Unified School District based on the State imposed fee in effect at that time. The school facilities fee shall be established by Resolution (i.e., State of California School Facilities Financing Act). 40. Prior to final map approval by the City Council, the property owner/developer shall meet the Parkland Dedication requirements by payment of in -lieu fees as set forth in Section 13.48 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. FIRE DEPARTMENT 41. 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: "/ certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 42. Phased improvements shall be approved by the Fire Department. ENVIRONMENTAL 43. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the property owner/developer shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community 'kACondTT28982Spanos.wpd Printed 11/20/98, Page 7 of Planning Commission Resolution 98-_ Tentative Tract Map 28982 November 24, 1998 Development Department demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of TTM 28982 and EA 98-369. Mitigation monitoring of the project site during grading is required. MISCELLANEOUS 44. All agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking purposes. 45. Prior to final map approval by the City Council, proposed street names shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. Three names shall be submitted for each proposed private street. Street signs shall be installed by the developer. 46. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department for review a copy of the proposed Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (C. C. and R's) for the project. Approval of the C. C. and R's by the City Attorney is required. A:\CondTT28982Spanos.wpd Printed 11/20/98, Page 8 of PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-631 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A 160-UNIT AIRSPACE CONDOMINIUM PROJECT IN A HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICT CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-631 APPLICANT: MAINIERO, SMITH AND ASSOC., INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 24th day of November, 1998, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to review the building elevation and development plans for a 160-unit condominium project on 10.17 acres located at the southwest corner of Adams Street and 471h Avenue, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 30, TSS, R7E SBBM WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63). The Community Development Department has prepared an Mitigated Negative Declaration under Environmental Assessment 98-369 for this project which states the project will not have a significant impact on the environment based on mitigation measures; and WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify a recommendation for approval to the City Council of said Site Development Permit 98-631: 1. The proposed condominium development is consistent with the City's General Plan in that the property is designated High Density Residential. The Land Use Element of the General Plan (Policy 2-1.1.8) allows attached residential house up to 16 units per acre as a permitted use. A density of 15.7 is requested. Therefore, the project is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2) provided conditions are met. 2. The condominium units are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance (RH Zoning District) in that the project is a permitted use and will comply with the development standards and design guidelines provided conditions are met. ResopcSDPSpanos- 28 Planning Commission Resolution 98-_ Site Development Permit 98-631 November 24, 1998 3. One- and two -bedroom units are proposed with ancillary parking and open space. The site design of the proposed project is compatible with the high quality of residential development in the immediate area. 4. The existing Oleander hedge on Dulce Del Mar will be retained to screen the two story project from surrounding single story buildings. Common open space has been provided throughout the site, creating a internal and external areas for active and passive recreation. Active recreation areas are located at the northeast corner of the project away from existing Lake La Quinta houses to reduce noise impacts. The perimeter landscape design is in conformance with existing Lake La Quinta landscaping. 5. The building materials will be aesthetically pleasing, and provide a blend of varied surfaces and variety of textures, provided conditions are met. The proposed landscape screening, setbacks and building orientations lessen the visual impact of the two story structures, provided conditions are met. 6. Parking for the project will consist of garage, carport and open parking stalls as required by the Chapter 9.150 of the Zoning Ordinance. Shared parking is proposed and consists of two parking spaces per unit, exceeding a general parking standard of 1.6 spaces per unit pursuant to Urban Land Institute (ULI) research studies. 7. Exterior project lighting is proposed for common areas and parking as required by Chapter 9.150 (Parking) of the Zoning Ordinance. Light fixtures shall be hooded to eliminate glare. Lighting adjacent to existing residential houses shall be low level not exceed eight feet in height to be consistent with Section 9.60.160 of the Zoning Ordinance. 8. The sign design of the project will provide project identity using common elements of size, color, and materials. 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 constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does recommend to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit 98-631 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. ResopcSDPSpanos- 28 Planning Commission Resolution 98-_ Site Development Permit 98-631 November 24, 1998 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 24th day of November, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California ResopcSDPSpanos- 28 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-631 NOVEMBER 24, 1998 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply (Assessor's Parcel Number: 643-090-014). 2. The Site Development Permit approval period shall run concurrently with Tentative Tract Map 28982. 3. The applicant shall comply with all applicable Conditions of Approval of the underlying tract map (Tract Map 24230) and Tentative Tract Map 28982. 4. Construction shall comply with all local and State building code requirements as determined by the Building and Safety Director. 5. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of SDP 98-631 and EA 98-369. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of SDP 98- 631 and EA 98-369. The Community Development Director may require inspection or other mitigation monitoring measures to assure such compliance. LANDSCAPING AND PERIMETER FENCING 6. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect, and approved by the Community Development Department pursuant to Chapter 8.13 of the Municipal Code. Prior to submission of the plans to the City, the developer shall obtain approval by the Coachella Valley Water District and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. The plans are not approved for construction until they have been approved and signed by each approval agency. 7. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of aboveground utility structures. 8. Tree sizes shall be a mix of 24-inch box, with a minimum of 2-1/2" to 3" caliper as measured 6" from grade, and 36-inch box, with a minimum of 4" caliper as measured 12" from grade, around the project perimeter and adjacent to open parking spaces. Palms trees shall not be installed in close proximity to the common area pool. CondSDP Spanos -28 9. Mature evergreen trees, measuring 10-feet high, shall be installed along the west property line to provide privacy screening (i.e., 40' wide spacing). Once the trees have been delivered to the site for installation, a field inspection by the Community Development Department is required before planting. 10. A six-foot high wall shall be constructed along Dulce Del Mar to the north of the existing Oleander hedge. The height of the wall is to be measured from the top of curb height on the street. The wall shall be constructed to match the existing Lake La Quinta perimeter wall. 11. Landscaping shall be added within the terraced planter areas adjacent to the project entry signs. FEES AND DEPOSITS 12. 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 applies for plan checking and permits. FIRE MARSHAL 13. Fire hydrants in accordance with CVWD Standard W-33 shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1500 g.p.m. for a 2-hour duration at 20 p.s.i. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of the streets directly in line with fire hydrants. 14. Applicant/developer will provide written certification from the appropriate water company that the required fire hydrants(s) are either existing or that financial arrangements have been made to provide them. 15. Note on plans: "All buildings, other than Group R, Division 3 occupancies, will be equipped with an automatic fire sprinkler system approved by the Fire Department." Prior to the issuance of building permits, system plans will be submitted for approval. 16. Prior to recordation of the final map, applicant/developer will furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to 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: 1 certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 17. The required water system including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on the site. CondSDP Spanos -28 18. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the construction of the model units only. Plans for a temporary water system must be submitted to the Fire Department for review prior to issuance of building permits. 19. Gates installed to restrict access shall be power operated and equipped with a Fire Department override system consisting of Knox Key Operated switches, series KS- 2P with dust cover, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox Company. Improvements plans for the entry streets and gates shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review/approval prior to installation. 20. If public use type buildings are to be constructed, additional fire protection may be required. Fire flows and hydrant locations will be stipulated when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Department. 21. Gate entrances shall be at least two feet wider than the width of the traffic lane(s) serving that gate. All gates providing access from a road to the driveway shall be located at least 30' from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the public road. Where a one-way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 40' turning radius shall be used. MAINTENANCE 22. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of drainage, landscaping and on -site improvements. LIGHTING 23. Lighting plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department Director prior to issuance of building permits. Freestanding pole mounted lighting for parking and common areas shall not exceed eight feet in height above finished grade pursuant to Section 9.60.170 of the Zoning Ordinance. Exterior lighting for the project shall comply with Sections 9.60.160 and 9.100.150 of the Zoning Ordinance. 24. Interior security lighting for carport structures (i.e., recessed flourescent tubes) shall be mounted to the underside of the roof. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN 25. Prior to issuance of building permits, subject to the Community Development Department approval, the building elevations shall be modified as follows: A. Remove the middle gable eave-end from the garage elevations; and B. Modify eave mounted architectural popouts on side building elevations of Buildings 6, 7, 9 and 10 so as to appear functional. CondSDP Spanos -29 Additional general requirements are: 1) Install decorative colored concrete (or pavers) for the main entrance (circular turnaround area) and 20-foot wide entrance lanes and 2) Submit construction plans for detached garage structures ensuring tile, hip roofs will be used. MISCELLANEOUS 26. The overall height of the recreation building shall be reduced to 22-feet to comply with Section 9.50.020 of the Zoning Ordinance. This design change shall be made before building permits are issued. 27. A centralized or gang -box mailbox delivery system shall be used for the project pursuant to any requirements of the U.S. Postal Service. 28. Prior to building permit issuance, trash and recycling areas for the project shall be approved by the Community Development Department pursuant to Section 9.60.220 of the Zoning Ordinance. The plan will be reviewed for acceptability by applicable trash company prior to review by the Community Development Department. 29. Handicap access, facilities and parking shall be provided per State and local requirements. 30. Permanent identification signs for the development shall be lit by an indirect source as required by Chapter 9.150 (Signs) of the Zoning Ordinance. Temporary and permanent signs for the development shall be approved by the City prior to installation. 31. A Minor Use Permit is required to establish temporary sales facilities and/or construction trailers for the project (i.e., Section 9.60.250 of the Zoning Ordinance). 32. Each housing unit shall be allocated one garage parking space for vehicle storage measuring 10-feet wide by 20-feet deep inside clear dimension. All open parking spaces shall be unassigned and open for use by residents and guests of the development. Oversized vehicles, recreational vehicles and trailers shall be prohibited. Parking restrictions shall be incorporated into the C. C. and R's for the project and enforced by the Homeowners' Association, subject to approval by the City Attorney before recordation. 33. Vertical support poles for carport structures shall be mounted within the first 6' of the front of the stall (including overhang) pursuant to Section 9.150.080 (135). 34. Pool equipment shall be located a minimum distance of five feet from the property line as required by Section 9.60.070 of the Zoning Code. CondSDP Spanos -28 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TRACT MAP 24230 (AMENDMENT #1) TO ELIMINATE CONDITION #41 OF RESOLUTION 89-85 REQUIRING AFFORDABLE HOUSE ON 10.17 ACRES, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 47T" AVENUE AND ADAMS STREET CASE NO.: TRACT MAP 24230, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: MAINIERO, SMITH AND ASSOC., INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission for the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 24th day of November, 1998, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to review the request to eliminate Condition #41 of Tract Map 24230 requiring affordable housing units to be built on 10.17 acres located at the southwest corner of 47th Avenue and Adams Street, more particularly described as: Assessor's Parcel Number 643-090-014; Portion of SE 1 /4 of Section 30, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, County of Riverside, California WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 5th day of July, 1989, require a certain percentage of future houses (5%) to be for low and moderate income families pursuant to draft General Plan Policies; and WHEREAS, the Tract Map 24230 was recorded with the County of Riverside on February 28, 1990; and WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970", as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development Director has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 98-369) and has determined that the proposed project could have an adverse impact on the environment; a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be filed. WHEREAS at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said Tract Map 24230 (Amendment #1): A. The proposed map amendment is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan, Zoning Code, and Subdivision Ordinance. The property is designated High Density Residential (HDR) by the General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2.0) permitting attached single family projects of 12 to 16 units per acre pursuant to Policy 2-1.1.8. The proposed development of A:\ResopcTTM24230Spanos.wpd (28) 160 condominium units under Tentative Tract Map 28982 is consistent with the HDR requirements. The Housing Element of the General Plan lists programs available to provide affordable housing. The amendment of Tract 24230 to eliminate Condition #41 should result in no impacts regarding affordable housing in the City as stated in EA 98-369. The RH District (High Density Residential) permits attached single family housing not exceeding three stories in height. Conditions are recommended to insure compliance with City Code requirements. B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan. Existing off -site improvements were constructed during construction of the Lake La Quinta development. New on -site streets and development improvements for the project will be completed by Tentative Tract Map 28982, the companion development application. C. The design of the subdivision, or the proposed improvements, are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The vacant, previously disturbed site is suitable for high density residential development based on the recommendations of Environmental Assessment 98- 369. D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. Infrastructure improvements are readily adjacent to the site and were constructed in the early 1990's. E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of property within the proposed subdivision. Off -site infrastructure improvements have been constructed as required by Tentative Tract Map 24230. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the finds of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 24230 (Amendment #1) for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and AAResopcTTM24230Spanos.wpd (28) subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 241h day of November, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California A:\RcsopcT'TM24230Spanos.wpd (28) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TRACT MAP 24230, AMENDMENT #1 NOVEMBER 24, 1998 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply (APN: 643-090-014). 2. Condition #41, requiring affordable housing units, shall be deleted. All other Conditions of Resolution 89-85 are still valid and remain enforceable for Tract 24230. CondTTM24230 Spanos -28 ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT I WHITEWATER CHANNEL -0 Eagle Hardware "IN LAKE 11111411A Whdewater Chwiritl HIGHWAY 111 GJ 48TH AV ATTACHMENT 2 Ia I IdWd 4 dd 4 �ed pp a Ala a "t cc 9� s a dddadd«s_e �a sas 8 R d p g} z $a�g0 Y6 dd d ri O d6dddddddtl d ddd d a j8 =£A NBg� Iasi �---� AQ . LUI I s 11gi A ATTACHMENT 3 MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA November 20, 1998 10:00 A.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meting of the Architecture and Landscaping Committee was called to order at 9:02 a.m. by Planning Manager Christine di Iorio who lead the flag salute. B. Committee Me` leers present: Bill Bobbitt and Dennis Cunningham. C. Staff present: Plannin anager Christine di Iorio, Principal Planner Sawa, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell,'Vd Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio asked if theeN were any changes to the Minutes of October 20, 1998. There being no changes it�was moved and seconded by Committee Members- Cunnirig`Iiaml obbifi to approve -the minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEM: A. Site Development Permit 98-631; a request of Mainiero Smith and Associates, Inc. for A. G. Spanos Corporation for approval of architectural and landscaping plans for 160 condominium units on 10.17 acres. 1. Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. There being no questions of staff at this time, the applicant was asked to address the commission. Mr. Jack Lucas, Project Manager for the Spanos Corporation and this project, explained the architectural detail changes that had been made. He further explained the fascia was drawn incorrectly. It will be tight to the building, compatible with the rest of the project, and will be a plastered overhang. A:\AI.RC 11-20-98.wpd Architectural & Landscaping Review Committee Minutes November 16, 1998 Committee Member Cunningham stated that the overhang was an excellent added detail and asked what material would be used on the garage doors. Mr. Lucas stated metal. 4. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the notch over the garage could be taken straight across. Staff stated this was one of the recommendations. He stated that as this was a multi -family area with single family residences across the street, that by not bringing a lot of attention to the buildings by use of the hips on the ends, it is better to keep it clean to create subtlety to the building. This will blend with the neighborhood as the applicant is not building stacked rows of condominiums. There is some variation between the roof elements. In regard to the exterior colors shown on the color board, they arejighter than the color elevations and he has no objections. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt agreed with Cbmittee Member Cunningham's architectural recommendations. He would prefer -to have the lines cleaner to fit in better with the existing single family how. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt gated that in regard to the landscaping, he has no problem with most of the plants imposed. The Phoenix Date palms that are being proposed, from a safety "standpoint, have a certain inherent propensity for crown breakage as compared to the Washingtonia Palms that do not. This can create a safety concern and he is only making it known that they can be a problem. He would suggest using a less mature palm. 7. Committee Member Cunningham asked about the use of landscaping in the parking lots where there are small planter areas as these palm trees do not work well in the planters and can be a problem. 8. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that any type of tree in a planter in a parking lot does not have enough room to grow. Upon installation it can look beautiful, but ten years down the road the homeowner's association has responsibility and are stuck with hardscape replacement that is very costly. He would like to work toward altering the guidelines dealing with trees and where to plant what species. Trees that are planted around residential units need to be of a variety that the full growth width of the head of the tree is acceptable for the area in which it is planted. Date Palms should be located at an entrance, not in highly populated areas. 9. Mr. Jose Estrada, RH A Landscape Architects, commented on the Phoenix Palms or Carinesis Incesis in that he thought the problem was mostly due to disease. Discussion followed as to problems that had been found in the Date Palm trees. Committee Member Bobbitt believes trees should be kept away from the concrete due to its root growth. AAALRC 11-20-98.wpd 2 Architectural & Landscaping Review Committee Minutes November 16, 1998 10. Committee Member Cunningham asked for additional information regarding the proposed trees on Dulce Del Mar and if the existing Oleanders will remain. If they are not destroyed by disease, the proposed trees will be dispersed throughout the site. Staff is recommending they be more cylindrical. 11. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the proposed try were a nice mix to give a variety of shape and colors. 12. Committee Member Cunningham suggested there,be mom and spaced better. Mr. Lucas stated the engineers had done a line of sight drawing which showed they needed to be sensitive to the location and size of the trees to mitigate the line of sight and insure pricey. They will add more trees as needed and some of them will be site specific. The existing Oleanders are healthy and 14 feet in height which will help mitigate the issue of privacy. Discussion followed as to plants that could be used. 13. Committee Member Cunningham recommended the landscaping proposed for the five foot wad along the 1�� Del Mar be increased. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio suggestadditional trees be planted along the perimeter wall on Dulce Del Mar to liter buffer the view of the residents. Trees could be relocated and added to better screen the project from the adjacent residences. Increase the box or tree size. 14. Committee Member Babbitt suggested the removal of the Agapanthas unless used on the North side and suggested the removal of the Date Palms from the pool. 15. Committee Mkt Cunningham asked if there was anyone in the audience that would like to speak regarding this project. Mr. Bill Hansch, 78-175 Dulce Del Mar, asked when this project would be referred to as rental apartments, which they actually were. 16. Committee Member Cunningham clarified this meeting was for architectural and landscaping purposes only. Mr. Hansch stated that in front of his house he is going to have a 32-33 foot building. It only has a 20 foot setback and something needs to be done to change that setback. He suggested there be greater setbacks and/or move the building closer to Adams Street. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell clarified it was 20 feet to the street and then the street width. Mr Hansch stated he would like to see the building heights reduced. Mr. Lucas stated they had met with the homeowners and they had requested moving the building, lower the heights, etc., and it was the opinion of the Spanos company that they had mitigated as many of their concerns as possible and still create a usable plan for the land use. A AALRC 11-20-98.wpd Architectural & Landscaping Review Committee Minutes November 16, 1998 17.- Committee Member Cunningham asked the height of the buildings. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell stated they were 30 feet. Committee Member Cunningham stated the Oleanders were currently 14 feet. The view from Mr. Hansch's property would only be affected by the loss of a small portion of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The applicant has created a good land use plan. Mr. Lucas stated there was no view from the buildings Lake La Quinta. The second floor windows that face the lake are all glass block which you cannot see out of or into. 18. Mr. Dutch Dilsaver, 78-835 Dulce Del Mar, stated his property is Lot 200. He was an owner/builder and had to go through the City press to build his house. Across the street from him is a single family house that sits back 30- feet. Their windows look down into his yard because of the pad differentials at Lake La Quinta. The oleanders on Dulce Del Mar currently stand at 14 feet high from curb level. The builders stated the pads will be built up five feet. Add to that the 30 feet to the ridge line. This will be 36 feet above curb. Put 38 feet on top of 14 feet and now there is 24 feet extending above the Oleanders with a 20 foot setback. The buildings will be twice as high and closer to the curb. Something has to be done to prevent this oppression created by the buildings. He suggested helium balloons be placed at each of the building locations to determine the impact. It is up to the City to stop this at the beginning and consider the exiting homeowners and those who have built up the City. 19. Mr. Ben Rosger, 47675 Via Montessa, stated he did not live adjacent to the project, but several hundred yards away, but he can see this will be an architectural monstrosity. People who have moved into an affluent community who are basically retired and want the beauty of the community are being asked to accept this project. Lake La Quinta is a gem for the La Quinta community. It should be noted that architecturally speaking this project does not fit next door to the existing community. Why would the City want to do this to a community that has built a pleasant community. Open car garages adjacent to their homes, is not acceptable. He was told this was going to be a condominium project, not apartments. It is bad architecture to place this project next to single family homes. 20. Ms. Terry Tasso, Lake La Quinta resident, stated her concern was the second story balconies facing the single family yards and being able to look down into their bedrooms and yards. Mr. Lucas stated there are architectural details that are proposed that are higher than the allowable height of the rear yard fencing. It would be an architectural barrier that would not be as attractive as landscaping. Ms. Tasso asked why there have to be two story units. Mr. A:\AI.RC 11-20-98.wpd 4 Architectural & Landscaping Review Committee Minutes November 16, 1998 Lucas stated the entitlements for the property allow two or even three story units. The land use plan that was developed to utilize this property is for two story units. Ms. Tasso asked how this was allowed in an upscale community. Mr. Lucas stated that if the property entitlements allow the property owner to do this, then they can do so. 21. Committee Member Cunningham clarified that this is not the place for these type of comments. We would like to keep the comments to architectural and landscaping issues. The project has already been.through rough the Code review process of determining what uses can be allowed. If the Lake La Quinta people want to change those uses, they need to address this under a different forum. Due to those property entitlements it is now this Committee's responsibility to make sure the plan complies with all applicable architectural and landscaping requirements. As a property owner he has the right to develop his property within those guidelinm The complaints that are being raised are not valid at this meeting. As to balconies, this Committee believes that with the use of landscaping and additional trees, based on the zoning and entitlements, this plan is valid. If the balconies are negatively impacting the surrounding neighborhood, they need to look at this. 22. Ms. Tasso stated that to use trees as camouflage does not keep out the noise. Mr. Lucas stated that in regard to the balconies a sound mitigation measure could be used similar to that used for the balconies that face Adams Street or 47`h Avenue. A plastic or glass sound mitigation shield could be used to go on top of the balcony wall. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio asked how many balconies are propmd that will face the residents to the west. Mr. Lucas stated there are two buildings or a total of four balconies. All others have windows that face the street consisting of glass block which prevent view into the adjacent yards. 23. Committee Member Cunningham stated there is a substantial distance between the yards and the units with balconies. There is also the fact that there is a line of sight into the backyards. However, he does believe this could be mitigated by the use of trees that are substantial in size. Otherwise you can move the balconies. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio asked if garages were proposed to be constructed in front of the units with balconies; what is the height of the garages. Mr. Lucas stated their height would be 12 feet. The balcony would be above the roof. Committee Member Cunningham suggested the applicant be required to plant full grown trees to block visibility from the balconies and he would like this added as a condition 24. Mr. Jay Baden, stated his concern was regarding the five foot wall that it would not be sufficient, especially if they were to lose the Oleanders. The raised grade on the Spanos side would reduce the height of the wall. The A:W,RC 11-20-98.wpd Architectural & Landscaping Review Committee Minutes November 16, 1998 wall needs to be placed on the raised pad or berm to maintain the five foot, and he would prefer a six foot. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell stated it was a five feet wall proposed above curb height. Discussion followed regarding the pad elevations. Mr. Lucas stated the wall could be placed on the berm. Commissioner Cunningham stated this should be added to the conditions. 25. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members CunninghamBobbitt to adopt linute Motion 98-010 recommending approval of the architectural and 1 sc*ng plans for Site Development Permit 98-633 as followed: a. Specimen trees (24-, 35- aW 48-inch boxes) shall be used for planting purposes around the project perimeter and adjacent to open parking spaces b. The overall height of the recreation buildifig shall be reduced to 22 feet to comply with Section 9.50.020 of the -Zoning Ordinance. This design change shall be made before building permits are issued. C. Prior to issuance of building pertnits, subject to the Community Development Department approval, the building elevations shall be modified as follows: 1) remove the middle gable eave-end from garage elevations; 2) modify eave mounted architectural popouts on side building elevations of Buildings 6, 7, 9 and 10 to match other buildings. d. Detached garage structures shall be architecturally compatible with other tin4te buildings including stucco walls and hip, and tile roofs. e. Relocate and add landscaping/trees per the view analysis to best screen the adjacent residences along Dulce Del Mar. Relocate the Date Palms and use a different species in the common/pool areas. g. Provide trees large enough to block the view into the single family homes from the balconies that face to the west. h. Provide berm and wall combination along Dulce Del Mar at six feet high from the pad deviation of the project. Unanimously approved. A:\ALRC 11-20-98.wpd 6 PH #C STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 1998 CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27519 REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF A 70 SINGLE FAMILY AND OTHER COMMON LOT SUBDIVISION MAP ON 17.6 ACRES IN THE RL ZONE DISTRICT, AND CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-370). LOCATION: APPROXIMATELY 100-FEET SOUTH OF DESERT STREAM DRIVE AND WEST OF DUNE PALMS ROAD (45-955 DUNE PALMS ROAD) APPLICANT: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES PROPERTY OWNER: MR. LANTSON E. ELDRED, TRUSTEE (ELDRED FAMILY TRUST) ENGINEERS: DUDEK AND ASSOCIATES ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE 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 (EA 98-370) AND DETERMINED THAT ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THERE WOULD NOT BE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE APPROPRIATE MITIGATION MEASURES ARE MADE PART OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THIS TRACT, AND A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WILL BE FILED. STPCTr27519-28, RESOTTM27519-28, CONDTr.27519- 28 Page 1 of 4 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) ZONING DESIGNATION: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND COMMON AREA RETENTION BASIN IN THE TOPAZ DEVELOPMENT (TRACT 23935) SOUTH: EXISTING GARRY HOPKINS GOLF SCHOOL EAST: RETENTION BASIN FOR TRACT 25363 AND VACANT LOT FOR FUTURE CITY PARK WEST: ACROSS DUNE PALMS ROAD ARE VACANT PROPERTIES IN THE CITY OF INDIO BACKGROUND: Sitelnfo_rmation The vacant, previously disturbed site is located to the south of the Topaz development on the west side of Dune Palms Road (Attachment 1). Vehicle traffic on Dune Palms Road is considered light, but projected to be over 14,000 vehicles per day at City build -out in 20 + years. Overhead utility lines exist on the east side of Dune Palms Road. Pr-oject-Reguest The applicant requests approval of a 70-lot single family subdivision with lots that are a minimum of 60-feet in width by 132-feet in length (7,920 square feet) on private streets (Attachment 2). Finished single family pad grades vary from approximately 59.5 feet to 63.8 feet, and are designed to be compatible with adjoining residential properties. Prototype houses for the project will be submitted in the next few months for review and approval by the Planning Commission. Gated access to Dune Palms Road is located between the proposed on -site retention basin (Lot "H") and Lot 1. Landscape lots (Lots "G" and "F") are provided along Dune STPCTr27519-28, RESOTTM27519-28, CONDTr.27519- 28 Page 2 of 4 Palms Road, and between Lots 20 and 21 a 10-foot wide easement is proposed for pedestrian access to the future public park to the west of the Tract. A conceptual 6andscape plan was prepared for the Dune Palms Road frontage and the retention basin. Plant types are well suited for the desert climate, and sized to provide a lush look once installed. On October 15, 1998, the City's Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed the applicant's cultural resources assessment determining that monitoring is required during grading and large-scale trenching (Minute Motion 98-009). A copy of the Minutes is attached (Attachment 3). Publi-cNotir,e This map application was advertised in the Desert Scan newspaper on October 31, 1998. All property owners within 500-feet were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by Title 13 (Subdivision Ordinance) of the La Quinta Municipal Code and Charter. Written correspondence is attached (Attachment 4). FINDINGS -FOR APPROVAL: Pursuant to Section 13.12.120 of the Subdivision Ordinance the following findings are provided: General Plan/Zoning Code Consistency The City's General Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential (2-4 dwellings per acre) which allows single family housing. The project density is approximately 3.9 dwelling units per acre which is within the permitted density range. Proposed lots are 7,920 square feet or greater, exceeding RL District requirements of 7,200 square feet. Tract Design/Improvements Off -site improvements required of the project are raised landscaped median and parkway improvements. The proposed improvements are consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Perimeter tract fencing for the project has not been submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission. The developer has requested that this element of the project be approved when the Site Development Permit is processed. The developer recognizes that decorative fencing compatible with the Topaz development to the north is required, and that view fencing shall be used adjacent to the retention basin to provide visual interest into this walled development as required by Policy 3-4.1.14 STPCTr27519-28, RESOTTM27519-28, CONDTr.27519- 28 Page 3 of 4 1100(�93 of the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Open fencing maybe used in combination with low-level masonry walls to accomplish this objective. CONOLUSION: Tentative Tract Map 27519 has been designed in compliance with requirements contained in the City's General Plan, Zoning Code and Subdivision Ordinance. Findings as noted in the attached Resolutions for a recommendation of approval can be made. The map, as conditioned, is consistent with the existing tracts in the immediate area. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-_, recommending to City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 98-370, subject to the attached findings and mitigation monitoring program; and, 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98 recommending to the City Council conditional approval of Tentative Tract Map 27519, subject to the attached findings and conditions. Attachments: 1 . Location Map 2. TTM 27519 Exhibit (Reduced) 3. HPC Minutes of October 15, 1998 4. Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Todd Hagey dated Oct. 29, 1998 5. Large Exhibits (Planning Commission Only) Pr `'ared Greq TrAusdell, Associate Planner Submitted by: Christine di lorio, Plan ing Manager STPCTr27519-28, RESOTTM27519-28, CONDTr.27519- 28 Page 4 of 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-370 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27519, TO ALLOW THE SUBDIVISION OF 17.6 ACRES INTO 70 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND OTHER COMMON LOTS IN THE LDR ZONING DISTRICT. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-370 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 24`h day of November, 1998, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing as requested by Century Crowell Communities on the Environmental Analysis for Tentative Tract Map 27519, located on the west side of Dune Palms Road between Westward Ho Drive and Miles Avenue; and, WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment complies 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 98-370) and has determined that although the proposed subdivision 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 98-370, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, 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 Environmental Assessment; and, WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing, said recommendation for certification was based on findings and subject to certain mitigation measures; and, WHEREAS, the La Quinta Planning Commission on the 24th day of November, 1998, did find the following facts to justify recommendation for certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed tentative tract map will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, with the implementation of mitigation measures. 2. The proposed tentative tract map will not have the potential to achieve short term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful Planning Commission Resolution 98- implementation of mitigation. 3. The proposed tentative tract map will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity. 4. The proposed tentative tract map will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect human, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of mitigation. 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 certification of Environmental Assessment 98-370 for the proposed Tentative Tract Map 27519. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 24th day of November, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California f 00006 PApcearesTTM27519. wpd Appendix I - EA 98-370 Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Tentative Tract Map 27519 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Leslie Mouriquand, Associate Planner (760) 777-7068 4. Project Location: 100 feet south of Desert Stream Drive, west of Dune Palms Road 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Century Crowell Communities 6. General ]Plan Designation: LDR 7. Zoning RL 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Subdivision of 17.6 acres into 70 single family residential lots and other common lots, including private streets. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. South- golf school and driving range West- retention basin, vacant City park site East- Dune Palms Road, City of Indio -Vacant parcels North- Residential subdivision 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) None have been identified. PAL.ESLIEEACKLIST9 8-369.wpd °`. 00r�rj I Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning Population and Housing X Geological Problems X Water Air Quality Determination Transportation/Circulation Biological Resources Energy and Mineral Resources Hazards Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: Public Services Utilities and Service Systems Aesthetics 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 a I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because 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. 11 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (be) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. 11 Signature Date Printed Name For -2- Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on - site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, `Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. See the sample question below. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 7) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different ones. PALE8LIE\EACKLIST98-369.wpd -3 - _►OOIJOJ 'ample question: I. IL Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Landslides or mudslides? (1,6) (Attached source list explains that 1 is the general plan, and 6 is a USGS topo map. This answer would probably not need further explanation.) LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source#(s): ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( I I I I X c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( I I I I X �] d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? ( I I I I X e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? ( ) X POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: 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? ( ) IIL GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( I X t rX� PALESLIENEACKLIST98-369.wpd 1)0G,0 t0 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) d) Seiche, tsunand, 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? IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? ( ) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ( ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 1 -1 X I-- I I X7 X-1 e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ( ) X PALESLIEIEACKLIST98-369.wpd V. VI. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 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 X capability? ( ) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) AIR QUALITY Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) I I I �� ___ - c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( I I I X d) Create objectionable odors? ( TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) I I I I X c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( d) Insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? ( ) M�M IJ0001 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( I I I I X g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? ( BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? ( ) I X b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? ( c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ( e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( VUL ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? M M= M�� PALESLIE\EACKLIST98-369.wpd 1 0 0 -� x. XL Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): impact Mitigated Impact Impact HAZARDS. 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? ( I I I I X c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ) I I I I X d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? I I I I X e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? I I I I X :1 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? ( ) F---j X I I I I L X 1 ::1 0 0s � 14 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial 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? ( ) g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( c) Create light or glare? ( ) XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact M�� PALESLIE\EACKLIST98-369.wpd Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): c) Affect historical resources? ( d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( I I I I X KV. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare to endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) X d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directory or indirectly? PALESLIE\EACKLIST98-369.wpd -1C 000016 XVIL EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EK 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 addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. PALESLIE\EACKLIST98-369.wpd -1 1 �_) 0 0 () ti INITIAL STUDY - ADDENDUM ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-370 Tentative Tract 27519 Century -Crowell Communities Prepared by: City of La Quinta Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 November 20, 1998 1)00 0 15 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 Hazards .................................... 25 3.10 Noise......................................26 3.11 Public Services ................................ 26 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 ANALYSIS ................................ 37 P:\EA98-370Century.wpd 2 1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW The purpose of this Initial Study is to identify the potential environmental impacts of a proposed Tentative Tract Map 27519 to subdivide 17.6 acres into seventy single family residential lots and lettered lots for private streets, landscaping and a retention basin. The parcel involved in the development is identified as Assessors Parcel Number 604-061-009. The project site is located on the west side of Dune Palms Road between Westward Ho Drive and Miles Avenue. The subdivision will be a gated community with private roads. 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 Tentative Tract Map 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 requests. 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 proposed development; To enable the applicant, or the City of La Quinta, to modify the requests, mitigating adverse acts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the projects 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 review of the Tentative Tract Map; To provide documentation for the findings in a Negative Declaration that the Tentative Tract Map will not have significant effects on the PAFA98-370Centwy.wpd 3 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 Tentative Tract Map 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 related to geological problems, water, transportation/circulation, biological resources, noise, public services, aesthetics, and cultural resources, and recreation issues contained in the Environmental Checklist. The degree of some of these adverse impacts is significant, however, with the recommended mitigation measures, the level of significance will be reduced to less -than - significant levels. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be recommended for this project, subject to conditions of approval and mitigation measures. An EIR will not be necessary. 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. 2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed Tentative Tract 27519 would create 70 single family residential lots for market rate sale, within a gated development. PAEA98-370Century.wpd 4 1) 0 C.r (I ' J 2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed development will operate as a single family residential subdivision within a gated community. 2.4 OBJECTIVES The objectives of the proposed Tentative Tract 27519 are to provide single family residential units for sale. 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 Tentative Tract Map will require discretionary recommendation of approval by the Planning Commission, and approval by the City Council. Certification of a Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-370 must be determined prior to action on the subdivision or development approvals. 2.6 RELATED PROJECTS There are no other current applications related to this project. SECTION 3• ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the land use and subdivision design approval of the proposed tentative tract. 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 subdivision. Thresholds of significance are defined either by standards adopted by responsible or trustee agencies, or by referring to criteria in CEQA (Appendix G). Mitigation measures are discussed for each issue and are formalized in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan that is a part of the project conditions of approval. 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) PAEA98-370Centurympd 5 0 0p to approximately 10,000 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 in the distant southeast, the San Bernardino Mountains to the northeast. The San Andreas fault transects the northeastern edge of the valley. Local Environmental Setting The local setting for the project is a desert parcel with small sand dunes that overlay the ancient Lake Cahuilla shoreline. Elevations on the parcel vary with an average of 63-feet above mean sea level. The proposed project is located near the northern portion of the City, north of the Garry Hopkins Golf School and the La Quinta High School. Parcels to the east, within the City of Indio, have not been developed. To the north and west are recently developed residential areas. To the southeast is an older residential area. To the Southwest is a vacant parcel owned by the City and designated for a future park site. A. Would the project conflict with the general plan designation or zoning? No Impact. Adjacent land uses and their designations to the subdivision boundary consist of Low Density Residential (RL) and Park (P) zoned developed residential and vacant residential parcels to the west. The La Quinta Golf Ranch is located to the south. The General Plan land use designations are compatible with the zoning designations for the surrounding parcels. These adjacent land uses and their designations are compatible with the proposed residential land use of Tentative Tract 27519. The subject property is designated as Low Density Residential (LDR) on the City's General Plan, and Low Density Residential (RL) on the City's Zoning Map. There are no adverse impacts or conflicts identified for this request, thus, no mitigation is required for this issue. 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 the proposed Tentative Tract Map. 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 development does not conflict with the above referenced documents adopted by the City Council. Specific environmental issues could have impacts that will be individually mitigated by measures identified in this document. No mitigation is required for this issue. C. Would the proposal be incompatible with existing land use in the PAEA98-370Centurympd 6 vicinity? No Impact. The proposed development is a continuation of existing and planned development in the general area. There are no impacts identified for this issue, and no mitigation is required other than the development standards for projects in the RL Zoning District. D. Would the project affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? No Impact. Historically, there has been farming activity in several sections of the City. The area of proposed Tentative Tract Map 27519 has been under agriculture in the past, as indicated in the cultural resources report. Active farming in the area ceased many years ago in anticipation of development. Thus, the impact on prime agricultural resources or operations in the immediate area has already occurred (Sources: La Quinta General Plan; Site Survey). No mitigation measures are required for this issue. E. Would the project disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income minority community)? No Impact. The proposed development will be developed with single family residential units for general market sale on land that has been designated for such development since at least 1992. Existing single family residential land uses are located to the north of the project site. A golf school exists to the south located on RL District property. The proposed gated development will not affect the physical arrangement of the existing or planned nearby neighborhoods as it is adjacent to Dune Palms Road, and does not propose to disrupt or divide the existing circulation system (Sources: Site Survey; TTM 27519). No mitigation measures are required for this issue. 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. The current population is estimated at 20,444. 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, and by 2010, the population could be 32,786 (Source: Community Development Department, 1998). PAEA98-370Century.wpd 7 The average age of a City resident is 32.2 years. Persons over the age of 45 make up 27% of the City's population. The average household income is $56,126 (Source: U. S. Census). In addition to permanent residents, La Quinta has approximately 9,300 seasonal residents who spend three to six months in the City. With more resort opportunities being created in the City, the numbers of visitors increases. It is estimated that 30% of all housing units in the City are used by seasonal residents (Source: Community Development Department, 1998). 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 values in La Quinta are approximately $110,000 which is lower than the average for Riverside County ($115,240), and less than other Southern California counties and the state median price of $177,630 (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 21 % are college graduates (Source: 1990 Census/Estimates). Local Environmental Setting A. Would the project cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? No Impact. The development planned for the proposed project will ultimately result in the development of 70 new single family units. The proposed project is projected to have a 2.85 per unit population, for a total population of approximately 199.5 people. The potential population of this project has been included in the 1992 General Plan analysis and associated EIR. Therefore, this issue has been previously considered by the City Council and does not require additional study or mitigation. Temporary construction -related jobs will be created as the new units are built. A limited number of new permanent or part time jobs will be created as a result of the project related to landscaping and maintenance of the development. No jobs are anticipated to be lost as a result of the project. New jobs will benefit the community, and result in a positive economic impact. No mitigation measures are required for this issue. ljonn'�)b PAEA98-370Century.wpd 8 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. It is anticipated that because the project will have cumulative growth inducing impacts, the project will also result in an increase in the growth rate of the population in the area. This anticipated growth has been planned for in the 1992 La Quinta General Plan, and is considered minor relative to surrounding planned development (Source: 1992 General Plan and EIR). No mitigation measures are required for this issue. C. Would the project displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? No Impact. The proposed project will not have an impact upon existing housing, as there are no existing housing units on the subject property (Sources: Site visit; Brock, 1998). No mitigation measures are required for this issue. 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. Local Environmental Setting A review of historical aerial photographs indicates that th-e project area has been vacant for many years. The elevation of the property ranges from 52 to 68 feet above mean sea level (Source: USGS La Quinta 7.5' Quad Map, TTM 27519). The project site is currently vacant and the majority of the ground surface is covered with sparse desert brush, short grasses, weeds, and debris. There is evidence of previous citrus trees including scattered tree trunks/roots and windrows from previous clearing operations. The entire 17.6 acre parcel PAEA98-370Centmy."d 9 1-1, 0 0 0? 6 is proposed for development (Source: TTM 27519). There is an inferred earthquake fault line located approximately one-half mile to the southwest of the project site. There has been no recorded activity along this fault line, and faults traces .in the area are not considered active. However, the City of La Quinta lies in a seismically active region of Southern California, and major earthquakes are predicted to occur. Major active faults in the region include the San Andreas and Mission Creek faults located several miles to the north and west, and the Elsinore Fault Zone located to the southwest. The project lies within Groundshaking Zones IV of the Modified Mercalli Scale, with Zone XII being the most hazardous. Very strong groundshaking, as well as the possibility of ground rupture, can occur during a major earthquake along these regional faults and represent the primary source of geologic hazard for the City. Should groundshaking occur, the grain size distribution and unconsolidated nature of alluvial sediments located within the City contributes to the potential for ground rupture, liquefaction and dynamic settlement, landsliding and geologic instability (Sources: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan; 1992 La Quinta General Plan; 1992 La Quinta MEA). A geotechnical reconnaissance investigation was conducted for the project by Sladden Engineering, in October 1998. Borings were drilled for soil profiling and sampling. The borings indicate the site soils to be Silty Sands (SM) to Sandy Silts (SP). Expansion testing indicates that the sands are non -expansive and fall within the "very low" expansion category in accordance with the Uniform Building Code classification system. All indications are that the soils on the site will allow for the proposed residential development, if the recommendations of the report are implemented. A. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: fault rupture? Less Than Significant Impact. The seismically -induced ground rupture, or earth cracking is not considered a significant hazard due to the absence of known active faulting located within City boundaries. Ground rupture produced through groundshaking of regionally active faults is not considered likely, although the possibility cannot be entirely discounted (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA). There is no feasible mitigation for this issue, other than construction to Zone IV Seismic Standards as outlined in the Uniform Building Code. B. Would the project results in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismic ground shaking? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed subdivision is located in .Groundshaking Zone IV, which indicates that there is a potential for hazardous groundshaking from seismically induced earthquakes. Mitigation for PAEA98-370Century.wpd 10 f n 7 ,� iJ 0, .. 1 this potential hazard consists of constructing all habitable structures to specific standards for Seismic Zone IV, as outlined in the Uniform Building Code. C. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: ground failure or liquefaction? No Impact. Liquefaction and ground failure are produced in geologically seismic areas where poorly consolidated soils mix with perched (trapped) groundwater causing dramatic decreases in the elevation of the ground. While groundwater depths can vary significantly over short distances, due to the presence of localized perched aquifers, the presence of known shallow water tables increases the potential for liquefaction throughout the region. The subdivision site is west of the known liquefaction hazard area in the City, thus an adverse impacts are assumed to be less than significant (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). The geotechnical engineering report indicates that the absence of groundwater in the upper 50 feet, the potential for liquefaction and the related surficial affects (liquefaction induced settlement) of liquefaction impacting the site are considered negligible. Groundwater was not encountered during boring work and is expected to be at least 80 feet below the existing ground surface (Source: Sladden Engineering, October 1998). 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 approximately five miles south of the southern boundary of the project (Source: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta USGS 7.5' Quad Map). The man-made lakes within the Lake La Quinta development are not anticipated to be any potential hazard to the proposed Aventine project. No mitigation is required for this issue. E. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving landslides or mudflows? No Impact. The proposed subdivision is not subject to potential mudflows or landslides as the adjacent hills and mountains are formed of rocky granitic material, and are several thousand feet south and southwest of the closest hillsides (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA). 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? PAEA98-370Century.wpd 11 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. As the proposed subdivision is developed there will be slight changes in the topography as a result of grading and excavation. Approved grading plans are required prior to any such activity. The geotechnical engineering report identifies specific hazards and mitigation measures for the proposed development type. This report states that the soil types found on the subdivision area have a moderate potential for wind erosion (defined as wind removal and/or soil accumulation in hummocks up to 24- inches high). In addition, due to silty nature of the surface soils, severe dust storms can be expected locally in areas not covered by vegetation. Therefore, an increase in wind erosion can be anticipated during grading and during development until ground cover is reestablished on the site. Impacts from erosion shall be mitigated by design or by implementation of the approved PM- 10 Mitigation Plan (Chapter 6.16 of the Municipal Code) to be submitted and approved by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. F. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving subsidence of the land? Less Than Significant 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, 1992). The proposed Tentative Tract will not have any significant effects from subsidence hazards if the recommendations of the geotechnical engineering report are implemented. H. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving expansive soils? No Impact. The underlying soils of the site have a low potential for expansion, thus future construction is not expected to be subject to problems from soil expansion. The soil types identified within the project site include fine grained windblown sands, silty sands, and sandy silts. 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; Sladden Engineering, October 1998). Mitigation consists of implementing the recommendations of the projects' geotechnical engineering report for this issue. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving unique geologic or physical features? No Impact. The Coral Reef Mountains and Santa Rosa Mountains represent unique geologic features in the La Quinta area. These unique features are RTA98-370Centwy."d 12 11) 0 0 4 # 2 ,,j located at least a mile from the project site and will not be impacted by the proposed subdivision (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA). No mitigation is required for this issue. 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 (Source: CVWD). 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 PAEA98-370Century.wpd 13 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 Engineering for the Coachella Valley Water District, in 1970. Construction was completed in November 1986. Local Environmental Setting The project site does not have any natural standing water. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made reservoir is located approximately 5.25 miles to the south. The Whitewater River channel is located approximately one-half mile to the north of the project site, and is dry except during seasonal storms. The La Quinta Stormwater Channel is located approximately 1 mile to the south of the project site, and 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 City also implements flood hazard regulations for development within flood prone areas (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA). A. Would the project result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed development will require some grading to level the project site. Once structures and street improvements are constructed, there will be changes in the absorption rates and the rate and amount of surface runoff within the project. Storm drain improvements will be constructed to transport water runoff from the entire 17 acres into the proposed retention basin. The retention basin will be 4-foot deep with 4:1 side slopes that will provide 2.62 acre-feet of storage. One foot of free -board is recommended for a total depth of 5-feet. Mitigation will consist of implementing the design of the subdivision pursuant to the requirements of PAEA98-370Century.wpd 14 '� JOG,( 1 the hydrology study prepared by Dudek & Associates, Inc., for Tentative Tract 27519. B. Would the project result in exposure of people or property to water - related hazards such as flooding? Less Than Significant Impact. The area is protected from regional stormwater flows by a system of channels and dikes, and may be considered safe from regional stormwater flows except in rare instances (Source: La Quinta MEA). 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. There are no existing natural bodies of surface water on or adjacent to the project site (Source: Aerial photographs). The proposed project will not have any effect upon surface waters. Runoff from the project site will be required to be directed into the retention system proposed for the project site. D. Would the project result in changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? No Impact. There are no bodies of water on or adjacent to the project site. There are no impacts identified for this issue, and no mitigation is required. E. Would the project result in changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? No Impact. The proposed project will not have any effect upon currents or water movements, as the project site is a dry desert parcel. There are no impacts identified for this issue. 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. The impact of the proposed project on the existing domestic water service will have a cumulative effect upon the subsurface water resources available. The Coachella Valley Water District has not submitted a comment letter for this project as of October 29, 1998. G. Would the project result in altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? PAEA98-370Century.wpd 15 0 0 , } 3 22 No Impact. The depth of local groundwater has been relatively stable since water has been imported from the Colorado River, with the level approximately 80 feet below the surface (Source: Sladden Engineering, October 1998). The Coachella Valley Water District has not submitted a comment letter for this project as of October 30, 1998. H. Would the project result in impacts to groundwater quality? Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the subdivision will include concrete and asphalt pavement of portions of the site, and landscaping areas. This pavement will reduce the absorption ability of the ground. Storm water runoff will be discharged into on -site facilities. Following a heavy rain, contaminates could be transported into the basins that could contribute to groundwater and/or surface water pollution. The use of Best Management Practices as defined by the Regional Water Quality Control Board- Region 7 Colorado River Basin in the application of chemicals, solvents, cleansers, oils, etc. is the only practical mitigation identified. Would the project result in substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development will result in a cumulative use of water resources available for public consumption. The Coachella Valley Water District has not submitted a will serve letter to the City regarding this project as of October 30, 1998. 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. The SCAQMD samples air at over 32 monitoring station in and around the Basin. According R EA98-370Centurympd 16 ()00()33 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 Setting The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, which has an arid 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. La Quinta 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development will contribute cumulatively to air quality impacts. However, the threshold for significant impacts from a single family residential development is 170 units. The proposed development will have 70 single family lots, therefore, there will not be a significant impact in this case (Source: AQMD Draft CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1992). Grading of the project areas will cause temporary adverse impacts on the air quality due to blowing dust and sand, but will be addressed as part of the City's review and approval of a dust control plan, per the City's PM-10 PAEA98-370Century.wpd 17 oo0034 Ordinance. B. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision would result in new single family residential units in an area with existing and planned residential development. Residential units are sensitive receptors. The addition of new residential units will contribute cumulatively to the air quality impacts in the City. There are no anticipated significant adverse air quality impacts identified with the proposed subdivision. No mitigation is required for this issue. C. Would the project alter air movements, moisture, temperature, or cause any change in climate? Less Than Significant Impact. Moisture content may increase as landscape areas are planted and irrigated. There are no significant climatic changes anticipated with the proposed development. No mitigation is required for this issue. D. Would the project create objectionable odors? No Impact. The proposed development will not result in a land use that might create objectionable odors, such as waste hauling, commercial kitchen odors, 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. No mitigation is required for this issue. 3.6 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Regional Environmental Seeing La Quinta is a desert community of over 20,444 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 1 1 1, 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. P:\EA98-370Centwy.wpd 18 0) 0 0 03 5 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 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 subdivision is located on the west side of Dune Palms Road, 100 feet south of Desert Stream Drive. Dune Palms Road is a Secondary Arterial with an 88-foot right of way. Desert Stream Drive is designated as a Local Street with a 60-foot right of way. The proposed internal road system will be private and classified as a Local Street. The La Quinta General Plan gives design standards for the various street classifications. The 1992 average daily traffic flow along Dune Palms Road was 600 vehicles. The traffic volume on Dune Palms Road, between Miles Avenue and Westward Ho Drive was counted at 904 vehicles for the a.m. peak and 1,406 vehicles for the p.m. peak, on October 5, 1994 (Source: Counts Unlimited, October 5, 1994). A detailed explanation of buildout traffic conditions and levels of service is found in the La Quinta General Plan (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). A. Would the project result in increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed development is anticipated to generate approximately 700 average daily trips. Street improvements to Dune Palms Road, along the length of the project site, will be required in order to mitigate traffic impacts related to the subdivision. The additional trips are not anticipated to be significant, but rather cumulative to the community. 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 proposed circulation system. The internal roadways will be private. Automobile and motorcycle traffic are the only types of vehicles that typically use private residential streets, with the exception of delivery trucks. PAEA98-370Century. wpd 19 C. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access to nearby uses? No Impact. The project would not be permitted to obstruct emergency access to surrounding land uses. One access is proposed for the project along Dune Palms Road. No additional accesses are required for this project (Source: La Quinta Engineering Department). D. Would the project result in insufficient parking capacity on -site or off - site? Less Than Significant Impact. Parking will be required for each residential unit, which will consist of at least 2-car garages, and driveway parking spaces. On - street parking will be allowed on the private internal roadways as the roadway widths will be 36-feet. E. Would the project result in hazards or barriers for pedestrian or bicyclists? No Impact. It is anticipated that hazards to bicyclists and pedestrians will not be increased significantly as a result of the proposed development because a 8-foot wide sidewalk will be constructed on the west side of Dune Palms Road for the length of the project boundaries (Source: 1992 La Quinta General Plan; TT 27519). F. Would the project result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. There are no proposed bus turn -outs as the SunLine Transit Agency bus system does not have a route near the subdivision, the closest route is along Washington Street, approximately three-quarters of a mile west of the project. The City has not received a letter from SunLine Transit, as of October 28, 1998. No mitigation is required for 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 2.5 miles to the north of the project site. There are no navigable rivers or waterways, or air travel lanes or airports within the City. Therefore, 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 2.5 miles north of the project site and the Desert Resorts Regional (Thermal) Airport, located approximately 7.5 miles southeast of the project, on Airport Boulevard, in the Thermal area of Riverside County (Sources: La Quinta MEA; USGS La Quinta 7.5' Quad Map; Site Survey). The PAEA98-370Century.wpd 20 (j proposed development will not impact this issue. 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 project site is located in the Sonoran Desert Scrub ecosystem. The Sonoran Desert Scrub is the most typical environment found in the Coachella Valley desert floor. It is generally categorized as containing plants which have the ability to economize water use, go dormant during periods of drought, or both. 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. Typically, undeveloped land within these ecosystems is rich in biological resources and habitat. 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. Birds and amphibians/reptiles can also be found in the Sonoran Scrub area. 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)? Less Than Significant Impact. The La Quinta General Plan identifies the property as being within the habitat of the Fringe -toed Lizard (Sources: La Quinta MEA). The project site is also within the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Habitat Development Fee area, which serves as mitigation for habitat destruction. For undisturbed land, payment of this fee at a rate of $600.00 per acre shall be the only required mitigation for this species. Staff transmitted a copy of the proposed tentative tract to the California State Department of Fish and Game and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service on September 14, 1998, and has not received any response as of October 30, 1998. PAEA98-370Century. wpd 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. No response has been received from these agencies regarding this project (Source: La Quinta MEA). C. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have locally designated natural communities. (Source: La Quinta MEA). D. Would the project result in impacts to wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? No Impact. There are no known natural wetlands, marshes, riparian communities, or vernal pools on the project site or nearby (Source: Site Visit). E. Would the project result in impacts to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? No Impact. The project site is surrounded by developed parcels and vacant parcels cutting off migration corridors to and from the Coral Reef Mountains and desert wash areas. Wildlife corridors are still open in the Coral Reef Mountains which provide access to the higher mountains to the south. There are no designated corridors in the City's General Plan (Source: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta General Plan, 1992). 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. PAEA98-370Centurympd 22 €_)00 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. The MRZ-1 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 (Source: La Quinta MEA; Site Survey). 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, there are goals, objectives, and policies in the General Plan pertaining to conservation of prime soil and mineral resource areas, and energy efficiency. Objective 6-5.1 states, Where feasible, the City shall conserve prime soil and mineral resources through a variety of alternative means". Policies 6-5.1.1 encourages that areas historically utilized as agricultural production remain as open space as long as possible. Policy 6-5.1.2 states that Mineral Resource Areas shall be reserved for mineral extraction activities, after which be reclaimed to a similar natural condition. Policy 6-5.1.3 states that the loss of soils through erosion shall be minimized through conservation of native vegetation, use of permeable ground materials and careful regulation of grading practices. Goal 6-6 states that public and private sector development projects which demonstrate that the best available technologies of energy efficiency and energy conservation techniques. Objective 6-6.1 states the City shall encourage that the best available technologies of energy efficiency and energy conservation techniques are incorporated into both public and private sector development projects. Policies 6-6.1.1, 6-6.1.2, 6-6.1.3, and 6-6.1 .4 provide a variety of methods to achieve the stated goal. The project site has no identifiable mineral resources, thus, no mitigation is required. 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 development include air, mineral, water, sand and gravel, timber, energy, and other resources. State of California Title 24 requirements shall be complied with for energy conservation prior to building permit issuance. 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). PAEA98-370Century.wpd 23 ) 0 0 0 AU C. Would the proposal result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? No Impact. There are no designated valuable mineral resources located on the project site. The soil type on the project site is classified as Myoma Fine sand, which has some value as fill material for construction projects (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). 3.9 HAZARDS 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 on Interstate 10. 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 area has not been used for any type of manufacturing or industry, other than perhaps agriculture, and there has not been any known dumping of hazardous substances on the property (Sources: Aerial Photos). 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 for grounds maintenance and by residents of the development. No storage tanks of any kind are being proposed for the development. No other risks are anticipated by the development (Source: TT 27519). PAEA98-370Centwy nd 24 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 development boundaries, except for adjacent off -site work as is necessary for road improvements, etc. 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. This issue has been reviewed by the Fire Department, with no concerns expressed (Source: Riverside County Fire Department, September 23, 1998). 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 proposed subdivision. 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 subdivision. E. Would the proposal involve increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? No Impact. The proposed subdivision will not have any effect upon fire hazard issues, as the project is not in an area with significant natural fire hazards. The proposed project has been reviewed by the Riverside County Fire Department, and has not expressed any concerns with this issue (Source: Riverside County Fire Department, September 23, 1998). 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 State Highway 1 1 1 and major or primary arterial roadways. PAEA98-370Centwy."d 25 1)0e0�'���,: Local Environmental Setting The ambient noise level at the project site is dominated by vehicle traffic noise from Dune Palms Road. Residential areas are considered noise -sensitive land uses, especially during the nighttime hours. The State Building Code requires that the 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. A. Would the project result in increases in existing noise levels? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. A noise study prepared for the proposed subdivision by Gordon Bricken & Associates, (dated October 27, 1998), assessed the potential effects of projected ultimate traffic volumes on the project's proposed residential units adjacent to Dune Palms Road. In summary, noise barriers are required for a number of lots along Dune Palms Road. In order to meet the City's 60 CNEL exterior noise standard, a noise barrier 4- to 6-feet high will be required along Dune Palm Road, according to the report. The barrier may consist of a wall, a berm, or a combination of the two, as long as there is a surface density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and no openings or gaps. The applicant proposes a combination of masonry walls and berms to meet this requirement (Source: Gordon Bricken & Associates, November 2, 1998). B. Would the project result in exposure of people to severe noise levels? Less Than Significant Impact. 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). Construction noise is regulated by Chapter 6.08.050 of the Municipal Code, and serves as mitigation for this project. 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 City Civic Center. The Department utilizes a PAEA98-370Century.wpd 26 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. 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. Additional public schools are being planned for construction by the State of California. The City is also within the College of the Desert Community College District (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). 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 (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). PAEA98-370Century.wpd Z7 1 Local Environmental Setting There are two City fire stations, one located on Frances Hack Lane, near Avenida Bermudas, and the second station at the corner of 5Wh Avenue and Madison Street. There is another fire station located on 42"d Avenue, within the unincorporated county area, that is closest to 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 Desert Sand Unified School District. 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. A response to the proposed single family residential development was received from the Fire Marshal on September 23, 1998, and are on file in the Community Development Department. The proposed development will cumulatively increase the need for fire protection services, however, this increase is not anticipated to be significant with the implementation of the fire protection measures stated in the above referenced letter. Conditions to mitigate the project are proposed. 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. The Riverside County Sheriff's Department responded on September 18, 1998, that they have no negative comments regarding Tentative Tract 27519. There will be cumulative impacts on police protection services to the community with the addition of 70 new single family houses. No mitigation is required for this issue. C. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to school services? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. A comment letter was received from the Desert Sands Unified School District, dated September 17, 1998. The letter indicates that there will be a potential impact on the school system. Mitigation for this impact is the payment of the state mandated school impact fee at the time of issuance of building permits. There is no evidence to show that State mandated school fees will not be adequate to address impacts to school facilities, in that the proposed subdivision as designed does not affect the current land use as it would be assessed at time of development, whether or not the project was implemented. No additional mitigation is required for this PAEA98-370Centnry."d 28 issue. 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. Development of the proposed single family project will result in the incremental increase in maintenance of public facilities especially local roads due to the increase in traffic. To mitigate this impact, the applicant shall pay infrastructure fees in accordance with the City's adopted program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits for regional City improvements. 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. Development of the proposed project will result in an incremental increase in the demand for other governmental services. Building and engineering plan checking and inspections, and planning review needed for the project will be partially offset by application, permit and inspection fees charged to the applicant and contractors. 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. 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 three landfills within the Coachella Valley. PAEA98-370Cent uy.wpd 29 Local Environmental Setting The project is adjacent to vacant areas on the west and east. The site is a former homestead that was under agriculture. The existing house was demolished. There are existing overhead lines along the east side of Dune Palms Road. A. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to power and gas service? Less Than Significant Impact. Electricity for the subdivision is provided by Imperial Irrigation District (IID). The system was expanded in the mid-1980's to provide adequate service to the existing and anticipated development within La Quinta. The project will cumulatively impact electrical service to the area. The applicant will be required to coordinate the electrical engineering for the project with IID, prior to on -site construction. A natural gas line is located along Dune Palms Road (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992).* B. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to communication systems? Less Than Significant Impact. With development will result in an incremental need for additional communication systems for telephone and television cable services. The applicant will have to coordinate with the providers of these services, prior to on -site construction. A General Telephone Company substation is located across from the project site, on the east side of Dune Palms Road. 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. The proposed development is anticipated to result in cumulative impacts upon the water treatment and distribution facilities. The Coachella Valley Water District is the agency to provide domestic water and sanitation service to the project site in accordance with the current regulations. The regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the developer. The applicant will have to coordinate with CVWD for any additional facilities needed for continued development as mitigation for this issue. A Water trunk line is located along Dune Palms Road (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). D. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to sewer services or septic tanks? i a PAEA98-370Century.wpd 30 � � 0 � � " � Less Than Significant Impact. It is not anticipated that there will be a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the sewer systems that would service the proposed subdivision. The applicant will have to coordinate with, and meet any requirements of, CVWD for sewer facilities. E. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to storm water drainage? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision has been designed to allow storm water drainage to flow into the retention basin to be located near the northeast corner of the project. The preliminary hydrology analysis prepared for retention basin sizing indicates that a one acre, 5-foot deep retention basin is required for the proposed project (Source: Dudek & Associates, Inc., October 8, 1998). F. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to solid waste disposal? Less 'Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision will require solid waste disposal services from Waste Management of the Desert, the current purveyor of solid waste collection, as new residential units will be added to the City. No comment has been received regarding this project, as of October 30, 1998, from Waste Management. G. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to local or regional water supplies? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision will be served by existing domestic water wells and supplies. The project will have a cumulative impact on the local and regional water supplies, but not a significant effect. 3.13 AESTHETICS 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 north -central portion of the City. Views from the project site consist of the Santa Rosa and Coral Reef Mountains to the south and southwest, and the open valley floor to the north and east and north. Point Happy, a prominent geological point, is located slightly over one mile to the west (Source: Site Survey; La Quinta MEA). PAEA98-370Cemtury.wpd 31 (H O () t A. Would the project affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the Native Vegetation Type of visual impact area, as indicated on the 1992 La Quinta General Plan Master Environmental Assessment/ Environmental Impact Report Visual Assessment. This designation is defined as having a high sensitivity for visual impacts, having low visual screening and vacant land. There will be cumulative impacts as the proposed project will add more structures to the urban environment. Since 1992, the immediate area around the project site has been developed with residential subdivisions and a public high school that have impacted the natural visual quality. The proposed subdivision is limited to 2- story single family residences by the development standards of the RL Zoning District. It is anticipated that one and/or two-story houses will be constructed on the 70 proposed lots. The height of the anticipated subdivision is within the accepted and planned for development of the immediate area. B. Would the project have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development of the subdivision will be required to comply with architectural and landscaping policies and ordinances of the Low Density Residential Zoning District standards in effect at the time of development. The proposed subdivision is anticipated to be developed with one and two story single family houses, not exceeding 28 feet in height. Development of the proposed project will result in incremental increases in buildings and landscaping, all subject to review and approval by the City to ensure a pleasing design and compatibility with the styles of desert architecture and landscaping found in La Quinta. The proposed tentative tract is not anticipated to have a significant adverse impact to this issue, but rather a cumulative impact as more structures are added to the urban area. No significant adverse impact is anticipated for this issue. C. Would the project create light or glare? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed subdivision will lead to development that will potentially create additional light and glare in the community. Anticipated single family houses will include exterior security and 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 lighting requirements in Section 9.60.160 and other policies of the City, in order to reduce anticipated impacts. PAEA98-370Centurympd 32 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 Quanta General Plan and the Master Environmental Assessment. Local Environmental Setting The project site is located in the northern portion of the City. There are numerous recorded archaeological sites within a one -mile radius of the project. A. Would the project disturb paleontological resources? No Impact. The project area is not within the Lakebed Paleontological area as indicated by the Paleontological Lakebed Determination Map in the Community Development Department. B. Would the project affect archaeological resources? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. An archaeological and historical survey of the project site was completed by Archaeological Advisory Group, in September, 1998, for the proposed subdivision. The report of this study was reviewed and accepted by the City's Historic Preservation Commission, at their meeting of October 15, 1998. The survey did not result in the discovery of any archaeological or historical sites, features, or isolates. The property was a part of a 1926 homestead grant patent to Howard Ames. No structures are present on the property today. However, because of the potential of the area to contain subsurface prehistoric or historical archaeological resources, the report recommends that rough grading and major trenching be monitored by a professionally -qualified archaeologist. To mitigate this potential, the project will be conditioned for monitoring of the rough grading and major trenching. C. Would the project affect historical resources? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. There were ruins of historic resources identified during the cultural resources survey of the project site. However, the structures had been demolished in past years, and there are no existing structures on the project site. The potential exists for subsurface historic deposits exists, for which the proposed project would impact. (Source: Archaeological Advisory Group, October, 1998). Grading activities will be monitored for archaeological resources, which will provide a mitigation contingency if any historic resources are exposed at that time. PAEA98-370Centurympd 33 D. Would the project have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnid values? No Impact. There is no identifiable unique ethnic value to the proposed project area. 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 within the project boundaries or adjacent parcels. 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 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 a vacant parcel that was once a homestead farm. There are no designated or existing recreation facilities or opportunities on the project site. There is a City -owned, future park site located adjacent to the property to the southwest. A. Would the project increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. The increase in demand for park and recreation facilities resulting in the need for dedication of parkland is estimated to be 3 acres per 1,000 in population. Based upon that State Department of Finance figure of 2.85 persons per household, the population of the 70-lot, 17.6 acre subdivision could be approximately 200 at buildout, warranting the dedication of parkland to the City or payment of in -lieu fees. Because no public parks will be built on -site, this project will be required to submit payment of in -lieu parks and recreation fees. B. Would the project affect existing recreational opportunities? Less Than Significant Impact. The development will contribute additional users to existing recreation facilities located elsewhere within the City, resulting in a cumulative impact. Payment of the in -lieu fees will off -set these impacts by PAEA98-370Century.wpd 34 (! l making funds available for construction of additional parks and other recreation facilities. The proposed subdivision will not have significant adverse impacts on the environmental issues addressed in the checklist and addendum, that can not be mitigated to insignificant levels. 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 Tentative Tract 27519 will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, with the implementation of mitigation measures. • The proposed Tentative Tract 27519 will not have the potential to achieve short term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful implementation of mitigation measures. • The proposed Tentative Tract 27519 will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned for proposed development in the immediate vicinity, and the implementation of mitigation measures. • The proposed Tentative Tract 27519 will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect human, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of mitigation measures. A. Earlier Analysis 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. 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. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan is attached to this Environmental Assessment. The Conditions of Approval also contain many of the required mitigation measures. PAEA98-370Cenhuympd 35 r) 0 0() 5 '_' O r Oz z� WWw Q U W E- Q z ¢ Q �W Ov ¢ W a U z H O z_ �o zz 0 0 w� w .7 M z o u rn N W E-� A ¢Q av U U d w H U z H c� z_ �o zz 0 w� ao w C7 .ti O :b z z o a cu .0 COP r 900054 rn N W H Q z �Q �w OV w � �v •o � U 'O a � _ o b a .OJD �O cn z oco ed co u' c�A �A c�UAA Ln � W cl :x cc P4 oo as A. o r? c rn N H H W E-- Ca zCA ¢Q �w OU N a a u b �O O A w �A VAA� CIS .O b cc p V ego •cd O c b > ' .b � i c .5 F `� d � ea •� V � � •� d 'o � A u •� a oA et as M A O Hb rn W) N ►] i W Q Q z ¢Q �w OU W U�Q^U acaUv�a�o b Wz �a 8 O C) 0 w U A A w o u C •� a 5 . A 40 a rn N W Q z ¢A v ox U U z �. cc � a 0 d�.a31 U z �o b a con� En �a94 0 �d u' �AUAA to �+ z O ��0 '� p�cl x4....gz u � � ev rA PC cd rn N A U pq �A a�x U O� UU 4.. W F � W u C7 cz 0 u o e� E+ Rio o � G7 � o Ln H PA cd �a.aa U A A A W o � ° � `� cow b E� p z � ° ...0 5 t c co 'b U a d b c•� U a F A V p�q �WA � x V OU U F C7 �O 00 W�0 a0 •o � 4-4 o Ln M z o rn N E� A U p�q A a� U OU a� qo o� a� O w o rA b z a a rA a; rA 90nk ()61 rn N H f-+ A U p�q A a�x U OU 40. :� N U o zH H � a 0 a�b o v„ �o En w UAAW 41 4 • �b °' a u pa PO pa 0 a:° O � w rn N s i H A U p�q �A U OU o o o U 0 � � w b C7 `� 0 H o � w� O 00 w 12 AAA a� � "C a � H U •� � .. c :; a� u Q () rn W) N H H E� A U p�q �A axe U OU U H U a� �o o� a� a� O w � � a � b o d o o � F d s ci po •'� M z o za f ) (0 rf!i f rn N F� A U pq �A U OU a W Vv'o . au o ads b a o C7 � a w z � UAA A O M M ►� o cr a g rn tn N F-' F A U p�q WU Ox UU W F� o � o e° o U u � �a oeb��log� as �o a > w � UAA � U �a� •off � 0 co E, to 0 ri a.:° F A U p�q �WA ax U OU C7 �O O� Ili a� a 0 w b ° � a .r� z M z o PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27519 TO ALLOW A 70-LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS COMMON LOTS FOR STREETS, DRAINAGE, AND LANDSCAPING ON 17.6 ACRES, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF DUNE PALMS ROAD APPROXIMATELY 100-FEET SOUTH OF DESERT STREAM DRIVE CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27519 APPLICANT: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission for the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 241h day of November, 1998, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to review the request for a 70-lot single family subdivision and additional common lots on 17.6 acres generally located to the west of Dune Palms Road, approximately 100-feet south of Desert Stream Drive, more particularly described as: Assessor's Parcel Number 604-061-009; Portion of SE 1 /4 of the SW 1 /4 of Section 20, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, County of Riverside, California WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended, Resolution 83-63, in that the Community Development Director has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 98-370) and has determined that the proposed project could have an adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case, because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map 27519, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be filed. WHEREAS at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said Tentative Tract Map 27519: A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan, Zoning Code, and Subdivision Ordinance. The property is designated Low Density Residential (LDR) by the General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2.0) permitting single family projects of two to four units per acre pursuant to Policy 2-1.1.5. The proposed density is less than four dwelling units per acre, an allowable density for LDR areas. AAResopcTr27519.wpd (28) 0 0 { ! The RL District (Low Density Residential) permits single family housing, provided lots are 7,200 square feet or larger unless a specific plan is prepared. Proposed lots are greater than 7,200 square feet as required by Section 9.30.030 of the Zoning Ordinance. Conditions are recommended to insure compliance with City Code requirements. B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan. All streets and improvements in the project, as conditioned, will conform to City standards as outlined in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance. All on -site streets are private and designed in accordance with Chapter 3.0 of the General Plan Circulation Element. Decorative perimeter fencing shall be constructed for the development consistent with Policy 3.4.1.14 of the General Plan, including opening view fencing to lessen effect of the walled community and its relationship with adjacent properties. C. The design of the subdivision, or the proposed improvements, are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The vacant, previously disturbed site is suitable for low density residential development based on the recommendations of Environmental Assessment 98- 370. Development will not cause substantial environmental damage, or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat provided mitigation measures are met. Urban improvements are adjoining the property making it conducive for residential development. D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. A one acre retention basin is proposed to contain on -site water flows created by seasonal rains. The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on City, State, and Federal requirements. Infrastructure improvements will be extended to serve the project if not readily adjacent to the site. New improvements required for this project will be compatible with the development improvements to the north (i.e., Topaz development). E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each residential lot. The project will be instrumental in causing new area -wide public infrastructure improvements to be constructed, which will benefit both existing development AAResopcTr27519.wpd (28) and other future development, including but not limited to street improvements and public utility improvements. The design of Tentative Tract Map 27519 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 constitute the finds of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 27519 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 24th day of November, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California fl0jJ AAResopcTr27519.wpd (28) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27519 NOVEMBER 24, 1998 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply. 2. The subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this tentative map or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 3. Tentative Tract Map No. 27519 shall comply with the requirements and standards of § § 66410 through 66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC). 4. The tentative map shall expire within two years unless an extension of time is applied for and granted by the City Council. 5. 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 • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. 1 The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the Notice of Intent received from the CWQCB prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site. 6. 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, prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or a waiver of parcel map. Conferrals shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant easements to the City for emergency vehicles and for access to and maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of essential improvements located on street, drainage or common lots or within utility and drainage easements. 7. Prior to approval of a final map, parcel map or grading plan, the applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur. 8. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property owners. 9. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. 10. Dedications required of this development include: A. Dune Palms Road - 44' half of 88' right-of-way. B. On -site streets - 37' right-of-way. C. Applicant shall dedicate a 10' easement for pedestrian access to and from the proposed City park site located adjacent to the southerly west boundary of the proposed development Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for entry drives, dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. If the City Engineer determines that access rights to proposed street rights of way shown on the tentative map are necessary prior to approval of final maps dedicating ()()C,()7'' 2 the rights of way, the applicant shall grant interim easements to those areas within 60 days of written request by the City. 11. The applicant shall dedicate utility easements as necessary to provide 10' of width outside of street and sidewalk improvements along both sides of all private streets 12. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as follows (listed setback depth is the average depth if meandering wall design is approved): A. Dune Palms Road - 10 feet Setbacks shall apply to all frontage including, but not limited to, remainder parcels, well sites and power substation sites. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall dedicate blanket easements for those purposes. 13. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to the following property from all frontage except entryways shown on the approved tentative map or as approved by the City Engineer: A. Dune Palms Road B. Proposed City park site. 14. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 15. 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. 16. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, on storage media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. If the map was not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the map. 17. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans shall have 3 rj0;,'�` rj signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development 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. 18. 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. 19. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as - constructed conditions. If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. I MPROVEMEN-T-AOREEMEDLT 20. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LOMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 21. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of improvement costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, 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. 4 ()()()ll"14 22. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (plot plans, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site improvements and common improvements (e.g., retention basins, perimeter walls & landscaping, gates) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first phase unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase and subsequent phases unless a construction phasing plan is approved by the City Engineer. 23. 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 or final building inspections or otherwise withhold approvals related to the development of the project until the applicant makes satisfactory progress on the improvements or obligations or has made other arrangements satisfactory to the City. 24. 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. 25. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the Applicant shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 26. The applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report with the grading plan. 27. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 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 final maps (if any are required of this development) that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 28. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting properties and between separate tracts and lots within this development. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within a tract, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. If compliance with this requirement is impractical, the City will consider and may approve alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 29. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications, stamped and signed by a California registered civil engineer or surveyor. {J0U4.►'7:� 5 The certifications shall list approved pad elevations, actual elevations, and the difference between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the following: 30. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 31. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm (the design storm) shall be retained within the development unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. 32. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual -lot basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for lots 2 A acres in size or larger or where the use of common retention is impracticable. If individual -lot retention is approved, the applicant shall meet all individual -lot retention provisions of Chapter 13.24, LQMC. 33. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated, unimpeded overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. 34. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 35. Retention facility design shall be based on site -specific percolation data which shall be submitted for checking with the basin plans. The design percolation rate shall not exceed two inches per hour. 36. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. Maximum retention depth shall be six feet for common basins and two feet for lot -by -lot retention. 37. Nuisance water shall be retained on -site. A trickling sand filter and leachfield of a design approved by the City Engineer shall be installed to percolate nuisance water. The sand filter(s) shall be designed to infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft (of landscape area) and to accommodate surges of 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. 38. In developments for which security will be provided by public safety entities (e.g., the La Quinta Safety Department or the Riverside County Sheriff's Department), retention basins shall be visible from the adjacent street(s). No fence or wall shall be constructed around basins unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 000076 0 UIILITIES 39. Existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv are exempt from this requirement. 40. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. 41. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. Any property within this development which has not been subdivided in accordance with this tentative map 60 days after the program is in effect shall be subject to the program. 42. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements shall conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Dune Palms Road (Secondary Arterial): Construct 32 foot half of 64 foot (curb face to curb face) improvement plus 8 foot sidewalk. If approved street grades differ from existing grades, the applicant shall install a 20' northbound lane as a part of the street improvements. B. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Entry drive design shall be approved by the City Engineer, and shall conform with the following criteria: A. The entry drive shall have stacking space outside the Dune Palms Road right-of-way for a minimum of three vehicles. B. Drive shall be designed to allow U-turns for rejected vehicles without interference with an open exit gate. 2) Applicant shall construct a 10' wide minimum, gated pedestrian access to the proposed future city park site at the southerly west boundary of the development. 3) Residential - 36 feet wide if double loaded (building lots on both sides), 32 feet if single. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, turn knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved ()0037( 7 construction plans may warrant additional street widths as determined by the City Engineer. 43. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs, and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 44. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks). 45. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by California -registered professional engineer(s). 46. Street right of way geometry for culs de sac, knuckle turns and corner cutbacks shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 47. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations which convey water without ponding and provide lateral containment of dust and residue for street sweeping. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to normal curbing prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot. 48. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections are 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" 49. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. 50. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly - maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the tract or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. 51. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. 52. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit plans for approval by the Community Development Department prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking is complete, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for signature by the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 53. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 54. 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 5-feet of curbs along public streets. 55. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, common basins and park areas shall be designed with grades and turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor -mounted equipment. 56. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. 57. The applicant shall construct perimeter walls and required landscaping to enclose the entire perimeter prior to final inspection and occupancy of any homes within the tract unless a phasing plan or construction schedule is approved by the City Engineer and Community Development Director. 58. Landscape berms shall be used throughout the parkway landscaping as required by Section 9.60.240(F) of the Zoning Ordinance. 59. Mature trees shall be installed along Dune Palms Road (e.g., minimum 1 .75" to 3" diameter trunk width per tree type). Vandal proof ground mounted lighting shall be used periodically to accent the parkway trees. Shrubs shall be clustered to form distinctive design themes. 60. Front yard landscaping for future houses shall consist of a minimum of two shade trees (15 gallon with 1" diameter trunk) and 10 five -gallon shrubs. Three additional OO(I(ICJ � 15 gallon trees shall be required for corner lot houses. All trees shall be double staked to prevent wind damage. Trees and shrubs shall be watered with emitters or bubblers. The developer is encouraged to use plants that are native to this area and drought tolerant. 61. Landscape and irrigation improvements shall be installed prior to occupancy of the house. The developer and subsequent property owner shall continuously maintain all required landscaping in a healthy and viable condition. QUALITY _ASS-URANCE 62. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 63. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other licensed professionals, as appropriate, to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 64. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program but required by the City as evidence that construction materials and methods comply with plans and specifications. Where retention basins are installed, testing shall include a sand filter percolation test, as approved by the City Engineer, after required tract improvements are'complete and soils have been permanently stabilized. 65. 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 shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. MAINTENANCE 66. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all required improvements unless expressly released from said responsibility by the City. FEES AND—DEP-QS1TS 67. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. 68. The applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. ()OQ()SU 10 69. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the property owner shall pay a fee of $600.00 per acre for disturbing the habitat area of the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard. 70. Within 24 hours after review by the City Council, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Community Development Department two checks made out to the County of Riverside in the amount of $78.00 and $1,250.00 to permit the filing and posting of the Notice of Determination for EA 98-370. 71. Prior to building permit issuance, the developer shall pay school mitigation fees to the Desert Sands Unified School District based on the State imposed fee in effect at that time. The school facilities fee shall be established by Resolution (i.e., State of California School Facilities Financing Act). 72. Prior to final map approval by the City Council, the property owner/developer shall meet the Parkland Dedication requirements by payment of in -lieu fees as set forth in Section 13.48 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. FIRE DEPARTMENT 73. Fire hydrants in accordance with CVWD Standard W-33 shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1,500 g.p.m. for a 2-hour duration at 20 psi. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of the streets directly in line with fire hydrants. 74. 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 wit 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." 75. The required water system including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. 76. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the construction of the model units only. Plans for a temporary water system must be submitted to the Fire Department for review prior to issuance of building permits. 77. The minimum dimensions for fire apparatus access roads entering and exiting this project shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20-feet in each direction and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. 78. Gate entrances shall be at least two feet wider than the width of the traffic lane(s) serving that gate. All gates providing access from a road to a driveway shall be 11 000081 located at least 40 feet from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop with obstructing traffic on the road. 79. Gates shall have either a secondary power supply or an approved manual means to release mechanical control of the gate in the event of loss of primary power. 80. Install Knox key operated switches, series KS-2P with dust cover, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox Company. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval of mounting location/position and operating standards. Ordering forms are available at the Fire Department. The form must be authorized and signed by the Riverside County Fire Department personnel for the correctly coded system to be purchased. 81. Operation of the Knox key switch shall simultaneously open and control the gates for both directions of travel. 82. Phased improvements shall be approved by -the Fire Department. 83. Applicant/developer will provide written certification from the appropriate water company that the required fire hydrants are either existing or that financial arrangements have been made to provide them. ENVIRONMENTAL 84. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the property owner/developer shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Department demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of TTM 27519 and EA 98-370. Mitigation monitoring of the project site during grading is required. 85. Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit, or ground disturbance, mitigation measures as recommended by the Cultural Resources Assessment and Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) for the site shall be completed at the applicant/developer's expense. This consists of having an archaeological monitor on - site during grading and earth disturbance operations. A final report shall be submitted for acceptance by the HPC prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy of the first building. MISCELLANEOUS 86. All agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking purposes. 87. Permanent tract identification signs shall be approved by the Planning Commission (i.e., Business Item). to�1�►:: 12 88. Prior to final map approval, proposed street names shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. Three names shall be submitted for each proposed private street. 89. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department for review a copy of the proposed Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC and R's) for the project. Approval of the CC and R's by the City Attorney is required. 90. The prototype house plans for the project shall be reviewed and approved by the Planing Commission pursuant to Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permit) of the Zoning Ordinance. 91. Open fencing shall be constructed along Dune Palm Road adjacent to the retention basin pursuant to General Plan Policy 3-4.1.14. In lieu of open fencing, a combination fence consisting of a low-level masonry wall with tubular steel fencing on top may be permitted, submitted to the approval by the Planning Commission. Rear yard walls constructed) for Lots 1 and 2 shall be decorative (i.e., masonry block with stucco coating) and include pilasters spaced at 30-foot intervals. 13 ATTACHMENTS () Oil) ' � 84 ATTACHMENT Case: TTM M19 F< z r*Ln W2 h z Q o << tiV �N z m e � 24 0 ial V12 H q W ti L lae JQ ti _® IW ti n In IL 01A z z F O h 0 U �` Z e z W a 4 a( u m W 1f1 O E •a QQQ «3 id gal 1N3VYidVd3a JNINNVId YY ATTACHMENT 2 ' �fi61 1�0 u�R 3A' MORO, J-017 Ovm r'llx.xwd V r- Mii O N � ►� i n 6e/�7 C / 1 t i ,Qae / spas S n s 'pA f mm �• L: 3 it l� m Ali. A,N 1� /aa23 may„ t INO as � Day i = mds m w � m ie ■ eI m / N ►� m ii- a s ED ATTACHMENT 3 Historic Preservation Conunission October 15, 1998 C. Cultural Resource Assessment (Phased Tentative Tract 27519. 1. Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand commented on the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Associate Planner Mouriquand said there were no deposits, or prehistoric sites found, but the property was a site of homesteading activities and early agriculture. 3. Commissioner Irwin commented that it had been a citrus ranch. 4. Associate Planner Mouriquand confirmed it was and there was potential for some subsurface, perhaps historic resources. For that reason, monitoring was recommended during the grading. 5. Commissioner Irwin commented on the Eucalyptus tree line and necessary monitoring if grading was to be done there. 6. Clarification of the Eucalyptus tree line was discussed. Commissioner Irwin pointed out they were visible' on Page 4, Figure 3 (right hand side). Commissioner Irwin said the stand of Eucalyptus trees were part of the early homestead. It might be possible the land around the Eucalyptus' had not been disturbed since they were planted. 7. Associate Planner Mouriquand asked if there were any special stipulations or conditions needed other than monitoring of the grading with special attention to that area. Commissioner Irwin reaffirmed monitoring with particular attention to that area due to the possibility of a wash located in the area. 8. Commissioner Puente asked what the criteria was to determine work stoppage on a project for archaeological, historical, or paleontological resources. Associate Planner Mouriquand replied that if discovery was made during the monitoring of the grading the project would stop for a short period of time for the archaeologist or historian to confirm the extent of the find. 9. Commissioner Puente also asked about removal of the findings. Planning Manager di Iorio replied it depends on the archaeologist's recommendations and the City staff. Possibly the project could require redesigning, otherwise it would only be recovery and removal. P:\CAROLYNVPC 101598.wpd 3 Historic Preservation Commission October 15, 1998 10. Vice Chairman DeMersman asked if there were any other questions or comments. There being none it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Puente/Irwin to approved Minute Motion 98-009 accepting the Cultural Resource Assessment (Phase 1) - Tentative Tract 27519 Archaeological Report with the recommendation that archaeological monitoring be done with specific attention being paid to the line of Eucalyptus trees. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE ANC WRITTEN MATERIAL A. Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand reviewed the correspondence which included a Call for Entries for the 1999 Preservatio esign Awards and asked if there were any possible entries. Planning Manager di lorio.saidA#Fre may be an entry from the Traditions project for Hacienda del Gato. She s ' ey were working with Traditions to gather information for the application. Commissioner in asked if there were any photos of the original house which was the small ding. She had previously seen a photo but could not recall where. Planni anager di lorio thought it might have been in the newspaper. lomissioner Wright said he had taken photographs of eve tng about three or uryears ago and put them in the file before any work even begun. Commissioner Irwin said there was a woodZstrucon the property which wasthe original house and there are pictures ofre. It was a small wooden structure that they lived in while the othenstruction. Planning Manager di Iorio said they a looking for a photograph of the Hacienda that's there now and were not abl ocate one. Commissioner Wright commented the pictures he took might be a for that purpose. Associate Planner Mouriquand said she would look for th B. Planning Commissi di Iorio commented on the article, in California Heritage, titled "A New To r Preserving California's Oldest History": S ointed out the article talks a the loss of archaeological sites and the rec endation of Land Banking. Vice Chairman DeMersman commented it was panic y significant to preserve our local sites. We have a plethora of archaeological siprand that's were our history lies. Our archaeological history can not be compared to the east coast where you've got more built environment. Archaeology is really important in this area. P:\CAROLYN\BPC 1 o 1598.wpd 4 ATTACHMENT 4 10/29/98 TO: THE LA QUINTA PLANNING COMMISSION REF: CENTURY-CROMWELL COMMUNITIES ITEM: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27519 MY WIFE AND MYSELF HAVE BEEN FORTUNATE TO LIVE IN THIS BEAUTIFUL CITY AND VALLEY FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS. WITH ALL OF THE MANY HOMES AND COMMUNITIES WITHIN THE CITY ALREADY BEING CREATED AT PRESENT, I DON'T FEEL THAT CRAMMING ONE MORE 70 HOME SINGLE FAMILY TRACT IS NECESSARY. I AM TOTALLY AGAINST ANY APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD ALSO SEE WITH THE MASS GROWTH TO THIS CITY RIGHT NOW THE LAND FOREMENTIONED WOULD BE BETTER USED FOR A RECREATIONAL PARCEL FOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE CITY TO UTILIZE. AT THE TIME WHEN MY WIFE AND I PURCHASED OUR HOME WE WERE TOLD BY THE SALES REPRESENTATIVE FROM CENTURY HOMES THAT THE PARCEL OF LAND IN QUESTION WAS GOING TO BE A CITY PARK WHERE DID THAT IDEA GO. MY NEIGHBORS, AS WELL AS MYSELF WOULD RATHER SEE THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT TURN THE PARCEL OF LAND BETWEEN WESTWARD HO AND DESERT STREAM INTO A GOLF COURSE. THERE ARE SO MANY OPTIONS FOR THIS PARCEL OF LAND. WHETHER AN 18 HOLE EXECUTIVE COURSE OR STANDARD 9-HOLE GOLF COURSE FOR THE COMMUNITY. THINK OF THE ADDITION REVENUE FOR THE CITY AND THE BEAUTY INWHICH IT WOULD BRING. THANK:=NY ITY, T 45-485 DESERT AIR ST LA QUINTA, CA 92253 a V c 2 11998 OF LAQUINTAt.NG DEPARTMENT IMF .1 PH #D PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 1998 CASE NO.: PLOT PLAN 94-543, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: DAVID CHAPMAN ARCHITECT: HABITAT REQUEST: APPROVAL OF BUILDING ELEVATION MODIFICATIONS FOR A 550+ SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING BUILDING (FORMERLY SESAME') FOR USE AS A RESTAURANT LOCATION: 50981 WASHINGTON STREET AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND CALLE TAMPICO IN THE LA QUINTA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS REQUEST IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPTED PURSUANT TO THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, SECTION 15301, CLASS 1(e). GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: NC (NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) ZONING: CN (NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing to expand remodel, and use the former Sesame' restaurant. This request entails interior and exterior remodeling and additions to the north and south ends of the 3,505 square foot building. The site is within the current boundaries of the Village guidelines area (Attachment 1). The project is subject to the CN (Neighborhood Commercial) Zone District requirements. C:pc rpt pp 94-543 amend 1 The La Quinta Village Shopping Center was approved in April, 1991, and developed in 1994. The freestanding restaurant pad permits 5,600 square feet of floor space. The restaurant was approved in January, 1995, and constructed in 1996, under Plot Plan 94-543, with 3,505 square feet of floor space. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The modifications consist of enclosing a small part of the covered entry, relocating the entry door further to the west, enclosing a portion of the covered outdoor seating area, and minor exterior changes. The entry area addition is approximately 10' x 18' and will be provided with windows to the north and west. The remaining addition at the southeast corner of the building, will move the existing windows out approximately eight feet to align with the existing columns which support the arcade on the south and a small portion of the east. Windows to match the existing windows will be provided. The door to the outdoor seating area on the south will be relocated one archway to the west. Other modifications consists of new larger windows on the west elevation and elimination of a utility door on the east elevation facing Washington Street. A new trellis will be provided on the concrete columns at the southwest corner of the building. The building will be repainted to match the beige of the main shopping center. The small wall facing Washington Street will be increased in height and length to increase screening. The site is fully landscaped and no changes are proposed at this time. PARKING REQUIREMENT CONSIDERATION: The 3,505 square foot building with the 550 square foot addition will total 4,050 square feet. The approved center permitted 5,600 square feet of floor space for this location. Therefore, the expanded use is within the size permitted and no additional parking is required. PUBLIC NOTICE: This request was advertised in the Desert Sun Newspaper on November 14, 1998, and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the Project. To date, no correspondence has been received. PUBLIC AGENCY REVIEW: A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City Departments. All written comments received are on file in the Community C:pc rpt pp 94-543 amend 1 Development Department. Applicable comments received have been included in the recommended Conditions of Approval. ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC) REVIEW• The ALRC reviewed this plan at its meeting of November 20, 1998, and on a unanimous vote, determined that the request is acceptable as submitted (Attachment 2). STAFF COMMENTS: The addition has been designed to be compatible with the materials, colors, and design features of the existing building and shopping center. Adequate parking facilities exist for the expanded use. FINDINGS: As required by Section 9.65.040 (Village Use Permits) of the Zoning Code, the Planning Commission is required to make the following findings: Consistency with the General Plan- The General Plan indicates the shopping center site as Neighborhood Commercial. This designation includes restaurants, as is proposed by this application. Consistency with the Zoning Code- The restaurant was constructed in compliance with then existing Code requirements. This addition complies with applicable Code requirements and Plot Plan requirements of the center. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act requirements- This addition to the restaurant is categorically exempted pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15301, Class 1(e), and therefore, in compliance with the requirements. Compatibility with Surrounding Uses- The architectural design of the building with the addition, is compatible with the surrounding uses, including other buildings in the center, and quality of design illustrated in the Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines Architectural Design- The architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements are compatible with the surrounding development and with the quality of design illustrated in the Village at La Quinta Guidelines in that the proposed construction matches the existing building. The building will be painted to match the main shopping center. The revised C:pc rpt pp 94-543 amend 1 project promotes the element of human scale and architectural variety, as desired in the Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines. Landscape Design- Since the building is existing, the site is fully landscaped and has been maintained. Due to the location of the proposed additions to the existing building, new landscaping is not needed. Any new landscaping will be primarily to replace dead plants or upgrade the design. Sign Program- The plans indicate the existing signs will be removed and replaced with new signs which will be approved by the planning Commission. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98- , approving Plot Plan 94-543, Amendment #1, subject to Findings and Conditions. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. ALRC minutes for meeting of November 20, 1998 3. Plan exhibits Prepared by: Submitted by: Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner Christine di lorio, Planning Manager C:pc rpt pp 94-543 amend 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO A PLOT PLAN TO ALLOW BUILDING ELEVATION MODIFICATIONS FOR A 550 + SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING BUILDING (FORMERLY SESAME') FOR USE AS A RESTAURANT CASE NO.: PLOT PLAN 94-543, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: DAVID CHAPMAN WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 24th day of, November, 1998, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of David Chapman for approval of an amendment to a previously approved Plot Plan to allow building elevation modifications for a 550 + square foot expansion of an existing building (formerly Sesame') for use as a restaurant, located at 50981 Washington Street at the northwest corner of Washington Street and Calle Tampico in the La Quinta Village Shopping Center, more particularly described as: APN 769-030-062 WHEREAS, said Plot Plan amendment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the Community Development Department has determined this Plot Plan amendment request is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1(E) of the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, and; WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee, on the 20" day of November, 1998, did review and unanimously recommend to the Planning Commission approval of this request, subject to conditions; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify approval of said Plot Plan amendment: A. Consistency with the General Plan- The General Plan indicates the shopping center site as Neighborhood Commercial. This designation includes restaurants, as is proposed by this application. c:\pc res pp 94-543 am #1 Planning Commission Resolution 98- November 24, 1998 B. Consistency with the Zoning Code- The restaurant was constructed in compliance with then existing Code requirements. This addition complies with applicable Code requirements and Plot Plan requirements of the center. C. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act requirements- This addition to the restaurant is categorically exempted pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15301, Class 1(e), and therefore, in compliance with the requirements. D. Compatibility with Surrounding Uses- The architectural design of the building with the addition, is compatible with the surrounding uses, including other buildings in the center, and quality of design illustrated in the Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines E. Architectural Design- The architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements are compatible with the surrounding development and with the quality of design illustrated in the Village at La Quinta Guidelines in that the proposed construction matches the existing building. The building will be painted to match the main shopping center. The revised project promotes the element of human scale and architectural variety, as desired in the Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines. F. Landscape Design- Since the building is existing, the site is fully landscaped and has been maintained. Due to the location of the proposed additions to the existing building, new landscaping is not needed. Any new landscaping will be primarily to replace dead plants or upgrade the design. G. Sign Program- The plans indicate the existing signs will be removed and replaced with new signs which will be approved by the planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby approve Plot Plan 94-543, Amendment #1 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. cApc res pp 94-543 am #1 Planning Commission Resolution 98- November 24, 1998 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 24" day of November, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California c:\pc res pp 94-543 am #1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED PLOT PLAN 94-543, AMENDMENT #1 DAVID CHAPMAN DECEMBER 1, 1998 GENERAL 1. The use of this site shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits contained in Plot Plan 94-543, Amendment #1, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. 2. The approved amended Plot Plan shall be used within two years of the date of approval, otherwise, it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Used" means the issuance of a building permit, completion of the work in a timely manner, and the beginning of operation of the business. A time extension may be requested as permitted in Municipal Code Section 9.200.080D. 3. 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 this project. The City of La Quints shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion. 4. The project shall incorporate the latest technology in recycling and other means of reducing the amount of waste requiring disposal (land filing), during demolition, construction, and upon site development/operation. A) prior to issuance of a demolition/building permit, the applicant shall provide proof to the Community Development Department that a recycling company and program has been established for the recycling of construction/demolition debris. 13) If the applicant can successfully demonstrate that current provisions exist to meet the requirements of the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991, the Community Development Director may waive, modify, or delete the requirements of this condition. 5. The applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies; as needed: Fire Marshal - Public Works Department - Community Development Department p:\pc coa pp 94-543, am #1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED PLOT PLAN 94-543, AMENDMENT #1 DECEMBER 1, 1998 - Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department - Desert Sands Unified School District - Coachella Valley Water District - Imperial Irrigation District 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. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit, provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program and the school mitigation fee in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 7. Final architectural working drawings, substantially conforming to this approval shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval prior to submission of plans to the Building and Safety Department. 8. The exterior colors shall match those used in the shopping center. 7. Comprehensive sign program, in compliance with applicable code requirements and/or sign program shall be approved by the Planning Commission prior to any fabrication of the signs. 8. Fire Department conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted for their review. 9. No roof equipment shall be allowed to encroach above the height of the parapet or roof. p:\pc coa pp 94-543, am #1 ATTACHMENT CASE No. CASE MAP PLOT PLAN 94-543 AMENDMENT #1 ORTH SCALE: NTS ATTACHMENT 2 Architectural & Landscaping Review Committee Minutes November 16, 1998 B. Site Development Permit 8-638: a request of Citrus Development, LLC (Peter Jacobs), for approval of ar hitectural plans for a new prototype residential unit. 1. Principal Plannef Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy/ of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Committee Member Cunningham stated he had no concerns as it appeared to tie in with !what is existing. i 3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he had no comments. He liked the units and hoped the flowers will look that good when planted as they do on the exhibit. 4. Mr.;peter Jacobs, representing the applicant, stated the minimum number of front yard trees is four 24 inch box trees and they go up to six tree. They also hive different walkway and driveway schemes. Probably will have two different elevations for each plan. 5. / Principal Planner Stan Sawa suggested another facade be submitted for approval by staff. i 6,! There being no further discussion it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 98-011 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 98-638 subject to the following modifications to the conditions: a. n additional facade be submitted and approved by staff. ,unanimously approved. C. Plot Plan 94-543. Amendment #1; a request of David Chapman for approval of building elevation modifications for a 550+ square foot expansion of an existing building (formerly Sesame') for use as a restaurant 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Committee Member Cunningham stated the modifications enhance the building and enclosing the patios makes it more inviting. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the arches would remain. Staff stated they would remain and a window would be added. A AALRC 1 1-20-98.wpd 7 Architectural & Landscaping Review Committee Minutes November 16, 1998 4. Mr. Fedderly, representing the applicant, stated they would add a tree facing Washington Street to hide the two utility doors. Staff asked Mr. Fedderly what restaurant would be going in. Mr. Fedderly stated it would be called "The Back Tee" and it would contain some personal furniture of Arnold Palmer along with his name. 5. It was moved and seconded by Cunningham/Bobbitt to approve the Plot Plan 94-543, Amendment # 1 as recommended by staff. Unanimously approved. parkway landscaping. 1. Assistant Engineer I Marcus Fuller presented the information cont ' ed in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Co/bridge. velopment Department. 2. Commissioner Bobbitt questioned how many lanes wded. Staff stated three lanes on each side of the median across t 3. Mr. Waune N DunaHOA, and Wayne Cadell, oA for Duna La Quinta. Aproves the plan, especially over the bridge. preciate staff s workiginwith them. Two problems, if pssible they are g out a lot of big trees, 13 palm trees and they will be relocated onto 50''' venue and the rest salvage within their compound. Would like some s 1 dwarf palm trees into the five foot side adjacent to Duna La Quinta. 4. Bobbitt they are not called fo , but they would have no difficultly having them. 5. Mr. Wayne have 13 lig ing fixtures lighting the wall, staff has stated they will be replaced with 0 watt halogen, why do they have to have such high voltage. The Dark ky does not allow the floruoscent. Christi stated they allow landscapin ighting. Bobbitt those are to high light the palms. Using the same hig ghts as what has been used in the mediums. Christi landscaping 'ghting with a wattage is exempt. Staff stated they have no problem. 6. Bobbi tated hehas been using the 13 watt and they cast a smaller highlight. Chri stated it sounds they just need to look at the wattage and she can reiew thi ith the wattage. Bobbitt stated you have to look at the lumans and not t wattage. 7. Bobbitt asked what will happen on the west side of the west wall. Marcus pointed out that it will be grass as it will be reduced to about two feet. Their major concern was the treatment of the retaining wall. AA ALRC11-20-98.wpd 8 PH #E PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 1998 CASE NOS.: TRACT 28545-2, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: KSL DESERT RESORTS, INC. REQUEST: APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO TRACT MAP 28545-2 TO RECONFIGURE THE SHAPE OF THE RESORT HOME LOTS TO INCLUDE THE PATIO AREA. LOCATION: GENERALLY WEST OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND SOUTH OF AVENIDA FERNANDO, IN THE LA QUINTA RESORT HOMES AREA (ATTACHMENT 1). ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS REQUEST IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPTED PURSUANT TO THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, SECTION 15305, CLASS 5. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: Tourist Commercial (RSP) ZONING: TC (Tourist Commercial) BACKGROUND: This Tentative Tract map was approved by the City Council on September 16, 1998, along with SP 121-E, Amendment #4, GPA 97-054, ZC 97-083, SDP 97-607, and SDP 97-608, with Tract 28545-2 recorded on March 31, 1998. The map included 69 condominium lots, and miscellaneous lots for open space, common areas, and private streets for the La Quinta Club Resort Homes approved under Site Development Permit 97-607. Lot Line Adjustment 98-289, was recorded on August 21, 1998, eliminating one condominium lot from the tract at the north end. The amended map shows 69 cApc rpt tt 28545, am #1 condominium lots because, although Lot 17 was eliminated by the lot line adjustment, the lot numbering after Lot 17 was retained. PROJECT REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval to reconfigure the shape of the condominium lots to include the redesigned outside patio areas in the condominium lot boundaries. This affects all but seven lots. Lots 1, 20, and 68 were also moved approximately one foot, but still comply with applicable setback requirements. PUBLIC NOTICE: This request was advertised in the Desert Sun Newspaper on November 14, 1998, and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the Project. To date, no correspondence has been received. PUBLIC AGENCY REVIEW: A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City Departments. All written comments received are on file in the Community Development Department. Applicable comments received have been included in the recommended Conditions of Approval. REQUIRED FINDINGS: 1. The Map and its design are consistent with the General Plan and Specific Plan 121-E in that its amended lots are in conformance with applicable goals, policies, and development standards, such as lot size and will provide adequate infrastructure and public utilities. 2. The design of the amended subdivision or its proposed improvements are not likely to create environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or their habitat because the area covered by the amended Map is graded or developed and mitigation measures and conditions have been imposed. 3. The design of the amended subdivision and the proposed types of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems because urban improvements are existing or will be installed based on applicable Local, State, and Federal requirements. 4. The design of the amended subdivision and the proposed types of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the subdivision in that none presently exist and access to the resort residential area will be provided to surrounding property owners. c:\pc rpt tt 28545, am #1 STAFF COMMENTS: The application, based on the findings as noted above is acceptable, subject to the conditions as recommended by Staff. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 98- , recommending approval of Tract 28545-2, Amendment #1, subject to conditions; Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Amended Tract Map Exhibit (Large Copy for Planning Commission only) Prepared by: Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner Submitted by: Christine di lorio, Planning Manager cApc rpt tt 28545, am #1 RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TRACT MAP 28545-2, AMENDMENT #1 TO THE CITY COUNCIL CASE NO.: TRACT 28545-2, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: KSL DESERT RESORT, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 24" day of November, 1998, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of KSL DESERT RESORT, INC. for approval of Amendment #1 to Tract Map 28545-2, in the area encompassing the La Quinta Resort Homes , generally located west of Eisenhower Drive, and south of Avenida Fernando, more particularly described as: A portion of Section 36, T6E, R6E, S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, said Tentative Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the La Quinta Community Development Department has determined that this request is Categorically Exempted pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15305, Class 5; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said amendment to Tract Map 28545-2: 1. The Map and its design are consistent with the General Plan and Specific Plan 121-E in that its amended lots are in conformance with applicable goals, policies, and development standards, such as lot size and will provide adequate infrastructure and public utilities. 2. The design of the amended subdivision or its proposed improvements are not likely to create environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or their habitat because the area covered by the amended Map is graded or developed and mitigation measures and conditions have been imposed. 3. The design of the amended subdivision and the proposed types of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems because urban PApc res tt 28545-2 amend #1 Planning Commission Resolution 98- Tract 28545-2, Amendment #1 improvements are existing or will be installed based on applicable Local, State, and Federal requirements. 4. The design of the amended subdivision and the proposed types of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the subdivision in that none presently exist and access to the resort residential area will be provided to surrounding property owners. WHEREAS, in the review of this amended Tract Map, the Planning Commission has considered, the effect of the contemplated action on housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of La Quinta and its environs with available fiscal and environmental resources; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does recommend approval of Amendment #1 to Tract Map 28545-2 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 24th day of November, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: P:\pc res tt 28545-2 amend #1 Planning Commission Resolution 98- Tract 28545-2, Amendment #1 RICH BUTLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\pc res tt 28545-2 amend #1 RESOLUTION 98- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TRACT MAP 28545-2, AMENDMENT #1 KSL DESERT RESORT, INCORPORATED NOVEMBER 24, 1998 GENERAL 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply. 2. Tract Map 28545-2, Amendment #1 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. This map shall expire two years after approval by the City Council unless extended pursuant to the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. 3. The applicant/developer shall comply with the mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan attached to Environmental Assessment 97-343. 4. This map shall be subject to all requirements of SP 121-E, Amendment #4, and SDP 97-607 and shall be revised as necessary prior to recordation. 5. 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 this project. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion. 6. All applicable conditions of City Council Resolution 97-75 for Tentative Tract Map 28545 shall be met prior to recordation of this Map. c:\pc coa tr 28545-2 amend #1 ATTACHMENT STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 1998 CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27519 REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF A 70 SINGLE FAMILY AND OTHER COMMON LOT SUBDIVISION MAP ON 17.6 ACRES IN THE RL ZONE DISTRICT, AND CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-370). LOCATION: APPROXIMATELY 100-FEET SOUTH OF DESERT STREAM DRIVE AND WEST OF DUNE PALMS ROAD (45-955 DUNE PALMS ROAD) APPLICANT: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES PROPERTY OWNER: MR. LANTSON E. ELDRED, TRUSTEE (ELDRED FAMILY TRUST) ENGINEERS: DUDEK AND ASSOCIATES ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE 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 (EA 98-370) AND DETERMINED THAT ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THERE WOULD NOT BE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE APPROPRIATE MITIGATION MEASURES ARE MADE PART OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THIS TRACT, AND A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WILL BE FILED. STPCTr27519-28, RESOTTM27519-28, CONDTr.27519- 28 Page 1 of 4 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING DESIGNATION: SURROUNDING LAND USES: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) NORTH: EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND COMMON AREA RETENTION BASIN IN THE TOPAZ DEVELOPMENT (TRACT 23935) SOUTH: EXISTING GARRY HOPKINS GOLF SCHOOL EAST: RETENTION BASIN FOR TRACT 25363 AND VACANT LOT FOR FUTURE CITY PARK WEST: ACROSS DUNE PALMS ROAD ARE VACANT PROPERTIES IN THE CITY OF INDIO BACKGROUND: Site Information The vacant, previously disturbed site is located to the south of the Topaz development on the west side of Dune Palms Road (Attachment 1). Vehicle traffic on Dune Palms Road is considered light, but projected to be over 14,000 vehicles per day at City build -out in 20 + years. Overhead utility lines exist on the east side of Dune Palms Road. Project Request The applicant requests approval of a 70-lot single family subdivision with lots that are a minimum of 60-feet in width by 132-feet in length (7,920 square feet) on private streets (Attachment 2). Finished single family pad grades vary from approximately 59.5 feet to 63.8 feet, and are designed to be compatible with adjoining residential properties. Prototype houses for the project will be submitted in the next few months for review and approval by the Planning Commission. Gated access to Dune Palms Road is located between the proposed on -site retention basin (Lot "H") and Lot 1. Landscape lots (Lots "G" and "F") are provided along Dune STPCTr27519-28, RESOTTM27519-28, CONDTr.27519- 28 Page 2 of 4 Palms Road, and between Lots 20 and 21 a 10-foot wide easement is proposed for pedestrian access to the future public park to the west of the Tract. A conceptual landscape plan was prepared for the Dune Palms Road frontage and the retention basin. Plant types are well suited for the desert climate, and sized to provide a lush look once installed. On October 15, 1998, the City's Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed the applicant's cultural resources assessment determining that monitoring is required during grading and large-scale trenching (Minute Motion 98-009). A copy of the Minutes is attached (Attachment 3). Public Notice This map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on October 31, 1998. All property owners within 500-feet were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by Title 13 (Subdivision Ordinance) of the La Quinta Municipal Code and Charter. Written correspondence is attached (Attachment 4). FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: Pursuant to Section 13.12.120 of the Subdivision Ordinance the following findings are provided: General Plan/Zoning Code Consistency The City's General Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential (2-4 dwellings per acre) which allows single family housing. The project density is approximately 3.9 dwelling units per acre which is within the permitted density range. Proposed lots are 7,920 square feet or greater, exceeding RL District requirements of 7,200 square feet. Tract Design /I rnproverne nts Off -site improvements required of the project are raised landscaped median and parkway improvements. The proposed improvements are consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Perimeter tract fencing for the project has not been submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission. The developer has requested that this element of the project be approved when the Site Development Permit is processed. The developer recognizes that decorative fencing compatible with the Topaz development to the north is required, and that view fencing shall be used adjacent to the retention basin to provide visual interest into this walled development as required by Policy 3-4.1.14 STPCTr27519-28, RESOTTM27519-28, CONDTr.27519- 28 Page 3 of 4 of the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Open fencing maybe used in combination with low-level masonry walls to accomplish this objective. CONCLUSION: Tentative Tract Map 27519 has been designed in compliance with requirements contained in the City's General Plan, Zoning Code and Subdivision Ordinance. Findings as noted in the attached Resolutions for a recommendation of approval can be made. The map, as conditioned, is consistent with the existing tracts in the immediate area. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-_, recommending to City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 98-370, subject to the attached findings and mitigation monitoring program; and, 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-_, recommending to the City Council conditional approval of Tentative Tract Map 27519, subject to the attached findings and conditions. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. TTM 27519 Exhibit (Reduced) 3. HPC Minutes of October 15, 1998 4. Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Todd Hagey dated Oct. 29, 1998 5. Large Exhibits (Planning Commission Only) Prepared by: Greg Tr ell, Associate Planner Submitted by: i Christine di lorio, Planning Manager STPCTr27519-28, RESOTTM27519-28, CONDTr.27519- 28 Page 4 of 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-370 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27519, TO ALLOW THE SUBDIVISION OF 17.6 ACRES INTO 70 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND OTHER COMMON LOTS IN THE LDR ZONING DISTRICT. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-370 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 2,Vh day of November, 1998, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing as requested by Century Crowell Communities on the Environmental Analysis for Tentative Tract Map 27519, located on the west side of Dune Palms Road between Westward Ho Drive and Miles Avenue; and, WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment complies 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 98-370) and has determined that although the proposed subdivision 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 98-370, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, 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 Environmental Assessment; and, WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing, said recommendation for certification was based on findings and subject to certain mitigation measures; and, WHEREAS, the La Quinta Planning Commission on the 24th day of November, 1998, did find the following facts to justify recommendation for certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed tentative tract map will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, with the implementation of mitigation measures. 2. The proposed tentative tract map will not have the potential to achieve short term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful Planning Commission Resolution 98- implementation of mitigation. 3. The proposed tentative tract map will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity. 4. The proposed tentative tract map will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect human, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of mitigation. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, CaDifornia, 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 certification of Environmental Assessment 98-370 for the proposed Tentative Tract Map 27519. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 24`h day of November, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PApcearesTTM 2 7 519.'Npd Appendix I - EA 98-370 Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Tentative Tract Map 27519 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Leslie Mouriquand, Associate Planner (760) 777-7068 4. Project Location: 100 feet south of Desert Stream Drive, west of Dune Palms Road 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Century Crowell Communities 6. General Plan Designation: LDR 7. Zoning RL 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Subdivision of 17.6 acres into 70 single family residential lots and other common lots, including private streets. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. South- golf school and driving range West- retention basin, vacant City park site East- Dune Palms Road, City of Indio -Vacant parcels North- Residential subdivision 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) None have been identified. P:Q,ESLIE\-.ACKI,IST98-369.wpd Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning N Transportation/Circulation Y Public Services Population and Housing X Biological Resources Utilities and Service Systems X Geological Problems Energy and Mineral Resources N Aesthetics X Water Hazards N Cultural Resources Air Quality N Noise Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared 11 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because 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. E I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (be) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. 11 Signature Printed Name Date For -2- Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on - site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. See the sample question below. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 7) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different ones. P:\I.ESIJE\EACKI,IST98-369.wpd -3- sample question: L IL Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Landslides or mudslides? (1,6) (Attached source list explains that 1 is the general plan, and 6 is a USGS topo map. This answer would probably not need further explanation.) LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source#(s): ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( I I I I X c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) X d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? ( ) X e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: 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? ( ) III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( lx� I I- I I X -1 P A.ESLIF.\F.AC KLIST98-369.wpd sz LMA Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): 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? WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? ( ) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ( ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact I I I I X--1 1XI e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ( ) X P:\LES1JE\FACKMST98-369.wpd 6 V VL Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 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 X capability? ( ) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) AIR QUALITY Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) X d) Create objectionable odors? ( TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) T -1 M�M= b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) X c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( d) Insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? ( ) M�M -6 VII. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): c) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) X g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? ( ) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: M�m 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)? ( c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ( e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( VIIL ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? X c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? P:\I.F.SI.IE\EACKI.IST98-369.wpd -7 0 0 XL Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 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? ( I I I I X c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ) X d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? I X 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? ( ) 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'? ( ) M�m Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Mitigated Impact Impact XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) X b) Communications systems? ( ) X 7 -1 c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( I I X d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) X e) Storm water drainage? ( ) X f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) X g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) X XIH, AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) X b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( I X c) Create light or glare? ( ) X XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( I I I X b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( I I X P:\I,F,SI,IF,\FACKI,IST98-369.wpd '9 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): c) Affect historical resources? ( d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) X XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) X b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare to endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) X d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directory or indirectly? P: LF,SI.IF.\FACKI,IST98-369.wpd -10 XVIL 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 addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards. and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated." describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. P:\I,ESI,IE\i ACKI.IST98-369.wpd INITIAL STUDY - ADDENDUM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-370 Tentative Tract 27519 Century -Crowell Communities Prepared ed by: City of La Quinta Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 November 20, 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 Hazards .................................... 25 3.10 Noise......................................26 3.11 Public Services ................................ 26 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 ANALYSIS ................................ 37 IIAEA99-370Centurympd 2 1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW The purpose of this Initial Study is to identify the potential environmental impacts of a proposed Tentative Tract Map 27519 to subdivide 17.6 acres into seventy single family residential lots and lettered lots for private streets, landscaping and a retention basin. The parcel involved in the development is identified as Assessors Parcel Number 604-061-009. The project site is located on the west side of Dune Palms Road between Westward Ho Drive and Miles Avenue. The subdivision will be a gated community with private roads. 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 Tentative Tract Map 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 requests. 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 proposed development; To enable the applicant, or the City of La Quinta, to modify the requests, mitigating adverse acts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the projects 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 review of the Tentative Tract Map; To provide documentation for the findings in a Negative Declaration that the Tentative Tract Map will not have significant effects on the PAEA98-370Centurympd 3 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 Tentative Tract Map 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 related to geological problems, water, transportation/circulation, biological resources, noise, public services, aesthetics, and cultural resources, and recreation issues contained in the Environmental Checklist. The degree of some of these adverse impacts is significant, however, with the recommended mitigation measures, the level of significance will be reduced to less -than - significant levels. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be recommended for this project, subject to conditions of approval and mitigation measures. An EIR will not be necessary. 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. 2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed Tentative Tract 27519 would create 70 single family residential lots for market rate sale, within a gated development. 11:U?A98-370Century. wpd 4 2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed development will operate as a single family residential subdivision within a gated community. 2.4 OBJECTIVES The objectives of the proposed Tentative Tract 27519 are to provide single family residential units for sale. 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 Tentative Tract Map will require discretionary recommendation of approval by the Planning Commission, and approval by the City Council. Certification of a Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-370 must be determined prior to action on the subdivision or development approvals. 2.6 RELATED PROJECTS There are no other current applications related to this project. This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the land use and subdivision design approval of the proposed tentative tract. 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 subdivision. Thresholds of significance are defined either by standards adopted by responsible or trustee agencies, or by referring to criteria in CEQA (Appendix G). Mitigation measures are discussed for each issue and are formalized in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan that is a part of the project conditions of approval. 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) PAEA98-370Centurympd 5 to approximately 10,000 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 in the distant southeast, the San Bernardino Mountains to the northeast. The San Andreas fault transects the northeastern edge of the valley. Local Environmental .Setting The local setting for the project is a desert parcel with small sand dunes that overlay the ancient Lake Cahuilla shoreline. Elevations on the parcel vary with an average of 63-feet above mean sea level. The proposed project is located near the northern portion of the City, north of the Garry Hopkins Golf School and the La Quinta High School. Parcels to the east, within the City of Indio, have not been developed. To the north and west are recently developed residential areas. To the southeast is an older residential area. To the Southwest is a vacant parcel owned by the City and designated for a future park site. A. Would the project conflict with the general plan designation or zoning? No Impact. Adjacent land uses and their designations to the subdivision boundary consist of Low Density Residential (RL) and Park (P) zoned developed residential and vacant residential parcels to the west. The La Quinta Golf Ranch is located to the south. The General Plan land use designations are compatible with the zoning designations for the surrounding parcels. These adjacent land uses and their designations are compatible with the proposed residential land use of Tentative Tract 27519. The subject property is designated as Low Density Residential (LDR) on the City's General Plan, and Low Density Residential (RL) on the City's Zoning Map. There are no adverse impacts or conflicts identified for this request, thus, no mitigation is required for this issue. 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 the proposed Tentative Tract Map. 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 development does not conflict with the above referenced documents adopted by the City Council. Specific environmental issues could have impacts that will be individually mitigated by measures identified in this document. No mitigation is required for this issue. C. Would the proposal be incompatible with existing land use in the YA FA98-370Century.wpd 6 vicinity? No Impact. The proposed development is a continuation of existing and planned development in the general area. There are no impacts identified for this issue, and no mitigation is required other than the development standards for projects in the RL Zoning District. D. Would the project affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? No Impact. Historically, there has been farming activity in several sections of the City. The area of proposed Tentative Tract Map 27519 has been under agriculture in the past, as indicated in the cultural resources report. Active farming in the area ceased many years ago in anticipation of development. Thus, the impact on prime agricultural resources or operations in the immediate area has already occurred (Sources: La Quinta General Plan; Site Survey). No mitigation measures are required for this issue. E. Would the project disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income minority community)? No Impact. The proposed development will be developed with single family residential units for general market sale on land that has been designated for such development since at least 1992. Existing single family residential land uses are located to the north of the project site. A golf school exists to the south located on RL District property. The proposed gated development will not affect the physical arrangement of the existing or planned nearby neighborhoods as it is adjacent to Dune Palms Road, and does not propose to disrupt or divide the existing circulation system (Sources: Site Survey; TTM 27519). No mitigation measures are required for this issue. 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. The current population is estimated at 20,444. 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, and by 2010, the population could be 32,786 (Source: Community Development Department, 1998). PAEA98-370Century.%vpd 7 The average age of a City resident is 32.2 years. Persons over the age of 45 make up 27% of the City's population. The average household income is $56,126 (Source: U. S. Census). In addition to permanent residents, La Quinta has approximately 9,300 seasonal residents who spend three to six months in the City. With more resort opportunities being created in the City, the numbers of visitors increases. It is estimated that 30% of all housing units in the City are used by seasonal residents (Source: Community Development Department, 1998). 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 values in La Quinta are approximately $110,000 which is lower than the average for Riverside County ($115,240), and less than other Southern California counties and the state median price of $177,630 (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 21 % are college graduates (Source: 1990 Census/Estimates). Local Environmental Setting A. Would the project cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? No Impact. The development planned for the proposed project will ultimately result in the development of 70 new single family units. The proposed project is projected to have a 2.85 per unit population, for a total population of approximately 199.5 people. The potential population of this project has been included in the 1992 General Plan analysis and associated EIR. Therefore, this issue has been previously considered by the City Council and does not require additional study or mitigation. Temporary construction -related jobs will be created as the new units are built. A limited number of new permanent or part time jobs will be created as a result of the project related to landscaping and maintenance of the development. No jobs are anticipated to be lost as a result of the project. New jobs will benefit the community, and result in a positive economic impact. No mitigation measures are required for this issue. PAF:A99-370Centurv.wpd 8 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. It is anticipated that because the project will have cumulative growth inducing impacts, the project will also result in an increase in the growth rate of the population in the area. This anticipated growth has been planned for in the 1992 La Quinta General Plan, and is considered minor relative to surrounding planned development (Source: 1992 General Plan and EIR). No mitigation measures are required for this issue. C. Would the project displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? No Impact. The proposed project will not have an impact upon existing housing, as there are no existing housing units on the subject property (Sources: Site visit; Brock, 1998). No mitigation measures are required for this issue. 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. Local Environmental Setting A review of historical aerial photographs indicates that the project area has been vacant for many years. The elevation of the property ranges from 52 to 68 feet above mean sea level (Source: USGS La Quinta 7.5' Quad Map, TTM 27519). The project site is currently vacant and the majority of the ground surface is covered with sparse desert brush, short grasses, weeds, and debris. There is evidence of previous citrus trees including scattered tree trunks/roots and windrows from previous clearing operations. The entire 17.6 acre parcel PAEA98-370Centurympd 9 is proposed for development (Source: TTM 27519). There is an inferred earthquake fault line located approximately one-half mile to the southwest of the project site. There has been no recorded activity along this fault line, and faults traces in the area are not considered active. However, the City of La Quinta lies in a seismically active region of Southern California, and major earthquakes are predicted to occur. Major active faults in the region include the San Andreas and Mission Creek faults located several miles to the north and west, and the Elsinore Fault Zone located to the southwest. The project lies within Groundshaking Zones IV of the Modified Mercalli Scale, with Zone XII being the most hazardous. Very strong groundshaking, as well as the possibility of ground rupture, can occur during a major earthquake along these regional faults and represent the primary source of geologic hazard for the City. Should groundshaking occur, the grain size distribution and unconsolidated nature of alluvial sediments located within the City contributes to the potential for ground rupture, liquefaction and dynamic settlement, landsliding and geologic instability (Sources: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan; 1992 La Quinta General Plan; 1992 La Quinta MEA). A geotechnical reconnaissance investigation was conducted for the project by Sladden Engineering, in October 1998. Borings were drilled for soil profiling and sampling. The borings indicate the site soils to be Silty Sands (SM) to Sandy Silts (SP). Expansion testing indicates that the sands are non -expansive and fall within the "very low" expansion category in accordance with the Uniform Building Code classification system. All indications are that the soils on the site will allow for the proposed residential development, if the recommendations of the report are implemented. A. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: fault rupture? Less Than Significant Impact. The seismically -induced ground rupture, or earth cracking is not considered a significant hazard due to the absence of known active faulting located within City boundaries. Ground rupture produced through groundshaking of regionally active faults is not considered likely, although the possibility cannot be entirely discounted (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA). There is no feasible mitigation for this issue, other than construction to Zone IV Seismic Standards as outlined in the Uniform Building Code. B. Would the project results in or expose people to potential impacts Involving seismic ground shaking? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed subdivision is located in Groundshaking Zone IV, which indicates that there is a potential for hazardous groundshaking from seismically induced earthquakes. Mitigation for IIAFA99-37OCenturV wpd 10 this potential hazard consists of constructing all habitable structures to specific standards for Seismic Zone IV, as outlined in the Uniform Building Code. C. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: ground failure or liquefaction? No Impact. Liquefaction and ground failure are produced in geologically seismic areas where poorly consolidated soils mix with perched (trapped) groundwater causing dramatic decreases in the elevation of the ground. While groundwater depths can vary significantly over short distances, due to the presence of localized perched aquifers, the presence of known shallow water tables increases the potential for liquefaction throughout the region. The subdivision site is west of the known liquefaction hazard area in the City, thus an adverse impacts are assumed to be less than significant (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). The geotechnical engineering report indicates that the absence of groundwater in the upper 50 feet, the potential for liquefaction and the related surficial affects (liquefaction induced settlement) of liquefaction impacting the site are considered negligible. Groundwater was not encountered during boring work and is expected to be at least 80 feet below the existing ground surface (Source: Sladden Engineering, October 1998). 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 approximately five miles south of the southern boundary of the project (Source: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta USGS 7.5' Quad Map). The man-made lakes within the Lake La Quinta development are not anticipated to be any potential hazard to the proposed Aventine project. No mitigation is required for this issue. E. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving landslides or mudflows? No Impact. The proposed subdivision is not subject to potential mudflows or landslides as the adjacent hills and mountains are formed of rocky granitic material, and are several thousand feet south and southwest of the closest hillsides (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA). 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? PAEA98-370Centurv.dvpd I I Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. As the proposed subdivision is developed there will be slight changes in the topography as a result of grading and excavation. Approved grading plans are required prior to any such activity. The geotechnical engineering report identifies specific hazards and mitigation measures for the proposed development type. This report states that the soil types found on the subdivision area have a moderate potential for wind erosion (defined as wind removal and/or soil accumulation in hummocks up to 24- inches high). In addition, due to silty nature of the surface soils, severe dust storms can be expected locally in areas not covered by vegetation. Therefore, an increase in wind erosion can be anticipated during grading and during development until ground cover is reestablished on the site. Impacts from erosion shall be mitigated by design or by implementation of the approved PM- 10 Mitigation Plan (Chapter 6.16 of the Municipal Code) to be submitted and approved by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. F. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving subsidence of the land? Less Than Significant 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, 1992). The proposed Tentative Tract will not have any significant effects from subsidence hazards if the recommendations of the geotechnical engineering report are implemented. H. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving expansive soils? No Impact. The underlying soils of the site have a low potential for expansion, thus future construction is not expected to be subject to problems from soil expansion. The soil types identified within the project site include fine grained windblown sands, silty sands, and sandy silts. 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; Sladden Engineering, October 1998). Mitigation consists of implementing the recommendations of the projects' geotechnical engineering report for this issue. I. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving unique geologic or physical features? No Impact. The Coral Reef Mountains and Santa Rosa Mountains represent unique geologic features in the La Quinta area. These unique features are PAFsA98-370Centurv.wpd 12 located at least a mile from the project site and will not be impacted by the proposed subdivision (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA). No mitigation is required for this issue. 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 (Source: CVWD). 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 PAEA99-37OCentury.Nvpd 13 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 Engineering for the Coachella Valley Water District, in 1970. Construction was completed in November 1986. Local Environmental Setting The project site does not have any natural standing water. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made reservoir is located approximately 5.25 miles to the south. The Whitewater River channel is located approximately one-half mile to the north of the project site, and is dry except during seasonal storms. The La Quinta Stormwater Channel is located approximately 1 mile to the south of the project site, and 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 City also implements flood hazard regulations for development within flood prone areas (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA). A. Would the project result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed development will require some grading to level the project site. Once structures and street improvements are constructed, there will be changes in the absorption rates and the rate and amount of surface runoff within the project. Storm drain improvements will be constructed to transport water runoff from the entire 17 acres into the proposed retention basin. The retention basin will be 4-foot deep with 4:1 side slopes that will provide 2.62 acre-feet of storage. One foot of free -board is recommended for a total depth of 5-feet. Mitigation will consist of implementing the design of the subdivision pursuant to the requirements of P:\EA98-370Century.wpd 14 the hydrology study prepared by Dudek & Associates, Inc., for Tentative Tract 27519. B. Would the project result in exposure of people or property to water - related hazards such as flooding? Less Than Significant Impact. The area is protected from regional stormwater flows by a system of channels and dikes, and may be considered safe from regional stormwater flows except in rare instances (Source: La Quinta MEA). 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. There are no existing natural bodies of surface water on or adjacent to the project site (Source: Aerial photographs). The proposed project will not have any effect upon surface waters. Runoff from the project site will be required to be directed into the retention system proposed for the project site. D. Would the project result in changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? No Impact. There are no bodies of water on or adjacent to the project site. There are no impacts identified for this issue, and no mitigation is required. E. Would the project result in changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? No Impact. The proposed project will not have any effect upon currents or water movements, as the project site is a dry desert parcel. There are no impacts identified for this issue. 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. The impact of the proposed project on the existing domestic water service will have a cumulative effect upon the subsurface water resources available. The Coachella Valley Water District has not submitted a comment letter for this project as of October 29, 1998. G. Would the project result in altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? PAEA98-370Centurympd 15 No Impact. The depth of local groundwater has been relatively stable since water has been imported from the Colorado River, with the level approximately 80 feet below the surface (Source: Siadden Engineering, October 1998). The Coachella Valley Water District has not submitted a comment letter for this project as of October 30, 1998. H. Would the project result in impacts to groundwater quality? Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the subdivision will include concrete and asphalt pavement of portions of the site, and landscaping areas. This pavement will reduce the absorption ability of the ground. Storm water runoff will be discharged into on -site facilities. Following a heavy rain, contaminates could be transported into the basins that could contribute to groundwater and/or surface water pollution. The use of Best Management Practices as defined by the Regional Water Quality Control Board- Region 7 Colorado River Basin in the application of chemicals, solvents, cleansers, oils, etc. is the only practical mitigation identified. Would the project result in substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development will result in a cumulative use of water resources available for public consumption. The Coachella Valley Water District has not submitted a will serve letter to the City regarding this project as of October 30, 1998. 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. The SCAQMD samples air at over 32 monitoring station in and around the Basin. According PAE.A98-370Centurympd 16 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 Setting The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, which has an arid 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. La Quinta 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development will contribute cumulatively to air quality impacts. However, the threshold for significant impacts from a single family residential development is 170 units. The proposed deveDopment will have 70 single family lots, therefore, there will not be a significant impact in this case (Source: AQMD Draft CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1992). Grading of the project areas will cause temporary adverse impacts on the air quality due to blowing dust and sand, but will be addressed as part of the City's review and approval of a dust control plan, per the City's PM-10 11AFA98-37OCentwy.wpd 17 Ordinance. B. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision would result in new single family residential units in an area with existing and planned residential development. Residential units are sensitive receptors. The addition of new residential units will contribute cumulatively to the air quality impacts in the City. There are no anticipated significant adverse air quality impacts identified with the proposed subdivision. No mitigation is required for this issue. C. Would the project alter air movements, moisture, temperature, or cause any change in climate? Less Than Significant Impact. Moisture content may increase as landscape areas are planted and irrigated. There are no significant climatic changes anticipated with the proposed development. No mitigation is required for this issue. D. Would the project create objectionable odors? No Impact. The proposed development will not result in a land use that might create objectionable odors, such as waste hauling, commercial kitchen odors, 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. No mitigation is required for this issue. 3.6 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Regional Environmental Setting La Quinta is a desert community of over 20,444 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 1 1 1, 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. 11AEA98-370Century.wpd 18 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 1 1 1 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 subdivision is located on the west side of Dune Palms Road, 100 feet south of Desert Stream Drive. Dune Palms Road is a Secondary Arterial with an 88-foot right of way. Desert Stream Drive is designated as a Local Street with a 60-foot right of way. The proposed internal road system will be private and classified as a Local Street. The La Quinta General Plan gives design standards for the various street classifications. The 1992 average daily traffic flow along Dune Palms Road was 600 vehicles. The traffic volume on Dune Palms Road, between Miles Avenue and Westward Ho Drive was counted at 904 vehicles for the a.m. peak and 1,406 vehicles for the p.m. peak, on October 5, 1994 (Source: Counts Unlimited, October 5, 1994). A detailed explanation of buildout traffic conditions and levels of service is found in the La Quinta General Plan (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). A. Would the project result in increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed development is anticipated to generate approximately 700 average daily trips. Street improvements to Dune Palms Road, along the length of the project site, will be required in order to mitigate traffic impacts related to the subdivision. The additional trips are not anticipated to be significant, but rather cumulative to the community. 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 proposed circulation system. The internal roadways will be private. Automobile and motorcycle traffic are the only types of vehicles that typically use private residential streets, with the exception of delivery trucks. P:U:A98-370Centurv.wpd 19 C. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access to nearby uses? No Impact. The project would not be permitted to obstruct emergency access to surrounding land uses. One access is proposed for the project along Dune Palms Road. No additional accesses are required for this project (Source: La Quinta Engineering Department). D. Would the project result in insufficient parking capacity on -site or off - site? Less Than Significant Impact. Parking will be required for each residential unit, which will consist of at least 2-car garages, and driveway parking spaces. On - street parking will be allowed on the private internal roadways as the roadway widths will be 36-feet. E. Would the project result in hazards or barriers for pedestrian or bicyclists? No Impact. It is anticipated that hazards to bicyclists and pedestrians will not be increased significantly as a result of the proposed development because a 8-foot wide sidewalk will be constructed on the west side of Dune Palms Road for the length of the project boundaries (Source: 1992 La Quinta General Plan; TT 27519). F. Would the project result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. There are no proposed bus turn -outs as the SunLine Transit Agency bus system does not have a route near the subdivision, the closest route is along Washington Street, approximately three-quarters of a mile west of the project. The City has not received a letter from SunLine Transit, as of October 28, 1998. No mitigation is required for this issue. G. Would the project result in rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? No Impacts. Where is no rail service in the City of La Quinta. The closest rail line is approximately 2.5 miles to the north of the project site. There are no navigable rivers or waterways, or air travel lanes or airports within the City. Therefore, 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 2.5 miles north of the project site and the Desert Resorts Regional (Thermal) Airport, located approximately 7.5 miles southeast of the project, on Airport Boulevard, in the Thermal area of Riverside County (Sources: La Quinta MEA; USGS La Quinta 7.5' Quad Map; Site Survey). The PAF'A99-370Centuty.wpd 20 proposed development will not impact this issue. 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 project site is located in the Sonoran Desert Scrub ecosystem. The Sonoran Desert Scrub is the most typical environment found in the Coachella Valley desert floor. It is generally categorized as containing plants which have the ability to economize water use, go dormant during periods of drought, or both. 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. Typically, undeveloped land within these ecosystems is rich in biological resources and habitat. 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. Birds and amphibians/reptiles can also be found in the Sonoran Scrub area. 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)? Less Than Significant Impact. The La Quinta General Plan identifies the property as being within the habitat of the Fringe -toed Lizard (Sources: La Quinta MEA). The project site is also within the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Habitat Development Fee area, which serves as mitigation for habitat destruction. For undisturbed land, payment of this fee at a rate of $600.00 per acre shall be the only required mitigation for this species. Staff transmitted a copy of the proposed tentative tract to the California State Department of Fish and Game and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service on September 14, 1998, and has not received any response as of October 30, 1998. I1:\1?A99-370Century.w,pd 21 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. No response has been received from these agencies regarding this project (Source: La Quinta MEA). C. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have locally designated natural communities. (Source: La Quinta MEA). D. Would the project result in impacts to wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? No Impact. There are no known natural wetlands, marshes, riparian communities, or vernal pools on the project site or nearby (Source: Site Visit). E. Would the project result in impacts to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? No Impact. The project site us surrounded by developed parcels and vacant parcels cutting off migration corridors to and from the Coral Reef Mountains and desert wash areas. Wildlife corridors are still open in the Coral Reef Mountains which provide access to the higher mountains to the south. There are no designated corridors in the City's General Plan (Source: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta General Plan, 1992). 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. 11AEA98-370Centwy.vupd 22 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. The MRZ-1 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 (Source: La Quinta MEA; Site Survey). 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, there are goals, objectives, and policies in the General Plan pertaining to conservation of prime soil and mineral resource areas, and energy efficiency. Objective 6-5.1 states, "Where feasible, the City shall conserve prime soil and mineral resources through a variety of alternative means". Policies 6-5.1.1 encourages that areas historically utilized as agricultural production remain as open space as long as possible. Policy 6-5.1 .2 states that Mineral Resource Areas shall be reserved for mineral extraction activities, after which be reclaimed to a similar natural condition. Policy 6-5.1.3 states that the loss of soils through erosion shall be minimized through conservation of native vegetation, use of permeable ground materials and careful regulation of grading practices. Goal 6-6 states that public and private sector development projects which demonstrate that the best available technologies of energy efficiency and energy conservation techniques. Objective 6-6.1 states the City shall encourage that the best available technologies of energy efficiency and energy conservation techniques are incorporated into both public and private sector development projects. Policies 6-6.1.1, 6-6.1.2, 6-6.1.3, and 6-6.1 .4 provide a variety of methods to achieve the stated goal. The project site has no identifiable mineral resources, thus, no mitigation is required. 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 development include air, mineral, water, sand and gravel, timber, energy, and other resources. State of California Title 24 requirements shall be complied with for energy conservation prior to building permit issuance. 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). 11AEA98-370Century.wpd 23 C. Would the proposal result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? No Impact. There are no designated valuable mineral resources located on the project site. The soil type on the project site is classified as Myoma Fine sand, which has some value as fill material for construction projects (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). 3.9 HAZARDS 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 on Interstate 10. 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 area has not been used for any type of manufacturing or industry, other than perhaps agriculture, and there has not been any known dumping of hazardous substances on the property (Sources: Aerial Photos). 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 for grounds maintenance and by residents of the development. No storage tanks of any kind are being proposed for the development. No other risks are anticipated by the development (Source: TT 27519). PA A98-370Century.wpd 24 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 development boundaries, except for adjacent off -site work as is necessary for road improvements, etc. 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. This issue has been reviewed by the Fire Department, with no concerns expressed (Source: Riverside County Fire Department, September 23, 1998). 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 proposed subdivision. 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 subdivision. E. Would the proposal involve increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? No Impact. The proposed subdivision will not have any effect upon fire hazard issues, as the project is not in an area with significant natural fire hazards. The proposed project has been reviewed by the Riverside County Fire Department, and has not expressed any concerns with this issue (Source: Riverside County Fire Department, September 23, 1998). 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 State Highway 1 1 1 and major or primary arterial roadways. PAEA99-37OCentury.wpd 25 Local Environmental Setting The ambient noise level at the project site is dominated by vehicle traffic noise from Dune Palms Road. Residential areas are considered noise -sensitive land uses, especially during the nighttime hours. The State Building Code requires that the 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. A. Would the project result in increases in existing noise levels? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. A noise study prepared for the proposed subdivision by Gordon Bricken & Associates, (dated October 27, 1998), assessed the potential effects of projected ultimate traffic volumes on the project's proposed residential units adjacent to Dune Palms Road. In summary, noise barriers are required for a number of lots along Dune Palms Road. In order to meet the City's 60 CNEL exterior noise standard, a noise barrier 4- to 6-feet high will be required along Dune Palm Road, according to the report. The barrier may consist of a wall, a berm, or a combination of the two, as long as there is a surface density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and no openings or gaps. The applicant proposes a combination of masonry walls and berms to meet this requirement (Source: Gordon Bricken & Associates, November 2, 1998). B. Would the project result in exposure of people to severe noise levels? Less Than Significant Impact. 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). Construction noise is regulated by Chapter 6.08.050 of the Municipal Code, and serves as mitigation for this project. 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 City Civic Center. The Department utilizes a PAEA98-370Century. wpd 26 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. 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. Additional public schools are being planned for construction by the State of California. The City is also within the College of the Desert Community College District (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992) . 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 (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). PAEiA98-370Century.wpd 27 Local Environmental Setting There are two City fire stations, one located on Frances Hack Lane, near Avenida Bermudas, and the second station at the corner of 54th Avenue and Madison Street. There is another fire station located on 42"d Avenue, within the unincorporated county area, that is closest to 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 Desert Sand Unified School District. 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. A response to the proposed single family residential development was received from the Fire Marshal on September 23, 1998, and are on file in the Community Development Department. The proposed development will cumulatively increase the need for fire protection services, however, this increase is not anticipated to be significant with the implementation of the fire protection measures stated in the above referenced letter. Conditions to mitigate the project are proposed. 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. The Riverside County Sheriff's Department responded on September 18, 1998, that they have no negative comments regarding Tentative Tract 27519. There will be cumulative impacts on police protection services to the community with the addition of 70 new single family houses. No mitigation is required for this issue. C. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to school services? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. A comment letter was received from the Desert Sands Unified School District, dated September 17, 1998. The letter indicates that there will be a potential impact on the school system. Mitigation for this impact is the payment of the state mandated school impact fee at the time of issuance of building permits. There is no evidence to show that State mandated school fees will not be adequate to address impacts to school facilities, in that the proposed subdivision as designed does not affect the current land use as it would be assessed at time of development, whether or not the project was implemented. No additional mitigation is required for this 11:U:A99-37OCentury.wpd 28 issue. 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. Development of the proposed single family project will result in the incremental increase in maintenance of public facilities especially local roads due to the increase in traffic. To mitigate this impact, the applicant shall pay infrastructure fees in accordance with the City's adopted program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits for regional City improvements. 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. Development of the proposed project will result in an incremental increase in the demand for other governmental services. Building and engineering plan checking and inspections, and planning review needed for the project will be partially offset by application, permit and inspection fees charged to the applicant and contractors. 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. 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 three landfills within the Coachella Valley. P:V:A98-370Century.wpd 29 Local Environmental Setting The project is adjacent to vacant areas on the west and east. The site is a former homestead that was under agriculture. The existing house was demolished. There are existing overhead lines along the east side of Dune Palms Road. A. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to power and gas service? Less Than Significant Impact. Electricity for the subdivision is provided by Imperial Irriga*Jon District (IID). The system was expanded in the mid-1980's to provide adequate service to the existing and anticipated development within La Quinta. The project will cumulatively impact electrical service to the area. The applicant will be required to coordinate the electrical engineering for the project with IID, prior to on -site construction. A natural gas line is located along Dune Palms Road (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). B. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to communication systems? Less Than Significant Impact. With development will result in an incremental need for additional communication systems for telephone and television cable services. The applicant will have to coordinate with the providers of these services, prior to on -site construction. A General Telephone Company substation is located across from the project site, on the east side of Dune Palms Road. 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. The proposed development is anticipated to result in cumulative impacts upon the water treatment and distribution facilities. The Coachella Valley Water District is the agency to provide domestic water and sanitation service to the project site in accordance with the current regulations. The regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the developer. The applicant will have to coordinate with CVWD for any additional facilities needed for continued development as mitigation for this issue. A Water trunk line is located along Dune Palms Road (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). D. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to sewer services or septic tanks? PA :A99-37OCcntury.%�pd 30 Less Than Significant Impact. It is not anticipated that there will be a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the sewer systems that would service the proposed subdivision. The applicant will have to coordinate with, and meet any requirements of, CVWD for sewer facilities. E. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to storm water drainage? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision has been designed to allow storm water drainage to flow into the retention basin to be located near the northeast corner of the project. The preliminary hydrology analysis prepared for retention basin sizing indicates that a one acre, 5-foot deep retention basin is required for the proposed project (Source: Dudek & Associates, Inc., October 8, 1998). F. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to solid waste disposal? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision will require solid waste disposal services from Waste Management of the Desert, the current purveyor of solid waste collection, as new residential units will be added to the City. No comment has been received regarding this project, as of October 30, 1998, from Waste Management. G. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to local or regional water supplies? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision will be served by existing domestic water wells and supplies. The project will have a cumulative impact on the local and regional water supplies, but not a significant effect. 3.13 AESTHETICS 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 north -central portion of the City. Views from the project site consist of the Santa Rosa and Coral Reef Mountains to the south and southwest, and the open valley floor to the north and east and north. Point Happy, a prominent geological point, is located slightly over one mile to the west (Source: Site Survey; La Quinta MEA). PAF'A98-370Centurv. wpd 31 A. Would the project affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the Native Vegetation Type of visual impact area, as indicated on the 1992 La Quinta General Plan Master Environmental Assessment/ Environmental Impact Report Visual Assessment. This designation is defined as having a high sensitivity for visual impacts, having low visual screening and vacant land. There will be cumulative impacts as the proposed project will add more structures to the urban environment. Since 1992, the immediate area around the project site has been developed with residential subdivisions and a public high school that have impacted the natural visual quality. The proposed subdivision is limited to 2- story single family residences by the development standards of the RL Zoning District. It is anticipated that one and/or two-story houses will be constructed on the 70 proposed lots. The height of the anticipated subdivision is within the accepted and planned for development of the immediate area. B. Would the project have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development of the subdivision will be required to comply with architectural and landscaping policies and ordinances of the Low Density Residential Zoning District standards in effect at the time of development. The proposed subdivision is anticipated to be developed with one and two story single family houses, not exceeding 28 feet in height. Development of the proposed project will result in incremental increases in buildings and landscaping, all subject to review and approval by the City to ensure a pleasing design and compatibility with the styles of desert architecture and landscaping found in La Quinta. The proposed tentative tract is not anticipated to have a significant adverse impact to this issue, but rather a cumulative impact as more structures are added to the urban area. No significant adverse impact is anticipated for this issue. C. Would the project create light or glare? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed subdivision will lead to development that will potentially create additional light and glare in the community. Anticipated single family houses will include exterior security and 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 lighting requirements in Section 9.60.160 and other policies of the City, in order to reduce anticipated impacts. 11:11:A98-370Ccntun'.v,pd 32 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 northern portion of the City. There are numerous recorded archaeological sites within a one -mile radius of the project. A. Would the project disturb paleontological resources? No Impact. The project area is not within the Lakebed Paleontological area as indicated by the Paleontological Lakebed Determination Map in the Community Development Department. B. Would the project affect archaeological resources? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. An archaeological and historical survey of the project site was completed by Archaeological Advisory Group, in September, 1998, for the proposed subdivision. The report of this study was reviewed and accepted by the City's Historic Preservation Commission, at their meeting of October 15, 1998. The survey did not result in the discovery of any archaeological or historical sites, features, or isolates. The property was a part of a 1926 homestead grant patent to Howard Ames. No structures are present on the property today. However, because of the potential of the area to contain subsurface prehistoric or historical archaeological resources, the report recommends that rough grading and major trenching be monitored by a professionally -qualified archaeologist. To mitigate this potential, the project will be conditioned for monitoring of the rough grading and major trenching. C. Would the project affect historical resources? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. There were ruins of historic resources identified during the cultural resources survey of the project site. However, the structures had been demolished in past years, and there are no existing structures on the project site. The potential exists for subsurface historic deposits exists, for which the proposed project would impact. (Source: Archaeological Advisory Group, October, 1998). Grading activities will be monitored for archaeological resources, which will provide a mitigation contingency if any historic resources are exposed at that time. J)AEA98-370Century.wpd 33 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 area. 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 within the project boundaries or adjacent parcels. 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 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 a vacant parcel that was once a homestead farm. There are no designated or existing recreation facilities or opportunities on the project site. There is a City -owned, future park site located adjacent to the property to the southwest. A. Would the project increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. The increase in demand for park and recreation facilities resulting in the need for dedication of parkland is estimated to be 3 acres per 1,000 in population. Based upon that State Department of Finance figure of 2.85 ,persons per household, the population of the 70-lot, 17.6 acre subdivision could be approximately 200 at buildout, warranting the dedication of parkland to the City or payment of in -lieu fees. Because no public parks will be built on -site, this project will be required to submit payment of in -lieu parks and recreation fees. B. Would the project affect existing recreational opportunities? Less Than Significant Impact. The development will contribute additional users to existing recreation facilities located elsewhere within the City, resulting in a cumulative impact. Payment of the in -lieu fees will off -set these impacts by 1'AHA98-370Century.% pd 34 making funds availabVe for construction of additional parks and other recreation facilities. The proposed subdivision will not have significant adverse impacts on the environmental issues addressed in the checklist and addendum, that can not be mitigated to insignificant levels. 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 Tentative Tract 27519 will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, with the implementation of mitigation measures. • The proposed Tentative Tract 27519 will not have the potential to achieve short term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful implementation of mitigation measures. • The proposed Tentative Tract 27519 will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned for proposed development in the immediate vicinity, and the implementation of mitigation measures. • The proposed Tentative Tract 27519 will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect human, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of mitigation measures. A. Earlier Analysis 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. 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. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan os attached to this Environmental Assessment. The Conditions of Approval also contain many of the required mitigation measures. 11AFA99-37OCentumvpd 35 ON 0 C? 00 cn CA y N cn cn N O w ooz x A U w w F Q z A d a U U U W E-- U z H C7 z c� �o zz 0 0 w� �a 0 fb d� ~ �O a � W R M z o' W Q Q z 0° ¢A av Ox U U Q a w H as U z H z_ �o zz 0 0 w� xa O w G7 .ti w W E- Q z ¢Q a• U � W OU z �s b z mo ow ow � � a p U W ¢ Q z ¢Q a� U U U L� 'O A � z clP z co A UAA� R'ay �� O N O N y rA aoclb z o a C7 .� F" 'o a M A 0 co .., w Q z ¢Q ax U U U ^o a w V �• V z z � � Con 0 �os�Aa UAA ea�a.. .c co co z O H cy ° Q �n w G r•, W d Q dQ av U U o a z mo � u" �AUAA z � u .c o � ao �z CO ��ed o x H 4.4vt rn N H H E� A U pq U O� vU a� U � W u c� o oa a� qo �� a � UAA�A W o w rA o a wco �cl r� U►.7 OF �,� � C�►.] as rn N F A Uz p�q d A O� UU v c� a� �o o� a� a0 w w io br '� d M o z o •5 z Co rn N f-" F"' F A U pq �WAW � x WU Ov U G7 L7 �O O� a�W� a0 w � � � �,,, Q '� o V d � � O+ � z � F d � � ,� �7 � N �*" .. •�, E-' �j d °" as M z o � za F A v� �A �WU OU � N U o� zF u F � e� a 0 0 a G� UAAW dv�'Na ON N F' E� A V p�q a U UU p�WW o � � o U � a w G7 `� o ° G7 W a0 �b LZ Q •� � � c p �� u � W rn N F A U O� UU V G7 �O O� w � � a a� � z C40 a M z o z co F A V pq �A a� U O� UU s� a CO V G7 EEO ern � b log a ° ea^t3 � w UAAraA a� O ON N f-" A V p�q a v O� UU u 0 a� ao°A 08•o�w�s3 L7 a� �o a O w o � U�1A � W a u �7 =. low F >, F Uaj d 4 c Maid s: Oh cQ rn kn r- �N+ F A U p�q �WA �x U O� vU U G7 �o o� a� a� O w o z O a PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27519 TO ALLOW A 70-LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS COMMON LOTS FOR STREETS, DRAINAGE, AND LANDSCAPING ON 17.6 ACRES, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF DUNE PALMS ROAD APPROXIMATELY 100-FEET SOUTH OF DESERT STREAM DRIVE CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27519 APPLICANT: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission for the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 241h day of November, 1998, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to review the request for a 70-lot single family subdivision and additional common lots on 17.6 acres generally located to the west of Dune Palms Road, approximately 100-feet south of Desert Stream Drive, more particularly described as: Assessor's Parcel Number 604-061-009; Portion of SE 1 /4 of the SW 1 /4 of Section 20, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, County of Riverside, California WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended, Resolution 83-63, in that the Community Development Director has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 98-370) and has determined that the proposed project could have an adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case, because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map 27519, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be filed. WHEREAS at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said Tentative Tract Map 27519: A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan, Zoning Code, and Subdivision Ordinance. The property is designated Low Density Residential (LDR) by the General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2.0) permitting single family projects of two to four units per acre pursuant to Policy 2-1.1.5. The proposed density is less than four dwelling units per acre, an allowable density for LDR areas. AAResopcTr275 ] 9.wpd (28) The RL District (Low Density Residential) permits single family housing, provided lots are 7,200 square feet or larger unless a specific plan is prepared. Proposed lots are greater than 7,200 square feet as required by Section 9.30.030 of the Zoning Ordinance. Conditions are recommended to insure compliance with City Code requirements. B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan. All streets and improvements in the project, as conditioned, will conform to City standards as outlined in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance. All on -site streets are private and designed in accordance with Chapter 3.0 of the General Plan Circulation Element. Decorative perimeter fencing shall be constructed for the development consistent with Policy 3.4.1.14 of the General Plan, including opening view fencing to lessen effect of the walled community and its relationship with adjacent properties. C. The design of the subdivision, or the proposed improvements, are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The vacant, previously disturbed site is suitable for low density residential development based on the recommendations of Environmental Assessment 98- 370. Development will not cause substantial environmental damage, or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat provided mitigation measures are met. Urban improvements are adjoining the property making it conducive for residential development. D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. A one acre retention basin is proposed to contain on -site water flows created by seasonal rains. The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on City, State, and Federal requirements. Infrastructure improvements will be extended to serve the project if not readily adjacent to the site. New improvements required for this project will be compatible with the development improvements to the north (i.e., Topaz development). E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each residential lot. The project will be instrumental in causing new area -wide public infrastructure improvements to be constructed, which will benefit both existing development A:\ResopcTr27519.wpd (28) and other future development, including but not limited to street improvements and public utility improvements. The design of Tentative Tract Map 27519 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 constitute the finds of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 27519 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 241h day of November, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California AAResopcTr27519.wpd (28) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27519 NOVEMBER 24, 1998 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply. 2. The subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this tentative map or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 3. Tentative Tract Map No. 27519 shall comply with the requirements and standards of § § 66410 through 66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC). 4. The tentative map shall expire within two years unless an extension of time is applied for and granted by the City Council. 5. 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 • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. 1 The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the Notice of Intent received from the CWQCB prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site. PROPERTY RIGHTS 6. 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, prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or a waiver of parcel map. Conferrals shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant easements to the City for emergency vehicles and for access to and maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of essential improvements located on street, drainage or common lots or within utility and drainage easements. 7. Prior to approval of a final map, parcel map or grading plan, the applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur. 8. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property owners. 9. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. 10. Dedications required of this development include: A. Dune Palms Road - 44' half of 88' right-of-way. B. On -site streets - 37' right-of-way. C. Applicant shall dedicate a 10' easement for pedestrian access to and from the proposed City park site located adjacent to the southerly west boundary of the proposed development Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for entry drives, dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. If the City Engineer determines that access rights to proposed street rights of way shown on the tentative map are necessary prior to approval of final maps dedicating i the rights of way, the applicant shall grant interim easements to those areas within 60 days of written request by the City. 11. The applicant shall dedicate utility easements as necessary to provide 10' of width outside of street and sidewalk improvements along both sides of all private streets 12. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as follows (listed setback depth is the average depth if meandering wall design is approved): A. Dune Palms Road - 10 feet Setbacks shall apply to all frontage including, but not limited to, remainder parcels, well sites and power substation sites. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall dedicate blanket easements for those purposes. 13. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to the following property from all frontage except entryways shown on the approved tentative map or as approved by the City Engineer: A. Dune Palms Road B. Proposed City park site. 14. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 15. 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. FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAP(S) 16. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, on storage media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. If the map was not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the map. IMPROVEMENT PLANS 17. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans shall have 3 signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development 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. 18. 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. 19. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as - constructed conditions. If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 20. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 21. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of improvement costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, 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. 0 22. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (plot plans, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site improvements and common improvements (e.g., retention basins, perimeter walls & landscaping, gates) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first phase unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase and subsequent phases unless a construction phasing plan is approved by the City Engineer. 23. 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 or final building inspections or otherwise withhold approvals related to the development of the project until the applicant makes satisfactory progress on the improvements or obligations or has made other arrangements satisfactory to the City. GRADING 24. 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. 25. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the Applicant shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 26. The applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report with the grading plan. 27. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 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 final maps (if any are required of this development) that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 28. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting properties and between separate tracts and lots within this development. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within a tract, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. If compliance with this requirement is impractical, the City will consider and may approve alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 29. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications, stamped and signed by a California registered civil engineer or surveyor. E The certifications shall list approved pad elevations, actual elevations, and the difference between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the following: 30. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 31. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm (the design storm) shall be retained within the development unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. 32. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual -lot basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for lots 2 %Z acres in size or larger or where the use of common retention is impracticable. If individual -lot retention is approved, the applicant shall meet all individual -lot retention provisions of Chapter 13.24, LQMC. 33. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated, unimpeded overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. 34. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 35. Retention facility design shall be based on site -specific percolation data which shall be submitted for checking with the basin plans. The design percolation rate shall not exceed two inches per hour. 36. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. Maximum retention depth shall be six feet for common basins and two feet for lot -by -lot retention. 37. Nuisance water shall be retained on -site. A trickling sand filter and leachfield of a design approved by the City Engineer shall be installed to percolate nuisance water. The sand filter(s) shall be designed to infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft (of landscape area) and to accommodate surges of 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. 38. In developments for which security will be provided by public safety entities (e.g., the La Quinta Safety Department or the Riverside County Sheriff's Department), retention basins shall be visible from the adjacent street(s). No fence or wall shall be constructed around basins unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. R UTILITIES 39. Existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv are exempt from this requirement. 40. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 41. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. Any property within this development which has not been subdivided in accordance with this tentative map 60 days after the program is in effect shall be subject to the program. 42. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements shall conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Dune Palms Road (Secondary Arterial): Construct 32 foot half of 64 foot (curb face to curb face) improvement plus 8 foot sidewalk. If approved street grades differ from existing grades, the applicant shall install a 20' northbound lane as a part of the street improvements. B. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Entry drive design shall be approved by the City Engineer, and shall conform with the following criteria: A. The entry drive shall have stacking space outside the Dune Palms Road right-of-way for a minimum of three vehicles. B. Drive shall be designed to allow U-turns for rejected vehicles without interference with an open exit gate. 2) Applicant shall construct a 10' wide minimum, gated pedestrian access to the proposed future city park site at the southerly west boundary of the development. 3) Residential - 36 feet wide if double loaded (building lots on both sides), 32 feet if single. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, turn knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved 7 construction plans may warrant additional street widths as determined by the City Engineer. 43. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs, and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 44. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks). 45. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by California -registered professional engineer(s). 46. Street right of way geometry for culs de sac, knuckle turns and corner cutbacks shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 47. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations which convey water without ponding and provide lateral containment of dust and residue for street sweeping. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to normal curbing prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot. 48. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections are 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" 49. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. 50. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly - maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the tract or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPING 51. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. 52. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit plans for approval by the Community Development Department prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking is complete, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for signature by the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 53. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 54. 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 5-feet of curbs along public streets. 55. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, common basins and park areas shall be designed with grades and turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor -mounted equipment. 56. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. 57. The applicant shall construct perimeter walls and required landscaping to enclose the entire perimeter prior to final inspection and occupancy of any homes within the tract unless a phasing plan or construction schedule is approved by the City Engineer and Community Development Director. 58. Landscape berms shall be used throughout the parkway landscaping as required by Section 9.60.240(F) of the Zoning Ordinance. 59. Mature trees shall be installed along Dune Palms Road (e.g., minimum 1 .75" to 3" diameter trunk width per tree type). Vandal proof ground mounted lighting shall be used periodically to accent the parkway trees. Shrubs shall be clustered to form distinctive design themes. 60. Front yard landscaping for future houses shall consist of a minimum of two shade trees (15 gallon with 1 " diameter trunk) and 10 five -gallon shrubs. Three additional 6 15 gallon trees shall be required for corner lot houses. All trees shall be double staked to prevent wind damage. Trees and shrubs shall be watered with emitters or bubblers. The developer is encouraged to use plants that are native to this area and drought tolerant. 61. Landscape and irrigation improvements shall be installed prior to occupancy of the house. The developer and subsequent property owner shall continuously maintain all required landscaping in a healthy and viable condition. QUALITY ASSURANCE 62. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 63. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other licensed professionals, as appropriate, to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 64. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program but required by the City as evidence that construction materials and methods comply with plans and specifications. Where retention basins are installed, testing shall include a sand filter percolation test, as approved by the City Engineer, after required tract improvements are complete and soils have been permanently stabilized. 65. 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 shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. MAINTENANCE 66. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all required improvements unless expressly released from said responsibility by the City. FEES AND DEPOSITS 67. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. 68. The applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 10 69. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the property owner shall pay a fee of $600.00 per acre for disturbing the habitat area of the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard. 70. Within 24 hours after review by the City Council, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Community Development Department two checks made out to the County of Riverside in the amount of $78.00 and $1,250.00 to permit the filing and posting of the Notice of Determination for EA 98-370. 71. Prior to building permit issuance, the developer shall pay school mitigation fees to the Desert Sands Unified School District based on the State imposed fee in effect at that time. The school facilities fee shall be established by Resolution (i.e., State of California School Facilities Financing Act). 72. Prior to final map approval by the City Council, the property owner/developer shall meet the Parkland Dedication requirements by payment of in -lieu fees as set forth in Section 13.48 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. FIRE DEPARTMENT 73. Fire hydrants in accordance with CVWD Standard W-33 shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1,500 g.p.m. for a 2-hour duration at 20 psi. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of the streets directly in line with fire hydrants. 74. 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 wit 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." 75. The required water system including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. 76. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the construction of the model units only. Plans for a temporary water system must be submitted to the Fire Department for review prior to issuance of building permits. 77. The minimum dimensions for fire apparatus access roads entering and exiting this project shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20-feet in each direction and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. 78. Gate entrances shall be at least two feet wider than the width of the traffic lane(s) serving that gate. All gates providing access from a road to a driveway shall be 11 located at least 40 feet from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop with obstructing traffic on the road. 79. Gates shall have either a secondary power supply or an approved manual means to release mechanical control of the gate in the event of loss of primary power. 80. Install Knox key operated switches, series KS-2P with dust cover, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox Company. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval of mounting location/position and operating standards. Ordering forms are available at the Fire Department. The form must be authorized and signed by the Riverside County Fire Department personnel for the correctly coded system to be purchased. 81. Operation of the Knox key switch shall simultaneously open and control the gates for both directions of travel. 82. Phased improvements shall be approved by the Fire Department. 83. Applicant/developer will provide written certification from the appropriate water company that the required fire hydrants are either existing or that financial arrangements have been made to provide them. ENVIRONMENTAL 84. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the property owner/developer shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Department demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of TTM 27519 and EA 98-370. Mitigation monitoring of the project site during grading is required. 85. Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit, or ground disturbance, mitigation measures as recommended by the Cultural Resources Assessment and Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) for the site shall be completed at the applicant/developer's expense. This consists of having an archaeological monitor on - site during grading and earth disturbance operations. A final report shall be submitted for acceptance by the HPC prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy of the first building. MISCELLANEOUS 86. All agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking purposes. 87. Permanent tract identification signs shall be approved by the Planning Commission (i.e., Business Item). 12 88. Prior to final map approval, proposed street names shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. Three names shall be submitted for each proposed private street. 89. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department for review a copy of the proposed Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC and R's) for the project. Approval of the CC and R's by the City Attorney is required. 90. The prototype house plans for the project shall be reviewed and approved by the Planing Commission pursuant to Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permit) of the Zoning Ordinance. 91. Open fencing shall be constructed along Dune Palm Road adjacent to the retention basin pursuant to General Plan Policy 3-4.1.14. In lieu of open fencing, a combination fence consisting of a low-level masonry wall with tubular steel fencing on top may be permitted, submitted to the approval by the Planning Commission. Rear yard walls constructed for Lots 1 and 2 shall be decorative (i.e., masonry block with stucco coating) and include pilasters spaced at 30-foot intervals. 13 ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT Case: TTM 275.19 0 �a A V r � O • t I a pp7� 1ttlJ00 .47'J�'912/9S9O 1 n F I Y O 4 I <e 1 CL W XAIMO XW ANA I I, O Q It 2 �< W It I m I O y<D Q '• 8 U° Q Ln OZ I • �u }� N 70 WQ hl i O� W • wm D a �F > O I': ^ h O" �% O� Q "VI 0Id 1 Z 14 < z m y I z W qF W ul O ~ F a „ Q o 8�dd "d S Id3 PIT IT g Xi all g. E. a asx-sz: k��ya a -qo a"ia•$q u6$Ss�6d�i I• ' �°g�fz It It 0 1N]Wld'dd3O JNINNdid 1 ATTACHMENT 2 9 dbbl 9 9 100 • 2jA�2O3 tOT QIGO/ 51171'd ,fNllO � a• r• i a. s a;o 1 rw Oe_ 4 to i bead a ;3 w°f 3 i 10 xw to': i Dd 11I toV III•' • � / � rY w to m m- D!°• N Ni N• m8 4" N`- N4 Na� '?• NF8 Od Ni3 — .� — oo.. •vanzr— — � — -- m I Q cc .• I f:f u ATTACHMENT 3 Historic Preservation Conunission October 15, 1998 C. Cultural Resource Assessment (Phase 1) - Tentative Tract 27519. 1. Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand commented on the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Associate Planner Mouriquand said there were no deposits, or prehistoric sites found, but the property was a site of homesteading activities and early agriculture. 3. Commissioner Irwin commented that it had been a citrus ranch. 4. Associate Planner Mouriquand confirmed it was and there was potential for some subsurface, perhaps historic resources. For that reason, monitoring was recommended during the grading. 5. Commissioner Irwin commented on the Eucalyptus tree line and necessary monitoring if grading was to be done there. 6. Clarification of the Eucalyptus tree line was discussed. Commissioner Irwin pointed out they were visible on Page 4, Figure 3 (right hand side). Commissioner Irwin said the stand of Eucalyptus trees were part of the early homestead. It might be possible the land around the Eucalyptus' had not been disturbed since they were planted. 7. Associate Planner Mouriquand asked if there were any special stipulations or conditions needed other than monitoring of the grading with special attention to that area. Commissioner Irwin reaffirmed monitoring with particular attention to that area due to the possibility of a wash located in the area. 8. Commissioner Puente asked what the criteria was to determine work stoppage on a project for archaeological, historical, or paleontological resources. Associate Planner Mouriquand replied that if discovery was made during the monitoring of the grading the project would stop for a short period of time for the archaeologist or historian to confirm the extent of the find. 9. Commissioner Puente also asked about removal of the findings. Planning Manager di Iorio replied it depends on the archaeologist's recommendations and the City staff. Possibly the project could require redesigning, otherwise it would only be recovery and removal. P:\CAROLYN\HPC 101598.wpd Historic Preservation Corn nission October 15, 1998 10. Vice Chairman DeMersman asked if there were any other questions or comments. There being none it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Puente/Irwin to approved Minute Motion 98-009 accepting the Cultural Resource Assessment (Phase 1) - Tentative Tract 27519 Archaeological Report with the recommendation that archaeological monitoring be done with specific attention being paid to the line of Eucalyptus trees. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL A. Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand reviewed the correspondence which included a Call for Entries for the 1999 PreservatiorLDesign Awards and asked if there were any possible entries. Planning Manager di Iorio sai re may be an entry from the Traditions project for Hacienda del Gato. She s ' ey were working with Traditions to gather information for the application. Commissioner to asked if there were any photos of the original house which was the small ding. She had previously seen a photo but could not recall where. Planni ' anager di Iorio thought it might have been in the newspaper. missioner Wright said he had taken photographs of evepolling about three or our years ago and put them in the file befZunderrcornstruction. ven begun. Commissioner Irwin said there was a woodroperty which was the original house and there are pictures of t was a small wooden structure that they lived in while the otheron. Planning Manager di Iorio said they,, e looking for a photograph of the Hacienda that's there now and were not ablaJrocate one. Commissioner Wright commented the pictures he took might be e for that purpose. Associate Planner Mouriquand said she would look for th B. Planning Commissi di Iorio commented on the article, in California Heritage, titled "A New To r Preserving California's Oldest History". Sh ointed out the article talks a the loss of archaeological sites and the recouv4fendation of Land Banking. Vice Chairman DeMersman commented it was pan/and ignificant to preserve our local sites. We have a plethora of archaeological siat's were our history lies. Our archaeological history can not be compared to the east coast where you've got more built environment. Archaeology is really important in this area. P:\CAROLYN\HPC 101598.wpd 4 ATTACHMENT 4 10/29/98 TO: THE LA QUINTA PLANNING COMMISSION REF: CENTURY-CROMWELL COMMUNITIES ITEM: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 27519 MY WIFE AND MYSELF HAVE BEEN FORTUNATE TO LIVE IN THIS BEAUTIFUL CITY AND VALLEY FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS. WITH ALL OF THE MANY HOMES AND COMMUNITIES WITHIN THE CITY ALREADY BEING CREATED AT PRESENT, I DON'T FEEL THAT CRAMMING ONE MORE 70 HOME SINGLE FAMILY TRACT IS NECESSARY. I AM TOTALLY AGAINST ANY APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD ALSO SEE WITH THE MASS GROWTH TO THIS CITY RIGHT NOW THE LAND FOREMENTIONED WOULD BE BETTER USED FOR A RECREATIONAL PARCEL FOR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE CITY TO UTILIZE. AT THE TIME WHEN MY WIFE AND I PURCHASED OUR HOME WE WERE TOLD BY THE SALES REPRESENTATIVE FROM CENTURY HOMES THAT THE PARCEL OF LAND IN QUESTION WAS GOING TO BE A CITY PARK WHERE DID THAT IDEA GO. MY NEIGHBORS, AS WELL AS MYSELF WOULD RATHER SEE THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT TURN THE PARCEL OF LAND BETWEEN WESTWARD HO AND DESERT STREAM INTO A GOLF COURSE. THERE ARE SO MANY OPTIONS FOR THIS PARCEL OF LAND. WHETHER AN 18 HOLE EXECUTIVE COURSE OR STANDARD 9-HOLE GOLF COURSE FOR THE COMMUNITY. THINK OF THE ADDITION REVENUE FOR THE CITY AND THE BEAUTY INWHICH IT WOULD BRING. THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY, TODD AND S NY HAGEY 45-485 DESERT AIR ST LA QUINTA, CA 92253 10 NOVu21998 Lj+ LPLANNINGn ITY OF LAQUATA EPARTMENT s PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-369 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28982 TO ALLOW THE SUBDIVISION OF 10.1 ACRES INTO ONE CONDOMINIUM LOT, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-631 TO CONSTRUCT 160 CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, AND TRACT MAP 24230 AMENDMENT 1 TO ELIMINATE CONDITION NO. 41 PERTAINING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-369 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 241h day of November, 1998, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing as requested by A. G. Spanos on the Environmental Analysis for Tentative Tract Map 28982, Site Development Permit 98-631, and tract Map 24230 Amendment 1, located at the southwest corner of the intersection of 471h Avenue and Adams Street; and, WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment complies 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 98-369) and has determined that although the proposed subdivision, development, and 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 98-369, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission 6d make findings to justify the recommendation for certification of said Environmental Assessment; and, WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing, said recommendation for certification was based on findings and subject to certain mitigation measures; and, WHEREAS, the La Quinta Planning Commission on the 24th day of November, 1998, did find the following facts to justify recommendation for certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1 . The proposed tentative tract map, site development permit, and amendment Planning Commission Resolution 98- will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, with the implementation of mitigation measures. 2. The proposed tentative tract map, site development permit, and amendment will not have the potential to achieve short term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful implementation of mitigation. 3. The proposed tentative tract map, site development permit, and amendment will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity. 4. The proposed tentative tract map, site development permit, and amendment will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect human, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of mitigation. 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 certification of Environmental Assessment 98-369 for the proposed Tentative Tract Map 28982, Site Development Permit 98-631, and Tract Map 24230 Amendment No. 1. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 24`h day of November, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California P:lpcearesTTM28982Aventine.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 98- ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:lpcearesTTM28982Aventine.wpd Appendix I EA 98-369 Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: DSP 98-631, TTM 28982, TM 24230 Amendment #1 Aventine at Lake La Quinta 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner (760) 777-7125 4. Project Location: Southwest corner of 47`h Avenue and Adams Street 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: A. G. Spanos 6. General Plan Designation: HDR (12-16 DU/AC) 7. Zoning RH 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) 160 unit condominium development with administrative and recreation buildings, garages, carports, and open space, in a gated community. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. East: Adams Street, CR vacant South: Dulce Del Mar, RL Lake La Quinta West: RL, Lake La Quinta North: CR vacant, CVWD well facility, 47th Avenue 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits. financing approval. or participation agreement.) P: I.E%I.IElCKI .ISTea98-369a VENT] NE.%kpd Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning Population and Housing X Geological Problems X Water Air Quality Determination Transportation/Circulation Biological Resources Energy and Mineral Resources Hazards Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance Public Services Utilities and Scrvice Systems Aesthetics Cultural Resources Recreation (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because 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 one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (be) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signature Date Printed Name For -I>- Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). Z) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on - site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures. and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. See the sample question below. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 7) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different ones. N:,LESIAE CKI.ISTea98-3G9aVENTINE.wpd -3- Sample question: I. 11. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Landslides or mudslides? (1,6) (Attached source list explains that I is the general plan, and 6 is a USGS topo map. This answer would probably not need further explanation.) LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict NNith general plan designation or zoning'? (Source#(s): ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) X c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) X d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? ( I I X e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: 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? ( ) III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( X I T I X n � rn- P: I.r:S1.IE C hI.IS'I'ea98-369a%'ENI'INE.%kpd -Z Potentially Potentially Significant I,ess'rhan Significant Unless Significant No Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact :Mitigated Impact Impact b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) x c) Seismic ground failure. including liquefaction? ( ) X d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? ( ) X c) Landslides or mudflows? ( )I I I x I f) Erosion. changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) X g) Subsidence of the land'? ( ) X h) Expansive soils? ( ) ti i) Unique geologic or physical features? IV. WATER. Would the proposal 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 c) Changes in currents. or the course or direction of water movements'? ( ) x P: I.ESI.IE,CRI.IS"I'ea9R-3G9a%'EN7'INF,.%Npd ILI V. VI. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Uniess Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 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 X capability? ( ) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies'? ( ) AIR QUALITY Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants'? ( c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature. or cause any change in climate'? ( 1 d) Create objectionable odors'? ( TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion'? ( X� l 1. 1 1 X I - -- I b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g.. farm equipment)? ( ) X c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( d) Insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? ( -6 VII. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): c) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less'rhan Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g.. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) X g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? ( BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal 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)? ( c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g.. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g.. marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ( e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors'? ( VIll. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans'? ( ) I -F--- I I b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? X 7 c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State'? P: I.E.SI,IE,CRLIS'I'ca98-3G9a\'EN'I'INI•:.Nipd -7 IX. X. XI. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: Potentially Potentially Significant I,ess'rhan Significant Unless Significant No Impact :Mitigated Impact impact 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 am' health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ) X d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards'? X c) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees'? L X 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? ( ) c) Other governmental services? ( ) m Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the folloNNing utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) b) Communications systems? ( ) Potentially Potentially Significant I,ess'rhan Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( ) X d) Sewer or septic tanks'? ( ) e) Storm water drainage? ( ) f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) g) Local or regional water supplies'? ( XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) c) Create light or glare? ( ) XIV. CULTURAL, RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) b) Disturb archaeological resources'? ( ) P: I.F.SI.IE,CKI.IS'I'ca98-369a\'EN'I'INE.wpd -9. X V. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): c) Affect historical resources? ( d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values'? ( ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact e) Restrict existing religious or 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? ( XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare to endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals'? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable'? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects. the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) X d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directory or indirect1v9 P:\LESLIE\CKLISTea98-369aVENTINE.wpd -1C XVII. 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 thev are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards. and state whether such effects «ere addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated." describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. P:\LESLIE\CKLISTea98-369aVENTINE.wpd INITIAL STUDY - ADDENDUM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-369 Aventine Tentative Tract 28982 Site Development Permit 98-631 Tract. 24230 (Amendment #1) Applicant: A. G. Spanos Prepared by: City of La Quinta Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 November 20, 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................. 3 1.1 Project Overview ............................................. 3 1.2 Purpose of Initial Study ........................................ 4 1.3 Background of Environmental Review ............................. 4 1.4 Summary of Preliminary Environmental Review ...................... 4 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................... 5 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 ............................................. 6 3 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ............................... 6 3.1 Land Use and Planning ........................................ 6 3.2 Population and Housing ....................................... 8 3.3 Earth Resources ............................................ l0 3.4 Water .................................................... 14 3.5 Air Quality ................................................ 17 3.6 Transportation/Circulation.................................... 19 3.7 Biological Resources ........................................ 21 3.8 Energy and Mineral Resources ................................. 22 3.9 Hazards .................................................. 23 3.10 Noise .................................................... 25 3.11 Public Services ............................................. 26 3.12 Utilities .................................................. 28 3.13 Aesthetics ............................................... 30 3.14 Cultural Resources .......................................... 32 3.15 Recreation...............................................33 4 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE .................... 34 5 EARLIER ANALYSIS ......................................... 35 PAEA99-369Aventine. wpd 2 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW The purpose of this Initial Study is to identify the potential environmental impacts of a proposed development resulting in 160 new single family condominium units with garages, covered parking areas, a swimming pool, basketball court, golf putting area, administrative office, and other accessory amenities, located at the southwest corner of the intersection of 47'h Avenue and Adams Street (A.P. N. 643-090-014). Tentative Tract Map 28982 proposes to subdivide 10.17 acres into one single family condominium residential lot. Site Development Permit 98-631 would ensure that the development and design standards of this Zoning Code, including but not limited to permitted uses, development standards, and supplemental regulations are satisfied. The site development permit process provides a means of achieving this purpose through City review of detailed plans for proposed development projects. The proposed one -bedroom unit will have 792 square feet of living space. There are two two - bedroom unit floor plans: Unit B having 960 square feet, and Unit C with 1, 121 square feet. The applicant proposes to name the development, "Aventine," which will be a single family residential condominium sales program within a gated development. The project site is a part of a previously approved Tract Map 24230, which involved the division of 151 gross acres into 1 multi -family lot at the southwest corner of 47`h Avenue and Adams Street, 3 commercial parcels along the east frontage of Washington Street south of 471h Avenue, and 281 single family residential lots located between these commercial and multi -family areas. TM 24230 was approved by the City Council on July 5, 1989, by Resolution 89-85. The single family development within Lake La Quinta was approved under Tract Map 26152, on July 31, 1990, by Resolution 90-64. This subdivision created 281 lots for single family custom homes on 103.5 acres at the northwest corner of 48' Avenue and Adams Street, south of the proposed condominium project site. In addition, Zone Change 89-037 was approved and changed the zoning designations of the property from R-2-9600, R-2-2500, and R-5 to R-2, R-1, and C-1 to implement a tract map for 281 single family lots, 22.58 acres of commercial retail -office, 10.1 acres for multi -family residential, and a 24-acre lake. The tract map and change of zone were assessed for environmental impacts in Environmental Assessment 89-110, for which a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was certified by the City Council. Subsequently, Tract Map 26152 was approved on July 31, 1990, and is within TM 24230 as a partial resubdivision to adjust multiple residential lot lines. The applicant is also requesting an amendment to Tract 24230 for deletion of Condition No. 41, which sets forth the reservation of a fixed percentage of units for low and moderate income persons. Tract 24230 consists of the Lake La Quinta residential and commercial development and includes the subject parcel of this request. 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 11AEA99-369Aventine.Ntpd 3 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 Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Permit, 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 requests. 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for the proposed development, To enable the applicant, or the City of La Quinta, to modify the requests, mitigating adverse acts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the projects 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 review of the Tentative Tract Map, Tract Map Amendment, and Site Development Permit; To provide documentation for the findings in a Negative Declaration that the Tentative Tract Map, Trat Map Amendment, and Site Development Permit will not have significant effects 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 Tentative Tract Map, Tract Map Amendment, and Site Development Permit applications were 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 related to geological problems, water, transportation/circulation, biological resources, noise, public services, aesthetics, and cultural resources, and recreation issues contained in the Environmental Checklist. The degree of some of these adverse impacts is significant, P: J-'A9R-369Aventine.NNpd 4 however, with the recommended mitigation measures, the level of significance will be reduced to less -than -significant levels. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be recommended for this project, subject to conditions of approval and mitigation measures. 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 1992. 2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed Tentative Tract 28982 would create one single family residential condominium lot within a gated development consisting of 160 residential condominium units with garages and accessory strictures. The project is located to the northeast of the Lake La Quinta development, and all access for the condominiums will be off of 47'h Avenue. The project site is currently vacant land that is a part of Tract Map 24230. 2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed development will operate as a single family residential condominium subdivision within a gated community. 2.4 OBJECTIVES The objectives of the proposed Tentative Tract 28982 and Site Development Permit 98-631 are to provide single family residential condominium units. The request to eliminate Condition #41 of Tract 24230 is to relieve the applicant from the responsibility to provide for affordable housing. 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 Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Permit will require discretionary recommendation of approval by the Planning Commission, and approval by the City Council. Certification of a Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-369 must be determined prior to action on the subdivision or development approvals. I ':\RA99-30 9Aventine. NNpd 2.6 RELATED PROJECTS Proposed Tentative Tract Map 28982, Site Development Permit 98-631, and Tract 24230 Amendment # 1 are companion applications for one project. There are no other current applications related to this project. Tract Map 23240 was approved in 1989, for the Lake La Quinta project, of which the Aventine project site is a part of. SECTION 3: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the land use and subdivision design approval of the proposed tentative tract and site development permit. 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 subdivision. Thresholds of significance are defined either by standards adopted by responsible or trustee agencies, or by referring to criteria in CEQA (Appendix G). Mitigation measures are discussed for each issue and are formalized in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan that is a part of the project conditions of approval. 3.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING Regional Environmental.S'etting 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 approximately 10,000 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 in the distant southeast, the San Bernardino Mountains to the northeast. The San Andreas fault transects the northeastern edge of the valley. Local Environmental.Setting The local setting for Aventine project is a relatively flat desert parcel with small sand dunes that overlay the ancient Lake Cahuilla shoreline. Elevations on the parcel vary with an average of 63-feet above mean sea level. The proposed project is located near the northern -central portion of the City, to the northeast of the Lake La Quinta project. Near the project site are vacant, commercially -designated parcels to the east and north, and developing residential areas within Lake La Quinta to the south and west. The proposed project would not be a part of the Lake La Quinta development, which is a single family, gated community. A. Would the project conflict with the general plan designation or zoning? No Impact. Adjacent land uses and their designations to the subdivision boundary consist P:\FA99-369Aventine.xNpd 6 of Low Density Residential (RL) zoned developed residential and vacant residential parcels to the south and west, vacant Regional Commercial (CR) zoned parcels and a CVWD well site to the north, and Regional Commercial (CR) zoned parcels to the east where an approved auto mall will be located. The General Plan land use designations are compatible with the zoning designations for the surrounding parcels. These adjacent land uses and their designations are compatible with the proposed high density residential land use of Tentative Tract 28982 as the high density residential will serve as a transition between the single family land uses and the commercial land uses. The subject property is designated as High Density Residential (HDR) on the City's General Plan, and High Density Residential (RH) on the City's Zoning Map. A perimeter wall around the proposed project is both required and proposed that will serve to separate the various land uses. The existing zoning and land use designations for the project site were reviewed and approved by the City Council in 1989 when the underlying tract map was approved. EA 98-1 10 states that the density of the Multifamily parcel should be restricted to a maximum use density of 16 units/acre, in accordance with draft Hwy. I I I Policies and the Draft Housing Element Update of 1989. There are no adverse impacts or conflicts identified for this request, thus, no mitigation is required for this issue (Source: EA 89-110; La Quinta General Plan. La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment; La Quinta Zoning Map). 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 the proposed Tentative Tract Map, Tract Map Amendment, and Site Development Permit. 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, EA 98-110, and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The proposed development does not conflict with the above referenced documents adopted by the City Council. Specific environmental issues area could have impacts that will be individually mitigated by measures identified in this document. No mitigation is required for this issue. C. Would the proposal be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? No Impact. The proposed development is a continuation of existing and planned development in the project area (Source: EA 98-110). There are no impacts identified for this issue, and no mitigation is required other than the development standards for projects in the RH Zoning District (Source: La Quinta General Plan, I,a Quinta Zoning Map, EA 98-1 10). D. 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. There is no indication that the project site itself has been tilled, since being graded in 1990. Construction of this project with the accompanying extensions and improvements to the infrastructure system will encourage owners of adjacent properties to develop their land. Active farming in the area ceased many years ago in anticipation of development. Thus, the impact on prime PAEA98-369Aventine xNpd 7 agricultural resources or operations in the immediate area has already occurred. Urban development of particular historically -agricultural lands is essential to achieving the objectives of the adopted La Quinta General Plan (Sources: La Quinta General Plan; Site Survey). No mitigation measures are required for this issue. E. Would the project disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income minority community)? No Impact. Existing single family residential land uses are located to the west and south of the project site. The proposed gated condominium development will not affect the physical arrangement of the existing or planned nearby neighborhoods as it is adjacent to 47`h Avenue and Adams Street, and does not propose to disrupt or divide the existing circulation system (Sources. Site Survey, TTM 28982). No mitigation measures are required for this issue. 3.2 POPULATION AND HOUSING Regional Environmental.4etting 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. The current population is estimated at 20,444. 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, and b_v 2010, the population could be 32,786 (Source: Community Development Department, 1998). The average age of a City resident is 32.2 years. Persons over the age of 45 make up 27% of the City's population. The average household income is $56,126 (Source: U. S. Census). In addition to permanent residents, La Quinta has approximately 9,300 seasonal residents who spend three to six months in the City. With more resort opportunities being created in the City, the numbers of visitors increases. It is estimated that 30% of all housing units in the City are used by seasonal residents (Source: Community Development Department, 1998). 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 values in La Quinta are approximately $110,000 which is lower than the average for Riverside County ($1 15,240), and less than other Southern California counties and the state median price of $177,630 (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% 1'A1`A99-309Aventine.%Npd 8 Native American. The 1990 Census indicates that 81 % of the La Quinta residents are high school graduates and 21 % are college graduates (Source: 1990 Census/Estimates). Local F_nvironrnental.Vetting A. Would the project cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? No Impact. The development planned for the proposed project will ultimately result in the development of 160 new single family condominium units, with garages, covered parking areas, a swimming pool, basketball court, golf putting area, administrative office, and other accessory amenities. The proposed project is projected to have a 2.85 per unit population, for a total population of approximately 456 people. The potential population of this project has been included in the 1992 General Plan analysis and associated EIR. Therefore, this issue has been previously considered by the City Council and does not require additional study or mitigation. Temporary construction -related jobs will be created as the new units are built. A limited number of new permanent or part time jobs will be created as a result of the project related to administration, landscaping and maintenance of the development. No jobs are anticipated to be lost as a result of the project. New jobs will benefit the community, and result in a positive economic impact. EA 98-110 states that Tract 24230 would not alter the location of human population, other than the obvious consideration that the property was vacant and may increase the growth rate of the specific area if the commercial aspect of the tract were developed first. The commercial development would stimulate a need for affordable housing which this project could provide. It is not foreseen that any significant impacts to population growth rate or location will occur. No mitigation measures are required for this issue. 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. If the Aventine project is developed, there will be changes in the location, distribution, and density of population in the project area. It is anticipated that because the project will have growth inducing impacts (see the preceding Land Use section), the project will also result in an increase in the growth rate of the population in the area. This anticipated growth has been planned for in the 1992 La Quinta General Plan, and is considered minor relative to surrounding planned development (Source: 1992 General Plan and EIR). Also see discussion above in Subsection A. No mitigation measures are required for this issue. 1'AEA99-369Aventinc.xvpd 9 C. Would the project displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? No Impact. EA 98-110 stated that the overall project (Tract 24230) could create some demand for affordable housing, above that demand which exists today. The multi -family area should be required to provide affordable units as set forth in Policy #20 of the Draft Policies for the Highway 111 Corridor, and the 1989 Draft Housing Element of the City. A minimum of 5% of the units proposed in the multi -family parcel will be required to be affordable units. It should be noted that the Draft Highway I l l Corridor Plan was not adopted by the City and that there is a recently adopted Housing Element with different policies and programs for affordable housing issues. However, Tract 24230 was conditioned to provide 5% of the total units for the multi -family parcel to be set aside for affordable households. This would amount to 8 of 160 potential units. The proposed project will not have an impact upon existing housing, as there are no existing housing units on the subject property. However, Tract Map 24230 was conditioned to require set -aside housing for low income buyers. Tract Map 24230 was approved by the City Council in 1989, prior to the adoption of the Housing Element in 1995, and certification by the Department of Housing and Community Development on September 11, 1995. The Housing Plan contains several components to achieve a variety and diversity of housing in La Quinta. These components include the provision of adequate housing sites through land use and zoning regulations, land banking, and density bonuses. Provision for very low, low, and moderate income housing is provided for by a redevelopment affordable housing set -aside fund, first-time home buyer down payment assistance programs, mortgage revenue bonds to support the development of owner and rental multiple and single family housing, Section 8 rental assistance, equity sharing, Section 202 elderly or handicapped housing, second units, mortgage credit certificate programs, and other financing and tax credit programs. Additionally, there are provisions for housing rehabilitation, removal of constraints that affect the cost of housing, energy and water conservation opportunities, promotion of equal housing opportunities, and the monitoring and administration of the Housing Element to ensure that it remains viable and useful. Because of the many programs and provisions listed above, the need to uphold conditions place on subdivisions approved prior to the Housing Element requiring set -aside housing is no longer necessary. (Sources: Site visit, Housing Element, 1995).The amendment of Tract 24230 to eliminate Condition #41 should result in no impacts regarding affordalnle housing in the City. No mitigation measures are required for this issue. 3.3 EARTH RESOURCES Regional Environmentul.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 PA'A99-36Mvcntine.«pd 10 thousand feet of Quaternary fluvial, lacustrine, and aeolian soil deposits. Local Environmental ,'Vetting A review of historical aerial photographs indicates that the project area has been vacant for many years. The elevation of the property averages 63 feet above mean sea level (msl), with a range of 57 to 69 feet above msl (Source: USGS La Quinta 7.5' Quad Map).The project site is currently vacant of structures and is fairly level with the exception of some small dunes to approximately two feet in height. Scattered desert vegetation exists throughout the site and landscaping debris was evident in the south-central region of the property (Source: Earth Systems Consultants, July, 1998). The entire 10.17 acres are proposed for development (Source: TTM 28982, SDP 98-631). There is an inferred earthquake fault line located through the area west of the project site, that transects in a northwest to southeast trend. There has been no recorded activity along this fault line, and these faults traces are not considered active. However, the City of La Quinta lies in a seismically active region of Southern California, and major earthquakes are predicted to occur. Major active faults in the region include the San Andreas and Mission Creek faults located several miles to the north and west, and the Elsinore Fault Zone located to the southwest. The project lies within Groundshaking Zones III and IV of the Modified Mercalli Scale, with Zone XII being the most hazardous. Very strong groundshaking, as well as the possibility of ground rupture, can occur during a major earthquake along these regional faults and represent the primary source of geologic hazard for the City. Should groundshaking occur, the grain size distribution and unconsolidated nature of alluvial sediments located within the City contributes to the potential for ground rupture, liquefaction and dynamic settlement, landsliding and geologic instability (Sources: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan, 1992 La Quinta General Plan, 1992 La Quinta MEA). A geotechnical reconnaissance investigation was conducted for the project by Earth Systems Consultants, in July 1998. Borings were drilled for soil profiling and sampling. The borings indicate the site soils to be Silty Sands (SM) to Sandy Silts (ML). Thin layers of clay were encountered in all borings at various depths. The report indicates that the project site has underlying ancient lake deposits. 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 residential development, if the recommendations of the report are implemented. A. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: fault rupture? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development of Tentative Tract Map 28964/Site Development Permit 98-631 could be effected by potential fault rupture hazards in the event of a large earthquake. The seismically -induced ground rupture, or earth cracking is not considered a significant hazard due to the absence of known active faulting located within City boundaries. Ground rupture produced through groundshaking of regionally active faults is not considered likely, although the possibility cannot be entirely discounted (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA, Earth systems Consultants, July 1998, EA 98-1 10). There is no feasible mitigation for this issue, other than construction to Zone IV Seismic Standards as outlined in p E.A98_309Aventinc.Nvpd 1 1 the Uniform Building Code. B. Would the project results in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismic ground shaking? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed subdivision location is on the border between Groundshaking Zones III and IV, which indicates that there is a potential for hazardous groundshaking from seismically induced earthquakes. Mitigation for this potential hazard consists of constructing all habitable structures to specific standards for Seismic Zone IV, as outlined in the Uniform Building Code (Source: EA 98-1 10, La Quinta MEA). C. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: ground failure or liquefaction? No Impact. Liquefaction and ground failure are produced in geologically seismic areas where poorly consolidated soils mix with perched (trapped) groundwater causing dramatic decreases in the elevation of the ground. While groundwater depths can vary significantly over short distances, due to the presence of localized perched aquifers, the presence of known shallow water tables increases the potential for liquefaction throughout the region. The subdivision site is west of the known liquefaction hazard area in the City, thus an adverse impacts are assumed to be less than significant (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). The geotechnical engineering report indicates that the absence of groundwater in the upper 50 feet, the potential for liquefaction and the related surficial affects (liquefaction induced settlement) of liquefaction impacting the site are considered negligible. Groundwater was not encountered during boring work and is expected to be in excess of 50 feet below the existing ground surface (Source. - Earth Systems Consulting, July 1998, EA 98-1 10). 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 approximately five miles south of the southern boundary of the project (Source: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta USGS 7.5' Quad Map, EA 98-110). The man-made lakes within the Lake La Quinta development are not anticipated to be any potential hazard to the proposed Aventine project. No mitigation is required for this issue. E. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving landslides or mudflows? No Impact. No mudflows are anticipated for this project, as the adjacent hills and mountains are formed of rocky granitic material. The proposed subdivision will not be effected by this hazard issue as Tentative Tract 28982 is 2,800 feet east of the closest rocky hillsides (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA; EA 98-1 10). PAF'A99-369Aventine.N%pd 12 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? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. As the proposed subdivision is developed there will be slight changes in the topography as a result of grading and excavation. Approved grading plans are required prior to any such activity. The geotechnical engineering report identifies specific hazards and mitigation measures for the proposed development type. This report states that the soil types found on the subdivision area have a moderate potential for wind erosion (defined as wind removal and/or soil accumulation in hummocks up to 24-inches high). In addition, due to silty nature of the surface soils, severe dust storms can be expected locally in areas not covered by vegetation. Therefore, an increase in wind erosion can be anticipated during grading and during development until ground cover is reestablished on the site. Impacts from erosion shall be mitigated by design or by implementation of the approved PM-10 Mitigation Plan (Chapter 6.16 of the Municipal Code) to be submitted and approved by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. G. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving subsidence of the land? Less Than Significant 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, 1992, EA 98-110). The proposed Tract/Site development Permit will not have any significant effects from subsidence hazards if the recommendations of the geotechnical engineering report are implemented. H. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving expansive soils? No Impact. The underlying soils of the site have a low potential for expansion, thus future construction is not expected to be subject to problems from soil expansion. The soil types identified within the project site include fine grained windblown sands, silty sands, and sandy silts. 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, Earth Systems Consultants, July 1998; EA 98-110). Mitigation consists of implementing the recommendations of the projects' geotechnical engineering report for this issue. 1. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving unique geologic or physical features? No Impact. The Coral Reef Mountains and Santa Rosa Mountains represent unique geologic features in the La Quinta area. These unique features are located over 2 miles south/southwest and approximately one-half mile west of the project site and will not be impacted by the proposed subdivision (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA; EA 98-110). No mitigation is required PA] `A99-369Aventinc.NNpd 13 for this issue. 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 (Source: CVWD). 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 I'AFA98-369Aventi„c.NNpd 14 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 Engineering for the Coachella Valley Water District, in 1970. Construction was completed in November 1986. Local Environmental.Vetting The project site does not have any natural standing water. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made reservoir is located approximately 5.25 miles to the south. The Whitewater River channel is located approximately one-half mile to the north of the project site, and is dry except during seasonal storms. The La Quinta Stormwater Channel is located approximately I mile to the east of the project site, and 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 City also implements flood hazard regulations for development within flood prone areas (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA). A. Would the project result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed development will require some grading to level the project site. Once structures and on -site street improvements are constructed, there will be changes in the absorption rates and the rate and amount of surface runoff within the project. Storm drain improvements will be constructed to transport water runoff from the interior streets into the facilities located within Lake I.a Quinta, as designed by Tract 24230 (Source: EA 98-110). The outlet structure will include a facility to control nuisance water. Mitigation will consist of implementing the design of the subdivision pursuant to the requirements of the hydrology study prepared by Mainiero, Smith and Associates, Inc., for Tentative Tract 28982. B. Would the project result in exposure of people or property to water -related hazards such as flooding? Less Than Significant Impact. The subdivision area is partially within the FEMA Flood Hazard lone C. The project does not have any offsite drainage courses entering the project The area is protected from regional stormwater flows by a system of channels and dikes, and may be considered safe form regional stormwater flows except in rare instances (Source: FEMA Flood Hazard Map). C. Would the project result in discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? IIAEA99-369Aventine NNpd 15 No Impact. There are no existing natural bodies of surface water on or adjacent to the project site (Source: Aerial photographs, EA 98-110). The proposed project will not have any effect upon surface waters. Runoff from the project site is required to be directed into the retention system already in place south of the project site (Source: Tract 24230, EA 98-1 10). D. Would the project result in changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? No Impact. There are no bodies of water on or adjacent to the project site. There are no impacts identified for this issue, and no mitigation is required. E. Would the project result in changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? No Impact. The proposed project will not have any effect upon currents or water movements, as the project site is a dry desert parcel (Source: Site visit, EA 98-1 10). There are no impacts identified for this issue. 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. The impact of the proposed project on the existing domestic water service will have a cumulative effect upon the subsurface water resources available. The Coachella Valley Water District has submitted a comment letter, dated October 1, 1998, stating they can serve the project. Another water well is located south of the project site, near the intersection of 48" Avenue and Adams Street (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA, EA 98-1 10). G. Would the project result in altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? Less Than Significant Impact. The depth of local groundwater has been relatively stable since water has been imported from the Colorado River, with the level ranging from 60 to 90 feet below the surface. The District has indicated they can serve the development (Source: CVWD, October 1, 1998, EA 98-110). H. Would the project result in impacts to groundwater quality? Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the subdivision will include concrete and asphalt pavement of portions of the site, and landscaping areas. This pavement will reduce the absorption ability of the ground. Storm water runoff will be discharged into on -site basins and pipes. Following a heavy rain, contaminates could be transported into the basins that could contribute to groundwater and/or surface water pollution. The use of Best Management Practices as defined by the Regional Water Quality Control Board- Region 7 Colorado River Basin in the application of chemicals, solvents, cleansers, oils, etc. is the only practical PA] ?A99-369Aventine.\%pd 16 mitigation identified. Information obtained from Bruce Kassler, of Mainiero, Smith and Associates, indicates that the existing water well located to the north of the project site was shut down 5 years ago by the water district due to high nitrate levels, pending an investigation of the well by the water district. The investigation has not been completed (Source: Bruce Kassler, Mainiero, Smith & Associates, Personal Communication, September 25, 1998). 1. Would the project result in substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development will result in a cumulative use of water resources available for public consumption (Source: EA 98-1 10). 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. 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 Environn:ental.'Yetting 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. 11:TA99-369Aventine.NNpd 17 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. La Quinta 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development will contribute cumulatively to air quality impacts. However, the threshold for significant impacts from a condominium residential development is 286 units. The proposed development will have 160 condominium units, therefore, there will not be a significant impact (Source: AQMD Draft CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1992, EA 98-110). Grading of the project areas will cause temporary adverse impacts on the air quality due to blowing dust and sand, but will be addressed as part of the City's review and approval of a dust control plan, per the City's PM-10 Ordinance. B. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision would result in new multiple family condominium residential buildings in an area with existing and planned residential development. Residential units are sensitive receptors. The addition of new residential units will contribute cumulatively to the air quality impacts in the City. There are no anticipated significant adverse impacts identified with the proposed subdivision (Source: AQMD CEQA Handbook; EA 98-110. No mitigation is required for this issue. C. Would the project alter air movements, moisture, temperature, or cause any change in climate? Less Than Significant Impact. Moisture content may increase as landscape areas are planted and irrigated. There are no significant climatic changes anticipated with the proposed development (Source: EA 98-1 10). No mitigation is required for this issue. D. Would the project create objectionable odors? No Impact. The proposed development will not result in a land use that might create objectionable odors, such as waste hauling or chemical products. Vehicles traveling on nearby 11AEA98-369Aventine.NNpd 18 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. No mitigation is required for this issue. 3.6 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Regional Environmental.Setting La Quinta is a desert community of over 20,444 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 1 11, 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. 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 Setting The intersection of 47r' Avenue and Adams Street is currently controlled by a stop sign on 4r Avenue. 47`h Avenue is a local roadway with a 60-foot right of way. Adams Street is designated as a collector street with a 64 to 72-foot right of way. The La Quinta General Plan gives design standards for the various street classifications. Buildout traffic capacity for 47`" Avenue is projected at 4,000 daily trips. Adams Street buildout is projected, south of Highway 111, at 14,000 trips. A detailed explanation of buildout traffic conditions and levels of service is found in the La Quinta General Plan (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). A. Would the project result in increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development is anticipated to generate approximately 6 to 10 average daily trips per unit, for a range of 960 to 1,600 average trips per day. Street improvements to 47" Avenue exist. The additional trips are not anticipated to be significant, but rather cumulative to the community Source: TTM 28982, EA 98-1 10). 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)? 1'AFA99-369Aventi„e.NNpd 19 No Impact. There are no identified hazards from design features in proposed circulation system. The internal roadways will be private. Automobile and motorcycle traffic are the only types of vehicles that typically use private residential streets, with the exception of delivery trucks. There will be incremental vehicle trips and miles traveled, resulting in a correlated increase in traffic hazards. Road and Signal improvements, alternative means of transportation will resolve this impact to an acceptable level (Source: EA 98-110). C. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access to nearby uses? No Impact. The project would not be permitted to obstruct emergency access to surrounding land uses. An emergency access is proposed for the project near the northwest corner of the development, that would provide access on to 47h Avenue (Source: EA 98-1 10, TTM 28982). No additional emergency accesses are required for this project. D. Would the project result in insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? Less Than Significant Impact. Parking will be required for each condominium unit, which will consist of a garages, covered parking, and open parking spaces. The applicant proposes 2 spaces per unit. The Planning Commission will review the developer's request to reduce the number of parking spaces from 355 required by the Zoning code, to 322. No on -street parking will be allowed on the private internal roadways as the roadway widths are too narrow to accommodate this. E. Would the project result in hazards or barriers for pedestrian or bicyclists? No Impact. Designated bike paths exist on Adams Street and 47`h Avenue. It is anticipated that hazards to bicyclists and pedestrians will not be increased significantly as a result of the proposed development because a 6-foot wide sidewalk exists on the south side of 47`h Avenue and west side of Adams Street for the length of the project boundaries (Source: 1992 La Quinta General Plan, TT 28982). F. Would the project result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. There are no proposed bus turn -outs as the SunLine Transit Agency bus system does not have a route near the subdivision, the closest route is along Washington Street, approximately '/z mile west of the project. However, there will be a bus turn -out installed at Highway I 1 I and Adams Street in conjunction with the auto mall project that has been approved. The City has not received a letter from SunLine Transit, requesting bus facilities on 47`h Avenue or Adams Street, as of November 2, 1998. No mitigation is required for 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 11AEA99-369Aventine wpd 20 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 Desert Resorts Regional (Thermal) Airport, located approximately 7.5 miles southeast of the project, on Airport Boulevard in the Thermal area of Riverside County (Sources: La Quinta MEA, USGS La Quinta 7.5' Quad Map, Site Survey). The proposed development will not impact 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. The Sonoran Desert Scrub is the most typical environment found in the Coachella Valley desert floor. It is generally categorized as containing plants which have the ability to economize water use, go dormant during periods of drought, or both. 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. Typically, undeveloped land within these ecosystems is rich in biological resources and habitat. 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. Birds and amphibians/reptiles can also be found in the Sonoran Scrub area. 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. The La Quinta General Plan identifies the property as being within the habitat of the Fringe -toed Lizard (Sources: La Quinta MEA; EA 98-1 10). The project site is also within the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Habitat Development Fee area, which serves as mitigation for habitat destruction. Payment of this fee was made on November 16, 1989, in conjunction with grading of Tract 24230. Staff transmitted a copy of the proposed tentative tract to the California State Department of Fish and Game and the L. S. Fish and Wildlife Service on September 11, 1998, and has not received any response at the time of this writing. V\FA99-369Aventine.NNpd 21 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. No response has been received from these agencies regarding this project (Source: La Quinta MEA). C. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have locally designated natural communities. (Source: La Quinta MEA). D. Would the project result in impacts to wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? No Impact. There are no known natural wetlands, marshes, riparian communities, or vernal pools on the project site or nearby (Source: Site Visit). E. Would the project result in impacts to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? No Impact. The project site is not located in or nearby any wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. There are no designated corridors in the City's General Plan (Source: La Quinta MEA; Site Survey). 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 (I113), Southern California Gas Company, and various gasoline companies. Local F.nvironn:ental 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. 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 (Source: I.a Quinta MEA; Site Survey). 11:U:A99-369Aventine.NNpd 22 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, there are goals, objectives, and policies in the General Plan pertaining to conservation of prime soil and mineral resource areas, and energy efficiency. Objective 6-5.1 states, "Where feasible, the City shall conserve prime soil and mineral resources through a variety of alternative means". Policies 6-5.1.1 encourages that areas historically utilized as agricultural production remain as open space as long as possible. Policy 6-5.1.2 states that Mineral Resource Areas shall be reserved for mineral extraction activities, after which be reclaimed to a similar natural condition. Policy 6-5.1.3 states that the loss of soils through erosion shall be minimized through conservation of native vegetation, use of permeable ground materials and careful regulation of grading practices. Goal 6-6 states that public and private sector development projects which demonstrate that the best available technologies of energy efficiency and energy conservation techniques. Objective 6-6.1 states the City shall encourage that the best available technologies of energy efficiency and energy conservation techniques are incorporated into both public and private sector development projects. Policies 6-6.1.1, 6-6.1.2, 6-6.1.3, and 6- 6.1.4 provide a variety of methods to achieve the stated goal. The project site has no identifiable mineral resources, thus, no mitigation is required. 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 development include air, mineral, water, sand and gravel, timber, energy, and other resources. State of California Title 24 requirements shall be complied with for energy conservation prior to building permit issuance. 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, EA 98-1 10). 3.9 HAZARDS 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 on Interstate 10. 11:U'.A99-369Avcntinc.NNpd 23 Local Environmental.4etting 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 area has not been used for any type of manufacturing or industry, other than perhaps agriculture, and there has not been any known dumping of hazardous substances on the property (Sources: Aerial Photos). 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 for grounds maintenance and by residents of the condominium units within the development. No storage tanks of any kind are being proposed for the development. No other risks are anticipated by the development (Source: TT 28982; EA 98-1 10). 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 development boundaries, except for adjacent off -site work as is necessary for road improvements, etc. 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. Emergency access will be required for the project to meet the requirements of the Fire Department. 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 proposed condominium development (Source: EA 98-1 10). 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 condominium development (EA 98-110). E. Would the proposal involve increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? No Impact. The proposed condominium development will not have any effect upon fire hazard issues, as the project is not in an area with significant natural fire hazards (Source: EA 98-110). PAFA98-369Aventine.wpd 24 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 l 11, and temporary construction noise. The ambient noise levels are dominated by vehicular noise along the State Highway 1 1 1 and major or primary arterial roadways. Local Environmental.Setting The ambient noise level at the project site is dominated by vehicle traffic noise from 47" Avenue and Adams Street. Residential areas are considered noise -sensitive land uses, especially during the nighttime hours. The State Building Code and La Quinta General Plan requires that the interior noise level in buildings do not exceed CNEL 45. The General Plan of the City of La Quinta requires that exterior and outdoor living areas noise levels do not exceed CNEL 60. A. Would the project result in increases in existing noise levels? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. A noise study prepared for the condominium development by Mestre Greve Associates, assessed the potential effects of projected ultimate traffic volumes on the project's proposed residential units adjacent to 47"' Avenue and Adams Street. In summary, noise barriers are required for a number of exterior living areas along 47'h Avenue and Adams Street. In order to meet the City's 60 CNEL exterior noise standard, a noise barrier 5-feet high will be required along 47' Avenue. The barrier may consist of a wall, a berm, or a combination of the two, as long as there is a surface density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and no openings or gaps. The applicant proposes a combination of masonry wall and berm to ensure a minimum of 6-feet in wall height measured from the project's condominium pad elevations to meet this requirement for mitigation (Source: Mestre Greve, September 8, 1998). There is an existing masonry wall along Adams Street, which meets the noise mitigation requirements for the interior living areas of condominium buildings closest to Adams Street. A number of balconies in the project will need noise barriers to meet the exterior noise standard. The Noise Study lists the required second floor noise barrier locations and heights to meet the 60 CNEL exterior noise standard. The noise barrier heights are relative to the balcony floor (Source: Mestre Greve, September 8, 1998). With the exterior noise mitigation measures specified in the Noise Study, the interior noise levels are projected to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard without building upgrades (Source: Mestre Greve, September 8, 1998). B. Would the project result in exposure of people to severe noise levels? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development will result in short-term impacts PAEA99-369Aventinc.wpd 25 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). Construction noise is regulated by Chapter 6.08.050 of the Municipal Code, and serves as mitigation for this project. 3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES Regional Environmental.4etting 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 City Civic Center. 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 Offices- assigned to the City (Source: 10 1 -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 Citv. 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. 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. Additional public schools are being planned for construction by the State of California. The City is also within the College of the Desert Community College District (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). t AE,A99-369Aventinc.NNpd 26 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 1 1 1 Center Shopping 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 (Source: La Quinta MEA, ➢ 992). Local F.nvironmental.4etting The proposed subdivision is roughly between two City fire stations, one located on Frances Hack Lane, near Avenida Bermudas, and the second station at the corner of 54' Avenue and Madison Street. 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 Desert Sand Unified School District. 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. A response to the proposed condominium development was received from the Fire Marshal on September 22, 1998, and are on file in the Community Development Department. The proposed development will cumulatively increase the need for fire protection services, however, this increase is not anticipated to be significant with the implementation of the fire protection measures stated in the above referenced letter. Conditions to mitigate the project are proposed. No significant impacts were identified with this issue in EA 98-1 10. 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. The Riverside County Sheriff's Department responded on September 18, 1998, that they have no negative comments regarding the condominium development. There will be cumulative impacts on police protection services to the community with the addition of 160 new condominium units. No significant impacts were identified with this issue in EA 98-1 10. No mitigation is required for this issue. C. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to school services? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. A comment letter, dated September ➢ 7, 1998, was received from the Desert Sands Unified School District. The letter indicates that there will PAFA99-369Aventine.-,Npd 27 be a potential impact on the school system. Mitigation for this impact is the payment of the state mandated school impact fee at the time of issuance of building permits (Source: EA 98- 110). 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. Development of the proposed condominium project will result in the incremental increase in maintenance of public facilities especially local roads due to the increase in traffic (Source: EA 98-110). To mitigate this impact, the applicant shall pay infrastructure fees in accordance with the City's adopted program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits for regional City improvements. 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. Development of the proposed condominium project will result in an incremental increase in the demand for other governmental services (Source: EA 98-110). Building and engineering plan checking and inspections, and planning review needed for the project will be partially offset by application, permit and inspection fees charged to the applicant and contractors. 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. 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 three landfills within the Coachella Valley. 11:U?A99-369Aventine.Nrpd 28 Local Environmental .Setting The site is adjacent to vacant areas on the north and east. There are existing electrical overhead lines, along Adams Street. A. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to power and gas service? Less Than Significant Impact. Electricity for the subdivision is provided by Imperial Irrigation District (IID) (Source: EA 98-110). The system was expanded in the mid-1980's to provide adequate service to the existing and anticipated development within La Quinta. There will be cumulative impact upon electrical services by the proposed project. The applicant will be required to coordinate the electrical engineering for the project with IID, prior to on -site construction. B. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to communication systems? Less Than Significant Impact. With development will result in an incremental need for additional communication systems for telephone and television cable services (Source: Ea 98- 110). The applicant will have to coordinate with the providers of these services, prior to on - site construction 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. The proposed development is anticipated to result in cumulative impacts upon the water treatment and distribution facilities (Source: EA 98-110). The Coachella Valley Water District submitted a comment letter on the project that indicates that the district will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to the area in accordance with the current regulations. The regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the developer. The applicant will have to coordinate with CVWD for any additional facilities needed for continued development as mitigation for this issue pursuant to their letter of October 1, 1998. D. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to sewer services or septic tanks? Less Than Significant Impact. The CVWD comment letter, dated October 1, 1998, indicates that they will provide the proposed development with sanitation services. The applicant will have to coordinate with, and meet any requirements of, CVWD for sewer facilities (Source: EA 98-1 10). E. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to storm water drainage? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed condominium development has been designed to allow storm water drainage to flow into the existing stormwater facilities located within 11AE.A99-369Aventinc.NNpd 29 Lake La Quinta. An update of the hydrology report prepared in 1989 for the Lake La Quinta development was prepared for the proposed condominium development (Source: EA 98-110). The new report states that the preliminary grading plan for the project is consistent with the original Hydrology Report (Source: Mainiero, Smith and Associates, Inc., August 27, 1998). The CVWD comment letter, dated October 1, 1998, does not indicate that there are required alterations, or a need for new systems, to the existing storm water drain system in the vicinity of the project site. F. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to solid waste disposal? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed condominium development will require incremental increases in solid waste disposal services from Waste Management of the Desert, the current purveyor of solid waste collection, as new residential units will be added to the City (Source: EA 98-110; TTM 28982). No comment has been received regarding this project, as of October 28, 1998, from Waste Management. G. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to local or regional water supplies? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed condominium development will be served by existing domestic water wells and supplies. The project will have a cumulative impact on the local and regional water supplies, but not a significant effect. CVWD has submitted a "will - serve" letter for this project, dated October 1, 1998. 3.13 AESTHETICS 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 residential zoned area in the north -central portion of the City. Views from the project site consist of the Santa Rosa and Coral Reef Mountains to the south and southwest, and the open valley floor to the north and east and north. Point 'Happy, a prominent geological point, is located approximately one mile to the northeast (Source: Site Survey; La Quinta MEA). A. Would the project affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the Non -Native Vegetation 1':U?A98-369Aventinc.Nipd 30 Type as indicated on the La Quinta General Plan Master Environmental Assessment/ Environmental Impact Report Visual Assessment. This designation is defined as having a low sensitivity for visual impacts, having high screening and within urban land. There will be cumulative impacts as the proposed project will add more structures to the urban environment. Appropriate height limitations will be applied to increase unobstructed line -of sight distancing within the tract (Source: EA 98-110). B. Would the project have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? No Impact. The proposed development of the condominium, garage, administrative, and recreation buildings will be required to comply with architectural and landscaping policies and ordinances of the High Density Residential (RH) Zoning District standards in effect at the time of development. The maximum structure height allowed in the RH Zoning District is 40- feet. The proposed residential structures will be 30-feet 2-inches. The height of the stand-alone garage structures is anticipated to be between 12- and 14-feet. The height of the proposed administration and recreation building is anticipated to be 22-feet. The height of all proposed buildings is lower than that height allowed by the RH Zoning District Development Standards. The proposed condominium buildings are proposed to be one and two story in height, and the development surrounded by perimeter walls and fencing to provide visual distance and screening. There is an additional requirement for a 150-foot setback for two-story structures along Adams Street. Development of the proposed project will result in incremental increases in buildings and landscaping, all subject to review and approval by the City to ensure a pleasing design and compatibility with the styles of desert architecture and landscaping found in La Quinta. A proposed 5-foot masonry block wall to be constructed along the west and south property lines will serve to physically and visually separate the proposed condominiums from the Lake La Quinta development and other adjacent properties. City staff is recommending a condition of approval that would require the wall to be 6-feet in height. There is an existing oleander hedge adjacent to the southern property line on the Lake La Quinta side of Dulce Del Mar roadway, that will remain. The hedge is approximately 14-feet tall. The proposed landscaping along the western property line will include 10 types of trees, all of which will be taller than the proposed 5- or 6-foot wall upon maturity. The trees will provide an added measure of visual screening. Of the eight condominium units proposed along the west boundary of the project, six of the units have been designed so as not to have second story windows facing west. This proposed orientation will assist in preserving the visual privacy of the single family homes located west of the project. These six condominium units are setback 80 feet from the west project boundary, which will provide for physical and visual separation between the proposed condominiums and the single family units to the west. The two condominium units located at the southwest corner of the project, that do have west -facing windows, are setback 90-feet from the west boundary providing an additional 10 feet of physical and visual distance. This design orientation will provide privacy for both the condominiums and the single family units located within Lake La Quinta to the west. The total distance between the single family units 11AEA99-369Aventinc.Ntpd 31 in Lake La Quinta and the proposed carports within the project along the west boundary is a minimum of 20 feet. The eight condominium units located along the southern project boundary are designed with a setback of 20-feet from the southern property line. The total minimum distance between the proposed condominium buildings and a single family unit on the south side of Dulce Del Mar is 85.5-feet. This distance was calculated by adding the 20-foot structure setback from condominiums to property line, the 7.5-foot utility easement on the north side of Dulce Del Mar, the 38-foot wide street (Dulce Del Mar), and the required 20-foot front setback for the homes on the south side of Dulce Del Mar. Several of the single family units located south of the project, on the south side of Dulce Del Mar. The setback requirements for the project provide distance from the existing low density development in Lake La Quinta. The required RH Zoning District setbacks for the project are 20-feet along 47' Avenue, 20-feet along the southern boundary (Dulce Del Mar), 10-feet along the west property line, and 15-feet along the east property line. The proposed project is in compliance with these setback standards. The proposed condominium project is not anticipated to have a significant adverse impact to this issue, but rather a cumulative impact as more structures are added to the urban area as part of the normal, planned development of the community. No significant adverse visual or aesthetic impacts are anticipated for this issue. C. Would the project create light or glare? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed condominium development will potentially create additional light and glare in the community (Source: EA 98-110). Condominium and accessory structures will include exterior security and landscaping lighting which will cumulatively contribute to the existing light and glare in the City. The applicant is proposing to use 50 watt high pressure sodium lamps in post -mounted fixtures with reflectors to eliminate spillover light and glare. Elimination of all spill -over light is required by the Citv's Lighting Ordinance. In addition, wall -mounted and ground -mounted fixtures are also proposed. All such lighting fixtures shall be required to comply with the lighting requirements in Section 9.60.160 and other policies of the City, in order to reduce anticipated impacts. 3.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES Regional Environn:ental.4etting 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. PAFA98-369Aventine."pd 32 Local Environmental Setting The project site is located in the north -central portion of the City. There are numerous recorded archaeological sites within a one -mile radius of the project. A. Would the project disturb paleontological resources? No Impact. The project area is not within the Lakebed Paleontological area as indicated by the Paleontological Lakebed Determination Map in the Community Development Department. B. Would the project affect archaeological resources? Less Than Significant Impact. An archaeological and historical survey of the project site was completed by Bowles and Salpas, in 1979, for Tentative Tract 24230, and again by Bowles in 1981. The project parcel was included in these archaeological surveys. During these surveys, two archaeological sites (RIV-2195 and RIV-2196) were recorded. Subsequently, these site were reevaluated in 1989 by Daniel McCarthy, of the Archaeological Research Unit, at the University of California. RIV-2195 was recorded in a location that could be within the condominium project boundaries. However, the site could not be relocated during the 1989 reevaluation effort. Subsequent to 1989, the parcel was graded, removing up to 12-feet of the natural topography and leaving a relatively flat area. In light of this substantial grading activity, there is no anticipated impact to any remaining archaeological resources (Source: Grading Plan for TT 24230). C. Would the project affect historical resources? No Impact. There were no historic resources identified during the cultural resources survey of the project site. No mitigation is required for this issue. Grading activities will be monitored for archaeological resources, which will provide a mitigation contingency if any historic resources are exposed at that time. 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 area. 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 within the project boundaries or adjacent parcels. 3.15 RECREATION Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta has an adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan that assesses the P:U?A99-369Aventinc. NNpd 33 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 The project site is a vacant desert parcel, with no designated or existing recreation facilities or opportunities. A. Would the project increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. The increase in demand for park and recreation facilities resulting in the need for dedication of parkland is estimated to be 3 acres per 1,000 in population. Based upon that State Department of Finance figure of 2.85 persons per household, the population of the condominium development could be approximately 456 at buildout, warranting the dedication of 1.36 acres of parkland to the City or payment of in -lieu fees. The design of the development will include a swimming pool, basketball court, a recreation building, and other recreational amenities. Because no public parks are designated in the General Plan for this site, this project will be required to submit payment of in -lieu parks and recreation fees. B. Would the project affect existing recreational opportunities? Less Than Significant Impact. The development will contribute additional users to existing recreation facilities located elsewhere within the City, resulting in a cumulative impact. Payment of the in -lieu fees will off -set these impacts by making funds available for construction of additional parks and other recreation facilities. Additionally, the project is designed with on - site recreation amenities, which will lessen the impact on off -site recreation facilities. SECTION 4: MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The proposed condominium development will not have significant adverse impacts on the environmental issues addressed in the checklist and addendum, that can not be mitigated to insignificant levels. 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 Tentative Tract 28982, Tract Map 24230 Amendment #1, and Site Development Permit 98-631 will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, with the implementation of mitigation measures. • The proposed Tentative Tract 28982, Tract Map 24230 Amendment #1, and Site Development Permit 98-631 will not have the potential to achieve short term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful implementation of mitigation measures. 1':\J:A99-369Avcntinc.NNpd 34 • The proposed Tentative Tract 28982, Tract Map 24230 Amendment #1, and Site Development Permit 98-631 will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned for proposed development in the immediate vicinity, and the implementation of mitigation measures. • The proposed Tentative Tract 28982, Tract Map 24230 Amendment #1, and Site Development permit 98-631 will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect human, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of mitigation measures. SECTION 5• EARLIER ANALYSES A. Earlier Analysis 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. 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. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan is attached to this Environmental Assessment. The Conditions of Approval also contain many of the required mitigation measures. References Cited: EA 89-1 10 City of La Quinta General Plan, 1992. City of La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment, 1992. City of La Quinta General Plan EIR, 1992. Tentative Tract Map 28982 U.S. Census, 1990. La Quinta Economic Overview, 1996. Geotechnical Report for TTM 28982, Earth Systems Consultants, July, 1998. Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan. La Quinta USGS 7.5' Quad Map. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Riverside County, California - Coachella Valley Area. Hydrology Update for Tentative Tract 28982, La Quinta 160. Mainiero, Smith and Associates, Inc., August 27, 1998. City of La Quinta, Aerial photographs. Bruce Kassler, Mainiero, Smith & Associates, Personal Communication, September 25, 1998. AQMD Draft CEQA Air Quality Handbook, May, 1992. City of La Quinta, Water Conservation Ordinance. Coachella Valley Water District letter, October 1, 1998. 1':U?A99-369Avcntinc. Nipd 35 City of I.a Quinta, 101-301 Police Services Supporting Information. City of La Quinta Building & Safety Department. Riverside County Sheriff's Department letter, September 8, 1998. Riverside County Fire Marshal letter, September 22, 1998. Desert Sands Unified School District letter, September 17, 1998. City of I.a Quinta Paleonotological Lakebed Determination Map. Noise Analysis for Tract 24230, City of La Quinta. Mestre Greve Associates, September 8, 1998, Report #98-183. Grading Plan for Tract Map 24230. I'AI .A99-369Aventine. wpd 36 W E-, Q ¢Q ax U U U w H U z U wz m� �o oz L W W a � cr @ olio U rA re) ON W E- Q ¢Q a U U U W F- U C7 z Wz �o -Z z oz w� x� 0 w �Q x rn M 00 Q W W H Q z ¢Q �x a U �w O U ° � a 300.E w aA 09z cEUAA W � o rn M 00 O� Q W W Q z ¢Q �x av W Ov a� o� C7 Wz w �• �A UAA3 w d•° . U cs aW a ca •°��'° y t Z ° ;FDA d W x a � `,� o % ' v w Q zm ¢Q a- U >w OU ¢ v a u Co ;DC4Urn4�a _ o z cc a c o a' Ca 6 .. ca o Q � � •� as � y, A -� 0-4 U? o 0 W E- Q ¢Q a U � W O U ¢ t� ° 0 Wz �o 0 a� z� Ll "o o ° +q asz rn r? 00 F A U pq zA d WW a x �+ U O� VV d u w U � W u C ed so. � CIO � a � E .Rt u t w VAAaA o W U (310-4 ►� '� � H wo ^o � wy" .� � o W V a v� aj rn M OC Q w H A W yr z QA ax U O� UU H U z a`�a oG z� oz a� W� a0 w � � a cl z CA Oo o a a 00 rn Q w H A A � a�x a0.0 O� U U a U 0.4 H c� �a �o zz 0 �o w w � o �' w 'L 0-4 � � w OG Q � .r E" .•, 0.0 z o w � zoo H A U� zA d W ax U O� U U d 0WW4 �' 0 z zx .. u F u a c7 � � o �• UAAW rn M F A �A a� U O� U U a b� � � w 0 C7 `� o CU .o o �7 as 00 �� w cAAA .� 41.1 Qj H a n F A z QA a�x av O� U U U z c� �o zz 0 a� w � � w b rA M z o zCO a M 00 ON E� A A Q a� OaWv x Uv Q a Ld F � a a� v C7 Mtn En W c a t 5 t p4 ea ea UAA�A Q � U on o..x A d ►.� M M M rn M 00 w H A U pq z A d a av O� UV p4 'ao zi F c w p4 t c C"4 U u 00 dC�4N� F W �H z� � x cx p a C ri. UAA CA F A dW ax U O� U U d W U _z H c� �o oz a� �O w � � a � b o Qj .n W aj z o zo+ GURALNICK & GILLILAND ATTORNEYS AT LAW 'ORNEYS SERVING MMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS City of La Quinta Planning Commission 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 74-399 HIGHWAY 111, SUITE M INLAND EMPIRE OFFICE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 (800) 239-7827 TELEPHONE: (760) 340-1515 FACSIMILE: (760) 568-3053 E-MAIL: GG@GGHOALAW.COM November 24, 1998 PLEASE REFER TO FILE: Re: Tentative Tract Map 28982/Site Development Permit No. 98-631, Tract 24230 (Amendment #1) and EA 98-369 Applicant: Mainiero Smith & Associates for Owner A.G. Spanos Corporation Dear Commissioners: This law firm represents the Lake La Quinta Homeowners Association. Lake La Quinta is a gated residential community of approximately 280 large, single --family home sites. Lake La Quinta is governed by a homeowners association composed of a volunteer Board of Directors. Currently there are approximately 160 homes either existing or under construction. Homes at Lake La Quinta range between 1,804 and up to over 3,700 square feet. The community is enhanced by a 24-acre lake as a central feature of its common area amenities. The Lake La Quinta community possesses substantially unhindered lovely mountain views from many locations in the community. This project is adjacent to, and surrounded on two sides by, the Lake La Quinta community. In particular, several homeowners' lots directly adjoin the planned project. This letter is to inform the Planning Commission of the Association's objections to the Spanos Corporation's planned condominium project. 1. Characterization of Project as "Condominiums". This project has always been characterized in public notices and other information distributed regarding the project as "condominiums". In fact, however, Spanos Corporation does not intend to sell any of the units; instead, Spanos Corporation has stated that it will retain ownership of all of the units, and will rent or lease the units to tenants. GURALNICK & GILLILAND ATTORNEYS AT LAW City of La Quinta Page 2 Under Civil Code sections 783 and 1351(f), a "condominium" is a separate estate in real property, consisting of an undivided interest in common in a portion of real property coupled with a separate interest in space called a unit. Spanos Corporation evidently intends to retain ownership of all of the individual units for rental purposes. Homeowners at Lake La Quinta, and any other interested members of the public, were misled by the characterization of this project as "condominiums' because it leads one to believe that the units will be owned, resulting in pride of ownership and a higher degree of care in landscape, repair and maintenance than do units which are occupied by renters. For this reason, we do not believe that the public notices for approval of this project properly notify the public of the actual nature of this development. Second -Story Element. The project includes a second story element, with heights of 30' 2", which obliterates mountain views within Lake La Quinta. The applicant intends to raise the grade in parts of the project up to six (6) feet, which will increase the actual height of the buildings to up to 361. These elements also include balconies which will overlook homes on the south and west boundaries of the project. While many areas of the Lake La Quinta community are affected by loss of scenic views, the most severely affected are residents residing adjacent to the project. Those homes will completely lose their mountain views as a result of the height of the second story element at these locations (See map attached and incorporated by reference herein, illustrating the affected units and attached photos showing balloon illustrating height impact). The Association believes that the City should not approve the inclusion of a second story element in the buildings which are directly adjacent to Lake La Quinta along Dulce Del Mar Street (south boundary) and along the west boundary of the project. The buildings directly adjacent to Lake La Quinta at the south and west boundaries should be limited to single -story in order to minimize the obstruction of these homeowners' views and protect their privacy, or should be relocated altogether. Additionally, the Association objects to the overall height of the second story element at 30, 2"; the height should be reduced in order to minimize the effect upon scenic views at Lake La Quinta. The pitch of the roofs should also be reduced to minimize the profiles of the roofs. GURALNICK & GILLILAND ATTORNEYS AT LAW City of La Quinta Page 3 Setbacks. Setbacks for the project are twenty (20) feet. This minimal setback contributes to the interference with Lake La Quinta homeowners' views. Setbacks should be increased to thirty (30) feet or more. Density. The City of La Quintals Housing Vision Statement provides that the City will strive to improve existing housing stock and encourage new housing, "while preserving the overall low density character of the City." The proposed project is contrary to the City's stated intention to preserve the low -density character of La Quinta. Although the tract is zoned for high - density residential, the Association believes that the City should not approve such high densities in this location. Certainly, wedging 160 units, the very highest possible density for this parcel, onto 10.17 acres, will result in a significant impact upon the surrounding areas of La Quinta in terms of increased traffic and noise. The Association desires that the density be reduced significantly. Carports. Spanos Corporation intends to erect open carport structures along the south and west boundaries of the project, which abut Lake La Quinta. The project essentially erects a large covered parking lot directly adjacent to beautiful residential homes of Lake La Quinta. The carports permit automobile noise, car alarms, and fumes to disturb the adjacent homeowners, destroying their quiet enjoyment of their back yard lots. Also, the carports permit automobile oil, transmission fluids, etc. to drain off into the common system, which evidently is planned to drain into the lake at Lake La Quinta. This aspect of the project is of serious concern to the Association. The Association submits that the project should be approved only with the use of enclosed garages throughout the project, which will be an improvement to the appearance of the project and will eliminate a significant environmental impact in terms of noise and air pollution, and will enclose and capture automobile oil and fluids.' Boundary Walls and Hedges. The applicant proposes to build a new six-foot berm -and -wall along Dulce Del Mar, which is adjacent to Lake La Quinta. Removal of the existing, 14, oleander hedges is planned. This will further expose the Lake La Quinta homeowners visually to this high -density project and carports. Walls should ' The City did not make its Environmental Assessment available to the public until 3:00 p.m. on November 23, 1998. Therefore, the Association has not been afforded any reasonable opportunity to respond to that document. The Association reserves the right to make objections to the proposed mitigated negative declaration within the time permitted by statute. GURALNICK & GILLILAND ATTORNEYS AT LAW City of La Quinta Page 4 be made significantly higher to protect homeowners' privacy and to provide adequate security for Lake La Quinta. With the project being operated as a rental park, Lake La Quinta homeowners are concerned that the planned wall will permit easy access into the community by intruders. Drainage Into Lake La Quinta. The project is planned to permit runoff into Lake La Quintals drainage system, including the lake. The Association objects to any runoff from the project being introduced into its own drainage systems and lake. Runoff from the landscape and parking areas of the project will subject the lake to pollution. Additionally, the Association is unaware of any legal right in Spanos Corporation to maintain drainage across Lake La Quintals property in order to drain into the lake; there are no recorded easements which have come to the attention of the Association which would permit Spanos Corporation to drain across Lake La Quinta. Drainage should be modified to run into drywell systems throughout the project so that the project will not impact the beauty and cleanliness of Lake La Quinta and its lake. If the above amendments are made to the proposed project, Lake La Quinta Association will be pleased to accept the Spanos Corporation's project as a neighbor. However, as the project is currently proposed, it seriously affects the views and quiet enjoyment of the homeowners of Lake La Quinta, and the Commission should decline to recommend approval of the project to the City Council. Very Truly Yours, GURALNICK & GI I D© M rie A. Bo ewich L /mb ATTACHMENT 2 (d FG:R�R!'R:B• ttlddtlddddddd flB� d 8 d �q a g�"xaa::�stas aP e.a9 let g t { i in R y: d c-E8: _ ddddd d N dd tlsd6d0 d6 fiSS e R �n r�s To S !sAr i � SASaQ::�R _sAi 8$ Its' Al All _ e � s- s 1 10 I ri y 1 I � 4 r• Y 4'JT Va r +IL _ N �' .� • � ''��,jj }fie �� x f . November 24, 1998 _ D iF n�V� 1999 )! TO: City of La Quinta Planning Commissioners Cf'i iOF L4QUJIJTA FROM: Jay Roberts, President, Lake La Quinta Homeowners Associati PLAon-- `jN,1Nd 'E�aRTMENT SUBJECT: Public hearing regarding Spanos Corporation proposal to construct 160 condominium units at the southwest corner of 47t' Avenue and Adams Street Dear Commissioner, I respectfully request that I be given the opportunity to address the Planning Commission this evening regarding the above subject. Enclosed with this letter is a copy of the remarks I would like to make at the public hearing. In addition, I am enclosing copies of two letters that are merely for your information. As President of the Lake La Quinta Homeowners Association, and if the opportunity to speak is offered, I will very much appreciate it if I might be the first speaker to speak in opposition to the project as I understand it is being proposed. I understand the need for brevity and will limit my remarks to less than five minutes. I am told that the usual time limit is three minutes per speaker but I ask your indulgence for a little more time. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Jay Roberts TO: LA QUINTA PLANNING COMMISSION SUBJECT: PROPOSED SPANOS PROJECT TO CONSTRUCT 160 CONDOMINIUM UNITS ("APARTMENTS") ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 47' AVENUE AND 47"' STREET GENTLEMEN, MY NAME IS JAY ROBERTS. I RESIDE AT 47-790 VIA JARDIN IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA. ACTING AS PRESIDENT OF THE LAKE LA QUINTA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, I REPRESENT THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE ASSOCIATION, APPROXIMATELY 150 CURRENT HOMEOWNERS AND131 FUTURE HOMEOWNERS WHO WILL BE LIVING IN THIS SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT. ALMOST WITHOUT EXCEPTION, THESE HOMEOWNERS ARE PERMANENT, FULL-TI1vIE RESIDENTS OF OUR CON'IlvIUNITY AND THE CITY OF LA QUINTA. MOST HAVE INVESTED A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THEIR SAVINGS IN THEIR HOMES AND FULLY EXPECT TO SPEND THE REST OF THEIR LIVES IN OUR FINE COMMUNITY. WE ARE PROUD OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND OUR CITY. AS YOU KNOW, LAKE LA QUINTA IS A UNIQUE COMMUNITY. AS THE NAME INDICATES, IT INCLUDES A 24-ACRE LAKE WHERE ELECTRICALLY POWERED BOATS AND OTHER QUIET WATERCRAFT MAY CRUISE THE LAKE. WE ENJOY A QUIET LIFESTYLE WITH A VIEW OF THE MOUNTAINS AND CONSIDER LAKE LA QUINTA TO BE A GEM IN THE DESERT OF WHICH OUR CITY CAN BE QUITE PROUD. PLEASE BE ASSURED GENTLEMEN THAT THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION IS NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT WITHIN OUR CITY. IN FACT, WE WELCOME DEVELOPERS WHO ARE WILLING TO CREATE ASSETS THAT ADD TO THE LUSTER OF OUR CITY AND TO ITS VARIOUS CONRVIUNITIES. WE HAVE HAD 'THREE MEETINGS WITH MR. JACK LUCAS, THE MANAGER OF THIS SPANOS PROJECT. WE HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE PROPOSED PROJECT PLAN AND HAVE COMMUNICATED OUR CONCERNS TO MR. LUCAS AND THE SPANOS COMPANY BOTH VERBALLY AND IN A LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 2, 1998. A COPY OF THAT LETTER IS EITHER IN YOUR HANDS OR IS AVAILABLE TO YOU THROUGH YOUR CLERK. WE HAVE REPEATEDLY ADVISED THE SPANOS CORPORATION THAT WE WANT TO WORK WITH THEM TO ACHIEVE REVISIONS TO THEIR PLAN THAT WILL SATISFY OUR CONCERNS. THEIR RESPONSE DATED NOVEMBER 13TH INDICATES THAT THEY HAVE NO INTENTION OF MAKING ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROJECT THAT ALEVIATE OUR CONCERNS. TELEPHONE CALLS TO THE SPANOS CORPORATION TO FURTHER DISCUSS THE PROJECT HAVE GONE UNANSWERED. LET ME REPEAT GENTLEMEN, WE DO NOT OPPOSE A PROJECT TO DEVELOP THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. HOWEVER, WE MUST VIGOROUSLY OPPOSE THE PROJECT AS IT HAS BEEN PRESENTED. PLEASE ALLOW ME TO BRIEFLY SUMrvIARIZE WHAT WE BELIEVE TO BE INAPPROPRIATE FOR THIS PROJECT. FIRST, THE UNIT DENSITY ON THIS PROPERTY IS PLANNED TO BE AT THE ABSOLUTE MAYJMUM PERMITTED BY ZONING REGULATIONS AND ALL RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS ARE TO BE TWO-STORY BUILDINGS. WE BELIEVE THIS IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE ADJOINING SINGLE FAMILY COMMUNITY. SOME SINGLE STORY UNITS AND/OR RELOCATION OF SOME OF THE PLANNED BUILDINGS WOULD BE IN ORDER TO INSURE THE PRIVACY AND SCENIC VIEWS OF ALL CONCERNED. SECOND, EVEN THOUGH IT MY HAVE BEEN SO ENGINEERED, IT IS OUR BELIEF THAT THE SPANOS CORPORATION IS NOT ENTITLED TO CROSS PRIVATE PROPERTY TO UTILIZE LAKE LA QUINTA AS A RETENTION BASIN FOR SURFACE WATER RUNOFF. PROVISIONS SHOULD MADE TO HANDLE SURFACE WATER RUNOFF WITHIN THE PROPOSED PROJECT SITE. THIRD, THE OPEN CARPORTS AS PLANNED BY THE SPANOS CORPORATION SHOULD BE REPLACED WITH CLOSED CARPORTS TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY. FOURTH, THE PROJECT PLANS INCLUDE A FIVE-FOOT WALL TO BE CONSTRUCTED AROUND THE PROPOSED PROJECT. WE BELIEVE THIS IS INADEQUATE TO PROVIDE SECURITY AND PRIVACY FOR EVERYONE. A TALLER WALL, ERECTED ON A RAISED BERM WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE. FIFTH, IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY CONDUCTED FOR THIS PROPERTY WAS PERFORMED AT LEAST NINE YEARS AGO. WHILE THIS HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND A SUPPLEMENTAL EIR (ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT) HAS BEEN PREPARED, WE SUGGEST THAT THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. SPECIFICALLY WITH REGARD TO TRAFFIC ON 47' AVENUE AS WELL AS WASHINGTON AND ADAMS. THIS PROJECT WITH THE PLANNED DENSITY LEVEL WILL EXACERBATE ANY TRAFFIC PROBLEMS CREATED BY THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AUTO MALL AT THE INTERSECTION OF 47TH AVENUE AND ADAMS. THE DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT HAS INDICATED THAT THIS, AND ANY OTHER "RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL POTENTIALLY RESULT IN AN IMPACT ON OUR SCHOOL SYSTEM". WE PRESUME THIS WILL BE A NEGATIVE IMPACT BASED UPON THEIR COMMENTS. GENTLEMEN, OUR PLEA IS SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD. WE URGE YOU TO WITHHOLD APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT AS IT HAS BEEN PRESENTED; TO CAREFULLY REVIEW OUR COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS TO EVALUATE THEIR MERIT; AND TO ADVISE THE SPANOS CORPORATION OF THE CHANGES IN THEIR PLANS THAT MUST BE MADE TO SATISFY THE SERIOUS CONCERNS OF THE LAKE LA QUINTA HOMEOWNERS. WITH APPROPRIATE MODIFICATIONS, WE WILL WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT THE PROJECT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION AND UNDERSTANDING. JAY ROBERTS PRESIDENT, LAKE LA QUINTA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION LAKE LA QUINTA HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION c/o J.& W. Management Co P.O. Box 1398 Palm Desert, CA 92261 (760) 568-0349 Fax: (760 346-4349 November 2,1998 A.G. Spanos Co. 1341 W. Robinhood Stockton, CA 95207 Attn: Jack Lucas Dear Mr. Lucas, The purpose of our meeting today, and this letter, is to set forth Lake La Quinta community's deep concern regarding the proposed "Spanos" project adjacent to us. Although we urge changes to your project, we want you to know at the outset that we are more than willing to discuss and work with your company to arrive at a mutually acceptable project which will prove to be beneficial to the City of La Quinta, the Lake La Quinta homeowners, as well as your company. At the present time Lake La Quinta is a growing community. We have now occupied over 140 homes within our development. We have a great deal of pride in our city and neighborhood. The Lake La Quinta Home Owners Association is a very active body and we look forward to completion of our total project. At that time we will occupy 281 homes on a land area exceeding100 acres. Our homes, by La Quinta standards, are upscale and at full build -out will have a density of 2.8 homes per acre. We have a beautiful lake for boating, fishing and general enjoyment. Our recreational area has a tennis court, pool, picnicking facilities and social meeting space. In addition, we are adjacent to an exclusive Bed and Breakfast facility. Lake La Quinta, by anyone's standard of assessment is a pride to an urban area. Naturally, our view of an incoming project such as the "Spans" project is measured by what we have accomplished in the community to date. Our view of any future adjacent project is colored by the overall appearance of that project, its density of population, its visual, health, safety and security impact and its overall effect on our financial and personal investment. At the present time, we believe the "Spanos" project, as it has been made known to our Lake La Quinta-Home Owners Association, will have an adverse affect on our community. The following items are the most obvious concerns to us, at this point. First. "Spanos" proposes a very high density project. We are informed that you plan to build 160 units on 10 acres. That number of units per acre is much too high adjacent to this low density community! We are presently a quiet residential neighborhood. Cars infrequently come and go on our streets. Our boating is all powered by wind, rowing or silent electric motors. The adjacent B&B sends its patrons to tennis courts outside the Lake La Quinta community so as not to impact our residents with added lighting and noise. Vehicle and social activity will occur throughout the day and night. High density equates to noise. Obviously, density adjacent to Lake La Quinta property will become a serious detriment to our homeowners and our future growth. We strongly object to the occupancy ratio which you propose to introduce. Another factor associated with the density aspects of this proposed project, and which exacerbates Lake La Quinta's concern, is that we are now being told that the "Spanos" project is an apartment complex and not a home -owner condominium development. We believe it is detrimental to our community and its future development to have a transient population residing in the proposed high density community. Managed apartments constitute a severe threat to our Lake La Quinta homeowners. We will accept no less than condominiums. Pride of ownership must be the hallmark of your community, as it is in ours! Second. The visual detriment of constructing a multitude of 2. two story buildings abutting and overlooking our single family residential community constitutes an unacceptable intrusion. Structures which approach 40' in height deprive us of our view, create balconies overlooking our property, and disturb our privacy. A residential one-story housing environment is better suited to this area. Third. We believe your proposal to construct open carports immediately adjacent to Lake La Quinta homes creates an intolerable situation. Carports contibute to blight, noise, errant alarms and fumes. The loud noises of cars starting -up, day and night, are exaggerated by an open carport. You can verify that these irritants travel east to west in this area, thereby threatening added nuisances to those our residents immediately west of your proposed site. We do not believe that Mr. Spanos or any other member of your organization would accept a vast number of open carports adjacent to their residential property. No less than fully covered garages should be constructed on your condominium project. Modern-day condominium projects no longer construct open carport. It should not be done here. Fourth. In our view the present "Spans" project plans to funnel water drainage directly into our stormwater system and ultimately into our private lake. We cannot accept the risks associated with such a plan. You must devise an alternate plan which will guarantee no invasion of our lake and drywells. Fifth. We understand that a five foot wall and some shrubbery are proposed in order to separate your project from Lake La Quinta . That does not seem adequate to us. We strongly urge, and seek your cooperation, to construct walls higher than five feet above any finished grade, thereby increasing privacy and security. Sixth. It is our understanding that the proposed "Spans" project will identify itself as "Aventine at Lake La Quinta" We object. 3. In our opinion it is improper and misleading to the public and the future landowners of your proposed community to identify with the Lake La Quinta community and our facilities. It is only fair to let you know that as a community we homeowners at Lake La Quinta are very sensitive to your proposed project. We have sought advice from legal counsel in order to assist our cause, .if necessary. Also, if necessary, we will communicate our heartfelt opposition to your project by petition and otherwise to the City of La Quinta. It is our opinion that the project needs some significant degree of redesign to eliminate the valid objections which we have expressed. We hope you agree. Again, please understand that we want to work with you and arrive at a mutually beneficial project which will be good for La Quinta, Lake La Quinta and your company. Sincerely, Jay Roberts President Lake La Quinta Home Owners Association a November 13, 1998 Mr. Jay Roberts, President Lake La Quinta Home Owners Association C/O J & W Management Co. P.O. Box 1398 Palm Desert, CA 92261 Dear Mr. Roberts low THE SPANOS CORPORATION 5029 LAMART DR., A-2 • RIVERSIDE, CA 92507 TELEPHONE: (9091 786-0777 FAX: (9091 788-2035 This letter is in response to our meeting and your letter of concerns dated November 2, 1998. From the inception of Lake La Quinta, The Spanos Company has always envisioned the multi -family component of the subdivision to be both an asset and a compliment to the community. Prior to our presentation to the Homeowners Board of Directors on September 14, 1998 and to the entire Homeowners Association on October 15, 1998, we worked closely with the City of La Quinta's Planning Staff to generate various site plans and building designs until we were able to attain a proposed property which achieves the best possible balance of all concerns. During this process we employed planning consultants, engineers and architects to lend their expertise to help design a project that was compatible with Lake La Quinta's land planning, architecture and landscaping. As you can imagine, our job has not been an easy one, but we feel we have done it well. We have been sensitive to our neighbors concerns and have not asked the City for any variances. If we had designed to best serve our own interests, we would have as many buildings as possible with views of the mountains and the lake and would have placed window locations with little regard for our neighbors, and so on. We have not done that. Instead, through landscaping, bu;ldi►,g orienLatio:i, v,ri. dow placement anti types, building elevations, and engineering, we have a product that allows for the land to be used for its designated purpose, as well as address the concerns, which are omnipresent. Our goal was to create a Class "A" property designed to Condominium Standards that exhibits quality in planning, construction, and management. I believe we have succeeded in designing a project that will achieve that goal and be a credit to the community. Yours Sincerely, Ja L cas Project Manager November 22, 1998 Planning Commission City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quu'nta, California 92253 Re: Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of the Planning Commission; ECEVE NO `� r n t1 s 998 CITY OF LAQUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT I want to express my deep concern and discontent about the Spanos Corporation proposing to build an apartment complex adjacent to the Lake La Quinta community. I share most of my fellow residents' concerns regarding the proposed project, but my largest concern has to do with the effect on the property value of my home I just purchased last February. I am a real estate manager by profession and I currently manage the Palm Desert Town Center. I have worked for my current employer (TrizecHahn Development) for about 9 1/2 years and in that time period I have had to physically move my residence eight (8) times. I'm somewhat of a trouble shooter for my many which is why I have worked at 11 malls is my tenure with Trize Rahn. When I was transfer to Palm Desert in December 1995, I wanted to "set up tent" for a long while. I have coarse to love the desert and decided that I would call it home. I spent about 6 months learning about the different cities in the valley prior to purchasing my home in La Quinta. I felt very torn because being the general manager of the premier commercial property in Palm Desert, I really felt I should reside in Palm Desert. However, I decided on La Quinta. When I first saw Lake La Quinta, I was stuck by its' beauty. It is one of the nicest communities I have ever seen and I'm blessed to live here. Most of the places I lived during my "tour of duty" with TrizecHabn were apartment telexes. While I always did my best to be a good neighbor, many of my neighbors did not feel the same way. I knew my apartment life would be for a short time until I found the community that I wanted to call home. I looked forward to the day when I would buy my very first home. Apartments are an important part of a community, please don't misunderstanmd me. However, I paid a premium to live in Lake La Quinta and I don't feel that arts should be part of our special, exclusive neighborhood. This community is fitting of housing units that are privately owned and meticulously maintained. Please keep one of La Quintals most prestigious addresses special. Very fly Yam, Mollie E. e Mo ie E. oyie 47840 Via Firenze La uinta C 92253 L4U LA QULNTA EU YER(S)t DATF_r I.OT NO. _, TRACT NO.26152 Buyer hereby acknevrledges that Buyer pas be referenced lot at Lake La Quints ("Project"), fro es informed of L1e to.tawing facts concerning Duyrx's purcliabe of the above. in Seller, and Buyer has nvesti3ated them to Buyer's satisfaction. Buyer hereby acknowledges receipt of s copy of this notifica;lort for Buyer's records. 1. LAKX - The Project includes a lake which shall be maintained by the Hofneowners Amciatioa and all owners shall have the right to ute the lake :or sailing, boating, and fishing, subject to the lake rules and other restrictions contained in the declaration. Ve swimming, wading, or other use of tho lake is permitted Entry to the lake may only be made at designated open area, or by means of Dock,'Deck facilities on owner's lots; provided however, that each owner of a let on or adjacent to which a Dockil)eck facility may be located shall have an exclusive right to use such Dock/Deok faei'ity. Although fishing may be Mowed subject to the lake rule#, Buyer acknowledges and agrees that Ale water and fish from the lave may be unsafe for human or animal consumption and Seller shall not be responsible for any harm resulting therefrom. Owners whose Iota abut the lake shall install and maintain landscaping Imp.ovemen,s in their rear yards facing the lake, within 120 days of recordation of the conveyance eftheir lot from Seiler. The plan for the itina:lation of such landscaping inust first be approved in writiM by the Atehitectural Cotnatittee and all nezessary approvals of pwinits must be obtained from applicable goverurnantal entities and ageti.-tes. Said improvements shad be nisintai tied by such owners continuously to present a pleasing and attractive app¢amuca, Landscaping improvements, once installed in accordance with approved plans shalt not be materially altered or changed wi*.oat the prior written consent of the Architectural Corn nittee. Only boats or water craft specifically authorized by and ragiaWmd with the Board, including certain sail boat, and non -gasoline powered boats, shall be allowed to use the lake. Ict skis and other such craft shall not be allowed No boat or water craft of any deacriptiun shall be stored, placed, kept or maintained on Any part or the storm water retention easement area (As deflmd in the declaration) except at approved docks or deck,. AU boats or water craft shall be maintained in a good appearance and o?erabie condition. 2. COMMERCIAL LOTS - Lots 282, 283, 284, and 186 of Tract 24230 are located adjacent to the project and are zoned for cottlmere al purposes. Seller does not own these lots cad therefore cannot give any assurance or guarantees regarding the deve!optrient of such lots. rurther questions should be directed to the City ofla Q uint& 3. it t I - ' - Lot 285 of Tract 24230 is located adjacent to the project and is zoned for multi -family development or "For Sale" or "For Rent" units. The C.C. Ar R.'s provide for the possibility of annexation of this lot to the project. However, Sailer does not own this lot and ices not guarantee how this lot will be developed or wtether :t shall be annexed to the project. Seller recommends that Buyer contact La Quinra City officials to further investigate the potential uses of this Iot. 4. LMTY H ASEMtttyrg - There are utility easement& over lots adjacent to al: private streets as dedicated on the recorded Tract Map for the project. Each owner and the Aasociadan is prohibited from excavation or construction of improvements witbra arty utility easements Iorated upon such lot without the, prior approval of the Approprfat9 utility company. Further, in the event any mainittlance or repair needs to be done to any utility within Such easemen4 the coat of removsl and replacement of any landseapmg or any other improvement *flail be borne by either the owncr or the association or both depending on wvhfch parry is responsible for the nomial maintennaw thereof as providod in this declaration. S- SEWER LATERALS, INDEMNIFICATION OF COACHIM J A VAi tyY M ATER DISTRCT - Each owner of a lot shall be responsible for the malntena.tee and repair of sewer laterals eoostcucted under driveways located on such lots and the replacement of concrete or other surface improvements upon such lot which may be required to be removed in the future to gain access to said sewer laterals, except for landscaping which may be required over that portion of the landscaped area located between the street and the front yard fence or wait which shall be the responsibility of the Association. Each owner and the Association shall hold the Coachella Valley Water District harmless from any costs related to the maintenano or repair of the laterals or the replacement of concrete or other surface improvements upon its lot which may be required to be removed in the future to gam access to the aforementioned sewer laterals. The estimated cost of sewer & water to Coachella Valley Water District is approximately S 4,600.00 6. PLOT PLAN - Dimeneimis and elevations shown In advertiat tg and promotional material are approximate and may vary tom actual elevations and dimaataiom of your lot due to field conditions and art subject to change by Seller. Buyer has inspected the lot and home Buyer intends to purchase and hereby accepts the position, dimensions end elownions of the lot and Improvements thereon, including the interior and exterior walls and/or fences, if any. 7. VIM - No representation or warranty is made by Seller, or its sales representatives with respect to the presence or continued existence of any view "tom any portion of the lot being purchased, A. MODELS A_= JQU5E JA V - Completed bom *. if built by Seller may vary and differ front the models, and both may vary and differ from the building plans and/or sales brochure. Such homes will be completed in substantial conformance with plans on file with the City of La Quints, Q. FEATURE SH r - The feature sheet furnishes: Buyer has been prepared to waist Buyer by explaining those items included in Line purchase of a lot. Buyta hereby acknowledges receipt of the feature sheet and that he has read and understands wSat items are not included. I RIGHT OF SUkl5TITC=N - From time to time, certain materials and colors may became unavailable due to loud lions beyond the com mi of Seller. Seller reserves the right, in its sole diocretivn, to aubaLlute materials and colors of similar quality to those selected fbr the standard finish materials and colors program. LhW1W.-V-4u6 6111 M7