1999 01 12 PCi
.Lam •�9`
z
5
w�.
OF tNtO
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
January 12, 1999
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 99-001
Beginning Minute Motion 99-001
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
II. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing.
Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes.
III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of the Minutes for December 8, 1998
B. Department Report
PC/AGENDA
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Case .................... SIGN APPLICATION 98-441
Applicant .............. Promotional Signs for Starbucks Coffee
Location ............... North side of Highway 111 in the One Eleven La Quints
Shopping Center, west of Boston Market.
Request ................ Approval of a deviation to an approved sign program to permi
a corporate sign for a new business.
Action .................. Minute Motion 99-_
B. Case .................... SIGN APPLICATION 99-447
Applicant .............. Ultraneon Sign Company for Quizno's Subs
Location ............... On the north side of Highway 111, west of Simon Drive, at thi
entry to the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center.
Request ................ Approval of a deviation to an approved sign program to permi
a corporate sign for a new business.
Action .................. Minute Motion 99-
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS
A. Commission report on the City Council meeting of January 5, 1999
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
January 12, 1999
I. CALL TO ORDER
7:00 P.M.
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 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,
Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Abels/Robbins to excuse Commissioner Kirk. Unanimously approved.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn
Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer,
Principal Planners Stan Sawa and Fred Baker, Assistant Engineer Marcus Fuller,
Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Approved.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Tyler asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of December 8, 1998.
Commissioner Robbins asked that the Minutes be corrected on Page 4, Item 3 by
spelling his name correctly. There being no other correction, it was moved and
seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to approve the minutes as corrected.
Unanimously approved with Commissioner Butler abstaining.
B. Department Report: None.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Environmental Assessment 98-365 and Tentative Tract Map 289664: a request of
Oliphant and Williams Associates, Inc. for Certification of a Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact and a request to subdivide 39 acres into 78
single family residential units and common lots located on the north side of Avenue
50, approximately 1,600 feet west of Jefferson Street.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCSTC1-12-99.wpd 1
r
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
1. Commissioner Butler excused himself due to a possible conflict of interest
and withdrew from the dias.
2. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
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 noted the recommendation of the Historic Preservation
Commission on the tract map were inadvertently omitted from the
Commission's packets and passed them out to the Commissioners.
3. Chairman Tyler asked if there were any questions of staff. As there were no
questions, Chairman Tyler asked where on the tract map the two
archeological sites were located. Staff showed the Commission their location
on the tract map.
4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Tyler asked if the
applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Dick Oliphant, the
applicant, stated they have done a substantial amount of work in accordance
with the Planning Commission's direction at the last meeting. He then
introduced Ms. Emily Hemphill, attorney for the client, who addressed the
Commission regarding the Conditions of Approval in regard to the
archaeological requirements. She went on to identify her concerns as they
related to the California Environmental Quality Act. Her first concern was
with the requirement for 100% recovery of all artifacts on the site. There are
important resources and her client intend to recover them, but as the
conditions are written, 100% recovery is required. CEQA has placed limits
on recovery due to costs. Their plan is to recover those artifacts that are on
that portion of the site that is defined as significant. The 100% recovery is
on the entire sitefar beyond what CEQA requires as well as the financial
burden it places on the applicant. The second concern is that all excavation
be done by hand. As there are many recognized techniques available in the
process of recovery that allow the site to be excavated to show the layers as
they lay on the site. Ms. Leslie Irish's technique is an accepted technique that
can show the same results. The requirement that it be done by hand is not
supportable. The third issue is contained in the Historic Preservation
Commission's recommendation that the bones found on the site be submitted
to a zooarchaeologist for further testing in order to make determination as to
what the bones are. According to the Health and Safety Code there are
stringent requirements placed on the site until the local Coroner can
determine whether or not they are human or belong to a Native American.
On this site there were very tiny bone fragments found. Work was stopped
and the Coroner, and a representative from the Cabazon Indian Band did
come to the site. The Coroner was unable to make the determination. If they
submit the sample for testing the samples are so small they would be
destroyed during testing. In order to resolve this, they are willing to declare
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC1-12-99.wpd 2
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
the bones as human and propose those remains be turned over to the Native
American Tribe with jurisdiction over the area and handled as the Tribe
determines. The changes they are suggesting should be a included in the
Conditions of Approval. She then gave the Commission copies of the
Coroner's report, letters from Mr. Benitez from the Cabazon Indian Band,
justifying the jurisdiction, and Appendix K to CEQA which described how
an archaeological site is to be handled.
5. Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant had submitted an alternative condition
to those they were challenging. Ms. Hemphill stated it would be best if Ms.
Leslie Irish from L & L Environmental draft those changes.
6. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated that the Historic Preservation
Commission is requesting 100% excavation for recovery of the potentially
significant sites only. If this needs to be better clarified, staff can do this. In
regards to the use of the backhoe, it been stated in the conditions, specifically
in that the first paragraph, that it is acceptable to remove the culturally sterile
overburden. It.is also acceptable to trench cross sections of the dunes for
determining the structure and chronology of the site. These items were
addressed in the conditions as recommended by the Historic Preservation
Commission. In regard to the human remains, the latest information received
at this meeting to allow the bones to be treated as human was not presented
to the Commission and they therefore, did not consider this option. Their
recommendation was that the bones be treated similar to the other faunal
remains found on the site and all be packaged together and given to a
zooarchaeologist for identification.
7. Ms. Leslie Irish, principal archaeologist for the project who meets the criteria
of Associate Archaeologist under the State Qualifications, working for L &
L Environmental, stated she has been working in the Valley for six years. As
a professional archaeologist, it is difficult when the City writes a staff report
as confining as this. She would like the Commission to consider putting the
responsibility of the ultimate mitigation and adjustment of the significant site
on the project archaeologist working in the field as they proceed. This would
allow them the ability to increase or decrease the work in the field based on
what is found. There are methods of using machinery in the field that are
more precise and economical for a site of this size. If they are held to the
staffs recommendation, it is economically prohibitive and perhaps excessive.
8. Mr. Oliphant stated that one of the questions raised at the Historic
Preservation Commission meeting was tribal jurisdiction. He then
introduced Mr. Mark Benetiz, second vice chairman of the Cabazon Band of
Indians and observer on archaeological finds for their reservation and
surrounding area of their reservation. Mr. Benetiz stated he has been doing
C:\Mv Documents\WPDOCS`,PCI-12-99.wpd 3
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
this type of work for three years and went on to give the jurisdictions of the
different Indian Bands in the area. It has been his responsibility to be the
contact person for other remains discovered on different sites and he has held
ceremonies for reinternment of the remains.
9. Chairman Tyler stated the issue raised by the Historic Preservation
Commission was who had jurisdiction. Mr. Benetiz stated that for a number
of years the two bands shared an agreement that Washington Street was the
boundary. Everything east of Washington Street was Cabazon Band.
10. Mr. Oliphant stated Ms. Hemphill and Ms. Irish were working on rewriting
of the conditions as they believe would be fair. He introduced Mr. Bob Ross,
engineer for the project who stated they reviewed the conditions and would
like consideration on Condition #23 regarding 50% of the cost of the traffic
signal. This project is located on only one quadrant which should only
require a 25% contribution. Unfortunately, the developer on the south sie of
501 Avenue built out before it was determined that a signal would be located
at this location. Rancho La Quinta is now paying 50% and they are being
required to pay the remaining 50%. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the
developer to the south did not contribute to the cost of a signal at the time of
construction of his project as there was no need at the time. The question
now is how to best distribute the cost. If they decrease this project's cost
participation, they would have to find the money from a different source.
11. Ms. Hemphill stated she had revised the conditions and submitted them to the
Commission for their consideration.
12. Mr. Joe Loya, Torres Martinez Indian Band, stated he has served as part of
the archaeological crew for this project and there were a number of issues he
finds to be in conflict in regard to preservation. He did not come to the
meeting to debate whose jurisdiction the site belongs to. He has been doing
a lot of research as to what is right and wrong. First, in regard to the Historic
Preservation Commission for 100% mitigation, in CEQA there is a process
of digging for 20 centimeters beyond the findings. In regards to the bones
that were found they were determined to be human. In the report submitted
by L & L Environmental, they were classified as being laborers. They are
professional archaeologists and know what they are doing. He has put
together a report which contains findings and he will hold onto until the
completion of this meeting as there were a lot of holes or inconsistencies that
had to be filled by the Historic Preservation Commission. For professionals
in this line of work there should be no holes; it is cut and dry as to what
should be done. This lack of consistency brings questions as to the
professionalism and integrity of those working on the site. Human bones are
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PCI-12-99.wpd 4
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
not to be taken lightly. The area that was dug with a backhoe was
approximately five meters to 45 meters in length. They knew it was wrong
to use a backhoe especially when human remains were found and had been
identified as such by the Coroner. Approximately 10 bags of bones were
brought to the surface. He has not read in any report that the Coroner ever
saw these remains. In regard to who has territorial rights, Mr. Benetiz
pointed out that Washington Street was the designation point between the
east and west boundaries as Agua Caliente and Cabazon Band of Indians .
If this is the case, then the Palm Springs Cabazon Band of Indians should also
be represented. There is too much here to be arguing. He read a report
written in 1972, when the Thermal Airport was first built. In that report
Ruby Madesto was the tribal liaison on that project. In that report a lot of
things came to the surface in regard to cremations, old traditions, how the
Augustine Reservation was established, the height of the water table. This
report got him thinking about this site and what they found by this site, where
the cremations were found. In this report it stipulated that cremations were
being done above ground. If this area in discussion was leveled, according
to this report, they would find a large historical cultural influx at one level.
If you take where the cremation was found and where all the bowl and shells
that were layered, as if someone was in there cooking, you would find they
were at the same elevation. In his opinion, he is for progress, but he will not
turn his back on tradition, historical value, on things that have a life to them.
He may not have the level of understanding as L & L Environmental, but he
does know his tradition, his culture, and the background of the Torres
Martinez Tribe as he has been working on this for some time. He has worked
with the Morongo Indian Reservation as well as his own elders to make sure
that he knows his history. This City made a mandate that it would not set
aside the historical value that is found here. His recommendation would be
that they look into what has been found and utilize all the power the
Commission has to make a just and moral decision. He will be following this
case closely.
13. Chairman Tyler asked if his report would help the Commission to arrive at
a just and moral decision. Mr. Loya stated no it would not.
14. Chairman Tyler then reviewed the suggested changes to the Conditions as
recommended by the applicant. Condition #85: "The archaeological data
recovery plan shall be required to consist of 100% hand excavation for total
recovery of a potentially significant site areas as identified in the Phase Il
Report." Suggested changes are "....100% hand excavation or mechanical
excavation to allow precise incremental removals up to 2-5 centimeters at a
time." "The use of the backhoe shall be limited to accepted uses 1) to remove
a culturally sterile overburden; and 2) to trench the cross section of a dune
CAW Documents\WPDOCS\PCI-12-99.wpd 5
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
for purposes of determining the geomorphical structures and potential
chronology of the archaeological site." "The data recovery plan shall clearly
state that the excavation will continue until the sterile levels are reached
regardless of depth and it shall be clearly stated that Phase III will consist of
a total recovery program." The suggested changes for this section are: ".....a
total recovery program of areas with a final designation as significant by the
project archaeologist as a result of the on -going field work." Condition #86
in the second paragraph remove the word "entire" to only require
"archaeological monitoring of the project site shall be required as determined
by the project archeologist based on field results".
15. Chairman Tyler asked if there was any other public participation. There
being none, this portion of the public hearing was closed and opened for
Commission discussion.
16. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio commented on the suggested changes.
In regard to Condition #85 with the addition of mechanical excavation, staff
would like to have this qualified to state "in consultation with the
archaeological research unit at the University of California Riverside". They
are the ones staff consulted with in regards to the mechanical excavation.
Ms. Irish stated UCR has no Phase II or III experience in the Coachella
Valley. Their comments in regard to the backhoe are appropriate, but they
have done no work of this type, so consulting with them is inappropriate.
They would not mind polling a number of peers and presenting this in their
plan for discussion.
17. Planning Manager stated staff would like to qualify the second paragraph
"with final designation as significant by the project archaeologist as the result
of on going field work.", staff would like to add, "subject to approval of the
Community Development Department". In regard to Condition #86, the
second paragraph, the City's procedure for monitoring has always been that
the monitoring will be for the entire site and not based on the project
archaeologist and field results. This has been a requirement for all projects
in the City. Staff is therefore requesting that the monitoring be remained as
written which is for the entire site.
18. Commissioner Abels stated this subject could be debated for a long time.
There needs to be give and take on both sides so a conclusion can be reached.
He stated he would agrees with the changes as submitted by the applicant on
Condition #85, and with staff s recommendation on Condition #86.
19. Commissioner Robbins asked Mr. Benetiz if the changes would be
acceptable to the Cabazon Indian Band. Mr. Benetiz stated they were
acceptable. Commissioner Robbins stated he agreed with the changes to
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PCI-12-99.wpd 6
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
Conditions #85 and #86. In regard to Condition #23, the City had a City fee
based on the TUMP process. He asked staff if there was any relief as a part
of the TUMP fee. Senior Engineer stated signals are paid for out of the
infrastructure fund. They have to be identified and the only ones they
identify are the intersections of arterial streets. This location is a
development driven signal location. The signal will only be installed if and
when it is warranted. Commissioner Robbins asked if Avenue 50 was an
arterial. Staff stated it is not an intersection of two arterials. The applicant
would have the same burden whether or signal is installed or not. The City
still has the same burden for the rest of the City. Therefore, they would have
no relief.
20. Chairman Tyler stated options had been given to the applicant if they wanted
to modify the center median at the other entry to the east to allow for a left
turn in. Staff stated this was true.
21. Commissioner Abels suggested Condition 23.A. be changed to a 25% share
of signal improvements. Commissioner Robbins stated he concurred.
Chairman Tyler stated this would leave the City with a shortfall.
22. Chairman Tyler questioned Condition #61 and asked that the last sentence
be deleted from the conditions. He then went over the Architectural
Guidelines presented by Oliphant & Williams and noted corrections that
needed to be made. He then stated the Historic Preservation Commission had
spent a lot of time on this project as well as the applicant and City staff. As
an engineer he is concerned about 100% recovery, as you can never reach
100%.
23. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution
99-001 recommending to the City Council Certification of Environmental
Assessment 98-365, subject to the Findings and Mitigation Monitoring
Program.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES:
None. ABSENT: Commissioners Butler and Kirk. ABSTAIN: None.
24. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Abels/Robbins to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 99-002 recommending to the City Council
approval of Tentative Tract Map 28964, subject to the Conditions of
Approval as modified:
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PCI-12-99.wpd 7
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
a. Condition #85: The Archaeological Data Recovery Plan shall be
required to consist of 100% hand excavation or mechanical
excavation to allow precise incremental removals up to two to five
centimeters subject to documentation from qualified archaeologists
(i.e., peer review) and acceptable to the Community Development
Director or his designee.
The Data Recovery Plan shall clearly state that the excavation will
continue until sterile levels are reached, regardless of depth, and that
it shall be clearly stated that Phase II will consist of a total recovery
program of areas with a final designation as significant by the project
archaeologist as the result of on -going field work subject to approval
by the Community Development Director or his designee.
b. Condition #23.A.: 25% of the cost and design -to construct traffic
signal improvements.
C. Condition #61: delete, "...front yard lawns shall be discouraged".
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES:
None. ABSENT: Commissioners Butler and Kirk. ABSTAIN: None.
Chairman Tyler recessed at 8:17 p.m. and reconvened at 8:2 p.m. Commissioner Butler rejoined the
meeting.
B. Site Development Permit 98-640; a request of Century -Crowell Communities for
approval of architectural and landscaping plans for seven new prototype residential
plans varying from 1,450 to 2,240 square feet to be constructed in Tract 23995-6
through 10 on the west side of Adams Street, north of the extension of Westward Ho
Drive.
1. 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. Ed Knight, representing Century -Crowell Communities stated they had
reviewed the conditions and had no questions.
3. Commissioner Robbins asked how many units were to be built. Mr. Knight
stated 150. Commissioner Robbins asked how the prototypes would be split.
Mr. Knight estimated 60% would be Del Rey and 40% Marbella.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC1-12-99.wpd 8
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
4. Chairman Tyler asked if anyone else would like to speak on this item. There
being none, this portion of the public hearing was closed and opened for
Commission discussion.
5. Commissioner Butler stated his only concern was that he was not seeing any
different elevations and he would like to see different elevations. Mr. Knight
stated this product has been very well received and they are hesitant to
change it. The Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee and staff
recommended a different color palette as well as some changes to the exterior
elevations. The roof lines are basically the same. They will remove the clips
on the gable, per staff s recommendation on one of the three elevations.
Commissioner Butler stated he wanted more severe changes on the roof
elevations to distinguish it from the other Century products in the area. Mr.
Knight stated he would look at the possibility of changing the roof lines.
6. Commissioner Robbins agreed with Commissioner Butler. He too wanted
to see a variety in the area without changing the floor plans. Mr. Knight
stated their desire was to be compatible, therefore, they submitted the plans
that are existing. By changing the color palette they hoped to achieve
diversity.
7. Commissioner Abels stated he too would like to see something different to
break up the streetscape.
8. Chairman Tyler stated he too concurred. The INCO homes do have a
variation in the roof lines. He would also like to see Condition #8 changed
to require rolled up sectional garage doors. Elevation "C" of the Marbella
series for each floor plan has a partial flat roof and is not compatible with
what is existing and he asked that this be changed. Mr. Knight stated he
would agree with a condition to remove the flat roof and the addition of
another elevation to be approved by staff. Chairman Tyler stated Plan 2 of
the Marbella series offers an option for a one car garage set off to the side; he
finds no compatibility with this option. Mr. Knight stated there are five or
six homes with this feature. Chairman Tyler stated he finds no basis for
compatibility. On the Del Rey Plan #5 they offer several options for adding
bedrooms and he is not clear as to what is the extra bedroom. Mr. Knight
stated that since the City requires a three car garage when a fourth bedroom
is added, they were trying to achieve this requirement and yet offer the home
buyer an option to provide a separate sleeping area for guests. If they opt for
the guest suite the bedroom adjacent to the master suite is changed to a
retreat. Chairman Tyler asked staff if a retreat was to be treated as a
bedroom. Staff stated they were and would require the three car garage.
Chairman Tyler stated his concern was that adequate parking be provided.
r-%NA- nl,,,—rntc\WPTiC)C:R\PC'1-12-99.Wnd 9
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
9. Principal Planner Stan Sawa stated that in the previous Marbella unit this
retreat was considered as a non -sleeping room.
10. Commissioner Robbins stated that on the Deane Homes where Century
Homes took over, the Commission had the same discussion. If they denied
it there, they cannot approve it here. Mr. Knight asked if they enlarged the
room to make it a master bedroom would it be allowed. They would remove
any walls between the two rooms to make one large master bedroom.
Commissioner Robbins stated he had no objection to this.
11. Commissioner Robbins asked about Condition #9 regarding side walls, as he
believed this could be monotonous if stuccoed. Block or slump stone
perimeter wall could be attractive. Staff stated this was a recommendation
of the ALRC and the applicant. Mr. Knight stated that on Adams Street they
would continue with the same streetscape, or with the split -face block
perimeter wall. On the interior they would propose masonry block wall with
the exception of anything that faces the street. Wherever the wall is seen
from the street, such as a corner lot, it would be stuccoed with the color that
matches the house.
12. Commissioner Butler stated his concern was that the stuccoed wall would be
ruined over time by the sprinklers. Commissioner Robbins asked that
Condition #9 be deleted.
13. Chairman Tyler stated his concern that streets change names in the middle of
an intersection. His second concern is that if the curb cuts do not match up,
they are to be returned to curb status.
14. Commissioner Robbins asked that a condition be added that where the third
garage is changed into the bedroom, they not leave the extra wide curb cut
but return it to the width of the driveway. Mr. Knight stated they have had
customers who want the third car driveway parking. Commissioner Robbins
stated they do not want to see a curb cut with lawn.
15. Commissioner Butler asked if staff could address the roof lines. Planning
Manager Christine di Iorio stated a condition could be added to state the
applicant shall introduce character defining features different than Del Rey
and Marbella, however compatibility with INCO, i.e., window shapes and
sizes, roof lines, and roof heights. The other existing Del Rey and Marbella
architectural plans shall be subject to Community Development approval.
16. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Robbins/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution
99-003 approving Site Development Permit 98-640, subject to the conditions
as modified:
CAMy Documents\WPDOCSTCI-12-99.wpd 10
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
a. Condition #8: delete one piece sectional garage doors.
b. Condition #9: deleted.
C. Condition #17: Plan #2C of Marbella series shall delete the third car
garage option.
d. Condition #18: Del Rey Plan #5 options for bedrooms, the master
bedroom and adjacent retreat room the wall shall be deleted if the
guest suite option (5G) is used. Curb cuts shall be restored if guest
suite deletes the garage space.
e. Condition # 19: applicant shall introduce character defining features
different than Del Rey and Marbella, however compatibility with
INCO, i.e., window shapes and sizes, roof lines, and roof heights.
The other revised Del Rey and Marbella architectural plans shall be
subject to Community Development approval.
-f. Condition #20: Elevation "C", the flat roof shall be is deleted and
revised plans will be approved by Community Development
Department.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler.
NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN: None.
C. Site Development Permit 98-641; a request of Southern Hills, LLC for compatibility
approval of architectural plans for three new prototype residential plans varying from
2,780 to 3,371 square feet to be constructed in Tracts 28776, 29004, and Parcel Map
28805 at PGA West.
1. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report
Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff
report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department.
2. Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission.
Mr. J. R. Morrow, representing the R. J. Hobbs Company, the builder, stated
they had read the staff report and would like to note a mistake in report, in
that they intend to use concrete roof tile rather than clay. Other than this
change, they have no objections.
3. Commissioner Abels commended the applicant on his presentation.
4. Chairman Tyler asked if anyone else would like to speak on this item. There
being none, Chairman Tyler closed this portion of the public hearing and
opened the hearing to Commission discussion.
I-AWA.. n.,,.n--ft\WPr)C)C'4;\PrI-1?-99 wnd 11
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Butler/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-
004 approving Site Development Permit 98-641, subject to the Findings and
Conditions of Approval with the change in roof material to concrete.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler.
NOES; None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN None.
D. Environmental Assessment 98 374 and Capital Improvement Project 98-09 for the
Washington Street Bridge Widening; a request of the City for Certification of a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and approval of median -
and parkway landscaping plans.
1. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Assistant Engineer Marcus Fuller 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 there were any questions of staff. Commissioner
Robbins asked if the artistic upgrading of the bridge railings was being
funded from the Art in Public Places Fund. Staff stated the portion of the
bridge that is artistic by design would be funded by the Art in Public Places
Fund.
3. Commissioners Butler and Abels commended staff on their presentation.
4. Chairman Tyler asked if most of the improvements would be on the west side
of the bridge and if so, what would happen on the east. Staff stated the east
side would have a curb and gutter, but no perimeter landscaping would be
installed until the land owner developed the site. Chairman Tyler stated the
18-foot median seemed excessive. Staff stated it is in agreement with the
General Plan. Chairman Tyler asked staff to explain the difference between
an "Australian Roundabout" and an "English Roundabout". Senior Engineer
Steve Speer stated the idea was first presented at the ALRC by the nearby
residents. There are similar attributes to the design, but the basic difference
is size. Should the Commission concur with the residents, the
recommendation could be passed on to the City Council.
5. Commissioner Abels asked if there was room at the intersection for a "Round
about". Staff stated there was and cars would be negotiating the round about
at about 18 miles per hour.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC1-12-99.wpd 12
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
6. Commissioner Robbins asked if the only difference between the two was the
size. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated it was his original understanding the
only difference was the size, but recently he has learned that the Australian
round about has a different approach. The approach flares as you enter to
help the flow of traffic. Commissioner Robbins asked what the diameter was
of the circle. Staff stated it would be 50 to 60 feet.
7. Chairman Tyler stated he had driven down streets with a round about and he
did not see the practicality of having one at this location. Commissioner
Robbins concurred. Commissioner Abels stated he grew accustomed to them
while in France and had no objection.
8. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Tyler asked if anyone
else would like to speak regarding this project. There being no further public
comment, the public participation portion was closed and open for
Commission discussion and Chairman Tyler commended staff on their
presentation.
9. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-005
recommending to the City Council Certification of A Mitigated Negative
Declaration for Environmental Assessment 98-374.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler.
NOES; None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN: None.
10. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 99-006 recommending to the City Council
approval of Capital Improvement Project 98-09, the Washington Street
Bridge Widening, as submitted.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler.
NOES; None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN: None.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS
A. Sign Application 98-441; a request of Starbucks Coffee/Promotional Signs for
approval of a deviation to an approved sign program to permit a corporate sign for
a new 'ousiness within the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center.
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.
C:\jMy Documents\WPDOCS\PCI-12-99.wpd 13
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
2. Chairman Tyler asked if anyone would like to speak on this application.
There being none, he asked staff if the west facing signs and two logos, the
one on the tower and the one on the window, were the only signs. There
would no signs on the east facing wall. Staff stated that was correct, however
the tower was at a slight angle and would be seen from the street to the east.
3. Commissioner Robbins asked if palm trees were to be planted to break up the
east elevation. Staff stated yes.
4. Mr. Jerry Murdock, Ultraneon Sign, stated he has discussed the 36 inch logo
with the owner and they have no objection.
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Robbins/Abels to adopt Minute Motion 99-001 approving
Sign Application 98-441, subject to the conditions as recommended.
Unanimously approved.
B. Sign Application 98-447; a request of Quizno's Subs/Ultraneon Sign Company for
approval of a deviation to an approved sign program to permit a corporate sign for
a new business within the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center.
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. Chairman Tyler asked if there would be an east facing sign. Staff stated there
would be.
3. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners AbelsButler to adopt Minute Motion 99-002 approving Sign
Application 98-447, subject to the conditions as submitted. Unanimously
approved.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL:
A. Commissioner Abels moved to recommend that the March 23`a meeting of the
Planning Commission be moved to March 22, 1999, if needed. Commissioner
Robbins seconded the motion. Unanimously approved.
B. Chairman Tyler asked if any Commissioner intended to attend the Planning
Commissioner's Forum on Saturday, January 23 in Fontana, or the League of
California Cities Planning Commissioners Orientation Workshop on Friday January
22, 1999 in Escondido. If so, they would need to get their request in early.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PCI-12-99.wpd 14
Planning Commission Meeting
January 12, 1999
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS
A. Chairman Tyler gave a report on the City Council meeting of January 5, 1999.
B. Commissioner Robbins asked why the Commission received the "Stand Up for
California. Staff stated all mail that is addressed to the Commission is forwarded to
them.
C. Commissioner Abels asked if there was any further discussion regarding a joint
meeting of the Council and Commission. Staff stated no.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to
adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning
Commission to be held January 26, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission
was adjourned at 9:35 P.M. on January 12, 1999.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCSTCI-12-99.wpd 15
PH #A
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: JANUARY 12, 1999 (CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 24, 1998)
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28964
REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF A 78 AND OTHER
COMMON LOT SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION MAP ON 39 ACRES
IN THE RL ZONE DISTRICT, AND CERTIFICATION OF A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT (EA 98-365)•
LOCATION: THE 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
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 83-68), IN THAT THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS CONDUCTED AN
INITIAL STUDY (EA 98-365) 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 ARE MADE PART OF THE CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL FOR THE TRACT, AND A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WILL BE FILED.
GENERAL
PLAN
DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE)
STPCTr28964-29, RESOTTM28964-26, CONDTr.28964-27 Page 1 of 7
ZONING
DESIGNATION: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
NORTH: VACANT (PORTION OF THE FUTURE RANCHO LA
QUINTA COUNTRY CLUB)
SOUTH: ACROSS 50TH AVENUE, CITRUS ORCHARD
SOUTHWEST: ACROSS 50TH AVENUE, ESTANCIAS RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT (TRACT 26524)
EAST: VACANT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES
WEST: VACANT (PORTION OF THE FUTURE RANCHO LA
QUINTA COUNTRY CLUB)
BAOKGRIO-U A:
On November 24, 1998, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing to
permit completion of the Archaeological Assessment for the development. Because
of the variety and volume of cultural material encountered on the potentially significant
sites, a Phase III mitigation program (100% recovery or avoidance) of certain areas is
required in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This
issue is addressed later in the report.
The vacant site is located on the north side of 50t" Avenue approximately 1,600 feet
west of Jefferson Street (Attachment 1) and immediately south and east of the
Rancho La Quinta Country Club development. Residentially zoned properties surround
the remainder of the site. Vehicle traffic on 50th Avenue is approximately 4,000 to
7,000 vehicles per day. Overhead utility lines exist along 50' Avenue.
The surface of the site consists of sand dunes and native vegetation and has
topographic relief changes in excess of 15 feet. Illegal dumping of nonhazardous
materials has occurred on portions of the property based on information provided by
the applicant's consultant and a review of the site by the Community Development
Department.
Project Request
The applicant is requesting approval of a 78-lot custom single family subdivision with
lots ranging in size from 15,000 square feet to over 22,500 square feet on 40-foot
wide (curb face to curb face) private streets (Attachment 2). The developer has
submitted architectural guidelines for the development which prescribe the design
guidelines necessary to build a custom house in the project as required by Section
STPCTr28964-29, RESOTTM28964-26, CONDTr.28964-27 Page 2 of 7
9.60.340 (Custom Home Design Guidelines) of the Zoning Ordinance. A copy of this
document is on file with the Community Development Department.
Access to the project is proposed at two points on 50th Avenue. One access is
located at the west side of the project (Street Lot "F) and is to be shared with the
Rancho La Quinta Country Club. A traffic signal is to be installed at this location when
warranted. The second, primary access is located at the southeast corner of the
project between Lots 1 and "H" (Street Lot "B"), and is restricted to right-in/right-out
traffic movements. Both access points are gated and 20' wide access lanes are
proposed.
Retention basins (Lots "G" and "H") are located outside of the 20-foot wide landscape
setback on 50th Avenue, and a Coachella Valley Water District well site is planned for
the southeast corner of the project (Lot "K") along with a sewage pump station (i.e.,
a portion of Lot "J").
A conceptual landscape plan has been prepared for the common areas adjacent to 50th
Avenue improvements showing trees, shrubs and groundcover being planted in the
parkway and on -site retention basins. To mitigate roadway noise, a six-foot high
serpentine privacy wall with pilasters is proposed on the south side of Lots 1-5, "H"
and "K" facing 50=' Avenue.
Public NQticte
This request was advertised in the D_e-ser_t_S-un newspaper on October 6, 1998, for the
initial public hearing on October 27, 1998. 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. No written correspondence
has been received.
Historic Preservation Commission_ (HPC)
On October 15, 1998, the HPC adopted Minute Motion 98-008, accepting the
Paleontogical Report for the project as prepared by L & L Environmental, Incorporated.
A copy of the HPC Minutes is attached (Attachment 3).
The Phase I Archaeological Assessment Report, prepared by L&L Environmental,
recommended a Phase II Testing and Data Recovery Program due to variety and
volume of cultural material found during field reconnaissance activities, and which
demonstrate that a wide range of prehistoric lifeways and activities took place at this
location. A Phase II Assessment (Interim Report) of the site was submitted by the
applicant's consultant stating that portions of the site contain prehistoric artifacts
potentially significant according to the National Register of Historic Places.
STPCTr28964-29, RESOTTM28964-26, CONDTr.28964-27 Page 3 of 7
On November 19, 1998, the HPC reviewed the developer's Phase II Archaeological
Resources Assessment (Interim Report) and determined modifications to the report
were warranted by adoption of Minute Motion 98-010. The Commission also
discussed site preservation for two critical archaeological sites. A copy of the HPC
Minutes is attached (Attachment 4). Because of the variety and volume of cultural
material encountered on the potentially significant sites, a Phase III mitigation program
of full data recovery of core site areas is required in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
On December 17, 1998, the HPC reviewed a proposal by the applicant's consultant
outlining additional mitigation in the form of data recovery (excavation) required for
this project. The Commission, on a 4-0 vote, adopted Minute Motion 98-013,
determining that the feasibility assessment for Phase III (Alternatives) was acceptable,
provided specific excavation measures were employed, additional analysis is performed
on the bone fragments, and additional information is supplied to the City (Attachment
5). The data report shall be approved by the Community Development Department as
required by Title 7 of the Municipal Code and CEQA.
Environmental_Assessment
The Community Development Department had prepared a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for this request (EA 98-365) based on review of the developer's site
studies (e.g., Noise, Hydrology, Cultural Resources, etc.). The Assessment concludes
that impacts to subsurface historic resources will occur unless data recovery is
completed. A copy of the Assessment is attached. Copies of the applicant's reports
are on file with the Community Development Department.
EI ND_1N G S-17-OR APP_R O-f A L
Pursuant to Section 13.12.120 of the Subdivision Ordinance, the following findings
are provided:
General Plan/Zoning Code Consistency
A. 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 two dwelling
units per acre, within the density allowed for LDR areas.
B. The RL District (Low Density Residential) permits single family housing, provided
lots are 7,200 square feet or larger. The proposed Design Guidelines ensure
architectural compatibility for the Tract.
Tract Design/Improvements
A. 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
STPCTr28964-29, RESOTTM28964-26, CONDTr.28964-27 Page 4 of 7
streets are private and designed in accordance with Chapter 3.0 of the General
Plan Circulation Element.
B. Interior private streets are 40-feet in width (curb face to curb face) which
exceeds the size requirements of the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance.
Sidewalks are not required when private streets are proposed. The
recommended conditions will ensure that all on -site work is consistent with City
standards.
C. 50' Avenue is planned to carry upwards of 25,000 vehicles per day at City
build -out. A new traffic signal is required to control traffic movement and
provide direct access into this project when warranted. The signal is to be
constructed at the westerly access point and will be shared with future Rancho
La Quinta Country Club improvements and the Estancias (Tract 26524)
development on the south side of 50'h Avenue at Orchard Lane. Off -site
improvements required of the project are raised landscaped median and parkway
improvements such as landscaping and other amenities consistent with City
requirements.
Environmental Consideration
A. The vacant site is suitable for low density residential development based on the
recommendations of Environmental Assessment 98-365. Development will not
cause substantial environmental damage, or injury to fish or wildlife, or their
habitat provided mitigation measures are met. Cultural resources shall be
mitigated through data recovery (excavation) as required by the City's Historic
Preservation Commission per CEQA. Urban improvements are adjoining the
property making it conducive for residential development.
Health and Safety Concerns
A. Retention basins are proposed to contain on -site storm water flows. A well site
and pump station are planned at the southeast corner of the project for future
use by the Coachella Valley Water District, to meet growth requirements of La
Quinta and surrounding areas. 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.
B. The developer is currently working with the Coachella Valley Water District to
determine the best solution to provide sewage improvements to the lots through
adjacent properties. The developer has proposed a temporary sewage pump
station until the property to the south is developed. The District is reviewing
the developer's request, and must approve the proposal before the final map
application can be approved.
STPCTr28964-29, R3SOTTM28964-26, CONDTr.28964-27 Page 5 of 7
11
Prepared by:
i
G u dell, Associate Planner
Submitted by:
Christine di lorio, Pla ping Manager
STPCTr28964-29, RESO,rTM28964-26, CONDTr.28964-27 Page 7 of 7
BI #C
DATE:
CASE NO.:
APPLICANT:
ARCHITECT:
REQUEST:
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
JULY 13, 1999
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-640
CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES
BENJAMIN AGUILAR AND ASSOCIATES
APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR TWO NEW
AND ONE REVISED PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL UNITS
LOCATION: TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN TRACT 23995-7 THROUGH 10
ON THE WEST SIDE OF ADAMS STREET, NORTH OF THE
EXTENSION OF WESTWARD HO DRIVE.
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
ZONING:
BACKGROUND:
THIS SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT HAS BEEN
DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPTED FROM
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
REQUIREMENTS UNDER SECTION 15303, CLASS 3 (A) OF
THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION.
LDR (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 2-4 DWELLINGS PER
ACRE)
RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
Seven new residential prototype plans (three Del Rey and four Marbella plans) were
approved on January 12, 1999, by the Planning Commission to be constructed in the
south portion of Tract 23995 in north La Quinta. Construction has begun on the first
phase of the Del Rey units. Revisions for some of the Marbella units have been
submitted. The Marbella units approved were as follows:
Plan 1 - 1,450 square feet (3 bdrm / 3 car garage)
Plan 2 - 1,803 square feet (3 bdrm / 2 car garage +optional one car garage)
Plan 3 - 2,166 square feet (4 bdrm / 3 car garage)
Plan 4 - 2,209 square feet (3 bdrm / 3 car garage)
C:pc rpt sdp 98-640 minor rev
C
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
The applicant has decided not to construct Plan 1 of the Marbella units. They have
submitted a revised Plan 3, and added a Plan 3F. Plan 3 and 3F are the same size at
2,165 sauare feet, with a three car garage and three bedrooms. A 211 square foot
optional home office is shown in third garage space of each plan.
Additionally, revisions have been made to Plan 4. Plan 4 is proposed at 2.200 square
feet as compared to the 2,209 square feet for the original. This plan includes four
bedrooms (game room is considered bedroom) and a three car garage. While the size
is similar to the original Plan 4, the layout and elevations are different.
The units are Mediterranean in nature, utilizing exterior plaster walls, wood fascias,
and concrete tile roofing. Colors of the exterior materials will be in the earth tone
range. Color samples will be available at the meeting. The roofs of all plans are a gable
running the width of the residence with smaller gable or hip roofs coming off the main
roof. Each plan includes three different facades, with building rears being the same
within each plan. Garage doors are metal roll -up type. The height of the units is
approximately 16 feet.
The plans utilize a variety of architectural features on the facades, including towers,
arches, wainscots, stucco recesses and popouts. Sides and rears of the units do not
have any popouts provided.
EXISTING UNIT DESCRIPTION:
The existing units in the northern part of the tract have been built by Inco Homes and
vary in size from 1,411 (three bedrooms) to 2,008 (four bedrooms) square feet. The
units are Spanish or Mediterranean in nature. The units are one story in height. Three
of the four plans have a main gable roof running the width of the residence, with a hip
or gable roof garage. Some plans have smaller hip or gable roof treatments over the
entries or windows. All units have concrete tile roofing, exterior plaster walls and
wood fascias. Other features used include arches, popout window and door
surrounds, stucco columns, brick or stone wainscot, and one piece tilt -up metal garage
doors.
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC) REVIEW:
The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of July 7, 1999, and discussed the
recommended conditions and other concerns on how to ensure the new units are
compatible with the existing units (Attachment 2). The Committee unanimously
adopted Minute Motion 99-016 , recommending approval.
C:pc rpt sdp 98-640 minor rev
0
C
FINDINGS:
As required by Section 9.60.300 (Compatibility Review) of the Zoning Ordinance, the
Committee is required to review and comment on the following architectural findings:
1. The architectural and other design elements of the new residential units will be
compatible and not detrimental to the other existing units in the projects.
2. The proposed single family residences will be compatible to existing dwellings
with respect to architectural materials such as roof material, window treatment,
and garage door style, colors, roof lines, and lot area.
Response to #1.and #2:
The proposed units are of a compatible architectural design, colors, and
materials. The units utilize similar architectural features such as tile roofs,
exterior plaster, arches, popout stucco surrounds, and wood fascias. Staff is
recommending the popout stucco surrounds be provided around windows and
doors of the sides and rear of all units.
3. The proposed units are in conformance with the Zoning Code requirements for
single family development.
Response.
The three proposed plans are similar to the previously approved plans with the
facades providing a variety of architectural treatment. The three car garage of
Plan 4 has a water heater encroachment within the -garage area. Staff is
recommending its relocation prior to issuance of a building permit for that plan.
The home office option for the third garage space of Plans 3 and 3F shall be
deleted because its use would require that the garage be a three car garage.
4. The single family dwelling units proposed within a partially developed
subdivision shall not deviate by more than 10 percent from the square footage
of the original developer which have either been approved or constructed.
Response.
The size range of the existing residences is 1,411 to 2,008 square feet. The
proposed units are 2,165 and 2,200 square feet, and therefore, this request is
in compliance.
In conclusion, the findings needed to approve this request can be made, subject to
conditions.
C:pc rpt sdp 98-640 minor rev
0
® ATTACHMENT #2
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta,.CA
July 7, 1999
I. CALL TO ORDER
10:00 a.m.
A. This meeting of the Architectural Landscaping Committee was called to order
at 10:15 a.m. by Principal Planner tan Sawa who led the flag salute.
B. Committee Members present: B' 1 Bobbitt and Dennis Cunningham. It was moved
and seconded by Committee embers Cunningham/Bobbitt to excuse Committee
Member Reynolds. Unani usly approved.
C. Staff present: Principal P�anner Stan Sawa and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF TH� AGENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT
A. Principal Plann Stan Sawa asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of June
2, 1999. The being no corrections, it was moved and seconded by Committee
Members Bot�itt/Cunningham to approve the minutes as submitted. Unanimously
approved.
V. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Site Development Permit 98-640; a request of Century -Crowell Communities for
j approval of architectural plans for one new and two revised prototype residential
units for Tract 23995-7 through 10 on the west.side of Adams Stret, north of the
extension of Westward Ho Drive.
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 asked if staff was requesting additional hip
roofs. Staff stated there were no recommendations.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\, I RC7-7-99.wpd 1
•
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee
July 7, 1999
3. Committee Member Cunningham asked if trim bands were being added to the
windows. Staff stated they were being required to add the trim bands and the
popouts.
4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked why the applicant was deleting their Plan
1. Staff stated the market was demanding larger units.
5. Committee Member Cunningham stated this was creating a good cross
section of homes to meet the market demand.
6. Nis. Marty Butler, representing the applicant, presented the color board.
7'. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if they would be using the barrel or flat
roof tile. Ms. Butler stated they would be using the "S" the with some flat.
8. Staff stated that on Plan 3 and 3F the applicant would have to delete the
office option. Discussion followed regarding the Plan 3 and 3F optional
rooms and when a third car garage was required.
9. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee
Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 99-016
recommending approval of Site Development Permit 98-640, subject to
conditions as recommended. Unanimously approved.
VI. CORRE§,�ONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
V. COMMITTEE-AIEMBER ITEMS: None
VI. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further busine it was moved and seconded by Committee Members
Cunningham/Bobbitt to adjourn this r ular meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review
Committee to the next regular meeting t be held on August 4, 1999. This meeting was adjourned
at 10:33 a.m. on July 7, *1999.
Respectfully submitted,
BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\ALRC7-7-99.wpd 2
PH #C
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: JANUARY 12, 1999
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-641
APPLICANT AND
PROPERTY
OWNER: SOUTHERN HILLS, LLC
ARCHITECT: THE WOODS GROUP ARCHITECTS
REPRESENTATIVE: FORREST HAAG, ASLA
REQUEST: COMPATIBILITY APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS
FOR THREE NEW PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL PLANS.
LOCATION: TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN TRACTS 28776,29004, AND
PARCEL MAP 28805 IN SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002 (PGA
WEST)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THIS SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT HAS BEEN
DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPTED FROM
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
REQUIREMENTS UNDER SECTION 15303, CLASS 3 (A) OF
THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION.
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: LDR (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 2-4 D.U./ACRE)
ZONING: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
BACKGROUND:
The proposal is for three new residential prototype plans for Tracts 28776,29004,
and Parcel Map 28805 within PGA West in south La Quinta (Attachment 1).
PC.STAFF rpt. SDP 98-641.wpd
0 9
PROJECT REQUEST•
Proposed are three prototype floor plans varying from 2,780 to 3,372 square feet in
size. All plans are one story at 18 and 19 feet in height excluding the chimney. The
roof heights vary within each plan due to the different roof planes and sizes. All
plans are have a similar footprint which includes three bedroom units and a two car
garage with Plan 3 providing a guest suite and single car garage under one roof.
The units are Spanish/Mediterranean in nature, utilizing exterior plaster walls, wood
and stone fascias, and clay tile roofing. Colors of the exterior plaster range from
white to light brown, with wood colors light tans to light brown, and roof tiles solid
red and red blends. A total of nine elevations with differing color schemes is
indicated. Each of the three floor plans include three different facades, with building
rears being the same within each plan. Garage doors are sectional roll -up doors.
Conceptual landscaping plan identifies a pallette of materials for trees, shrubs, and
ground cover. The clanting complies with the plant pallette in the approved Specific
Plan for PGA West.
EXISTING UNIT DESCRIPTION:
The existing units have been built by a number of developers. To date,
approximately 1,800 dwelling units have been constructed in PGA West. The size of
the constructed and approved units varies from 1,290 to 4,830 square feet. All of
the units are Spanish or Mediterranean in nature. The units are primarily one story
with some two story units. All units have clay or concrete tile roofing, exterior
plaster walls and plaster or wood fascias. Other features used include but are not
limited to arches, shutters, popout window and door surrounds, earth tone exterior
cclors, and sectional garage doors,
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This request was advertised in the Desert Sun Newspaper on December 3, 1998, and
mailed to all property owners within PGA West and 500 feet around the project
boundaries. To date, no correspondence has been received.
STATEMENT OF ISSUES•
ISSUE - Development Standards For Compatibility Review
The Zoning Code specifies standards or findings that must be met to grant
compatibility approval. This request complies with those as noted below:
1 . No new two story units are proposed as a part of this approval. Therefore,
there will be no height impacts on existing residences.
PC.STAFF rpt. SDP 98-64' .wpd
® 0
2. The applicant proposes to use block walls which will match or be similar to the
existing walls in the PGA West to provide compatibility.
3. The proposed residences are similar to the existing residences. The designs are
compatible with the existing units in terms of architectural materials, style, and
colors. No two story units are proposed, but they are not required for
compatibility.
4. The recommended approval and Code requires a minimum of one 24" box size
tree in the front yard. This will be required as a part of the landscaping
approval.
5. The proposed units vary from 2,780 to 3,372 square feet in size which is
within the range of 1,290 to 4,830 square feet of existing constructed units
within PGA West.
ISSUE 2- Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) Review
The ALRC reviewed these plans at its meeting of December 3, 1998. (Attachment 2)
The Committee adopted Minute Motion 98-01 5, recommending approval subject to
the staff recommended conditions.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98- , approving Site Development Permit
98-641, subject to Findings and Conditions.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Minutes for ALRC Meeting December 3, 1998
3. Plan Exhibits (for Planning Commission only)
Prepared by:
Fred Baker, AICP
Principal Planner
Submitted by:
Christine di lorio, PlanAing Manager
PC.STAFF rpt. SDP 98-641.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-641, SUBJECT TO
CONDITIONS, PROVIDING COMPATIBILITY APPROVAL OF
THREE PROTOTYPE UNITS FOR CONSTRUCTION IN PGA
WEST
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-641
APPLICANT: SOUTHERN HILLS LLC.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 121h day of January, 1999, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
the request of Southern Hills LLC. to approve architectural and landscape plans for
three new prototype residential plans to be constructed east of Madison Street, south
of Airport Drive, in Specific Plan 83-002 (PGA West), more particularly described as:
Tracts 28776, 29004, and Parcel Map 28805
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has been determined to be
exempt from California Environmental Quality Act requirements under Section 15303,
Class 3 (A) of the Guidelines For Implementation; and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of
said Site Development Permit:
1. No new two story units are proposed as a part of this approval. Therefore,
there will be no height impacts on existing residences.
2. The applicant proposes to use block walls which will match or be similar to the
existing walls in the PGA West to provide compatibility.
3. The proposed residences are similar to the existing residences. The designs are
compatible with the existing units in terms of architectural materials, style, and
colors. No two story units are proposed, but they are not required for
compatibility.
4. The recommended approval and Code requires a minimum of one 24" box size
tree in the front yard. This will be required as a part of the landscaping
approval.
A:\PC.RESO SDP 98-641 d.wpd
0
Planning Commission Resolution 98-
Site Development Permit 98-641
January 12, 1999
5. The proposed units vary from 2,780 to 3,372 square feet in size which is
within the constructed range of 1,290 to 4,830 square feet which exists in
PGA West.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 98-641 for the reasons
set forth in t,"1is Resolution, subject to the Conditions labeled Exhibit "A",
attached hereto;
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 121h day of January, 1999, 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:1PC.RESO SDP 98-641 d.wpd
RESOLUTION 98-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-641
JANUARY 12, 1999
GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. This approval is for three prototype units of the following approximate sizes:
A. Plan 1 - 2,780 square feet
B. Plan 2 - 3.020 square feet
C. Plan 3 - 3,372 square feet
2. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community
Development Department, Coachella Valley Water District, Riverside county
agricultural Commissioner before they will be considered final. Each residential lot
shall include at least one 24-inch box size tree, with other trees, groundcover, and
shrubs consistent with the Specific Plan.
3. Lawn areas shall be either hybrid Bermuda (summer) or hybrid Bermuda/Rye
(winter) depending on the season installed. All trees shall be double staked to
prevent wind damage.
4. The perimeter walls around the tract and residences shall match or be compatible
with those used in the project. Gates shall be constructed out of metal pickets or
its equivalent.
5. Final working drawings shall be reviewed by the Community Development
Department. Final working drawings for Plan 3, with the guest unit, shall
accommodate a three car garage, in which the two car garage area is a minimum
20 feet wide by 20 feet deep, or its equivalent.
LOCATION MAP
PROTC
moNTECI77 0
by
The R.C. Hobbs Company
Forrest K. Haag, ASV+, Inc.
Landscape Architecture • Land Planning
25o Newport 'center Drive, suite toa
Newoort Heath californis R2660
0 0
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee
December 3,.1998
addition. The landscaping plant pallet is good. The date palm to be used in
the; small islands will not be a problem. His concern has been the crowns
breaking off of the larger palms.. On the use of pine trees, he has had
problems with some of the pine trees at PGA West. All other trees are pretty
standard. He is not against using the pine trees, rather the problems they have
incurred using them in the desert is that they can be diseased and cause a
problem.
3. Mr. Pete Bilicki, Innovative Resort Communities, the applicant, stated they
would check with their landscape architect regarding the pine trees.
Discussion followed regarding the use of pine trees.
4. Committee Member Dennis Cunningham stated that in regard to the
architecture, they are compatible with the existing units. He asked if staff to
clarify why and where they were recommending the use of surrounds on the
windows. Discussion followed regarding the window treatments.
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee
Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 98-014 approving
Site Development Permit 98-636 as recommended by staff and with the
deletion of the pine trees from the plant pallette. Unanimously approved.
B. Site Development Permit 98-641; a request of Southern Hills, LLC (Roger Hobbs)
for approval of architectural and landscaping plans for three prototype plans for the
property located on the east side of Southern Hills, at Oakmont and at the north end
of Laurel Valley in PGA West.
l . Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff
report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department.
2. Committee Member Bobbitt asked staff to clarify the reason for the change
in the size of the garage. Staff stated it was to accommodate a hot water
heater and door which encroaches into it.
3. Committee Member Cunningham stated it is another fine product in PGA
West and is in keeping with what is existing.
4. Committee Member Bobbitt abstained due to a possible conflict of interest.
5. There being no further discussion it was moved and seconded to adopt
Minute Motion 98-015 approving Site Development Permit 98-641 as
recommended by staff.
FILE! COP � 0
0
DATE:
CASE NO.:
APPLICANT:
SIGN COMPANY:
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
JANUARY 12, 1999
SIGN APPLICATION 98-441
STARBUCKS COFFEE
PROMOTIONAL SIGNS
B I #A
REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A A DEVIATION TO AN APPROVED SIGN
PROGRAM TO PERMIT A CORPORATE SIGN FOR A NEW
BUSINESS
LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111 1N THE ONE -ELEVEN LA
QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER, WEST OF BOSTON MARKET
(78-742 HIGHWAY 111)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
ZONING:
BACKGROUND:
THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THIS SIGN
APPLICATION* IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT
TO SECTION 15311, CLASS 11, OF THE GUIDELINES FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT.
M/RC (MIXED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
Starbucks Coffee will be opening in the south end of the building under construction
at the Simon Drive entrance, west of Boston Market, in the One -Eleven La Quinta
Shopping Center. This tenant will be one of several in the building.
SIGN REQUEST:
The shopping center has an approved sign program which requires 24" high internally
illuminated helvetica style channel letters. Length is permitted to be 75% of the lease
width, up to a maximum of 50 square feet. A provision in the sign program allows a
national tenant with 5 or more outlets to request approval to use their corporate sign.
The applicant is requesting approval to use their standard corporate signs and logo.
cApc rpt sa 98-441
Starbucks Coffee has stores throughout the western United States which qualifies
them to use their corporate signs. The landlord has approved the requested sign as
submitted.
The request is for two signs and two logos on the building. "STARBUCKS COFFEE"
is proposed on the south side of the building facing Highway 111, with "STARBUCKS"
on the west side facing the parking above the entry. These 3" deep block letter signs
will be halo illuminated reverse pan channel letters mounted 1.5" off of the stucco
fascia with the transformers behind the fascia. The letters are solid aluminum letters
painted green. The illumination will be around the letters due to the clear backing and
1.5" space between the sign and wall.
Facing Highway 111, "STARBUCKS" will be 14'-6" long and 18" high, with "COFFEE"
9 feet long by 18" high. The total square footage as placed on the wall will be
approximately 39.75 square feet.
Adjacent to the entry, on the west side of the building, "STARBUCKS" will be 16" high
by 12'-10.5" long for a total of 17.3 square feet. Both signs will be on centered on
the facia, evenly spaced between the cornice and horizontal score line below it.
Facing the driveway to the east, a 48" diameter, 9" deep internally illuminated logo is
proposed on the tower. This logo will be centered vertically between the cornice and
false window arch below and horizontally between the ends of the tower. The logo
will be green, black, and white, with the white and green "STARBUCKS COFFEE" and
white mermaid illuminated. The can retainer and returns will be black.
A small 24" diameter illuminated logo matching the larger one is proposed to hang
inside behind the glass window next to the public entrance. This logo functions as a
pedestrian sign since the main sign above is not visible to those approaching the
business from the north on the sidewalk.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE:
Issue 1 - Consistency
National tenants are permitted to use corporate or their standard signs with approval
of the Planning Commission. To date, a number of tenants have chosen to do this in
the center. The style of the letters is compatible with the approved "Helvetca"style
letters.
Issue 2 - Tower logo
The sign company has drawn the tower for the 48" logo taller than the construction
plans show it. If drawn to scale, the logo would have only 6" of clearance from the
top cornice and from the bottom false window treatment. This would overpower the
tower space. Staff recommends the logo be reduced to 36" in diameter.
c:\pc rpt sa 98-441
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Minute Motion 99-_, approving the requested sign, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Obtain a building permit prior to any work on the sign being started.
2. Final plans shall be reviewed by the Community Development Department prior
to obtaining building permit.
3. The logo on the tower shall be reduced to 36" in diameter and centered on the
stucco surface.
Attachments:
1. Sign exhibits
Prepared by:
Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner
Submitted by:
6L-"-,s
oC
Christine di lorio, Planning .Manager
cApc rpt sa 98-441
ILI'
DATE:
CASE NO.:
APPLICANT:
SIGN COMPANY:
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
JANUARY 12, 1999
SIGN APPLICATION 98-447
QUIZNO'S SUBS
ULTRANEON SIGN COMPANY
L •J
REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A DEVIATION TO AN APPROVED SIGN
PROGRAM TO PERMIT A CORPORATE SIGN FOR A NEW
BUSINESS
LOCATION:
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
ZONING:
BACKGROUND:
NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111 IN THE ONE -ELEVEN LA
QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER, WEST OF BOSTON MARKET
THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY. DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THIS SIGN
APPLICATION IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT
TO SECTION 15311, CLASS 11, OF THE GUIDELINES FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT.
M/RC (MIXED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
Quizno's Subs will be opening in the space north of Starbucks in the the building under
construction at the Simon Drive entrance, west of Boston Market, in the One -Eleven
La Quinta Shopping Center. This tenant will be one of several in the building.
SIGN REQUEST:
The shopping center has an approved sign program which requires 24" high internally
illuminated helvetica style channel letters. Length is permitted to be 75% of the lease
width, up to a maximum of 50 square feet. A provision in the sign program allows a
national tenant with 5 or more outlets to request approval to use their corporate sign.
The applicant is requesting approval to use their standard corporate sign on the fascia
in front of their business location. Quizno's Subs has stores throughout the California
which qualifies them to use their corporate signs. The landlord has approved the
requested sign as submitted.
cApc rpt sa 98-447
The request is for an internally illuminated sign on the front of the building facing the
west and on the back facing the Simon Drive entry into the shopping center. Each
sign will read "Quizno's Subs" with their logo between the words. The sign is
approximately 14' long by 1 1.5" high for a total of approximately 13.5 square feet.
The logo is 2' long by 1 '-2" high.
"Quizno's" will have a face that is a translucent hunter green with thin white stripes,
with the trim caps a matching green and returns red. "Subs" will be a translucent red,
with matching trim cap and hunter green returns. The logo will be hunter green and
red with white lettering reading "oven baked classics", and a hunter green trim cap and
return.
The sign will be 5" deep and mounted flush with the stucco facia, with the
transformer hidden behind the facia. On each side of the building, the sign will be
centered on the stucco facia
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE:
Issue 1 - Acceptability
National tenants are permitted to use corporate or their standard signs with approval
of the Planning Commission. To date, a number of national or regional tenants have
chosen to do this in the center. The style of the letters is compatible with the other
signs in the center. The signs proposed are typical of other Quizno's Subs locations.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Minute Motion 99 approving the requested signs, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Obtain a building permit prior to any work on the sign being started.
2. Final plans shall be reviewed by the Community Development Department prior
to obtaining building permit.
Attachments:
1. Sign exhibits
Prepared by:
Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner
S mitted by:
r
Christine di lori Planning Manager
cApc rpt sa 98-447
Op
F F"� OF
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quints City Hall Council Chamber
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
January 12,1999
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 99-001
Beginning Minute Motion 99-001
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
II. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing.
Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes.
III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of the Minutes for December 8, 1998
B. Department Report
PC/AGENDA
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Case ..................... CONTINUED - TENTATIVE TRACT 28964 AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 93-365
Applicant ................ Oliphant and Williams Associates, Inc.
Location ................. North side of Avenue 50, approximately 1,600 feet west of
Jefferson Street.
Request ................... Approval and recommendation to the City Council of
Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact and a request to subdivide 39 acres into
78 single family residential units and common lots.
Action ................... Resolution 99- , Resolution 99-
B. Case ..................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-640
Applicant ................ Century -Crowell Communities
Location ................. West side of Adams Street, north of the extension of Westward
Ho Drive.
Request ................... Approval of seven prototype residential plans varying from
1,450 to 2,240 square feet for construction in Phases 6-10 of
Tract 23995.
Action ................... Resolution 99-
C. Case ..................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-641
Applicant ............... Southern Hills LLC
Location ................ Within PGA West on Southern Hills, east of PGA West
Boulevard.
Request ................. Approval of three new prototype residential plans varying from
approximately 2,780 to 3,371 square feet in floor area.
Action ................... Resolution 99-
D. Case ..................... CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 98-09 AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-374 -
WASHINGTON STREET BRIDGE WIDENING
Applicant ............... City of La Quinta
Location ................ Washington Street from Avenue 50 to the La Quinta Evacuation
Channel.
Request ................. Approval and recommendation to the City Council of
Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact and request for median and parkway
landscape plans.
Action ................... Resolution 98- Resolution 99-
PC/AGENDA
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Case .................... SIGN APPLICATION 98-441
Applicant .............. Promotional Signs for Starbucks Coffee
Location ............... North side of Highway 111 in the One Eleven La Quint,
Shopping Center, west of Boston Market.
Request ................ Approval of a deviation to an approved sign program to permi
a corporate sign for a new business.
Action .................. Minute Motion 99-
B. Case .................... SIGN APPLICATION 99-447
Applicant .............. Ultraneon Sign Company for Quizno's Subs
Location ............... On the north side of Highway 111, west of Simon Drive, at thi
entry to the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center.
Request ................ Approval of a deviation to an approved sign program to permi
a corporate sign for a new business.
Action .................. Minute Motion 99-
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS
A. Commission report on the City Council meeting of January 5, 1999
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
December 8, 1998
I. CALL TO ORDER
7:00 P.M.
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by
Chairman Tyler who lead the flag salute.
B. Chairman Tyler requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Kirk,
Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Abels/Kirk to excuse Commissioner Butler. Unanimously approved.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn
Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer,
Principal Planners Stan Sawa and Fred Baker, Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand,
and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: None.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Tyler asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of November 24,
1998. Commissioner Robbins asked that the minutes be corrected on Page 12, Item
3 to correct the spelling of the word "wold" to "would"; and Page 18, under
adjournment to correct that Commissioner Abels did not second the motion as he was
absent. Chairman Tyler asked that Page 13, Item 4 be corrected to correct the
spelling of the word "inner -face" to "inter -face". There being no other correction, it
was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to approve the minutes
as corrected.
B. Department Report: None.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Conditional Use Permit 98-042 a request of Garry Hopkins for approval of an
extension of time for an unlit golf driving range and school within the Low Density
Residential (RL) Zoning District.
AApc12-8-98.wpd I
Planning Commission Meeting
December 8, 1998
Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
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.
2. Chairman Tyler asked if there were any questions of staff. There being none,
he asked staff to explain where at the west end of the site there are single
family residences. Staff stated the residential units were to the south-west
and northwest.
3. Chairman Tyler asked about the condition regarding screening. Staff stated
the condition was to provide safety netting to be installed at the same time as
the adjoining tract is developed.
4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Tyler asked if the
applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Garry Hopkins, 45-995
Dune Palms Road, stated the only condition he questioned was the Dune
Palms Road street improvements. If he had to meet all the conditions, it is
not feasible for him to continue with the application as he could not afford to
make the $40,000 worth of improvements. He went on to explain the
operation of the business. He asked for relief from the Dune Palms Road
street improvements.
5. Chairman Tyler asked if the improvements along Westward Ho Drive were
a problem. Mr. Hopkins stated he understood the only requirement was for
Dune Palms Road improvements. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell informed
the applicant he was responsible for all the conditions and asked if he
understood this was a requirement for both street improvements.
6. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the process of reviewing each application
does not require reviewing the depth of the applicant's "pockets". It is a
difficult situation. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the City does not
have a provision that would allow waiving this condition. The applicant
needs to make a request to the City for relief through the Redevelopment
Agency or apply for a Development Agreement.
7. Commissioner Abels asked if this could be addressed during the time
extension application. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell suggested a
continuance be given to give the applicant time to investigate the options that
are available to him for assistance.
8. Commissioner Robbins asked if the assessment district that is being proposed
nearby could be of any assistance. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated
this was a possibility, but would need to be looked into.
A:\pc 12-8-98.wpd 2
Planning Commission Meeting
December 8, 1998
9. Commissioner Abels stated his concern that if the applicant was forced to
comply with the conditions, the City would be putting him out of business.
He would suggest a continuance to allow the applicant time to look into his
options.
10. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the original use was
approved as a Temporary Use and since his ten year approval is expiring, this
requires the street improvements to be completed. He went on to explain the
options that were made available to the applicant.
11. Commissioner Kirk asked if the applicant had been required to meet these
conditions when the application was first approved. Staff stated no as it was
a Temporary Use approval at the time.
12. Chairman Tyler stated his concern was the cost of the improvements.
Community Development Director explained the improvements were for
sewer and water which are not street improvements.
13. Commissioner Abels asked if these improvements could be included with the
street improvements. Staff stated that was not known. Commissioner Abels
asked if he could have a six months extension. Senior Engineer Steve Speer
stated the Commission could change either number. City Attorney Dawn
Honeywell stated you cannot have disparate treatment to people as they come
before the Commission. Assistance is available and she explained some
options to the applicants.
14. Commissioner Robbins asked if the City Council could waive this condition.
City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated no, they would have to enter into a
development agreement which could allow the ability to alter some of the
requirements and/or offer assistance. In order to make a change. you must
have consistency with the General Plan.
15. Chairman Tyler asked if there was any other public participation. There
being none, this portion of the public hearing was closed and opened for
Commission discussion.
16. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Abel to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-086
approving Conditional Use Permit 98-042, subject to the conditions as
modified.
A:\pcl2-8-98.wpd 3
Planning Commission Meeting
December 8, 1998
a. Condition #8: The date was changed to June 1, 2002.
b. The improvements shall be completed within four years of the City's
approval of the Conditional Use Permit.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler.
NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None.
B. Site Development Permit 98-608, Amendment #1; a request of KSL Land
Corporation for approval and recommendation to the City Council for an
Amendment to a previously approved Site Development Permit for the resort
employee parking lot to delete Conditions #32 and #38 which pertain to construction
and timing of Eisenhower Drive street improvements.
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 staff had a picture of the site. Staff explained where
the parking lot was located and discussion followed regarding the current use
of the site and the adjoining site.
3. Commissioner Robins asked if landscaping would be added. Staff was still
in the process of reviewing the landscaping plans, but a living fence was
proposed and it would be heavily landscaped.
4. Chairman Tyler asked if this was to be a permanent use. Staff stated the
applicant was wanting it to be permanent for the time being.
Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission.
Mr. Chevis Hosea, speaking for the applicant, thanked staff for their help. He
went on to state their objection to constructing a 12-foot retaining wall
against Eisenhower Drive as it would be too costly. One of their objections
was that the wall would encroach into the existing golf course. They have
been working with staff to make this a safe egress/ingress area. They will
continue to work on a plan for alternatives to the location of the employee
parking lot as well as maybe reconfiguring this area. In addition, they are
working on a solution for temporary power access to light the parking lot.
6. Chairman Tyler asked if there was any other public participation. There
being none, this portion of the public hearing was closed and opened for
Commission discussion.
AApc I2-8-98.wnd 4
Planning Commission Meeting
December 8, 1998
7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution
98-087 approving Site Development Permit 97-608, Amendment #1, subject
to the conditions as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler.
NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None.
C. Site Development Permit 98-636; a request of Innovative Resort Communities for
compatibility approval for five new prototype plans from approximately 3,580 to
4,621 square feet in floor area for units approved within PGA West on Weiskopf,
west of Winged Foot.
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 staff to explain Condition #6. Staff stated this was a
request of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee.
3. Chairman Tyler asked if anyone else would like to speak on this item. There
being none, Chairman Tyler closed this portion of the public hearing and
opened the hearing to Commission discussion.
4. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-
088 approving Site Development Permit 98-636, subject to the Findings and
Conditions of Approval as amended.
a. Condition #7: A second facade for Plan 1-2 shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department for approval.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler.
NOES; None. ABSENT: Butler. ABSTAIN None.
D. Tract 26855 (,Revisedl; a request of Brookfield California Land Holdings, Inc. for
approval and recommendation to the City Council to create 95 single family
residential lots and miscellaneous lots on 33.8 acres on the property east of Jefferson
Street south of 50th Avenue.
1. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff
report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department. Staff noted the changes to the conditions they were proposing.
AApc12-8-98.wpd 5
Planning Commission Meeting
December 8, 1998
2. Chairman Tyler asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner
Robbins asked staff to explain how Lot "K" is not a part. Staff explained the
changes as proposed by the Public Works Department.
3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Tyler asked if the
applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Chris Schultz, Keith
International, representing Brookfield International who owns the tract, stated
they had no objections to the conditions as submitted or modified.
4. Chairman Tyler asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this
project. There being no further public comment, the public participation
portion was closed and open for Commission discussion.
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution
98-089 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 26855
(Revised), subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as modified.
a. Condition #23 (A): The percentage is 23.1 %.
b. Condition #23(B): The percentage is 46.2%.
C. Conditions #45(B), (C), and #80 are deleted.
d. Condition #83 is added: "Common Lot "K" shall be designated as an
"Undevelopable Open Space", unless it is merged with the contiguous
property lying on its east or west side. It cannot be merged to Lot 45
of this tract.
e. Condition #84 is added: Prior to final map approval, the north -south
street that connects this tract with the adjacent tract to the south shall
have the same name.
f. Condition #85 is added: Prior to final map approval, the entrance
street from Jefferson Street shall be named Pomello Drive.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman
Tyler. NOES; None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
E. Tentative Tract Map 23773, Extension #1; a request of Century -Crowell
Communities for approval and recommendation to the City Council for a one year
time extension for unrecorded Tract Phases 4-7 consisting of 77 single family lots on
20.95 acres.
Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
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.
AApc 12-8-98.wpd 6
Planning Commission Meeting
December 8, 1998
2. Chairman Tyler asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner
Robbins asked if this tract had a prototype that contained a two story unit or
loft. Staff stated a condition was contained in the Conditions of Approval for
the Site Development Permit for the Precise Plan approval. A condition
could be added to this request as well, but it is covered in the Site
Development Permit Conditions of Approval.
3. Chairman Tyler stated the first sentence of Condition #60 had been overcome
by events with the houses built by the previous developer. The remaining
portion of the condition was intended to clear up the street naming and the
Orion Way should be added to the condition for consistency. Staff would
add that Orion Way be deleted and replaced with Orion Court.
4. Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission.
Mr. Terrance Strong, representing Century -Crowell Communities, the
applicants, on behalf of the property owners, stated they concurred with the
conditions as revised.
5. Chairman Tyler asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this
project. There being no further discussion, this portion of the public hearing
was closed and open for Commission discussion.
6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Robbins/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-
090 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 23773
Extension #1, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval as
recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler.
NOES; None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None.
F. Environmental Assessment 98-368 and Zoning Code Amendment 98-062; a request
of the City for a recommendation to the City Council for Certification of
Environmental Assessment and approval of an Amendment to Chapter 9.140 -
Hillside Conservation Regulations to allow fencing to mitigate environmental
impacts as a permitted use.
1. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
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.
A Apc 12-8-98. wpd 7
Planning Commission Meeting
December 8, 1998
2. Chairman Tyler asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner
Robbins asked staff to elaborate on what the Tradition developer's options
were if they decided not to approve the amendment. City Attorney Dawn
Honeywell stated the Tradition project is not conditioned to do this. This
request is part of their settlement with the Department of Fish and Game and
United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service. The City
has no requirement contained in the Conditions of Approval for the fence.
3. Commissioner Kirk clarified that the applicant was required to ask the City
for the amendment. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the City is the
applicant due to the process to review the amendment.
4. Commissioner Kirk asked if denying the request would jeopardize the
Tradition project. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated that was her
understanding it would not.
5. Chairman Tyler asked if anyone would like to address the Commission. Mr.
Forrest Haag stated he was not representing any particular developer, but
does have clients who have an interest in preserving the aesthetic quality of
the hillside. Staff stated they have identified in the Environmental
Assessment that any fencing could potentially have a negative aesthetic
impact.
6. Chairman Tyler asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this
project. There being no further discussion, this portion of the public hearing
was closed and open for Commission discussion.
7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-
091 denying Zoning Code Amendment 98-062 recognizing the environmental
concerns such as the aesthetics and geology that have been raised in the staff
report.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler.
NOES: None. ABSENT: Butler. ABSTAIN: None.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS
A. Site Development Permit 98-638; a request of Citrus Development, LLC. For
compatibility approval of a new 4,408 square foot prototype residential unit for Tract
24890 within the Citrus Development.
A:\pcl2-8-98.wpd 8
Planning Commission Meeting
December 8, 1998
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 anyone would like to speak on this application.
There being none, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels
to adopt Minute Motion 98-011 approving Site Development Permit 98-638,
subject to the conditions as recommended. Unanimously approved.
B. Minor Use Permit 98-104; a request of Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates
for approval of a temporary turfed parking lot with 219 parking spaces for the Saint
Francis of Assisi Catholic Church immediately south of 47-225 Washington Street.
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. Chairman Tyler asked if the frontage road wasn't awkward. Staff stated the
City was reviewing the and was not wantint to address this for the temporary
use but would address it as the permanent uses are submitted for approval.
It will be a right-in/right-out access.
Chairman Tyler asked how long temprary was. Staff stated one year with a
one year extension.
4. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Kirk to adopt Minute Motion 98-012 approving Site
Development Permit 98-638, subject to the conditions as submitted.
Unanimously approved.
C. Site Development Permit 98-634; a request of Rielly Homes, Inc. for approval of
preliminary landscaping plans for six prototype residential plans and minor material
changes.
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.
3. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Robbins/Abels to adopt Minute Motion 98-013 approving Site Development
Permit 98-638, subject to the conditions as submitted. Unanimously
approved.
A:\pc 12-8-98.w•pd 9
Planning Commission Meeting
December 8, 1998
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL:
A. Community Development Director Jerry Herman asked if any Commissioner
intended to attend the Planning Commissioners Forum. If so they would need to get
their request in early.
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS
A. Chairman Tyler gave a report on the City Council meeting of December 1, 1998.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to
adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning
Commission to be held January 12, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission
was adjourned at 9:38 P.M. on December 8, 1998.
A:\pc 12-8-98.wpd 10
PH #A
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: JANUARY 12, 1999 (CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 24, 1998)
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28964
REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF A 78 AND OTHER
COMMON LOT SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION MAP ON 39 ACRES
IN THE RL ZONE DISTRICT, AND CERTIFICATION OF A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT (EA 98-365).
LOCATION: THE 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
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 AMEN DED(RESOLUTION 83-68), IN THAT THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS CONDUCTED AN
INITIAL STUDY (EA 98-365) 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 ARE MADE PART OF THE CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL FOR THE TRACT, ,AND A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WILL BE FILED.
GENERAL
PLAN
DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE)
STPCTr28964-29, RESOTTM28964-26, CONDTr.28964-27 Page 1 of 7
ZONING
DESIGNATION: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
NORTH: VACANT (PORTION OF THE FUTURE RANCHO LA
QUINTA COUNTRY CLUB)
SOUTH: ACROSS 50T" AVENUE, CITRUS ORCHARD
SOUTHWEST: ACROSS 50T" AVENUE, ESTANCIAS RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT (TRACT 26524)
EAST: VACANT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES
WEST: VACANT (PORTION OF THE FUTURE RANCHO LA
QUINTA COUNTRY CLUB)
On November 24, 1998, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing to
permit: completion of the Archaeological Assessment for the development. Because
of the variety and volume of cultural material encountered on the potentially significant
sites, a Phase III mitigation program (100% recovery or avoidance) of certain areas is
required in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This
issue is addressed later in the report.
The vacant site is located on the north side of 501h Avenue approximately 1,600 feet
west of Jefferson Street (Attachment 1) and immediately south and east of the
Rancho La Quinta Country Club development. Residentially zoned properties surround
the remainder of the site. Vehicle traffic on 50th Avenue is approximately 4,000 to
7,000 vehicles per day. Overhead utility lines exist along 501h Avenue.
The surface of the site consists of sand dunes and native vegetation and has
topographic relief changes in excess of 15 feet. Illegal dumping of nonhazardous
materials has occurred on portions of the property based on information provided by
the applicant's consultant and a review of the site by the Community Development
Department.
The applicant is requesting approval of a 78-lot custom single family subdivision with
lots ranging in size from 15,000 square feet to over 22,500 square feet on 40-foot
wide (curb face to curb face) private streets (Attachment 2). The developer has
submitted architectural guidelines for the development which prescribe the design
guidelines necessary to build a custom house in the project as required by Section
STPCT:r28964-29, RESOTTM28964-26, CONDTr.28964-27 Page 2 of 7
` �(6
9.60.340 (Custom Home Design Guidelines) of the Zoning Ordinance. A copy of this
document is on file with the Community Development Department.
Access to the project is proposed at two points on 50th Avenue. One access is
located at the west side of the project (Street Lot "F") and is to be shared with the
Rancho La Quinta Country Club. A traffic signal is to be installed at this location when
warranted. The second, primary access is located at the southeast corner of the
project between Lots 1 and "H" (Street Lot "B"), and is restricted to right-in/right-out
traffic movements. Both access points are gated and 20' wide access lanes are
proposed.
Retention basins (Lots "G" and "H") are located outside of the 20-foot wide landscape
setback on 501h Avenue, and a Coachella Valley Water District well site is planned for
the southeast corner of the project (Lot "K") along with a sewage pump station (i.e.,
a portion of Lot "J").
A conceptual landscape plan has been prepared for the common areas adjacent to 50th
Avenue improvements showing trees, shrubs and groundcover being planted in the
parkway and on -site retention basins. To mitigate roadway noise, a six-foot high
serpentine privacy wall with pilasters is proposed on the south side of Lots 1-5, "H"
and "h:" facing 50' Avenue.
This request was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on October 6, 1998, for the
initial public hearing on October 27, 1998. 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. No written correspondence
has been received.
�M
TINUM•� •u� •� ■'
On October 15, 1998, the HPC adopted Minute Motion 98-008, accepting the
Paleontogical Report for the project as prepared by L & L Environmental, Incorporated.
A copy of the HPC Minutes is attached (Attachment 3).
The Phase I Archaeological Assessment Report, prepared by L&L Environmental,
recommended a Phase 11 Testing and Data Recovery Program due to variety and
volume of cultural material found during field reconnaissance activities, and which
demonstrate that a wide range of prehistoric lifeways and activities took place at this
location. A Phase II Assessment (Interim Report) of the site was submitted by the
applicant's consultant stating that portions of the site contain prehistoric artifacts
potentially significant according to the National Register of Historic Places.
STPCTr28964-29, RESOTTM28964-26, CONDTr.28964-27 Page 3 of 7
On November 19, 1998, the HPC reviewed the developer's Phase II Archaeological
Resources Assessment (Interim Report) and determined modifications to the report
were warranted by adoption of Minute Motion 98-010. The Commission also
discussed site preservation for two critical archaeological sites. A copy of the HPC
Minutes is attached (Attachment 4). Because of the variety and volume of cultural
material encountered on the potentially significant sites, a Phase III mitigation program
of full data recovery of core site areas is required in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
On December 17, 1998, the HPC reviewed a proposal by the applicant's consultant
outlining additional mitigation in the form of data recovery (excavation) required for
this project. The Commission, on a 4-0 vote, adopted Minute Motion 98-013,
determining that the feasibility assessment for Phase III (Alternatives) was acceptable,
provided specific excavation measures were employed, additional analysis is performed
on the bone fragments, and additional information is supplied to the City (Attachment
5). The data report shall be approved by the Community Development Department as
required by Title 7 of the Municipal Code and CEQA.
The Community Development Department had prepared a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for this request (EA 98-365) based on review of the developer's site
studies (e.g., Noise, Hydrology, Cultural Resources, etc.). The Assessment concludes
that impacts to subsurface historic resources will occur unless data recovery is
completed. A copy of the Assessment is attached. Copies of the applicant's reports
are on file with the Community Development Department.
Pursuant to Section 13.12.120 of the Subdivision Ordinance, the following findings
are provided:
General Plan/Zoning Code Consistency
A. 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 two dwelling
units per acre, within the density allowed for LDR areas.
B. The RL District (Low Density Residential) permits single family housing, provided
lots are 7,200 square feet or larger. The proposed Design Guidelines ensure
architectural compatibility for the Tract.
Tract Design/Improvements
A. 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
• 6
t
STPCTr:?8964-29, RESOTTM28964-26, CONDTr.28964-27 Page 4 of 7
streets are private and designed in accordance with Chapter 3.0 of the General
Plan Circulation Element.
B. Interior private streets are 40-feet in width (curb face to curb face) which
exceeds the size requirements of the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance.
Sidewalks are not required when private streets are proposed. The
recommended conditions will ensure that all on -site work is consistent with City
standards.
C. 50`h Avenue is planned to carry upwards of 25,000 vehicles per day at City
build -out. A new traffic signal is required to control traffic movement and
provide direct access into this project when warranted. The signal is to be
constructed at the westerly access point and will be shared with future Rancho
La Quinta Country Club improvements and the Estancias (Tract 26524)
development on the south side of 501h Avenue at Orchard Lane. Off -site
improvements required of the project are raised landscaped median and parkway
improvements such as landscaping and other amenities consistent with City
requirements.
Environmental Consideration
A. The vacant site is suitable for low density residential development based on the
recommendations of Environmental Assessment 98-365. Development will not
cause substantial environmental damage, or injury to fish or wildlife, or their
habitat provided mitigation measures are met. Cultural resources shall be
mitigated through data recovery (excavation) as required by the City's Historic
Preservation Commission per CEQA. Urban improvements are adjoining the
property making it conducive for residential development.
Health and Safety Concerns
A. Retention basins are proposed to contain on -site storm water flows. A well site
and pump station are planned at the southeast corner of the project for future
use by the Coachella Valley Water District, to meet growth requirements of La
Quinta and surrounding areas. 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.
B. The developer is currently working with the Coachella Valley Water District to
determine the best solution to provide sewage improvements to the lots through
adjacent properties. The developer has proposed a temporary sewage pump
station until the property to the south is developed. The District is reviewing
the developer's request, and must approve the proposal before the final map
application can be approved.
STPCTr28964-29, RESOTTM28964-26, CONDTr.28964-27
Page 5 of 7
%J
C. The proposed on -site 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 and other future development, including but not limited to street
improvements and public utility improvements.
D. The design of Tentative Tract Map 28964 will not conflict with existing public
easements, as the project has been designed around, and with consideration for,
these easements.
CON-CIQN :
Tentative Tract Map 28964 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 99-_, recommending to City Council
certification of Environmental Assessment 98-365, subject to the attached
findings and mitigation monitoring program; and
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-_, recommending to the City
Council conditional approval of Tentative Tract Map 28964, subject to the
attached findings and conditions; or
3. Deny the development application; or
4. Continue the request.
Attachments:
1 . Location Map
2. TTM 28964 Exhibit (Reduced)
3. HPC Minutes of October 15, 1998 (Excerpt)
4. WPC Minutes of November 19, 1998 (Excerpt)
5. WPC Minutes of December 17, 1998 (Excerpt)
6. Large Exhibits and Architectural Design Guidelines (Planning Commission Only)
STPCTr28964-29, RESOTTM28964-26, CONDTr.28964-27
Page 6 of 7
Prepared by:
G - 19,
dell, Associate Planner
Submitted by:
o i
Christine di lorio, Pla ping Manager
STPCTr28964-29, RESOTTM28964-26, CONDTr.28964-27
Page 7 of 7
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION
OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-365
PREPARED FOR PROPOSED TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 28964
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-365
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 2e day of January, 1999, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider
recommendations on Environmental Assessment 98-365, prepared for proposed
Tentative Tract Map 28964; and,
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of "The
Rules; to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended;
Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community
Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 98-365); and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that
said application could have a significant adverse effect for some environmental issues,
however,, mitigation has been identified that, when implemented, will reduce the level
of impacts to less than significant, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact should be filed; and
WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments,
if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the Planning Commission did find
the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify a recommendation to certify said
Environmental Assessment:
1. The proposed tentative tract map will not be detrimental to the health, safety,
or general welfare of the community, either indirectly or directly, in that no
significant impacts have been identified for this issue.
2. The proposed subdivision will not have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population
to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number of rare or endangered plants or animals, but
AAperesoea98-365wpd.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
will eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory, unless 100% archaeological data recovery is completed for the two
archaeological sites determined potentially slignificant under federal and state
criteria, followed by archaeological monitoring of grubbing, grading, and
trenching of the entire project site, according to the Phase II Testing Report
and the Phase III Data Recovery Plan.
3. The proposed tentative tract map will not have the potential to achieve short-
term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental
goals, with the implementation of specific mitigation measures.
4. The proposed tentative tract map will have impacts which are individually
limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed
development in the immediate vicinity, unless mitigation measures identified
for the proposed project are implemented.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California as follows:
1. That the recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment.
2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 98-365 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution
and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum,
attached hereto and on file in the Community Development Department.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 26' day of January, 1999, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
AAperesoea98-365wpd.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
AAperesoea98-365wpd.wpd
J-
��
INITIAL STUDY - ADDENDUM
FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-365
Tentative Tract 28964
Rancho Fortunado
Applicant:
Oliphant/Williams, LLC
Prepared by:
City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
January 5, 1999
P AEA98-3 65 o-wtrad28964. wpd
- � a
.t..i.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1 INTROD1UCTION.............................................. 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
Q Y................................................
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 ....................................................
27
3.11 Public Services .............................................
28
3.12 Utilities ..................................................
30
3.13 Aesthetics ................................
............... 32
3.14 Cultural Resources ..........................................
33
3.15 Recreation ................................................
35
4 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ....................
36
5 EARLIER ANALYSIS ..........................................
37
P:EA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 2 of 35
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The purpose of this Initial Study is to identify the potential environmental impacts of a
proposed Tentative Tract 28964 to subdivide 39 acres into 78 single family residential lots.
The parcel involved in the subdivision is identified as Assessors Parcel Number 649-100-015.
The: project site is located on the north side of 50t' Avenue, 1,600-feet west of Jefferson
Street. The applicant proposes to name the subdivision, "Rancho Fortunado," and will be a
lot sales program for custom home construction within a gated development.
The: City of La Quints 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, 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 tentative tract map;
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 projects;
To facilitate environmental review early in the review of the tentative tract;
To provide documentation for the findings in a Negative Declaration that the tentative
tract will not have significant effects on the environment;
To eliminate unnecessary EIR's; and,
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 3 of 35
To determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the projects.
1.3 BACKGROUND OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The: proposed tentative tract 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, utilities and service systems, 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.
SECTION 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2..1 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City of La Quinta is a 31.18 square mile municipality located in the southwestern portion
of the Coachella Valley, in Riverside County, California. The City is bounded on the west by
the City of Indian Wells, on the east by the City of Indio and Riverside County, on the north
by Riverside County, and federal lands to the south. The City of La Quinta was incorporated
in 1982.
2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed Tentative Tract 28964 would create 78 single family residential lots within a
gated development. The project will have on -site stormwater retention basins located near the
project entrance off of 50"' Avenue.
2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed tentative tract would operate as a single family residential subdivision within
a gated community.
P:\:A98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 4 of 35
f
2.4 OBJECTIVES
The objective of the proposed Tentative Tract 28964 is to provide single family residential
lots for sale, by the applicant.
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 will require discretionary
recommendation of approval by the Planning Commission, and approval by the City Council.
The following discretionary approvals will be required for this project:
Certification of the Environmental Assessment 98-365
Tentative Tract Map 28964
2.6 RELATED PROJECTS
There are no related projects to the proposed Tentative Tract 28964.
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) 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.
PAE:A98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 5 of 35
Local Environmental Setting
The local setting for Rancho Fortunado is a rolling sand dune field that overlays the ancient
Lake Cahuilla lakebed. Elevations on the parcel vary with an average of 40-feet above mean
sea level. The proposed subdivision is located near the central portion of the City, with the
Coral Reef Mountains and modern Lake Cahuilla to the south, and the Village area of La
Quinta to the west. Adjacent to the project site is vacant residentially -designated parcels to
the east, vacant land within a golf course/residential specific plan to the south, and to the west
and north is the Rancho La Quinta Specific Plan area with vacant residential and golf course
land uses approved.
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 residential, golf, and vacant parcels. These adjacent land uses and their designations are
compatible with the proposed residential land use of Tentative Tract 28964. 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?
Less Than Significant 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 tentative tract
doe; 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 subdivision is a continuation of existing and planned development
in the project area. There are no impacts identified for this issue, and no mitigation is
required.
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. Historically,
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 6 of 35
X tt
the area to the south and west of proposed Tentative Tract Map 28964 has been under
agriculture, but there is no indication that the project site itself has been tilled. As
development in the area progresses, the agricultural areas are converted to urban land uses.
This conversion was addressed within the Final ]EIR for the La Quinta General Plan.
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 several years ago in anticipation of development. Thus, the
impact on prime agricultural resources or operations in the immediate area has occurred to
a large extent since 1985, and is likely to continue. Urban development of agricultural lands
in the project area 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. The proposed tract will be developed with single family lots for general market
sale. Res'.dential land uses are located in all directions adjacent to the project. The proposed
subdivision will not affect the physical arrangement of the existing or planned nearby
neighborhoods as it is adjacent to 50' Avenue, and does not propose to disrupt or divide the
existing circulation system (Sources: Site Survey; TTM 28964). 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: pro ected 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).
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
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 7 of 35
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 I.a Quinta are approximately $117,400 which is lower than the average for Riverside
County ($120,950), but less than other Southern California counties (Source: La Quinta
Economic Overview 1996 Edition).
Ethnicity information from the 1990 Census revealed that the composition of La Quinta's
population is 70% Caucasian, 26% Hispanic, 2% Afro-American, 1.5% Asian, and 1.0%
Native American. The 1990 Census indicates that 8 1 % of the La Quinta residents are high
school graduates and 21% are college graduates (Source: 1990 Census/Estimates).
Local Environrnental.Setting
A. Would the project cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projections?
No Impact. The development planned for the proposed tract will ultimately result in the
development of 78 new single family houses. The proposed project is projected to have a 2.85
per unit population, for a total population of approximately 222.3 people.
Temporary construction -related jobs will be created as the new units are built. New
permanent or temporaryjobs will be created as a result of the project. There may be new jobs
created as a result of continued development within the tentative tract, including
housekeeping and landscaping jobs. No jobs are anticipated to be lost as a result of the
project. New jobs will benefit the community, and result in a positive impact. 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. As the Rancho Fortunado project is developed, there will
be changes in the location, distribution, and density of population in the 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. Anticipated growth is considered minor relative to surrounding master planned
communities. No mitigation measures are required for this issue.
P:\EA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 8 of 35
C. Would the project displace existing housing, especially affordable housing?
No Impact. The proposed subdivision will not have an impact upon existing housing, as
there are no existing housing units on the subject property (Sources: MEA). 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. The
elevation of the property averages 40 feet above mean sea level (Source: USGS La Quinta
7.5' Quad Map). The entire 39 acres are proposed for development.
There is an inferred earthquake fault line located through the Rancho La Quinta parcel 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 Zone
III 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:
Riversi6e County Comprehensive General Plan; La Quinta General Plan; La Quinta MEA).
A geotechnical reconnaissance investigation was conducted for the project by Sladden
Engineering. The report indicates that the project site has underlying ancient lake deposits.
This report identifies three soil types on the property, light brown slightly silty fine to course
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 9 of 35
L a�
sand and gravel, light brown silt and very fine sand, and brown silty fine to medium sand with
some gravel. The investigation included ten borings drilled in various portions of the project
site. The report states that the bearing soils showed expansion indices of zero when tested.
All indications are that the soils on the site will allow for the proposed single family
development.
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
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: La Quinta MEA, 1992). 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 location is within
Groundshaking Zone III 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.
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
preliminary geotechnical reconnaissance report prepared by Sladden Engineering indicates
that based upon the depth to groundwater, the potential for liquefaction and the related
surficial affects of liquefaction impacting the site are considered negligible. Groundwater was
not: encountered during boring work and is expected to be in excess of 60 feet below the
existing ground surface. The Sladden report states that the proposed residential development
is feasible from a soil mechanic's standpoint provided that the recommendations included in
PAFA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 10 of 35
the report are considered in building foundation design and site preparation. The Applicant
shall be required to overexcavate and recompact the soil to provide suitable building areas.
Mitigation for this issue shall consist of implementing the recommendations of the Sladden
report.
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
three mile south of the southern boundary of the project (Source: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta
USGS 7.5' Quad Map). 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 general area of the project site is, protected from
flood waters by earthen training dikes and retention basins that are located in various
locations of the City, and a proposed retention basin within the subdivision. (Source: La
Quinta MEA; La Quinta USGS 7.5' Quad Map; TT 28964). The proposed subdivision will
not be effected by this hazard issue as Tentative Tract 28964 is several hundred feet north of
the rocky hillsides.
E. 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 changes in the topography. These changes will include grading and excavation
activities. Approved grading plans are required prior to any such activity.
The geotechnical report identifies specific hazards and mitigation measures for the proposed
development type. The preliminary geotechnical 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
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 11 of 35
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). The proposed Tract will not have any
significant effects from subsidence hazards if the recommendations of the geotechnical 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
clayey 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). Mitigation consists of implementing the
recommendations of the projects' geotechnical 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 represent a unique geologic feature in the La Quinta
area. This unique feature is located over a mile south/southwest of the project site and will
not be impacted by the proposed subdivision. 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).
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 12 of 35
La Quinta is located primarily in the lower Thermal Subarea of the groundwater basin. The
Thermal Subarea is separated into the upper and lower valley sub -basins near Point Happy,
located southwest of the intersection of Washington Street and State Highway 111. CVWD
estimates that approximately 19.4 million acre feet of water is stored within the Thermal
Subarea -which is available for use. Water pumped from the aquifer is treated and distributed
to users through the existing (potable) water distribution system. Water is also pumped for
irrigation purposes to water golf courses and the remaining .agricultural uses in the City.
Water supplies are augmented with surface water from the Colorado River transported via
the Coachella Canal.
The quality of water in the La Quinta area is highly suitable for domestic purposes. However,
chemicals associated with agricultural production in nearby areas and the use of septic tanks
in the Cove area affect groundwater quality. Groundwater is of marginal to poor quality at
depths of less than 200 feet. Below 200 feet, water quality is generally good and water depths
of 400 to 600 feet are considered excellent.
Percolation from the tributaries of the Whitewater River flowing into La Quinta from the
Santa Rosa Mountains provide a natural source of groundwater replenishment. Artificial
recharging of groundwater will be a necessary in the near future.
Suri:ace •,eater in La Quinta is comprised of Colorado River water supplied via the Coachella
Canal a:zd 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
JDS) 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 I.a 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.
P:\EA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 13 of 35
Local Environmental Setting
The project site does not have any natural standing water. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made
reservoir is located approximately 3.25 miles to the south. The Whitewater River channel is
located approximately 1.75 miles to the north of the project site, but is dry except during
seasonal storms. The La Quinta Stormwater Channel is located approximately 1 mile to the
north and west, 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.
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 subdivision will require extensive
mass grading to level the project site. This grading will result in changes to the historic
drainage patterns. Once houses and street improvements are constructed, there will be
changes in the absorption rates and the rate and amount of surface runoff within the
subdivision. Storm drain improvements will be constructed to transport water runoff from the
interior streets into the basins. 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.
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 Zone C. The project does not have any offsite drainage courses entering the project
The north half of 50' Avenue will be widened and fully improved as part of this project. One
basin will be constructed along the frontage on 50'h Avenue. This basin will be designed to
collect drainage from the half street tributary to this area, and transport drainage into the
retention basin. The basin will be 4.8 feet in depth, with a volume capacity of 4.15 acre feet.
The hydrology study calculated that the required retention volume must be 3.96 acre feet for
the 100-year (6 hour) storm (Source: RBF-Preliminary hydrology Study). The comment
letter from the Coachella Valley Water District, dated August 24, 1998, states that the project
area is designated Zone X on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this
time. 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.
C. Would the project result in discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)?
P:\JE:A98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 14 of 35
No Impact. There are no existing natural bodies of surface water on or adjacent to the
project site (Source: Aerial photographs). The proposed tentative tract will not have any
effect upon surface waters. No mitigation is required for this issue. Runoff from the project
site is required to be directed into the proposed retention basins.
D. Would the project result in changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body?
No ]Impact. There are no proposed changes to any bodies of water. 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 subdivision 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. A well site is proposed within the project. The Coachella
Valley Water District will co-ordinate the dedication of land for the well site, construction of
the well, and its maintenance. The addition of a domestic water well to service the proposed
subdivision will have a cumulative effect upon the subsurface water resources available but
will also benefit further projects. The Coachella Valley Water District will review and accept
the proposed well site, and issue a permit for the well's construction.
G. Would the project result in altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
Less Than Significant Impact. Coachella Valley Water District has stated that the depth
of 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 submitted
a comment letter for this project (Source: Coachella Valley Water District, August 24, 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 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
PAE?A98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 15 of 35
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.
I. Would the project result in substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision will include a domestic water well
site that will result in a cumulative use of water resources available for public consumption.
The Coachella Valley Water District has submitted a will serve letter to the City for the
proposed project identifying their immediate and future needs (Source: Coachella Valley
Water District, August 24, 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 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 and climate,
characterized by hot summers, mild winters, infrequent and low annual rainfall, and low
humidit i. 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.
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 16 of 35
The City of La Quinta is subject to the SCAQMD AQMD, a plan which describes measures
to bi~ing the SCAB into compliance with federal and state air quality standards and to meet
California Clean Air Act requirements. The General Plan for the City contains an Air Quality
Element outlining mitigation measures as required by the Regional AQMP.
The City is located within Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30, which includes two air quality
monitoring stations, one located in the City of Palm Springs, and the other in the City of
Indio. The Indio station monitors conditions which are most representative of the La Quinta
area. The station has been collecting data for ozone and particulates since 1983. The Palm
Springs station monitors carbon monoxide in addition to ozone and particulate and has been
in operation since 1985.
A. Would the project violate any air standard or contribute to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed tentative tract map will contribute
cumulatively to air quality impacts. However, the threshold for significant impacts from a
single family residential development is 170 units. The proposed subdivision will have 78 lots,
thus, there will not be a significant impact. 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 (Source: AQMD Draft CEQA Air
Quality Handbook, 1992).
B. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
No 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. There are no anticipated adverse 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?
No Impact. Moisture content may increase as individual yards and landscape planter areas
are plamed and irrigated. Swimming pools would add to the moisture index of the area. There
are no significant climatic changes anticipated with the continued development of the
subdivision. No mitigation is required for this issue.
D. Would the project create objectionable odors?
No Impact. The proposed subdivision will not result in development which may create
objectionable odors, such as waste hauling or chemical products. Vehicles traveling on nearby
and internal project streets generate gaseous and particular emissions that may be noticeable
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 17 of 35
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 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 north side of 50t' Avenue, 1,600 feet west of Jefferson
Street. The intersection of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 is currently controlled by 4-way
stop signs. 50``' Avenue is a Secondary Image Corridor. Bikeways include the east side of
Jefferson Street, and the south side of 50' Avenue (Source: La Quinta General Plan, 1992).
50' Avenue is a Primary Arterial with a 100-foot to 110-foot right-of-way. The La Quinta
General Plan gives design standards for the various street classifications.
The; traffic volume on 50'h Avenue is 8,200. Buildout traffic capacity for 50' Avenue is
projected at 25,500 daily trips. Jefferson Street buildout is projected, south of 50t' Avenue,
at 4.7,600 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?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The subdivision is anticipated to generate
approximately 640 to 780 average daily trips. Street improvements to 50d' Avenue will be
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 18 of 35
required in order to mitigate traffic impacts related to the subdivision. The additional trips
are riot anticipated to be significant, but rather cumulative to the community. A traffic signal
will be installed at the west entrance when warranted.
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 and provide access to each lot. Automobile,
motorcycle, and golf cart traffic are the only types of vehicles that typically use private
residential streets, with the exception of delivery trucks.
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. A shared secondary access is proposed at the southwest property
corner, in conjunction with the Rancho La Quinta development (i.e., SP 84-004). No
additional emergency accesses are required for this project.
D. Would the project result in insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site?
No Impact. Parking will be required for each custom-built housing unit as it is constructed,
which will consist of a garages, and tandem parking in the driveway. Additionally, on -street
parking will be allowed on the private internal roadways as required by Chapter 9.150 of the
Zoning Code.
E. Would the project result in hazards or barriers for pedestrian or bicyclists?
Less Than Significant Impact. It is anticipated that hazards to bicyclists and pedestrians
will not be increased significantly as a result of the proposed tentative tract because sidewalks
will. be constructed on the north side of 50`t' Avenue (Source: La Quinta General Plan; TT
28964).
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. The City has not received a letter from SunLine
Transit, requesting a bus turnout, pursuant to the City's correspondence of August 6, 1998.
No mitigation is required for this issue.
G. Would the project result in rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 19 of 35
No Impacts. There is no rail service in the City of La Quinta. The closest rail line is
approximately six miles to the north of the project site. There are no navigable rivers or
waterways, or air travel lanes or airports within the City. Thus, there will be no impacts upon
these issues. The closest airports are the Bermuda Dunes Airport, a small private facility
located just south of Interstate 10, approximately six miles north of the project site and the
Thermal. Airport, located approximately six miles southeast of the project, on Airport
Boulevard in the Thermal area of Riverside County (Sources: La Quinta MEA; USGS La
Quinta 7.5' Quad Map; Site Survey). The proposed tentative tract 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
enviromnents 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. The largest mammal species found in this area is the Peninsular Bighorn
sheep which is found at the higher elevations of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountain
ranges. Birds and amphibians/reptiles can also be found in the Sonoran Scrub area.
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).
PAE:A98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 20 of 35
«, f
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 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 August 6, 1998, and has not
received any response at the time of this writing.
B. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated species (e.g. heritage
trees)?
No Impact. There are no locally designated biological resources within the City of La
Quinta. All significant biological resources are designated by the California Department of
Fish and. Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Source: La Quinta MEA).
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 WA).
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.
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. (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 (III)), Southern California Gas Company, and various gasoline
companies.
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 21. of 3 5
Local Environmental Setting
There are no oil wells or other fuel or energy producing facilities or resources on or near the
project site. While the project site is undeveloped, there is no significant resource to be mined,
such as rock or gravel. The project site is located within MRZ-1 and MRZ-3. The MRZ-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.
The MRZ-3 designation is for those areas (mountainous areas) containing mineral deposits
the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data (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
conditicn. 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.
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 tentative tract
map anc. development of homes 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).
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?
PAEA98-3650-wtrad28964.wpd Page 22 of 35
No Impact. The proposed subdivision is located in the MRZ-1 mineral resource zone which
is an area where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are
present or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence (Source: La Quinta
ME.A., 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.
Loral 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 Specific Plan area has not been used for any type of manufacturing
or industry, other than 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 by residents of the future homes within the subdivision. No other
risks are anticipated by the land division, future homes (Source: TT 28964).
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 subdivision boundaries, except for
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.
PAFA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 23 of 35
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 Tentative
Tract 28964, which consist of single family residential development.
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 tentative
tract.
E. Would the proposal involve increased fire hazard in areas with flammable
brush, grass, or trees?
No Impact. The proposed tentative tract will not have any effect upon fire hazard issues, as
the project is not in an area with significant natural fire hazards.
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 111 and major or primary arterial roadways.
Local Environmental Setting
The ambient noise level at the project site is dominated by vehicle traffic noise from 50`"
Avenue. Residential areas are considered noise -sensitive land uses, especially during the
nighttime hours. The nearest residential use is located adjacent to the southwest and north of
the project site. The State Building Code requires that the interior noise level in buildings do
not exce-ad 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 subdivision by
Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates, (dated July 31, 1998), assessed the potential effects
of projected ultimate traffic volumes on the project's proposed residential units adjacent to
50d' Avenue. In summary, the proposed 50'h Avenue privacy wall will provide adequate noise
attenuation for the project. The projected ultimate noise level for the project's residential units
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 24 of 35
nearest to 50`h Avenue will be 59.4 CNEL at the nearest rear yard area, which will achieve
the City's outdoor noise standard of 60 CNEL. This is based on a minimum noise attenuation
of 5 dBA CNEL from the proposed six-foot high privacy wall. These rear yards are also
separated from 50' Avenue by a 90-foot wide landscape area proposed to be used for
stormwater retention. No additional mitigation is required for this issue.
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 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
Ser ices Officer, and School Resources Officer assigned to the City (Source: 10 1-3 01 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 Lack 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
PAE.A98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 25 of 35
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).
Local Environmental Setting
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 54a, 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 subdivision was received from
the Fire Marshal on August 13, 1998, and are on file in the Community Development
Department. Development of the subdivision 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?
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 26 of 35
Less 'Than Significant Impact. The Riverside County Sheriffs Department responded on
August 11, 1998, that they have no negative comments regarding the tentative tract. 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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The addition of 78 new single family units will generate
additional students that will impact the local school district. Mitigation for this impact is
payment of the State mandated school mitigation fee upon 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 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?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. Development of the proposed subdivision will
result in the incremental increase in the construction and 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 subdivision 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. III) 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.
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 27 of 35
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.
,focal Environmental Setting
The project is adjacent to vacant areas on the west, north, and east. The site is a sand dune
field that has never been under cultivation. There are existing overhead lines.
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. A letter from IID, dated
August 17, 1998, states that the project will impact electrical service to the area. The
app:lican.t 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 within the subdivision, there will be 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.
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 subdivision is anticipated to result in
cumulative impacts upon the water treatment facilities. It is anticipated that there could be
additional water treatment or distribution facilities needed for the proposed subdivision. The
applicant will have to coordinate with CVWD for any additional facilities needed for
continued development as mitigation for this issue pursuant their letter of August 24, 1998.
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 28 of 35
r N c.
D. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to
sewer services or septic tanks?
Less; Than Significant Impact. There is the potential that additional sewer facilities will be
needed for the development of the subdivision. The applicant will have to meet any
requirements of CVWD for additional sewer facilities as mitigation for this issue.
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 proposes on -site retention basins
for stormwater and nuisance water collection (Source: TT 28964). Mitigation will consist of
construction of the retention basins designed for the subdivision, pursuant to the requirements
of the Subdivision Ordinance and the Zoning Code.
F. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to
solid waste disposal?
Less Than Significant Impact. The continued development within the project will require
incremental increases in solid waste disposal services from Waste Management of the Desert,
the current purveyor of solid waste collection.
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 includes a domestic water well site
to service the project. This well will be permitted and dedicated to CVWD pursuant their
design requirements. 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.
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 southeastern
portion of the City. Views from the project site consist of the Santa Rosa and Coral Reef
PAEA98-_-650-wtract28964.wpd Page 29 of 35
Mountains to the south and southwest, the alluvial fan area to the west, and the open valley
floor to the north and east (Source: Site Survey; La Quinta MEA).
A. Would the project affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
]Less Than Significant Impact. There is a proposed perimeter masonry block wall with gated
entries for the subdivision that will be visible from 50t`' Avenue. Houses are proposed to be
limited to one story. Continued development within the area adjacent to the project site will
result in incremental increases in buildings and landscaping, all subject to architectural reviews
and approvals by the City to ensure a pleasing design and compatibility with the existing
features. In light of this situation, the proposed tentative tract are not anticipated to have a
significant adverse impact to this issue, but rather a cumulative impact.
B. Would the project have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
No Impact. The proposed development of the tentative tract map 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. No significant adverse impact
is anticipated for this issue.
C. `Mould the project create light or glare?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed subdivision will potentially create
additional light and glare. Houses will include exterior security and low level landscaping
lighting which will cumulatively contribute to the existing light and glare in the City. All such
lighting fixtures shall be required to comply with the lighting requirements in Section 9.60.160
and other policies of the City, in order to reduce anticipated impacts.
3.141 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, the Master Environmental Assessment,
and numerous project -specific cultural resource reports contained in City files.
Local Environmental Setting
The project site is located in the southeastern portion of the City. There are four recorded
archaeological sites within the project boundaries and numerous archaeological sites within
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 30 of 35
a one -mile radius of the project. The project site is within a highly sensitive archaeological
area
A. Would the project disturb paleontological resources?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The entire project area is within the Lakebed
Paleontological area as indicated on the Paleontological Lakebed Determination Map in the
Community Development Department. A paleontological investigation was conducted by
Paleontologist Bruce Lander, Ph.D. (for L & L Environmental), for this proposed project.
Although there were no paleontological resources observed on the surface of the property,
there is a potential for adverse impact to paleontological resources that may be subsurface.
To mitigate this impact, all excavation activities shall be monitored by a professionally -
qualified paleontologist (Source: Bruce Lander, L & L Environmental, October 5, 1998).
B. Would the project affect archaeological resources?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. An interim report of a cultural resources survey
and significance testing of the project site was submitted to the City by L & L Environmental,
on November 13, 1998. Four prehistoric archaeological sites were recorded on the property.
Two of the archaeological sites were determined, through Phase II Testing investigation to
be potentially significant according to the National Register and California Historic Resources
Inventory criteria. The two sites determined to be potentially significant warrant mitigation
through either preservation or complete data collection of the sites. Preservation of the sites
through redesign of the project was determined to be not feasible by the Historic Preservation
Commission on December 17, 1998. A Phase III Archaeological Data Recovery Plan was
prepared and approved by the City's Historic Preservation Commission with the
recommendation for modifications for completeness and compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act. The mitigation recommended by the Historic Preservation
Commission for approval by the City Council is for the applicant to complete a 100%
archaeological data recovery according to the Phase III Data Recovery Plan, as modified by
the Historic Preservation Commission. Status, draft, and final reports shall be submitted by
certain deadlines.
Following completion of the data recovery field work, the applicant shall be required to have
archaeological monitoring conducted. All activities dealing with clearing vegetation and debris
frorn the project site, rough grading, and major trenching shall be monitored by a
professionally -qualified archaeologist experienced with similar sites in the Coachella Valley,
and, an experienced local Native American monitor; If buried cultural remains are uncovered,
construction in this area shall be stopped or relocated until appropriate mitigation measures
can be taken. In the event that human remains are encountered during the earth -moving
activities, the local Riverside County Coroner's Office shall be contacted to evaluate the
remains and to take temporary legal custody of the remains. After a reasonable period of time
to allow for completion of an osteological analysis, the remains may be returned to the
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 31 of 35
designated local Native American representative. All artifacts, field notes and catalog
information shall be curated with the City of La Quinta.
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 subdivision 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
283 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 natural desert sand dunes, with no designated recreation facilities or
opportunities.
A. Would the project increase the demandfor neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. 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 subdivision will be approximately 222 at buildout,
PAE.A98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 32 of 35
warranting the dedication of 0.66 acres 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?
Potentia➢ly Significant Unless Mitigated. Development of the subdivision will contribute
additional users to existing recreation facilities, resulting in a cumulative impact. Payment of
the yin -lieu fees will off -set these impacts by making funds available for construction of
additional parks and other recreation facilities.
SECTION 4: MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The proposed tentative tract will not have significant adverse impacts on the environmental
issues addressed in the checklist and addendum, that cannon 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 28964 will not have the potential to degrade the
duality 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. However, the
proposed project will have the potential to eliminate important examples of
major periods of California history or prehistory, namely two prehistoric
archaeological sites, RIV-3013 and Temporary Site No. OW-2, that have been
determined to be potentially significant cultural resources according to the
National Register criteria and California Historic Resources Inventory criteria,
as indicated by the archaeological investigation of the project site. This impact
is potentially significant but will be mitigated through 100% data recovery of
the archaeological information.
• The proposed Tentative Tract. 28964 will not have the potential to achieve short
term goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, with the
successful implementation of mitigation measures.
• The proposed Tentative Tract 28964 will not have impacts which are
individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned
or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, and the implementation of
mitigation measures.
• The proposed Tentative Tract 28964 will not have environmental effects that
PAEA98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 33 of 35
y
will adversely affect human, either directly or indirectly, with the
umplementation 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:
A Report on the Archaeological Resources Assessment of the 40+ Acre Site, APN
649-100-015, City of La Quinta, County of Riverside. Barbara Hall, L & L
Environmental, Inc. October 5, 1998.
2. A Report on the Paleontological Resources Assessment of the 40+ Acre Site, 649-
100-015, City of La Quinta, County of Riverside. Bruce Lander, L & L
Environmental, Inc. October 5, 1998.
3. Phase II Investigation, APN 649-100-015, North of Avenue 50 & East of Rancho La
Quinta, La Quinta, California. Earth Systems Consultants. August 25, 1997.
4. Noise Assessment for Tentative Tract No. 28964. Robert G. Ross, Robert Bein,
William Frost & Associates. July 31, 1998.
5. Geotechnical Investigation, 40 Acre Residential Development, Avenue 50, La Quinta,
California. Sladden Engineering. July 31, 1998.
6. Preliminary Hydrology Study, Tentative Tract 28964. Robert Bein, William Frost &
Associates. July 31, 1998.
7. City of La Quinta, Engineering Department Conditions for Tentative Tract 28964,
August 28, 1998.
8. Riverside County Sheriff Department letter, August 11, 1998.
PAEA98-,650-wtract28964.wpd Page 34 of 35
�! 1
9. Riverside County Fire Department letter, August 13, 1998.
10. Imperial Irrigation District letter, August 17, 1998.
11. Coachella Valley Water District letter, August 24, 1998.
12. City of La Quinta General Plan, 1992.
13. City of La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment (MEA), 1992.
14. AQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, May, 1992.
15. City of La Quinta Zoning Map.
16. Tentative Tract Map 28964.
17. U S. Census, 1990.
18. La Quinta Economic Overview, 1996.
19. U S. G. S. La Quinta 7.5' Topographic Quad Map.
20. Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan.
21. U S. D. A. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Riverside County, California -
Coachella Valley Area.
22. Federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps.
23. City of La Quinta, Aerial photographs.
24. City of La Quinta, 10 1-3 01 Police Services Supporting Information.
25. City of La Quinta, Building & Safety Department.
26. City of La Quinta, Paleontological Lakebed Determination Map.
27. .Architectural Guidelines, Rancho Fortunado at La Quinta. Oliphant and Williams
.Associates, Inc. October 6, 1998, Revised.
28. An Interim Report on the Phase II Archaeological Resources Assessment of the 40+
Acre Site, APN 649-100-015, City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, California.
Barbara Hall, Ph.D., L & L Environmental, Inc., November 12, 1998.
P:\E.A98-3650-wtract28964.wpd Page 35 of 35
Appendix I EA 98-365
Environmental Checklist Form
1. Pro'lect Title: Tentative Tract 28964
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, (760) 777-7068
4. Project Location: North side of 50 h Avenue, 1,600 feet west of Jefferson Street
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Oliphant and Williams
43-725 Monterey Ave, Suite C
Palm Desert, CA 92260
6. General Plan Designation: 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
addNonal sheets if necessary.) Subdivide 39 acres into 78 single family and other common
lots„
9. Surrounding Lane Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings.
East - vacant
South - 50t' Avenue
West/North - vacant (golf course development approved)
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation
agreement.) Coachella Valley Water District
Fire Marshal
Imperial Irrigation District
PAEA98-355-T728964.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
Population and Housing
• Geological Problems
• 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 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. 11
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at
least one e.Tect 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 `dVIL]L, 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
._ / �.
•
!' �• i i
Printed. Name •
M
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.
PAEA98-365-TT28964.wpd -3
ample questim:
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving:
Landslides cr 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 of 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 x
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( )
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or
farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? ( I I I x
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established
community (including a low-income or minority community)? ( )
IL POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projections? ( )
b) Induce si.bstantial 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? ( )
rI r
PAEA98-365-TT28964.wpd
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) Expansiv-- 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
mI �
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements?
( ) x
P:\EA98-365-TT28964.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) Imp,acts 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 rn
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change
in climate? ( I I I I x
d) Create objectionable odors? (
TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( )
b) Ha7iirds 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? (
VII.
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) Cowlicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) x
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? ( )
BIIOLI3GICAL 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 liabitat (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?
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?
PAF A98-365-TT28964.wpd
10
X.
XI.
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? ( ) x
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ) x
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? x
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? I I I I x
NOISIE. 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? ( )
ITS
I T X I I . -1
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) Coramurdcations systems? ( ) x
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( ) x
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) x
e) Storm water drainage? ( ) x
f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) x
g) Local or .regional water supplies? ( ) x
XIIL AESTIRETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) x
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) x
c) Create light or glare? ( ) x
KIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) x
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) x
P:\EA98-3ti5-TT28964.wpd e! -�
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
recreations: facilities? ( )
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (
XVL 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
Califoimia 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 AEA98-36 5-TT28964.wpd
XVu• EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program
EIR, or otber 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 A1EA98-365-TT28964.wpd
a
U pq
WU
OU
U
c5
�o
z
Rx
w
o
S
a
�
a
b
o
v
M�
�
po
..
*4
a
y
z
w
®
W a.8
za
A
U p�q
��
O�
U
��
�®
��
��
�®
��
°'
a
�
,�
�'�
�
�
a
v
�,
� �
�
�
�
�
�
w
�,
.�'
�'
'�
'�
�
�
°'
A
z
o
z �►
��,
�tl _.
W
H
d
A
U pq
U
W
Ou
-�s
a�sv�Wr?
UU
�o
0
as
A
euo
_
a
w► � O �
�
F
�
®
�
•d
A
� b .� �
Or as
•y ,�
9
0
L7.�
O
H°a��
via
U
�i
@
A
U�
UU
A
'►�"�
�
O U
C�a
aA'a
G7
VIM. ...
;N
,
as
N C
t
pop 'd boo
IV
A
� pQ
®6
b a
o w �
QQU
U
$1uW �c
cc
40
.5
c a
CO
L5
z
o
�•��
d
A
U pq
W
O�
"a
o.
b
p4
•'mac o. � � a
CEO �' o
A
U pq
U
U
67
•�
0
0
o
CJ
� �
®
A
o
W,
UAA C
40
®
U
� o
d
Ga
U p�q
O�
U
C7
C7
a�
qo
z�
R
R
�
b
o
a
�
im
PC
4
U pq ''
Cs
W
05
U
C7
G7
�®
z
x
�
b
®
P
.�
..
..
V
d
C4
z
o
za
@
U pq
®U
ao
b �
z�
a
a
c�
a�
o
0
UC�C�W
A
U p�q
�R
w
®�
b
U@E-4
v�
b
�
ae
A
o
c
0 0
�
0
w�
40
z
v�
a a
> a
ROD
.
o
ea
a
p.i •
her PO
otwo
*41
L7
b
a
d
A
U p�q
U
O�
U
G7
F+
a�
z
R
a
w
a
�
z o
A
U p�q
U'
d
� a
.
U
Foe
b0
cc
ad
C p
bA e0 C
.O•
y
M,
Otb.,
L7
O
�
�
a
U
b
b
�
�
W
� `�
g'•um
®o
aka
tm a
o
ba
•y W
fFy
U bCodN
O
'd
o
O
F
A
U pq
V
W
OV
U
•�
a
G7
0
o a
G7
W
�
[O
jo/] �
�
i�yy1 w wry
Q icy
G
� � O•
Vc�c�v�
w
�
a
A
�
�
®
°° a
z
'-*,zoo
W
�
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 28964 TO ALLOW A 78 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL AND OTHER COMMON LOT SUBDIVISION
ON 39+ ACRES, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 50T"
AVENUE APPROXIMATELY 1,600 FEET WEST OF
JEFFERSON STREET IN THE RL ZONE DISTRICT
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28964
APPLICANT: OLIPHANT AND WILLIAMS ASSOC., INC.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission for the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 271h day of October, 241h day of November, 1998, and 121h day of January, 1999,
hold duly noticed Public Hearings to review the request for a 78-lot single family
subdivision and additional common lots on 39+ acres generally located north of 50
Avenue, approximately 1,600-feet west of Jefferson Street, more particularly described as:
Assessor's Parcel Number 649-100-015; Portion of Section 32, 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 98-365) 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 are a part of
the Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map 28964, 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 for a recommendation
for approval of said Tentative Tract Map 28964:
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 two dwelling units per
acre, within the density allowed for LDR areas.
The RL District (Low Density Residential) permits single family housing, provided
Lots are 7,200 square fleet or larger. All proposed lots sizes exceed this size
requirement. The proposed Design Guidelines ensure architectural compatibility for
AAResop.Tr28964.wpd (26) ; p
the Tract.
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.
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 site is suitable for low density residential development based on the
recommendations of Environmental Assessment 98-365. Development will not
cause substantial environmental damage, or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat
provided mitigation measures are met.
D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
Retention basins are proposed to contain on -site storm water flows. A well site and
pump station are planned at the southeast corner of the project for future use by the
Coachella Valley Water District, to meet growth requirements of La Quinta and
surrounding areas. The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will
not cause serious public health problems because they will install urban
improvements based on City, State, and Federal requirements.
E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of property
within the proposed subdivision.
The proposed on -site 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 and other future development, including but not limited to street
improvements and public utility improvements.
The design of Tentative Tract Map 28964 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 findings of the
Planning Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map
28964 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached
conditions.
AAReso1)cTr28964.wpd (26)
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission, held on the 12th day of January, 1999, 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
AAResopcTr28964.wpd (26) �~
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28964
JANUARY 12, 1999
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
G ENERAL
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. 28964 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). The tentative map shall
expire two years after approval by the City Council unless an extension of time is
applied for and granted.
4. 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 Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit)
The; applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from
those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans,
applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the
plans.
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 include a copy of the application for the Notice of Intent with
grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site
construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed Storm Water
Pollution Protection Plan for review by the Public Works Department.
CondTTM 28964 - 27
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28964
January 12, 1.999
5. All easements, rights of way and other property rights required of the tentative map
or otherwise necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the development and
functioning of improvements shall be dedicated, granted or otherwise conferred, 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.
6. Prior to approval of a final map, parcel map or grading plan, the applicant shall furnish
proof oil 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Dedications required of this development include:
A. 50th Avenue - Primary Arterial; remainder of applicant's half of 100-feet wide
right-of-way.
B. Entry Street - Lot B - 80-feet wide right-of-way.
C. Shared Entry Street - Lot F - applicant's half of a shared entry street between the
applicant and the adjacent property owner, centered on the westerly Tract
boundary. Shared entry street shall be configured to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and as mutually agreed between the applicant and the adjacent property
owner with one entrance lane and two exit lanes (one left lane and one through -
right lane), and a denied access turnaround.
Applicant shall grant access across their half of the shared entry street to the
adjacent property owner. The easement shall be conditional upon completion of
the westerly portion of the shared entry street by the adjacent property owner.
D. Interior Streets - Lots C, D, & E - 42-feet wide right-of-way, (36-feet wide right-
of-way for Lot F behind the proposed security gate), plus suitable right-of-way
fcr knuckle turns and offset culs-de-sac per Riverside County Standards.
CondTTM 28964 - 27 Page 2 of 14
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28964
January 12, 1999
Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left
turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction
plans.
If the City Engineer determines that access rights to proposed street rights of way
shown on the tentative map are necessary prior to approval of final maps dedicating
the rights of way, the applicant shall grant interim easements to those areas within 60
days of written request by the City.
10. The applicant shall dedicate 10-feet wide public utility easements contiguous with and
along both sides of all private streets.
11. The applicant shall create a 20-feet wide perimeter landscape setback along 50th
Avenue. Landscape setback depth is the average depth if a meandering perimeter wall
design is approved. 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.
12. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to Avenue 50 from all frontage
except for the main entry street (Lot B), the shared entry street (Lot F), and adjacent
to Lot K if developed as a well site, as shown on the approved Tentative Map or as
approved by the City Engineer.
13. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to
utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common
areas.
14. The applicant shall 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.
►� : ' ZA . .
15. 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
AutoCed 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.
CondTTM 28964 - 27 Page 3 of 14
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28964
January 12, 1,999
Il'i• _1) ►. 'wa11��
16, 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
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.
17. 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.
18. 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.
19. 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.
20. 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.
CondTTM 28964 - 27 Page 4 of 14
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28964
January 12, ] 999
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.
21. 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.
22. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely
mariner 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.
23. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security for applicant's required share of
improvements which have been or will be constructed by others (participatory
improvements).
Participatory improvements for this development include:
A. 50th Avenue and Shared Entry Street (Lot F) - 50% of the cost to design and
construct traffic signal improvements.
S. 50th Avenue - 50% of the cost to design and construct a 12-feet wide raised,
landscaped median in that portion adjacent to this Tentative Map.
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.
CBAMNO
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.
CondTTM 28964 - 27 Page 5 of 14
Planning Connnission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28964
January 12, 1999
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.
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 in common retention basins within the development
unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer„ The tributary drainage area shall
extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets.
32. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated,
unimpeded overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route.
CondTTM 28964 - 27 Page 6 of 14
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28964
January 12, 1,999
33. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and
retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route.
34. The applicant shall provide easements to on -site retention facilities for periodic "blow
off" and flushing of water from well site(s) dedicated within this Tentative Map.
Drainage improvements for the well site(s) shall provide direct drainage to common
retention basins.
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
feel: 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.
Thee sand filter(s) shall be designed to infiltrate 5 gallons per day/1,000 square feet (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 Quirta Safety Department or the Riverside County Sheriff's Department), retention
basins shall be visible from the adjacent street(s). No fence or wall, other than the
Tract's perimeter wall, shall be constructed around basins unless approved by the
Community Development Director and the City Engineer.
UB UTLES
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. Where hardscape improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed
prior to the 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:
r�
CondTTM 28964 - 27 Page 7 of 14
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Mp 28964
January 12,1999
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1) 50th Avenue (Primary Arterial) -- Applicant's half of a 76-feet wide travel
section (curb face to curb face) with a 6-feet wide meandering sidewalk.
If applicant's side of the street is constructed first, improvements shall
include a striped median and a 20-feet wide eastbound lane. If the other
side of the street is constructed first, improvements shall include a 12-feet
wide raised, landscaped median, unless otherwise deferred by the City at
that time.
B. PRIVATE STREETS AND CULS-DE-SAC
1) Entry Street - Lot B - 20-feet wide travel sections (curb face to curb face)
divided by a 20-feet wide raised median with a gated entry layout
acceptable to the City Engineer.
2) Shared Entry Street - Lot F - Applicant's half of a shared entry street
between the applicant and the adjacent property owner, centered on the
westerly Tract boundary. Shared entry street shall be configured to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and as mutually agreed between the
applicant and the adjacent property owner with one entrance lane and two
exit lanes (one left Bane and one through -right lane), and a denied access
turnaround.
If constructed first, the applicant's half of the shared entry street shall be
constructed in an interim condition to provide two-way access from 50th
Avenue to the Tract to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the
issuance of the 36' residential building permit within the Tentative Map.
3) Typical Interior Streets - Lots C, D, & E - 40-feet wide (curb face to curb
face); Lot F (behind the proposed security gate) - 28-feet wide (curb face
to curb face); adjacent 6-feet wide sidewalks not required.
4) Cul-de-sac curb radius - 45, or as approved by the City Engineer.
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, turn knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus
turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved
construction plans may warrant additional street widths as determined by the
City Engineer.
43. Access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following:
A. Entry Street on 50th Avenue - Lot B - right-in/right-out movements allowed. A
left -in movement may be approved if the applicant installs approved traffic
control markings and devices within the painted median. Left -out movement is
not allowed.
CondTTM 28964 - 27 Page 8 of 14
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Tentative Tract Map 28964
January 12, 1999
B. Shared Entry Street on 50th Avenue - Lot F - all -way access allowed.
44. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and
other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs, and sidewalks. Mid -block
street lighting is not required.
45. 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).
46. 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 and access gates shall be stamped and
signed by California -registered professional engineer(s).
47. Street right of way geometry for cuts 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.
48. 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.
49. 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"
50. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (<two years old at the time of
construction) for base, paving and curb/gutter materials. Submittals 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 (< 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.
51. The: City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings only
when the buildings have improved street and sidewalk access to publicly -maintained
CondTTM 28964 - 27 Page 9 of 14
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28964
January 12, 1999
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.
LAN DS-CAPIN C
52. The! applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common
lots, and park areas.
53. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention
basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect and
be prepared based on the water conservation measures addressed in Chapter 8.13 of
the Municipal Code.
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
Cite Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City
Engineer.
54. 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.
55. 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.
56. 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.
57. The; applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to
provide visual screening of aboveground utility structures.
58. The; applicant shall construct perimeter walls and required landscaping to enclose the
entire perimeter prior to final inspection of any homes within the tract unless a phasing
plan or construction schedule is approved by the City Engineer and Community
Development Director.
59. Landscape berms of 24" to 36" high shall be used throughout the parkway
landscaping as required by Section 9.60.240(F) of the Zoning Ordinance.
CondTTM 28964 - 27 Page 10 of 14
Planning Conunission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Mp 28964
January 12, 1999
60. Mature landscaping shall be installed in the perimeter landscaping parkways. No less
than 75 percent of the trees on 50th Avenue shall be 24"- or 36"-box specimen trees
(e.g., minimum 1.75" to 3" diameter trunk width per tree type) with remaining trees
15 gallon in size with one inch diameter trunk. Vandal proof ground mounted lighting
shall be used periodically to accent the parkway trees. Shrubs shall be clustered to
form distinctive design themes.
61. Front yard landscaping for future houses shall consist of a minimum of two shade
trees (i.e., one tree @ 15 gallon with 1 " diameter trunk and one tree @24" box with
1.75" diameter trunk) and 10 five -gallon shrubs. Three additional 15 gallon trees shall
be reqLired 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. Front
yard lawns should be discouraged.
62. 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.
FU B_UC_,SER_JLQFS
63. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements along 50th Avenue as required
by Sunline Transit Agency.
QlJAUDT _ASISUBAMGE
64. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
65. 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 tc furnish and sign accurate record
drawings.
66. 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.
67. 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
CondTTM 28SO64 - 27 Page 11 of 14
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28964
January 12, .1999
applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to
reflect as -constructed conditions.
M A NTENIA1NGE
68. The: applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all
required improvements until expressly released from said responsibility by the City.
FEES AMID—DEP__QSLTS
69. 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.
70. The applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the Infrastructure Fee
program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits.
71. 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.
72. 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 98-365.
73. 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).
74. 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.
75. 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.
76. 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.
CondTTM 28964 - 27 Page 12 of 14
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28964
January 12, 1999
77. 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."
78. 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.
79. '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.
80. 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.
Improvement plans for the entry street and gates shall be submitted to the Fire
Department for review and approval prior to installation.
81. 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
located at least 30 feet from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop
with obstructing traffic on the road. Where a one-way road with a single traffic lane
provides access to a gate entrance, a 40 foot turning radius shall be used.
82. After site preparation work has been completed, the applicant shall contact the Fire
Department (Planning and Engineering Department) for an inspection of the property
to insure all conditions listed have been met by calling 760-863-8886.
83. Phased improvements shall be approved by the Fire Department.
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 28964 and EA 98-365. Mitigation monitoring of the
project site during grading is required.
85. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit for ground disturbance, a revised
archaeological Data Recovery Plan and implementation schedule shall be submitted to
the Community Development Department for review and acceptance, at least two
weeks prior to conducting any data recovery work on the project site. The approved
CondTTM 28964 - 27 Page 13 of 14
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28964
January 12, 1999
Data Recovery Plan field work shall be completed prior to issuance of any project -
related grading permits or ground disturbance.
Progress reports for the data recovery field work, certified by the Principal Investigator,
shall be submitted to the Community Development Department every two weeks
beginning with the on -set of field work. A draft of the final report for the Data
Recovery Plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within
60 days from the conclusion of the field work and prior_t-o-the_issuance of_anX-grading
perrnit_s, A final report shall be submitted to the Community Development Department
prior-tojszuanne-of_any—building-permits or_within_6_m-onth�D-f--Gompletion__of_th-e D-ata
Re�Qry Plan. Draft and Final Reports for the Phase III Data Recovery shall follow the
"Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMA): Recommended Format and
Contents" for completeness and organization. Prior to issuance of a grading permit,
the completed Final Report for the Phase II Testing Investigation shall be submitted for
review and acceptance by the City's Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). This
report shall also follow the ARMR format.
Archaeological monitoring of the entire project site shall be required. Prior -to -issuance
of_ -a grading permit, the name and list of the archaeological monitors shall be
submitted to the Community Development Department. The archaeological monitors
shalil be notified of, and attend all, pre -grade meetings conducted by the
developer/contractors. The developer shall notify the archaeological monitors of the
intent to begin grading within 72 hours of on -set. A report of the results of the
monitoring activities shall be submitted to the Community Development Department
for review by the HPC, prior to the first final_buildina inspection conducted_f-or—tbe
p-mipct.
86. All agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for
plan checking purposes.
87. 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.
88. 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 C. C. and R's by the City Attorney is
required.
CondTTM 28SI64 - 27 Page 14 of 14
ATTACHMENTS
q
1
tan ho La Q inta C
(Future
Develo ment)
C,
Property in
Question
Case: TTM 28964
Attachment 1
Vacant Ir
w
w
o:
W
z
0
c�
w
w
w
w
Attachment 2
1 . i .. VQ! Cam' _ 4�,� ; �c .. SIN Qtlr VN 'D� .. • �O . � _
-� a�.. _! b ,� .�-� yr� � _ g�y t bSN bR�, b8J bmS r .gY♦
//I� �.t • v 1 / N� U •. Y to 4 Y .{t J NE
, 4 C v-a• `I• it i -�--7 �D .• a b� I J. f -
1, o a ,tevP
e "i{ ' ; .� �a �- .. b�� .. I i• �a UE
-
8 ` ' �bp�'� I$ ,y I ,1 '� �,�4u� � ,: i :•! aJ bo .. SIN � I
w it•� I 31 'J \ ., I Syr I !2• y,
_� `"R fl ' `•.\�_ _ � � 8� I III'" ' "'�. � m�. .. ' ' s; ��b
eE
,..bsY
log
R b
I� .. r", rp r _[`, a �\; .\ r'o� ... r ., •m
rvP
, �{T � �,Z•' b N NE
�I OV
'` 1 ••r}. ;_�T n
jbj?i,` I rl, f ., b baN _ 4\ ,v'2 \ c� _•
},'Ora b � 1 � .. •� v iq ,
0 III i yv� .. ., " 1 �•1y - bB� .,
�• •I u.,b �:� - 16 � Iri L : S--' �\•• �Y �\� .!" a ..J I � I - , � _. I
I .rllr 1^ \ v � N ". •' I 'J, y� ,
I
r- J LOT Q �__>`\•_'—! — NN 'rr.
if
PROPOSED ,[
�x� • 11 i �-%' / --.� ^ T% 8 YIELD- SITE
LOT
. •• \ RQplTI O " AfovoSED CF.rrcax+c va��� -
LOT :1
•� LVIS—T�'^'�c:%aawlb /�'_LIT A-
-.
REPORT/INFORMATIONAL ITEM: a
MINUTES Attachment 3
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall Session Room
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
OCTOBER 15, 1998
This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order by Vice -Chairman
DeMersman at 3:30 p.m. who led the flag salute and asked for the roll call.
I. " CALL TO ORDER
A. Present: Commissioners Irwin, Puente, Wright and Vice -Chairman
DeMersman.
B. Staff Present: Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Associate Planner Leslie
Mouriquand and Secretary Carolyn Walker.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA:
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barbara Irwin/Robert Wright to
approve the Minutes of Tune 18, 1998. Unanimously approved.
BUSINESS ITEMS
A. Cultural Resources Assessment (Phases I and II) for Tract 28964.
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 reported during the Phase II testing they
discovered that two of the sites are larger than anticipated. They have
currently found four sites on the property; one recorded several years ago,
two of which may be significant under three criteria listed in CEQA.
3. The developer has two options: 1. Redesign their project to avoid and
preserve; or 2. Proceed with the Phase III treatment plan - excavation plan.
The developer is currently considering their options and we will be meeting
on site to discuss this further.
P:\CAROLYN\HPC 101598.wpd l f
FILE COPY
Attachment 4
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall Session Room
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
November 19, 1998
This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order by Vice -Chairman
DeMeirsman at 3:30 p.m. who led the flag salute and asked for the roll call.
I. CALL TO ORDER
II.
IV.
A. Present: Commissioners Puente, Wright and Vice -Chairman DeMersman.
It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Puente/Wright to
excuse Commissioner Irwin. Unanimously approved.
B. Staff Present: Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Associate Planner Leslie
Mouriquand and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Puente to approve the Minutes
of August 20, 1998, as submitted. Unanimously approved.
B. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Puente to approve the Minutes
of October 15, 1998, as submitted. Unanimously approved.
BUSINESS ITEMS
A. An Interim Report on the Phase II Archaeological Resources Assessment of the 40+
acre site, APN 649-100-015, City of La Quinta (TTM 289641.
1. Planning Manger Christine di Iorio presented the information contained in the
staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department.
2. At the request of staff, Vice Chairman DeMersman explained the basics
regarding the NAGPRA law in regards to Native American participation and
curation of artifacts. In his opinion staff recommendation #2 did not need
to be addressed by the Commission as this was an issue that is handled by
NAGPRA. Native American human remains and associated grave goods must
be repatriated under this law.
PACAROLYMITC I I-19-98.wpd
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
November 19, 1998
3. Commissioner Puente questioned Page 9 and Page 24 of the report and the
depth of the findings. Does staff think objects could be found at a deeper
level. Ms. Leslie Irish, speaking for L & L Environmental, Inc., stated she did
not believe any items would be found any deeper. The deepest material
recovered was 80 centimeters and that was unusual. Most material was found
at a shallower depth. The listing on Page 9 are sites that surround this site
within a one mile radius.
4. Vice Chairman DeMersman stated that in reading the report he did not get a
sense`of what kind of human remains were found. Were they significant or
not? Ms. Irish stated they were fairly small fragments. It was a cremation
that had been found and had eroded to the surface at a fairly shallow depth
and made its way down the slope and spread out. The recover involved
picking up all the material identified by the Coroner's Physical Anthropologist
to be human and then any bone that was in the general area.
5. Mr. Oliphant, the applicant, informed the Commission that a blessing
ceremony was also held on the site by the local tribe. Ms. Irish stated a tribal
member was able to perform the ceremony at the site.
6. Vice Chairman DeMersman asked how significant was the site to the
development, where are they located at on the site, and what impact would
they have to the site.
7. Mr. Bob Ross, RBl~ Engineers, identified where the sites would be found on
the tract. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio asked if the width and length
of the sites had been identified. Ms. Irish stated it was established in the
report on Page 24. Staff asked that the depth be identified as well. With the
existing topography and the proposed grade and what the differential is given
the depth of the project, is what staff is looking for. It was important to have
the depth differential in relation to the project between the existing
topography and fill. Mr. Ross went over the topography of the site.
8. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio asked the consultant what more they
hope to find and why they were recommending the additional work in the
cremation area. Ms. Irish stated they went through a portion of the site, and
then went higher in expectation that the cremation would be higher on the
slope due to the erosion down into the wash. They cut through and got an
amount of material from the higher end. They opened a section north of this
site which was three meters by nine meters and found material in the lower
range. If they propose to collect the remainder they need to go south of this
site to obtain cremation material that could have eroded off.
9. Vice Chairman DeMersman asked if they find significant material and it needs
to be preserved, how will that be done. Ms. Irish stated they do not have any
it
P:ACARIDLYNTPC I I- I 9-98.wpd
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
November 19, 1998
objection to preservation. CEQA shows this to be the preferred method of
handling archaeological resources. More knowledge might be gained from
excavation later on. CEQA allows an analysis and a determination of
feasibility for doing this and that depends on a lot of factors including the size
of the project and what the site can bear in terms of removal of lots or
inclusions of open space area. They have not done a feasibility analysis for
preservation because the developer has indicated that is not something they
want done. Staff has indicated that an analysis should be done, but the
conditions do not call for this. Is the City requiring the preservation of the
site or asking for more analysis?
10. Vice Chairman DeMersman stated there should be a feasibility report because
if there is something there, it should be preserved. This Commission has been
a flexible group when it comes to looking at development and issues of
preservation within that development. There are also times when things need
to be preserved. As a City we are losing a lot and we need to look at this
issue a little more closely. It is his recommendation that they look at the
feasibility of preservation, if it is warranted.
11. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated it is a part of CEQA and the
environmental assessment and mitigation that the City can't require a study
as a part of the assessment if it is going to have the opportunity to change the
project. The City has to have the information now and have it approved
before the environmental assessment can go forward.
12. Mr. Oliphant asked staff what they would anticipate finding that has not
already been found and would need to be preserved. It was his understanding
that what had been found could be collected. Ms. Irish stated they were
proposing 100 percent mitigation of what they feel is a significant portion of
the originally identified site. This is an acceptable alternative under CEQA.
She feels the analysis has been made and they did not recommend avoidance
because the results'were fairly consistent. The subsurface material was
consistent with the surface material. They are finding the same thing all over
the site. The advantage to the mitigation as it offers the opportunity to
answer questions or determine factors they might not have retrieved to date.
The significance of the site is that it is a rich deposit with two contrasting time
periods. Their recommendation is mitigation.
13. Ms. Barbara Hall, gave her credentials and stated she was an Associate
Professor with the Riverside Community College. She has done a lot of field
work in both the State of California and Arizona. Ms. Irish asked what her
opinion was regarding preservation versus mitigation. Ms. Hall stated
preservation is the better option, as in the future there will always be better
techniques. There is a lot to be learned from the site which can only be
learned from excavation of the site. They have tested the site and they have
P:\CAR.OLYNIHPCI1-19-98.wpd `'
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
November 19, 1998
an idea of the limits, some idea of the formation structure process of the site.
However, they have no real information of the subsurface remains in terms of
location for future excavation. Ms. Betty Williams, applicant, asked if this
could be done during the grading process. Ms. Hall stated that if it is
excavated it should be done by hand to have good stratigraphic information
such as grids and this could be done in a reasonable amount of time.
14. Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand stated that excavating by hand is not
associated with monitoring of grading.
15. Ms. Williams stated that as developers they have tried to work with the City
in conducting the studies requested. In her opinion it has been extremely
expensive and they feel the material that has been gathered and the report
written, clearly identifies solutions to them being able to work on the site. A
major factor is that there is a large amount of money that has been spent to
bring the information that is before the Commission to date. To support Ms.
Irish's statement would be repetitive of what has been presented and reported.
16. Commissioner Wright stated they have been flexible to help every developer
in a timely and cost saving manner. He is concerned that there may be more
here than what appears and would agree with Vice Chairman DeMersman on
his original assessment.
17. Mr. Joe Loya, a member of the Torres Martinez Indian Reservation and
spokesman for Native American Field Resource Crew who assisted with the
consultant L & L Environmental, on the project, stated he did consult with
Mark Benitez regarding the site and he was aware of him being present at this
meeting. He shared with Mr. Benitez what happened on the site as far as him
being the lead for spiritual and other areas. They are concerned about the site.
There is a number of things that are there that have not been seen before.
They have put together a Native American crew of ten people and are finding
items that have never been seen before. They felt so moved with this project
to the point that if things were not taken into consideration for their feelings,
they would have to walk off the project. On reading the report, there was
more than one Native American working on the site doing the excavation and
he does agree with L & L Environmental, Inc., that they do need to look
further into the site. He does understand the developers point of view, but
they need to take into consideration what could be found. Items found can
be a marketing item for the developer's project.
18. Ms. Irish asked if staff wanted the resume's and appendix of each of the
workers on the site. Staff stated it was an option not a requirement
19. Commissioner Puente stated that when there is a site with human remains it
P:ACAR0LYNAHPC11-19-98.wpd
Historic: Preservation Commission Minutes
November 19, 1998
is more important. The items found are from the people who were there.
You can consider the economics, but they need to stress the preservation.
20. Commissioner Wright stated the Commission was created and became a
Certified Local Government because of what our past has been. This Valley
has been dozed under due to the lack of concern for these sites. He is in favor
of following through with staff s recommendation.
21. Mr. Oliphant stated that from the conversations, it sounds like additional work
is being required. If that is the alternative to preservation and collection,
could staff give him some idea of the area involved. He would need this
information to determine if the project would be viable. Ms. Irish asked what
area needs to be done. Staff stated this is what staff has been asking for.
They now have information and it is significant. The area has been reduced,
in coordination with the project development does it fit and is there an
opportunity for preservation for some or all of the material found. Maybe the
remainder is mitigation through recovery. As staff does not have that
information, they do not know how it fits with that area that is to be graded,
what the ultimate grade will be, or what opportunities are left.
22. Mr. Oliphant stated that if they were to lose two or more lots, economically
this project does not work. Staff stated this is why a feasibility report is
needed. Mr. Ross stated if the areas are what he thinks they are, it is ten or
fifteen lots. Staff stated that with previous tracts where there are sites like
this, they have been able to define them and make a determination, to define
the boundaries, and see if there is some work that could be done like possibly
changing the grade.
23. Vice Chairman DeMersman stated that when significant sites had been found
on previous tracts the Commission was given options. They are not being
given an option on this tract. It is either this or that and the Commission
wants some options.
24. Commissioner Puente asked if staff was asking for the hand excavation due
to the importance of the site. Ms. Hall stated yes. Some areas are very
shallow redeposited areas and part of the trenching is to define where the
significant deposits are located. Staff stated this is what staff has been asking.
Now staff is requesting how the existing topography is affected by the areas
that are affected.
25. Wlliams stated that staff had done an overlay of the tract. Planning Manager
Christine di Iorio stated they do not have the grading, as it is the responsibility
of the archaeologist and engineer. Ms. Irish stated the tract map was plotted
on top of the topographic map showing where the sites were located. The
PACAROLYNWC 11-19-98.wpd "
Historic ]Preservation Commission Minutes
Novernter 1S, 1998
grading analysis, however, was not been a part of the overlay prepared by
staff. In their opinion, this is such a small project that to avoid the area, given
the information presented by the applicant, it makes the project infeasible.
While she has no objection to a further analysis, if the applicants have to avoid
one or two lots, the project becomes marginal. As an archeologist she would
like to see preservation where ever it is possible, especially when it relates to
features. With the difference in the topography it is not possible to avoid and
cap the site, especially given the fact that the applicant will have to compact
the soil. If they want further analysis, she will do that, but the results will be
the same. It makes the project stop.
26. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated that one of the reasons staff has
been in favor of preservation is the cost of 100 percent recovery. Staff is
looking at preservation through CEQA as the alternative and to provide the
City with other information. When you talk about feasibility, this should be
considered.
27. Mr. Oliphant stated this tract has large lots and it to attract the higher priced
market. Each lot is worth $108,000 to them. So to lose one or two lots it
becomes a substantial loss and the project becomes infeasible. With the cost
per lot being what it is, to spend additional money on recovery does not make
sense. To spend $50,000 on a study would be less than losing one lot.
28. Ms. Williams asked what would satisfy staff. Staff stated it is up to the
Commission. Ms. Williams stated she would like to have some criteria so they
can respond to. Ms. Williams inferred that the Commission was dictated to
by staff.
29. Commissioner Wright responded to Ms. Williams comment by stating the
Commission was not dictated to by staff. They take staffs recommendation
very seriously. The Commission just finished a review of a project where
preservation was a decided upon issue by the developer. It was a very
congenial decision by everyone. In his opinion, an assessment is needed.
30. Vice Chairman DeMersman and Commissioner Puente concurred with
Commissioner Wright's comments.
31. Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand read Commissioner Barbara Irwin's
comments into the record.
"a. The . City needs to keep the standards for cultural resource
preservation as set with the Tradition Project and the Avenue 48
project.
P:\CARoLYN\HPC I I-19-98.wpd
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
November 19, 1998
a. The two significant sites on TTM 28964 should be capped and
preserved.
b. The human remains on the project should be buried on the project
site."
32. Ms. Williams asked if this was typical. She thought the remains would be
removed to sacred ground. Staff stated that in La Quinta, they have been re-
buried on the project site per the wishes of the Native American
representatives of that project.
33. Ms. Williams asked what Mark Benitez indicated. Ms. Irish stated she
understood he would want them buried on a different site.
34. Ms. Williams asked for definitive guidelines to follow so they could provide
the Commission with the information they wanted.
35. Vice Chairman DeMersman stated that the Commission wanted the feasibility
and analysis of preservation as opposed to mitigation. How much area is
involved on the tract site.
36. Commissioner Puente asked staff to consider preservation of the entire site
due to the human remains. Staff stated the human remains would be
excavated.
37. Mr. Tony Lavato, Torres Martinez Survey Group, stated that in the areas they
worked in there were four or five bags of human remains. If you walk the
whole section you find a lot of stuff. You need to look at everything not just
the human remains. It is good to develop and it could make the developer
look good if they were to help them preserve their history. Need to resurvey
and test because if you walk around you find something everywhere.
38. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio asked if the Commission was approving
the interim report with staffs recommendations. She had a list to better
define what the feasibility study would be for the preservation of the two sites:
a. The potential depth of the sites.
b. Feasibility study for preservation of the sites.
C. Analysis of the economics of the preservation.
d. The cost of 100% recovery of the two sites.
39. Following discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Wright/Puente to adopt Minute Motion 98-010 accepting the Interim Report
on Phase 11 Archaeological Resources Assessment for Tentative 'Tract 28964
with partial compliance with the requirements of CEQA with the
modifications as follows:
�� .J
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
November 19, 1998
a. Provide a list of all field crew.
b. Provide a feasibility study for:
1.) The preservation of the two sites including the sites
relationship to the tract map as far as the topography and
proposed grade.
2.) Its location with the proposed lots.
3.) The depth of the sites.
4.) The economic feasibility
5.) 100 percent recovery of the two sites versus the preservation
of the sites.
Unanimously approved.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL:
A. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated staff had submitted an application for
preservation award in conjunction with The Tradition project for the Hacienda del
Gato.
II COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Commissioners Wright and Puente went to the La Quinta Historical Society's
Workshop on Archiving training and gave a brief report.
B. Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand stated the Commissioners were required to
make a presentation stating how archival skills could be put into the planning process.
C. Staff informed the Commission that on December 17'htraining would be given by Mr.
Jim Brock of Archaeological Advisory Group.
III. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Puente to
adjourn this meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission to the next scheduled meeting of the
Historical Preservation Commission on December 17, 1998. This meeting of the Historical
Preservation Commission was adjourned at 4:37 P.M. Unanimously approved.
P:\CAROLYN\HPC 11-19-98.wpd
Attachment 5
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
December 17, 1998
E. Tentative Tract Map 28964 - Feasibility Assessment for Phase III alternatives for
potentially significant cultural resources.
1. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio commented on the staff report, a copy
of which is on file in the Community Development Department. She also
added that two sites had been determined to be potentially significant for
listing on the National Register. At the last meeting, the. Commission
requested the applicant prepare a feasibility study t6evaluate the two resource
mitigation alternatives as discussed,#*p the CA" ;guidelines. Those
alternatives are: 1) preservation o: the two potiai:",significant sites
through avoidance by various mew; and 2) 44ta r ve'rythrough 100%
salvage excavation program. Iri response .tti the request,-' the Historic
Preservation Commission the appliclp* miffed a letter of the proposed
excavation, a letter regarding the pj financial loss, a memo from the
engineer regarding cut and fills, and"� p v tl1 the quantitative artifact and
site location information overlaid o1i '=, pfttposed subdivision. Staff
reviewed the information and provided a rei tions in the staff report.
Staff wanted to devote the tirq ;*Ae key con e preferred alternative
in CEQA which is Al*# ve Staff i t commending additional
information regarding t'edesigt lead sores of the potential significant
areas as open space and also to adders r� nation of in situ preservation
and data recoyez . Not everything , 1 be preserved and what was not
preserved would be 10Q'No excavated. The staff report discusses several
options to resign the,*ject to avoid some of the potentially significant site
areas, pursuing reducih dot siz in' d moving lot lines, and reducing the 42-
foot width of the pr60t4 stets. The General Plan specifies streets to be
36 feet, irt.width wit _p rking on both sides. A recent General Plan
Ameridrneait .allows street width to be reduced to 28 feet with additional
parking to :, vided elsewhere. A 32 foot width would accommodate
parking on one, stVie. There is also some consideration of re -designing the
circulation pattern as it may be possible to preserve some sites with a cap
featured in a landscape setting with conservation easements. Staff is
recommending the applicant re -design the proposed Tentative Map to
preserve the potentially significant sites.
2. Vice Chairman DeMersman stated that if there were no questions of staff,
would the applicant like to address the Commission.
3. Mr. Dick Oliphant, applicant, stated they had received a copy of the staff
report and reviewed it with their consultants. He then asked Ms. Leslie Irish
of L & L Environmental to address her concerns regarding the staff report.
4. Ms. Leslie Irish, Principal Archaeologist, L & L Environmental introduced
Ms. Julia Casperzak, field director on the site, and stated Ms. Barbara Hall,
project archaeologist was unable to attend due to family illness. Ms. Irish
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\HPC12-17-98.wpd -4- -`
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
December 17, 1998
5.
6.
commented on the Conditions of Approval. First, is a procedural question as
it appears that the recommendation by staff on Condition # 1 is that the
applicant submit a redesign of the tract to the Commission for review prior
to proceeding to Planning Commission. It was her understanding they were
still in the phase of analyzing the feasibility of preservation as opposed to
mitigation and that mitigation was what staff had recommended? Is it
appropriate to require the redesign at this point in time since they are still
analyzing the feasibility of preservation as opp6 to ddata recovery. In
addition, they have been working with cif to re .edition #5 regarding
the Native American consultation for'` Phase 3 co9per�t of the work be
..., = .
coordinated through, and in compl*e with, Heritage
Commission. It has now been de4mined by° the Rivers.& 60*yi ;Q Toner
that the bones recovered from the�r� ire„fit officially ideriti1 a"s human.
Therefore, the Native American, °> ommission was never contacted
and the next of kin never identified' ,:" they have Mr. Mark Benitez on
the site acting as a consultant art !Maki endations, this condition
4.;
would then be somewhat inappropriate to t1 J What has been agreed
to is that they would complyy requirei°tie Commission had that
are applicable to the prc,:: there are a number of conditions in the
,; _ z i.
staff report that are -e�t'her a... vm si ent for our firm or some
_.
combination of writing assigrtent°It Bein Frost, the engineers, and
I think they will bably steak to tho >teasibility, but I would like to reiterate
my point th ' & L,;ci ntinues t6 feel that excavation of this site is
appropriate<<fb' this pr6jelibt and thdy have proposed 100% mitigation of the
site. Alth6iigh someex ed a concern that this site be preserved for
a variety,4reasons, t d vetoper has stated they do not think it is feasible.
Therefor they are stit`mmending mitigation at 100% of the significant
sites. _Tjs 'over and above what CEQA actually requires which is 3% to
5% of the s46" Their desire is to explore the site, recover the data, analyze
the materiat Bred, and utilize that information.
Mr: Oliphant introduced Mark Benitez from the Cabazon Tribe. Mr. Benitez
introdcd'Judy Staub, Cultural Programs Director for the Tribe, who has
been doing the cataloging and tracking of artifacts found on the site.
Mr. Oliphant interjected that Mark Benitez has been their Native American
representative overseeing the project. He asked Mr. Benitez to give his
opinion.
7. Mr. Benitez stated their position was to a liaison to the archaeologist on the
site. In his opinion they are to lend advice, observe, and see what the site may
be holding as far as any type of cultural remains. He has been doing this type
of work for about three years and has seen a number of sites. His work has
primarily been with Bruce Love who has been working extensively in this
area. Most of his experience has come from on-the-job training to understand
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\HPC12-17-98.wpd -5- "
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
December 17, 1998
all the different aspects of archaeology. This particular site, from what he has
seen in the area, isn't much different than any of the others that have been
developed. The lower section of the Coachella Valley is probably one of the
most sensitive areas in the whole Valley and would require a more thorough
and thoughtful recovery process due to the fact that the cremation sites on
those locations are definitely identifiable. This location appears to be a sparse
location. A large gathering of a village would have a much more intensive
locations, or remains that would give a true presence of the"inhabitants of the
village that stayed at that location.
8. Mr. Oliphant stated some studies h been made sin last Commission
meeting with their engineers. Thy looked-4t the projoct to,, seel,if;it was
feasible to re -design and made some e ibns, but they do; 1 wd> k. They
are here to graphically demonstrate �`,,. will not work. In addition, they
have made efforts to do alternate 1 ","'ou.Mwithout much success. Mr. Bob
Ross, Vice President of RBF Engjfi6ers "1 .*,,v th exhibits to demonstrate
some of the problems with this particular sxt+g preservation.
9. Mr. Ross stated that since tw s 37-,"' unission" txteeting they had looked at
a couple of exhibits slowing " W' seotioriacross the two areas that are
:.: ; _
considered for prervation.: heir emu: ijk at the cross-section there is a
large dune approximately. - 26 f€h'height. The cross -sections show
"
what was proposed on the original trot as far as elevations, in relation to the
existing ground. Marked in pen ar e two areas considered for preservation.
The first area is on thi Me of tl `_ une. We anticipate cutting down this area
to the pads; or appro?o � k feet. In the second area, it is a fill area of
appr6ijmlately ten &:` if you look at preserving those two areas and
maintalm" th lot configuration, the fill site will be difficult. It could be
napped. ir',t.ut area, you would lose several lots and create some cut
slopes outsi�he preservation area. Then the other area of concentration
would be 100% recovery. After looking at this we went back and taken the
City's mments, we came up with the schematic of what the Commission
waa aS�'Ig.
10. Associate Planner ]Leslie Mouriquand stated this was true. Staff had worked
on this design with the City's Public Works Department and came up with
some ideas. What they are looking at is taking the cul-de-sac, extending it
and tying it in with the street section. This could possibly preserve the ridge.
12. Mr. Bob Ross explained this was the cut area, elevation -wise of the City
streets. It shows this concept would not work because it would be cutting
away approximately eight or nine feet which creates a two -to -one slope or 16
feet horizontally. This would put you into the preservation area. What they
did was create a different configuration that would keep the lots essentially
the same size, reduce several lots in area, and remove three lots from the lot
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\HPC12-17-98.wpd -6- `�
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
December 17, 1998
count to 75 or 76. This would require some cut slopes. The area to the west
would appear as a large mound, approximately 10 feet above the surrounding
lots. This area, assuming you could cap it, you would want approximately 10
feet of fill to create an open space area between the two cul-de-sacs. This
would be nine feet, ten feet up above the adjacent lots or relatively close to
the graded lots height due to the ten feet of fill on from the existing ground.
13. Mr. Dick Oliphant stated that in studying the differxt laybuts created by the
engineers, it became evident that the prject be .nancially difficult.
In addition, it becomes a project thdt has real dif eu t s far as trying to
preserve the historic sites. Buildj�g lots with: te:�f€t high sand done
behind it within the middle of th "project is,,, feasible ; "fie; slopes ,blend
into the two lots on either side trig the essentially un b ldable which
causes them to lose more lots and her side. This that becomes a ten
foot fill or a cap situation which is`d�t� They could bring it up to lot
levels. They have already lost at least t�_p probably three, now with
the slopes they Iose two more lots for a tot;;, This makes the project
a `, ._�A
impossible financially to su�� :,:They would l i up essentially half -a -
million dollars or more i;t1th ;v These lots will start selling roughly
about $110,000 to $150,000 the,reasons for the large lots is to
eliminate the commbn area. P�00' e� put their amenities on their own lot.
So, it defeats a lot of what we're trying toachieve financially in fact it makes
�W
it financially,„ not possible. They,:believe the recommendation of their
consultant; to mitigate,, areas a eve the requirements of CEQA is a very
generous offer, but pr 3rvatio�.' omes something that's just physically and
financial) not feasi s project.
l4. Vice Chakman DeMersman asked if there were any questions from the
Commissioner ;, commissioner Irwin asked if the skeletons that they found
had been prove . t be human or animal? Ms. Leslie Irish replied they have
not been proven to be animal and are not identifiable as human. There is not
ehbiigh material to be able to identify them. They have a memo from the
Riversib County Coroner which states there was some burned bone and
pieces of bone that were recovered, but none of them are large enough to be
identifiable as human. It does not mean they are not. It just means that
legally these are not identifiable as human.
I. Commissioner Puente asked the applicant to explain the statement in the
report about the human cremation remains, or how do you identify that they
are human remains. Ms. Irish stated that in other cases there are other factors
that might be used to be determine that it is actually a burial. Unfortunately,
in this case because of the motion of the dunes the area was eroded and
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\HPC12-17-98.wpd -7-
Historic Preszrvation Commission Minutes
December 17, 1998
deflated and additionally eroded so that whatever it was that was originally
there was almost gone. There were some fragments on the surface on a slope
and in the course of a drainage area that were recovered. But most of what
was originally there is now gone.
16. Commissioner Puente stated that in their report a number of findings were
listed as being found in this area. It seemed to be very rich with deposits and
appeared to have a lot of activity. Ms. Irish rep that ,this was actually
referring to was an analysis of the surzo th a records search
they pick up anything within a certa`redius and it in our report.
17. Commissioner Irwin asked about*� representative of the NMiye American
people and if there was a represen . ve,fr, the Cabazon Iidia�s and is he
a member of the Heritage CommisSi�ril'-Mr. Mark Benitez stated he is not.
18. Commissioner Irwin questioned wythd Indian Tribe is working on
this project area when traditionally this has Urres-Martinez area. She
did not know if it made,any, iftrence, b as artifacts who had
.
ownership rights. She 'quee why a representative of the Torres -
Martinez Tribe was,` bt invo 1 '` 1' Mari Benitez stated it was his
understanding the To Tres -Martine 6 c :not come this far west and that
was the reason theCabazon,Indians were,brought onto the scene to make a
recommendat,i;
19. Commissioner Irwin'' ?.ted it,easher understanding that the Act of 1970
stated acts were,1Q-r = to the Native American people and I have a
concern about it beirig.re ned to the proper group.
20. _ Mr. Benitez$ed that as far as he knows, from Washington Street probably
to somewhere,nr Coachella on the west side, but because the Cahuilla
people have reservations that extends all the way into Mecca it is pretty
extensive central location in the Valley. He was not sure exactly, where
Torres -Martinez leaves off and the Cabazon Indians begins.
21. Commissioner Irwin asked staff if they agreed. Associate Planner, Leslie
Mouriquand stated she was not a authority on the territories and believes
traditional territories changed through time.
22. Mr. Benitez stated he would supply a map of the Coachella Valley showing
the different territory boundaries of each of the Bands. The Agua Caliente
Band has traditionally been involved with providing advice on archaeological
resources from Washington Street to Palm Springs.
CAMy Docum--nts\WPDOCS\HPC12-17-98.wpd -8-
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
December 17, 1998
23. Commissioner Irwin stated she has a real concern about the bones that have
been found and would rather assume that they were human and find out that
they were animal rather than assume that they are animal and then find out at
another point they are human.
24. Commissioner Puente stated if the bones have not been identified as human
does that means they're not going to conduct further, research to identify the
bones? Ms. Irish stated the law requires that when human bones are
potentially identified on the site that,we contact the Coroner. The Coroner
makes the determination of whethef or not they are human bones and they
contact the Native American Heritage Commission. If they're not
identifiable as human there is no. contact made and no requirement for a
notification of next of kin occurs '.> The Native American Heritage
Commission does not recommend".4nOnitors or consultants. They only
recommend next of kin. So, in this `case; a memo from the forensic
anthropologist with the County of Riverside, was- submitted regarding her
original work report which 'was handed out at this meeting. It further
clarified the issue as to whether or not the Coroner and the Native American
Heritage Commission would be invalid in this project. The issue that is not
resolved has more to do with who takes control of these bones and where
they are ultimately re -interred. It is not our current plan to continue testing
because the Coroner has stated they are not identifiable. The only way to
identify these bones as positively human would be DNA testing. We have
not recommended that, because there is nothing in the law that compels us to
do that and I guess the question would be what would we be trying to
accomplish by identifying the bones? If, under the law, the indeterminate
status of the bones does not change because they are not identifiable by the
Coroner, we intend to hand them over to the Native Americans and allow
them to do what they want with them. What would we be gaining by
spending the additional funds?
25. Commissioner Puente inquired about what level of jurisdiction the project
site fell in. Ms. Irish stated it is private land and no Federal jurisdiction.
26. Commissioner Puente asked what governing laws apply to the archaeological
sites on this land; Federal or State? Ms. Irish stated that only on public land
do you apply the Federal laws. I'm sorry, I shouldn't say that. There are
Federal laws that effect developable land, but in this case, they're not
changed by the presence of human bones.
27. Mr. Jim Brock, Archaeological Advisory Group, asked if there was a
zooarchaeologist looking at the rest of the bone material. Those bones should
be provided to him to see if he can identify them as non -human. Ms. Irish
stated there is a possibility, I mean I probably would do this.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\HPC12-17-98.wpd -9-
Historic; Preservation Commission Minutes
December 17, 1998
28. Ms. Irish asked what they would gain by doing this? Mr. Brock stated you
are evaluating an archaeological site. Every piece should fit together to form
a big picture.
29. Leslie Irish stated this would enable them to designate them in their report
and possibly determine, by additional testing whether or nit the fragments
were actually human bone. That is a possibility: It is not necessarily
absolute.
30. Vice Chairman D,eMersman stated=his concerns ,ftft � �Ws listenirng:to
someone who purports to be an a haeologist, bncerned'oWcha logy,
saying "what do we gain?". Arlois about undersng previous
cultures, it is part of a bigger pictu "i t� mply say "Eh, they're bones" and
you don't care what kind of bones t"i�ally disturbs me.
31. Ms. Irish responded that was not l
said she did not care about";;
accomplishing in this ever; ,t
analyzing bones agthe cliA
and allowing them to do wharthe,
32.
:nti the did not believe that she
she s41 what would they be
need to weigh the scientific value of
dUe of returning them to the Indians
-th'them. Now, it's true that if we
went and analyzed these bones furtl)'6 would know, possibly, whether
they were human or not.,,:'What I am,a"ying is I am not sure this is something
we should=me. about.; I'm just crying that analyzing these bones and
subjecting them to scientific an*sis is, in itself, sometimes as offensive to
Nati V'eA; ixricanS as1:Ji1#+ fit allow them to re -inter them in an area that
they. _psipate as appi6oi4Ate. It was not my intention to indicate that I do not
care wh not these bones are actually human. I'm just saying that my
actions *babiy won't change as far as the ultimate deposition of the bones.
Corn.missionerIrwin stated she thought the sensitivity of the area is more
extensive than just the bones. The bones are part of it, and are important to
us, but we are trying to understand the lifestyle and what was here before us.
The City of La Quinta has decided to research its archaeological heritage and
learn as much as we can about who was here and how they lived. This
Commission is very serious about this endeavor. Every aspect of this report
is important to us.
33. Commissioner Puente stated the although the bones have been found in an
area where there was so much prehistoric activity and human remains appear
in places where some human activity has been conducted. This is then an
indicator that the bones may be human and you stated at our last meeting that
a human cremation was found. It is my understanding that you are now
stating the bones are of no significant value for additional analysis; they are
just bones and not that important.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\HPC12-17-98.wpd -10- '
Historic: Preservation Commission Minutes
December 17, 1998
34. Ms. Irish stated that legally this distinction has been made; they are not
identifiable as human. The site is still significant. It does not change the
designation of the site.
35. Commissioner Puente stated she had been doing research to become more
aware and familiar with the legal disposition of bones. What she discovered
was that there should be something like an Archaeological Resources
Protections Act permit issued under the Archaeolocl Resources Protection
Act before removing any bones or any other attil%qts: ° How does this fit in
with your Coroner order to remove the nes? She ken to one of the
representatives of the Torres -Martinet Band and, the h made me aware.that
there is a new Federal Repatriation and Discovery Law adopted :January,
1998, that affects human remains qq, 4pi h t federal or private owned land.
It is suppose to address the issue of, cts with Indian remains whether
or not it belongs to Federal or privates are to be considered sacred
site and the appropriate Indian true is t4`,ed.
36. Mr. Jim Brock stated this is t*:.care of who Coroner is notified that
bones have been discovete
37. Ms. Irish stated she would b6willitaarch this law and see if it was
pertinent. However, she is ►t preser tbi- ware of any change in the law and
after speakidg:with * ,' Coroner=h and the Native American Heritage
Commission and they, --did not infbtin her of any new changes in the laws
pertaining,16 human, mains ixr an archaeological context.
38. Commissioner Wright` tatd he believes this could be a very rich site. He
understands the developer's financial concerns. It would either make or
break the proje,but unfortunately too many projects have gone forward in
this Valley without an archaeological study and an enormous amount of
information has been lost regarding our past and the past of the Coachella
Valley,.;, As mentioned by Commissioner Irwin, the City of La Quinta has
gone forward to maintain the integrity of its historical past. He stands by
what was stated at the last meeting and he completely agrees with staff s
recommendations on all the points with the exceptions of the ones made
regarding the Native American Heritage Commission. He does not believe a
project should be evaluated on its financial concerns when it comes to an
issue of costs versus preservation. In regard to discovery he thinks the City
needs to hold firm.
39. Vice Chairman DeMersman stated he had read the report numerous times
trying to understand the concerns of the developer. His conclusion was the
same as Commissioner Wright. His only exception would be the elimination
of Condition #1, the re -design. Commissioner Wright concurred.
C:Ny Documents\WPDOCS\HPC12-17-98.wpd -11- -
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
December 17, 1998
40. Vice Chairman DeMersman stated the applicant had shown this was not
feasible. In regard to the remainder of the conditions, he would agree with
staff s recommendation. They are appropriate and needed.
41. Planning Manager di Iorio stated she would like to ask a question about the
re -design issue; specifically looking at the design and area that needed to be
cut. Did the applicant address the problems in the fill areas? Mr. Bob Ross
discussed the areas in question and solutions thatE,l been introduced.
42. Planning Manager Christine di Iorid ai d if Mi., Moss had looked at those
areas in regards to lot sizes. They "could add ano her 1ot•by reducing the lot
size from 19,000 square feet to 1 ',000 squar6 feet to al1ow,f,6r:open-sNace
43. Mr. Bob Ross stated they were tryit to :eep the original lot size to retain a
certain price for the lots. The smalls *14 not bring as much money.
44. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio ackno 1"iie change involved, but
stated the City was looking- 'it - taining the a minimum of 15,000
square feet and above. This WoWd wain one loY fcii'open space area with the
fill and possibly gainifig anothef.l t. ; i'�ducing the lot size.
45. Mr. Ross stated the reason they have �1,900 square foot lots and 42 foot wide
streets was to keep it from being a cookie -cutter type of subdivision.
46. Planning Manager Chr6tine di Iorio pointed out that the City encourages
smaller streets becaxso i1 _More of a neighborhood atmosphere and brings
the landscaping out s-_ tifile ' street. This design concept proposed by the
applicant differs from what the City has adopted in the General Plan
Amendmed to ,retuce street widths and reduce the amount of asphalt. This
project is therefore, in opposition to what the City is trying to accomplish.
Discussion followed regarding possible redesign alternatives.
47. Mr: Russ concluded there would be a net loss of lots. It would be a gain of
one lot, but a sacrifice on the corners resulting in additional flag lots
48. Vice Chairman DeMersman asked if the Commissioners wanted to delete
Condition #1 or leave it in.
49. Commissioner Puente believed the most important conditions were #4 and
#5.
50. Discussion followed as to whether a zooarchaeologist should analyze the
faunal remains and whether there should be a condition recommended for
proper identification of the bones.
51. Commissioner Irwin asked where the bones would be stored. Ms. Irish stated
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\HPC12-17-98.wpd -12-
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
December 17, 1998
they would be re -interred, but if the Commission wanted a condition
requiring them to make an analysis first, this could be accomplished.
52. Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand asked if the applicant was proposing
that all bone be re -interred? Ms. Irish stated they would be sending the bones
out for analysis. If the City would like them to send the potentially human
bones out for further analysis to determine, by whatever method is most
appropriate, then they could do that.
53. Commissioner Irwin asked what thexiethod would lie,used for excavation of
the artifacts to avoid mixing the artifacts. Would,ie:;be'�� a backhoe or
hand excavation? Ms. Irish responded they aypty a grid and,6d'-d' "it to a'survey
locations so we know precisely where;each unit is on the grouch Then do
the collection with every bag i _~cleptified with that `grid number,
identifying what it is, and at what 1 retrieved.
54. Commissioner Puente asked if the bones had beet �Iiected. Ms. Irish stated
the bones were collected i p the day ttt coroner was there and
then in total by the next, da sew more excavation was done to make
sure that everything -had beex2 vein. There was a possibility more
material could be below in the drains, but the upper areas were all
excavated and whatever be e was thl had been recovered
55. Vice Chairman DeMersman stated he would like further clarification of the
Indian Batid boundaries to, be s� they were returned to the rightful owners.
'56. There be� no further" ' discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commisi'o� Wright/Irwin to adopt Minute Motion 98-013 approving the
Peasibili 'Aslssnent for Phase III Alternatives for Tentative Tract Map
28964 as aiuedded:
a.: Delete Conditions # 1 and #6.
b. 'Add new Condition #9: The applicant shall provide current tribal
boundaries for the purposes of correct disposition of any human
remains.
C. Add new Condition # 10: The potentially human cremation bone
material referenced in the Phase II Interim Testing report and
subsequently determined "not large enough for a
q Y S g positive
identification", as human by Consulting Biological Anthropologist
Debbie Gray shall be submitted with all other bone material to a
qualified zooarchaeologist for study and possible identification. The
results of this study are to be included in the final Phase III data
recovery report.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\HPC12-17-98.wpd -13- ,
PH #B
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: JANUARY 12, 1999
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-640
APPLICANT: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES,
ARCHITECT: BENJAMIN AGUILAR AND ASSOCIATES
REQUEST: APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING
PLANS FOR SEVEN NEW PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL
PLANS
LOCATION: TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN TRACT 23995-6 THROUGH 10
ON THE WEST SIDE OF ADAMS STREET, NORTH OF THE
EXTENSION OF WESTWARD HO DRIVE.
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
ZONING:
BACKGROUND:
THIS SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT HAS BEEN
DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPTED FROM
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
REQUIREMENTS UNDER SECTION 15303, CLASS 3 (A) OF
THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION.
LDR (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 2-4 DWELLINGS PER
ACRE)
RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
The proposal is for seven new residential prototype plans to be constructed in the
south portion of Tract 23995 in north La Quinta. The existing residences in the tract
have been constructed and are currently being marketed by Inco Homes (Desert Pride).
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
Proposed are seven prototype floor plans varying in size from 1,450 to 2,240 square
feet. Three of the prototypes are Plans 2, 3, and 5 from the applicants Del Rey series,
with the remaining four prototypes from their Marbella series. All of these plans have
C:pc rpt sdp 98-640
been previously approved and are under construction in north La Quinta, easterly of
the subject tract.
The proposed prototypes contain two to four bedroom; with two or three car garages.
All of the plans are one story, with the height of the units 16 or 17 feet high.
The prototypes are Mediterranean in nature, utilizing exterior plaster walls, wood
fascias, and concrete tile roofing. Colors of the exterior materials will be in the earth
tone range. Color samples will be available at the meeting. The roofs of all of the
Marbella plans are a clipped gable running the width of the residence with smaller
gable, hip, or flat roofs coming off the main roof. The roofs of all of the Del Rey plans
are a gable running the width of the residence with smaller gable or hip roofs coming
off the main roof. Each plan includes three different facades, with building sides and
rears being the same within each plan. Garage doors are not specified.
The plans utilize a variety of architectural features on the facades, including towers,
arches, wainscots, stucco recesses and popouts.
Typical front yard landscaping plans without a plant pallette has been submitted for
the Marbella plans. Generally, each interior lot will have two trees, foundation planting
around the front of the residence and front wall, and lawn. Corner lots will have three
additional trees and shrubs along the walls enclosing the rear yard.
Generally, the Del Rey series will be constructed closest to the existing Inco Homes.
Along the south boundaries of the tract, the Marbella series will be constructed. There
will be some overlap of these two series in the phase 7 area (Attachment 1).
EXISTING UNIT DESCRIPTION:
The existing units in the northern part of the tract have been built by Inco Homes and
vary in size from 1,411 (three bedrooms) to 2,008 (four bedrooms) square feet. The
four different unit plans are Spanish or Mediterranean in nature. The units are one
story in height. Three of the four plans have a main gable roof running the width of the
residence, with a hip or gable roof garage. Some plans have smaller hip or gable roof
treatments over the entries or windows. All units have a semi -flat concrete tile roof,
exterior plaster wails and wood fascias. Other features used include arches, popout
window and door surrounds, stucco columns, an occasional brick or stone wainscot,
and one piece tilt -up metal garage doors.
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC) REVIEW:
The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of January 6, 1999, and discussed the
recommended conditions and other concerns on how to ensure the new units are
compatible with the existing units (Attachment 2). The Committee unanimously
adopted Minute Motion 98-018, recommending approval. Conditions in addition to
those recommended by Staff were adopted regarding visible wall treatment around the
C:pc rpt sdp 98-640
new units, submitting a revised exterior color pallette, and using a semi -flat tile on one
of the Del Rey elevations of each prototype plan to provide better compatibility with
the existing residences.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This request was advertised in the Desert Sun Newspaper on January 1., 1999, and
mailed to all property owners within Desert Pride and 500 feet around the project
boundaries. To date, no correspondence has been received.
STAFF COMMENTS:
The three car garages need to be 30 feet wide by 20 feet deep, because they are
required for the four bedroom plan (Marbella-Plan 4). The garage has a water heater
encroachment within the garage area. The proposed Marbella two car garages either
don't meet the minimum 20' by 20' inside dimensions or have a water heater
encroachment. These will need to be corrected prior to issuance of a building permit.
FINDINGS:
As required by Section 9.60.300 (Compatibility Review) of the Zoning Ordinance, the
Planning Commission is required to review and comment on the following findings:
1. The architectural and other design elements of the new residential units will be
compatible and not detrimental to the other existing units in the project.
2. The proposed single family residences will be compatible to existing dwellings
with respect to architectural materials such as roof material, window treatment,
and garage door style, colors, roof lines, and lot area.
Response to #1.and #2:
The proposed units are of a compatible architectural design, colors, and
materials. The units utilize similar architectural features such as the roofs,
exterior plaster, arches, popout stucco surrounds, and wood fascias. The plans
with some revision to the roof and exterior will be compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood.
3. At least one specimen tree (min. 24-inch box size (minimum 2.5" caliper), and
minimum 10 feet tall, measured from top of box) shall be provided in the front
yard or street side yard.
C:pc rpt sdp 98-640
Response:
The proposed landscaping plans will be required to provide a minimum of one
24" box size tree in the front yard area. All units will have at least one
additional tree and other shrubs and groundcover.
4. A two story house shall not be constructed adjacent to or abutting a lot line of
an existing single story home constructed in a prior phase of the same
subdivision unless proof can be provided that a two story unit was proposed for
the lot by the prior builder.
Response:
No two story residences are proposed, nor are there any existing in the tract.
5. If fencing has been provided in the subdivision, the new developer shall provide
the same or better type of fencing for the new dwellings, as determined by the
Planning Commission.
Response:
Masonry walls are proposed between units and will be required to be compatible
with existing walls.
6. The single family dwelling units proposed within a partially developed
subdivision shall not deviate by more than 10 percent from the square footage
of the original developer which have either been approved or constructed.
Response:
The size range of the existing residences is 1,411 to 2,008 square feet. The
proposed units vary from 1,450 to 2,240 square feet. With a reduction of 31
square feet from the largest unit as recommended by Staff, this request will be
in compliance.
7. Residential units with identical, or similar, front elevations shall not be placed
on adjacent lots or directly across the street from one another.
Response:
Although a preliminary plot plan has been submitted, it does not specify facade
types. The conditions of approval contain a requirement for the Community
Development Department to review the final plot plans to ensure compliance
with this requirement.
C:pc rpt sdp 98-640
In conclusion, the findings needed to approve this request can be made, subject to
conditions.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99- , approving Site Development Permit
98-640, subject to conditions.
Attachments:
1. Tract Map exhibit
2. Minutes of Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee for January 6,
1999
3. Plan exhibits
Prepared by:
Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner
Submitted by:
Christine di lorio, Olanning Manager
C:pc rpt sdp 98-640
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-640, SUBJECT TO
CONDITIONS, PROVIDING COMPATIBILITY APPROVAL OF
FOUR PROTOTYPE UNITS FOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE
SOUTH PORTION OF TRACT 23995
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-640
APPLICANT: CENTURY- CROWELL COMMUNITIES, L.P.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 12" day of January, 1999, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
the request of Century -Crowell Communities, L.P. to approve architectural and
landscaping plans for seven new prototype residential plans to be constructed west
of Adams Street, north of the extension of Westward Ho Drive, more particularly
described as:
Portions of Tract 23995, Phases 6-9
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has been determined to be
exempt from California Environmental Quality Act requirements under Section 15303,
Class 3 (A) of the Guidelines For Implementation; and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of
said Site Development Permit:
1. The proposed units are of a compatible architectural design, colors, and
materials to the existing units in the tract. The units utilize similar architectural
features such as tile roofs, exterior plaster, arches, popout stucco surrounds,
and wood facias. The plans with some revision to the roof and exterior are
compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
2. The proposed landscaping plans provide a minimum of one 24" box size tree in
the front yard area. All units have at least one additional tree and other shrubs
and groundcover.
3. No two story residences are proposed, nor are there any existing in the tract.
4. Masonry walls are proposed between units and will be compatible with existing
walls in the tract.
A:\pc res sdp 98-640.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Site Development Permit 98-640
January 12, 1999
5. The size range of the existing residences is 1,411 to 2,008 square feet. The
proposed units vary from 1,450 to 2,240 square feet. With a reduction of 31
square feet from the largest unit, this request is in compliance with compatibility
review requirements.
6. The final plot plan ensures compliance with the requirement that identical, or
similar, front elevations shall not be placed on adjacent lots or directly across
the street from one another.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 98-640 for the reasons
set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions labeled Exhibit "A",
attached hereto;
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 12" day of January, 1999, 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:\pc res sdp 98-640.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-640
JANUARY 12, 1999
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1
a
EXHIBIT "A"
This approval is for seven prototype units of the following approximate sizes:
MARBELLA SERIES
A. Plan 1 - 1,450 square feet
B. Plan 2 - 1,803 square feet
C. Plan 3 - 2,166 square feet
D. Plan 4 - 2,209 square feet
DEL REY SERIES
A. Plan 2 - 1,460 square feet
B. Plan 3 - 1,663 square feet
C. Plan 5 - 1,718 square feet +
282 square foot guess room option
31 square feet of living area shall be removed from Plan 4 of the Marbella
Series.
3. The final landscaping plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community
Development Department, prior to issuance of any building permits issued for
units authorized by this approval.
4. Plant pallette with a minimum of one 24" box size tree (2.5" caliper) specified,
shall be submitted for approval by the Community Development Department.
5. Popout window and door surrounds shall be provided on all side and rear
elevations of all plans, except adjacent to bay windows.
6. Elevation "A" of each of the Marbella Series prototypes shall have the clipped
gable roof deleted and replaced with a full gable on the main roof ridge to mix
the prototypes.
7. All two car garages shall be a minimum 20 feet by 20 feet clear insidewith all
obstructions relocated.
8. The garage doors shall be one piece or sectional metal doors.
9. Front and exposed side yard perimeter walls around each unit shall be clad in
C:\pc coa sdp 98-640
stucco to match the dwelling unit to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Department.
10. Gates in side yards shall match those used in the existing residences.
11. The prototype color pallette shall be revised from that submitted to the ALRC.
12. Elevation "C" of each of the Del Rey Series prototypes shall use a flat roof tile.
13. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community
Development Department, Coachella Valley Water District, Riverside County
Agricultural Commissioner before they will be considered final.
14. Lawn areas shall be either hybrid Bermuda (summer) or hybrid Bermuda/Rye
(winter) depending on the season installed. All trees shall be double staked to
prevent wind damage.
15. All existing unused curb cuts shall be removed and replaced with full curb when
the lot is developed.
16. Revised plans showing all changes required by this approval shall be submitted
to the Community Development Department for approval, prior to issuance of
any building permits issued for units authorized by this approval.
c:\pc coa sdp 98-640
,TTACHMENT 1
If
CASE No.
CASE MAP
Tract 23995
Future Single
Family Homes
Future Single
Family Homes
,t{
F, �&
NORTH
SCALE: nts
ATTACHMENT 2
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee
January 6, 1999
C mittee Member Bobbitt asked about the location of the site; was the
bu lding on the corner or set back from Darby Road. Mr. Woodward stated
it ould be set back from the corner. Committee Member Bobbitt asked who
o ed the corner parcel. Staff stated they did not know at the present time.
Di ussion followed regarding the uses of the proposed medical center.
4. Co ittee Member Bobbitt stated that although Date Palms are an attractive
Ian scaping tree. He again, has concern about the danger of the crown
bre king. He suggested an alternative tree, the Canarinsis Palm, be used
inst ad. Mr. Woodard stated they had no objection to changing the tree
spe es.
5. Con mittee Member Bobbitt ed that as long the trees are not adjacent to
ped 8trian traffic, the Da alm could be used. Other than the trees, the
prop sed plant matey' is excellent. As to the architecture, he strongly
sunnbrted the desi
6. The bein o further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee
Me be Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 98-017 approving
Site evelopment Permit 98-635 as recommended by staff. Unanimously
-- -� B. Site Development Permit 98-640; a request of Century -Crowell Communities for
approval of architectural and landscaping plans for four prototype plans for the
property located on the west side of Adams Street, north of the extension of
Westward Ho Drive within Tract 23995.
Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff
report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department. Staff stated the applicant was also asking for approval of the
Del Rey residential prototypes used in Tract 27899 as well as the four
Marbella prototypes being presented for a total of seven prototypes.
2. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the Marbella and Del Rey were
comparable. Mr. Ed Knight, representing Century -Crowell Communities,
stated they were a mixture of what is existing. The applicant stated they were
requesting four prototype residential units from the Marbella and three from
Del Rey for a total of seven plans to be used in this tract.
3. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio asked how these additional units would
affect Condition #3 regarding roof styles and roof heights. Mr. Knight stated
they were a variation of roofs, but all were within the same height range of
16 to 17 feet.
CAMy Documents\WPDOMALRC1-6-99.wpd 2
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee
January 6, 1999
a. Condition #5: Elevation "A" of each of the four Marbella prototypes
shall have the clipped gable deleted and replaced with a full gable on
the main roof ridge to mix the prototypes.
b. Condition #8: Front and exposed side yard perimeter walls around
each unit shall be clad in stucco to match the dwelling unit to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director
C. Condition # 10: The prototypes color palette shall be revised
d. Condition # 11: Elevation "C" of each of the four Del Rey prototypes
shall use a flat roof tile.
VI. NCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL:
V. )COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS:
VI. ANOURNMENT:
There being o further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members
Bobbitt/Cunnin ham to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping
Committee to the ext regular meeting to be held on February 3, 1999. This meeting was adjourned
at 11:00 a.m. on Actuary 6, 1999.
CAMy Documents\WPD0CS\ALRC1-6-99.wpd 4
PH #C
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: JANUARY 12, 1999
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-641
APPLICANT AND
PROPERTY
OWNER: SOUTHERN HILLS, LLC
ARCHITECT: THE WOODS GROUP ARCHITECTS
REPRESENTATIVE: FORREST HAAG, ASLA
REQUEST: COMPATIBILITY APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS
FOR THREE NEW PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL PLANS.
LOCATION: TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN TRACTS 28776,29004, AND
PARCEL MAP 28805 IN SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002 (PGA
WEST)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THIS SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT HAS BEEN
DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPTED FROM
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
REQUIREMENTS UNDER SECTION 15303, CLASS 3 (A) OF
THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION.
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: LDR (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 2-4 D.U./ACRE)
ZONING: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
BACKGROUND:
The proposal is for three new residential prototype plans for Tracts 28776,29004,
and Parcel Map 28805 within PGA West in south La Quinta (Attachment 1).
PC.STAFF rpt. SDP 98-641.wpd
PROJECT REQUEST:
Proposed are three prototype floor plans varying from 2,780 to 3,372 square feet in
size. All plans are one story at 18 and 19 feet in height excluding the chimney. The
roof heights vary within each plan due to the different roof planes and sizes. All
plans are have a similar footprint which includes three bedroom units and a two car
garage with Plan 3 providing a guest suite and single car garage under one roof.
The units are Spanish/Mediterranean in nature, utilizing exterior plaster walls, wood
and stone fascias, and clay tile roofing. Colors of the exterior plaster range from
white to light brown, with wood colors light tans to light brown, and roof tiles solid
red and red blends. A total of nine elevations with differing color schemes is
indicated. Each of the three floor plans include three different facades, with building
rears being the same within each plan. Garage doors are sectional roll -up doors.
Conceptual landscaping plan identifies a pallette of materials for trees, shrubs, and
ground cover. The planting complies with the plant pallette in the approved Specific
Plan for PGA West.
EXISTING UNIT DESCRIPTION:
The existing units have been built by a number of developers. To date,
approximately 1,800 dwelling units have been constructed in PGA West. The size of
the constructed and approved units varies from 1,290 to 4,830 square feet. All of
the units are Spanish or Mediterranean in nature. The units are primarily one story
with some two story units. All units have clay or concrete tile roofing, exterior
plaster walls and plaster or wood fascias. Other features used include but are not
limited to arches, shutters, popout window and door surrounds, earth tone exterior
colors, and sectional garage doors.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This request was advertised in the Desert Sun Newspaper on December 3, 1998, and
mailed to all property owners within PGA West and 500 feet around the project
boundaries. To date, no correspondence has been received.
STATEMENT OF ISSUES:
ISSUE 1 - Development Standards For Compatibility Review
The Zoning Code specifies standards or findings that must be met to grant
compatibility approval. This request complies with those as noted below:
1 . No new two story units are proposed as a part of this approval. Therefore,
there will be no height impacts on existing residences.
PC.STAFF rpt. SDP 98-641.wpd
2. The applicant proposes to use block walls which will match or be similar to the
existing walls in the PGA West to provide compatibility.
3. The proposed residences are similar to the existing residences. The designs are
compatible with the existing units in terms of architectural materials, style, and
colors. No two story units are proposed, but they are not required for
compatibility.
4. The recommended approval and Code requires a minimum of one 24" box size
tree in the front yard. This will be required as a part of the landscaping
approval.
5. The proposed units vary from 2,780 to 3,372 square feet in size which is
within the range of 1,290 to 4,830 square feet of existing constructed units
within PGA West.
ISSUE 2- Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) Review
The ALRC reviewed these plans at its meeting of December 3, 1998. (Attachment 2)
The Committee adopted Minute Motion 98-015, recommending approval subject to
the staff recommended conditions.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-—
98-641, subject to Findings and Conditions.
Attachments:
, approving Site Development Permit
1. Location Map
2. Minutes for ALRC Meeting December 3, 1998
3. Plan Exhibits (for Planning Commission only)
Prepared by:
Fred Baker, AICP
Principal Planner
Submitted by:
Christine di lorio, Plan ing Manager
PC.STAFF rpt. SDP 98-64' .wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-641, SUBJECT TO
CONDITIONS, PROVIDING COMPATIBILITY APPROVAL OF
THREE PROTOTYPE UNITS FOR CONSTRUCTION IN PGA
WEST
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-641
APPLICANT: SOUTHERN HILLS LLC.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 12th day of January, 1999, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
the request of Southern Hills LLC. to approve architectural and landscape plans for
three new prototype residential plans to be constructed east of Madison Street, south
of Airport Drive, in Specific Plan 83-002 (PGA West), more particularly described as:
Tracts 28776, 29004, and Parcel Map 28805
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has been determined to be
exempt from California Environmental Quality Act requirements under Section 15303,
Class 3 (A) of the Guidelines For Implementation; and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of
said Site Development Permit:
1. No new two story units are proposed as a part of this approval. Therefore,
there will be no height impacts on existing residences.
2. The applicant proposes to use block walls which will match or be similar to the
existing walls in the PGA West to provide compatibility.
3. The proposed residences are similar to the existing residences. The designs are
compatible with the existing units in terms of architectural materials, style, and
colors. No two story units are proposed, but they are not required for
compatibility.
4. The recommended approval and Code requires a minimum of one 24" box size
tree in the front yard. This will be required as a part of the landscaping
approval.
A:1PC.RESO SDP 98-641 d.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 98-
Site Development Permit 98-641
January 12, 1999
5. The proposed units vary from 2,780 to 3,372 square feet in size which is
within the constructed range of 1,290 to 4,830 square feet which exists in
PGA West.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 98-641 for the reasons
set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions labeled Exhibit "A",
attached hereto;
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 12" day of January, 1999, 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:\PC.RESO SDP 98-641d.wpd
RESOLUTION 98-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-641
JANUARY 12, 1999
GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. This approval is for three prototype units of the following approximate sizes:
A. Plan 1 - 2,780 square feet
B. Plan 2 - 3.020 square feet
C. Plan 3 - 3,372 square feet
2. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community
Development Department, Coachella Valley Water District, Riverside county
agricultural Commissioner before they will be considered final. Each residential lot
shall include at least one 24-inch box size tree, with other trees, groundcover, and
shrubs consistent with the Specific Plan.
3. Lawn areas shall be either hybrid Bermuda (summer) or hybrid Bermuda/Rye
(winter) depending on the season installed. All trees shall be double staked to
prevent wind damage.
4. The perimeter walls around the tract and residences shall match or be compatible
with those used in the project. Gates shall be constructed out of metal pickets or
its equivalent.
5. Final working drawings shall be reviewed by the Community Development
Department. Final working drawings for Plan 3, with the guest unit, shall
accommodate a three car garage, in which the two car garage area is a minimum
20 feet wide by 20 feet deep, or its equivalent.
LOCATION MAP
PROT
moNTECITO
by
The R.C. Hobbs Company
Forrest K. Haag, P5LA, Inc.
Landscape Architecture • Land Planning
-,50 Newport center Grlve. Suite 104
Newport Hewah cauforme 97660
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee
December 3,.1998
addition. The landscaping plant pallet is good. The date palm to be used in
the small islands will not be a problem. His concern has been the crowns
breaking off of the larger palms.. On the use of pine trees, he has had
problems with some of the pine trees at PGA West. All other trees are pretty
standard. He is not against using the pine trees, rather the problems they have
incurred using them in the desert is that they can be diseased and cause a
problem.
Mr. Pete Bilicki, Innovative Resort Communities, the applicant, stated they
would check with their landscape architect regarding the pine trees.
Discussion followed regarding the use of pine trees.
4. Committee Member Dennis Cunningham stated that in regard to the
architecture, they are compatible with the existing units. He asked if staff to
clarify why and where they were recommending the use of surrounds on the
windows. Discussion followed regarding the window treatments.
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee
Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 98-014 approving
Site Development Permit 98-636 as recommended by staff and with the
deletion of the pine trees from the plant pallette. Unanimously approved.
B. Site Development Permit 98-641; a request of Southern Hills, LLC (Roger Hobbs)
for approval of architectural and landscaping plans for three prototype plans for the
property located on the east side of Southern Hills, at Oakmont and at the north end
of Laurel Valley in PGA West.
Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff
report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department.
2. Committee Member Bobbitt asked staff to clarify the reason for the change
in the size of the garage. Staff stated it was to accommodate a hot water
heater and door which encroaches into it.
3. Committee Member Cunningham stated it is another fine product in PGA
West and is in keeping with what is existing.
4. Committee Member Bobbitt abstained due to a possible conflict of interest.
5. There being no further discussion it was moved and seconded to adopt
Minute Motion 98-015 approving Site Development Permit 98-641 as
recommended by staff.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\ALRC12-3-98-a.wpd 2
PH #D
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: JANUARY 12, 1999
CASE NO.: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 98-09
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-374
REQUEST: 1. CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
2. APPROVAL OF MEDIAN AND PARKWAY LANDSCAPING
LOCATION: WASHINGTON STREET, FROM 500 FEET SOUTH OF THE
LA QUINTA EVACUATION CHANNEL TO AVENUE 50
APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA
REPRESENTATIVE: HOLMES & NARVER INC. / RAY LOPEZ ASSOCIATES
ZONING: N/A
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: MAJOR ARTERIAL
SURROUNDING
ZONING/LAND USE: WEST: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL - DUNA LA
QUINTA, LA QUINTA FAMILY APARTMENTS, AND
VACANT LAND
EAST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL - DESERT CLUB
ESTATES AND VACANT LAND
OFFICE COMMERCIAL - VACANT LAND
GOLF COURSE - KSL DUNES COURSE
BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW:
The area of land within the scope of Capital Improvement Project (CIP) 98-09 consists of
Washington Street from Calle Tampico to Saguaro Drive. Conceptual landscaping
improvements are proposed within the parkways and median extending from 500 feet
south of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel to Avenue 50.
The proposed conceptual landscaping improvements are part of CIP 98-09, which involves
the widening of the Washington Street bridge at the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. The
scope of this project involves the ultimate widening of the existing Washington Street
bridge, as well as full width right-of-way improvements, including median and median
landscaping, parkway landscaping, and traffic signal improvements at the Avenue 50 /
P:\PCstfrpt-cip98-09.wpd 1
Washington Street intersection. Upon completion, Washington Street between Avenue 50
and Calle Tampico will function at its ultimate width.
Project Request
The request is for certification of a mitigated negative declaration of environmental impact
for Environmental Assessment (EA) 98-374 and approval of conceptual median and
parkway landscaping plans associated with CIP 98-09.
The project is designed in accordance with the General Plan designation for Washington
Street (major arterial), and will provide six lanes of traffic divided by an 18-feet-wide
landscaped median. Upon completion, a 12-feet-wide landscaped parkway will be
provided along the west side of Washington Street, north of the bridge. However, parkway
improvements beyond the easterly curb north of the bridge are deferred and will be a
development requirement of the adjacent property when it is developed.
CIP 98-09 requires removal of existing landscaping improvements adjacent to the Duna
La Quinta development to facilitate the street and bridge widening. In its place, a 6-feet-
wide sidewalk and 5-feet-wide landscaped parkway adjacent to Duna La Quinta, from the
La Quinta Evacuation Channel to Avenue 50, is proposed.
The proposed median and parkway landscaping improvements are consistent with and will
greatly resemble the existing median and parkway landscaping along Washington Street,
from Calie Tampico to the La Quinta Village shopping center. Numerous native plants are
proposed, such as Palms, Acacias, Crape Myrtles, Pepper Trees, as well as Bougainvillea,
Ocotillo, Barrel Cactus, and various other shrubs as indicated in the conceptual landscape
plans, (see Attachment #1).
The proposed landscape lighting consists of approximately 21 landscape lights within the
Washington Street median and 10 landscape lights within the westerly parkway adjacent
to Duna La Quinta. The proposed light fixtures utilized in the median and parkway
landscaping improvements are low wattage flourescent fixtures, which will be shielded and
filtered consistent with the City's Zoning Code.
The Community Development Department completed EA 98-374 for CIP 98-09 with a
recommendation for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact. Based upon this assessment, the project will not have significant adverse effects
on the environment. Appropriate mitigation has been identified that will reduce the levels
of project impacts to less than significant.
The General Plan Circulation Element designates Washington Street as a major arterial.
This designation provides for an ultimate right-of-way improvement width of 120 feet, with
six lanes of traffic divided by an 18-feet-wide median and adjacent 12-feet wide parkways.
The proposed improvements associated with CIP 98-09 are consistent with the major
arterial designation for Washington Street and the General Plan.
P:\PCstfrpt-cip98-09 wpd 2 i +>
L a Y4
Public Agency & Department Comments: City staff has coordinated with the Homeowners
Associations within the Duna La Quinta development, as well as KSL Land Corporation,
owners of adjacent properties impacted by this project. Each have expressed their
approval to staff of the proposed conceptual landscaping improvement plans.
The conceptual landscaping plans were reviewed by the Architecture and Landscaping
Review Committee at their November 16, 1998, meeting. The Committee reviewed the
proposed plans and recommended approval of CIP 98-09 as submitted, (see Attachment
#2).
Public Notice: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper and posted on
December 17, 1998. All property owners within 500 feet of the project area were mailed
a copy of the public hearing notice.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99- , recommending to the City Council
Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Assessment 98-
374.
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99- , approving Capital Improvement
Project 98-09.
Attachments:
1. Washington Street Bridge Widening Over La Quinta Evacuation Channel -
Conceptual Landscape Plans and Photo Plant Palette Book
2. Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee Meeting Minutes, November 16,
1998
Prepared & Submitted by:
Steve Speer, Senior Engineer
P:\PCstfrpt-cip98-09.wpd 3 _ aJ
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
CERTIFICATION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT 98-374 PREPARED FOR CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 98-09
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-374
CITY OF LA QUINTA
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did,
on the 12th day of January, 1999, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider
Environmental Assessment 98-374, and Capital Improvement Project 98-09; and,
WHEREAS, said Capital Improvement Project has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970"(as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the
Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 98-374); and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that said
Capital Improvement Project could have a significant adverse effect on the environment
unless mitigation measures are implemented, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration
of Environmental Impact could be filed; and,
WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if
any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the
following facts, findings, and reasons to justify recommending certification of said
Environmental Assessment:
1. The proposed capital improvement project will not be detrimental to the health,
safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly or directly, in that
appropriate mitigation measures have been imposed which will minimize project
impacts.
2. The proposed capital improvement project will not have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory.
PAPCreso-EA98 374.wpd
1
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Environmental Assessment 98-374
3. The proposed capital improvement project does not have the potential to achieve
short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental
goals.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of the
Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment.
2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of Environmental
Assessment 98-374 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the
Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum, attached hereto, and on file
in the Community Development Department.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 12th day of January, 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PAPCreso-EA 98-374. wpd
2
ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR
WASHINGTON STREET
BRIDGE WIDENING PROJECT
November,1998
Prepared for:
The City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Prepared by:
Terra Nova Planning & Research, Inc.
400 South Farrell, Suite B-205
Palm Springs, CA 92262
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
Table of Contents
Page No.
I. ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES/
CHECKLIST
A. Introduction 3
B . Background Information 3
C . Project Description 10
D. CEQA Environmental Checklist 11
E. Response to CEQA Checklist Items 23
II ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DETERMINATION 36
List of Exhibits
I. Existing Roadway Configuration 4
II. Future Roadway Configuration 5
III. Future Roadway Cross Sections 6-9
List of Appendices (See attached documents)
A. Hydrological Assessment, Washington Street Bridge Widening Project A-1
B . Washington Street Bridge Widening/Improvements Project
Noise Analysis B-1
C. Paleontological Resource Assessment - Washington Street Bridge
Widening Project, La Quinta, Riverside County, California C-1
D. Negative Archaeological Assessment for the Washington Street Bridge
Widening Project, City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, California. D-1
2
TN/City of ]La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
WASHHNG T OIL STREET BREDGE
WMENENG PROJECT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
I. ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES/CHECKLIST
A. Introduction
This Initial Study and Environmental Assessment (EA) have been prepared in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 - 21178.1).
It analyses the potential impacts associated with the widening of Washington Street at the La Quinta
Evacuation Channel (see project description below).
In accordance with Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines, this Initial Study has been
prepared for and executed by the Lead Agency, the City of La Quinta, in consultation with other
jurisdictional agencies, to inform the decision -makers, affected agencies, and the public of potential
environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. Section I.D of this EA provides
detailed explanations for all responses checked in the Initial Study as potentially significant adverse
impacts.
B . Background Information
The subject EA was prepared based upon a wide range of general background references and site -
specific studies. Specific reference documents include:
* City of La Quinta General Plan
* City of La Quinta General Plan EIR
* Hydrological Assessment, Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
* Washington Street Bridge Widening/Improvements Project Noise Analysis
* Paleontological Resource Assessment - Washington Street Bridge Widening Project, La
Quinta, Riverside County, California
* Negative Archaeological Assessment for the Washington Street Bridge Widening Project,
City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, California.
The City's General Plan and its accompanying EIR provide a broad and generalized overview of
environmental conditions throughout the City and region. In addition to these documents, special
studies were prepared specifically for this project, including noise, archaeological resource,
paleontological resource and hydrologic analyses. These analyses were determined to be necessary
by the City, based on the preparation of the Initial Study, provided below.
3' REMOVAL
MEDIAN
3' REMOVAL
REMOVE EXIST
STREET
IMPROVEMENTS
WASHINGTON STREET
33+5 0 TO 35+50
MEDIAN
18'-15'1
3' REMOVAL
EXISTING RETAININGISOUND --�
WALL TO REMAIN !
3ED STREET IMPROVEMENTS !
39' 12' - 13' !
!
II
f
I
j!
I
!
I
WASHINGTON STREET
35+50 TO 37+45.45
J l'xth l 1MYl(U V EMLIN l J
r -1 Exhibit
® Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
/ TERRA NOVA Street Cross Sections 3-A
Planning & Research, Inc.
CONSTRUCT
RETAINING/SOUND WALL
PROPOSED STREET -IMPROVEMENTS
6'
2
FILL MATERIAL
MEDIAN
REMOVE EXIST \
STREET IMPROVEMENTS \
\
FILL MATERIAL
\
\
\
\
WASHINGTON STREET
37+45.45 TO 38+70.53
ITS1 �
43.25' 6' 13'
REMOVE BRIDGE
DENIN
BRIDGE WIDENING
EXISTING BARRIER `
WASHINGTON STREET
38+70.53 TO 39+95.52
r -I Exhibit
® Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
J TERRA NOVA Street Cross Sections 3-B
Planning & Research, Inc.
AVH Zslxa
Ava Isixa
rA
W
w
CL�
_I \
aw3
1
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
C . Project Description
The City of La Quinta's General Plan calls for Washington Street to be constructed as a major
arterial, with a 120 foot right of way and 96 foot paved width. That portion of the roadway at the
La Quinta Evacuation Channel is currenoot built out to its ultimate width. The City proposes to
widen Washington Street at the La Quinta Evacuation Channel to improve capacity and complete
the widening of Washington Street as required in the City's General Plan. The street is currently
two lanes in each direction at the project location, with a 60 foot paved width. The widened street
will provide for a 96 foot paved width, and the addition of sidewalks, a raised median, retaining
walls and connection to existing improvements to the north and south, to 50th Avenue. Widening
will consist of 43 feet added to the west side of the existing roadway, and 13 feet added to the east
side. A 12 foot parkway, including a 6 foot sidewalk and 5 foot landscaped area and retaining
wall, will be added north of the Evacuation Channel on the west side of Washington Street. The
east side of Washington, north of the Channel, will be graded to slope down to existing grade.
South of the Channel, all improvements will be constructed to match and connect to existing
improvements on Washington Street.
The area to be affected extends approximately 450 feet south of the bridge, and 150 feet north of
Avenue 50. The widening of the bridge will include new pilings in the Evacuation Channel, which
is a Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) facility.
The area surrounding the proposed project is generally built out with residential development, both
single family detached homes, multi -family units and condominiums, as well as golf course uses.
The area along the northeastern portion of the project is currently vacant, and designated for High
Density Residential development in the City's General Plan. To the north of the proposed project is
primarily residential development, while residential and commercial development occur to the
southeast and southwest, respectively.
D . CEQA Environmental Checklist (see following pages)
e�
101..
Appendix I
Environmental Checklist Form
Project Title: Washington Street Bridge Widening at the La Quinta Evacuation Channel
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Christine DiIorio
760-777-7125
4. Project Location: Washington Street at and adjacent to the La Quinta Evacuation
Channel
5. Project Sponsor's Name & Address: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
6. General Plan Designation: N/A
7. Zoning: N/A
8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of
the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach
additional sheets if necessary.)
The project includes the widening of Washington Street to 96 feet, from approximately 500
feet south of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, to 150± north of Avenue 50.
9. Surrounding Lane Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings.
Lands surrounding the proposed project are primarily residential. The northeastern parcel
adjacent to the project area is currently vacant. Please also see project description in Section
I.C. Of Environmental Assessment.
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation
agreement.)
Coachella Valley Water District
PAEnvironmental Checklist Form.wpd
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.
X Land Use and Planning
X Population and Housing
X Geological Problems
X Water
X Air Quality
Transportation/Circulation
Biological Resources
Energy and Mineral Resources
Hazards
Noise
Mandatory Finds of Significance
Determination
(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.
❑X 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 (b) have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that
are„rr4`ed upqn the pryposed project.
Signatur Date '
lui 3 i' Llly of L1 �L'Al i 4
Printed Name For
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.
PAEnvironmental Checklist Form.wpd
mple question:
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? ( 1, 4 )
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by X
agencies with jurisdiction over the project. ( 3 )
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( 1 ) X
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or I t X
farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? ( 1 )
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established X
community (including a low-income or minority community)? ( 1 )
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? X
(1,3)
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. X
through projects in an undeveloped area or extension or major
infrastructure)? ( 1 )
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( 1 )
I. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose
people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? (2,3)
v' A_
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? ( 2, 3 )
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( 2, 3 )
WATER. Would the proposal result in:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate and amount X
of surface runoff? ( 2, 3 )
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as
flooding? ( 2, 3 )
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water
quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? ( 2, 3 )
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ( 2, 3 )
0
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? X
(2,3)
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct X
additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability? ( 2, 3 )
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( 2, 3 )
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( 2, 3 )
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise
available for public water supplies? ( 2, 3 )
AIR QUALITY Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or
projected air quality violation? ( 1, 2, 3 )
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( 1, 2, 3 )
IN��I
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in X
climate? ( 3 )
d) Create objectionable odors? ( 3 )
I. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( 2, 3 )
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous X
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( 5 )
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( 5) X
d) Insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? ( 5) X
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (5 )
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation X
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( 1 )
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? ( 1 )
JII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including but X
not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? ( 1, 2 )
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? ( 1, 2 )
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, coastal
habitat, etc.)? ( 1, 2 )
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ( 1, 3 )
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( 1, 3 )
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( 1 )
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner?
(1 )
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that X
would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State?
(1 )
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
K. 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 X
(including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)?
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency X
evacuation plan? ( 1 )
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( 1) X
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? X
( 1 )
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? X
(1 )
NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( 6 )
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( 6 )
:I. 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? ( )
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
[I. 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? ( 3 )
b) Communications systems? ( 3 )
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( 3 )
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( 3 )
e) Storm water drainage? ( 3 )
f) Solid waste disposal? ( 3 )
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( 3 )
III. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( 2 )
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( 2 )
c) Create light or glare? ( 2, 5 )
IV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( 7 )
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( 8 )
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
c) Affect historical resources? ( 8 )
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values? ( 8 )
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact X
area? ( 8 )
K V . RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other
recreational facilities? ( I )
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( I )
K V I. 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?
X
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but X
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.)
d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directory or
indirectly?
7II 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.
arces Cited Above:
City of La Quinta General Plan 1992
Master Environmental Assessment, 1992
City of La Quinta General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report 1992
City of La Quinta Municipal Code, Zoning Ordinance.
Project description and cross -sections provided by Holmes & Narver, Inc.
Noise Impact Analysis for Washington Street Bridge Widening, LSA Inc.
Paleontological Assessment for Washington Street Bridge Widening, LSA Inc.
Archaeological Assessment for Washington Street Bridge Widening, LSA Inc.
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
E. Response to CEQA Checklist Items
The following discussion provides responses to those Environmental Checklist items where a
potential for significant adverse impacts is indicated. The discussion is divided into Findings of
Fact, which describe the proposed project activity and potential impacts; followed by mitigation
measures that may be necessary to reduce impacts to insignificant levels; and finally Mitigation
Monitoring, where needed, is described. The end of this section includes a listing of all items
checked "No Impact."
1. c) Land Use
Finding of Fact: The proposed project will widen Washington Street to a 96 foot paved
width from approximately 500 feet north of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel to 50th
Avenue. Capacity of this roadway will be increased by the proposed project, but will not
increase traffic on the roadway. Existing land uses adjacent to the project are primarily
residential. Planned land use for the only adjacent vacant parcel is for high density
residential development. The General Plan calls for the widening of Washington Street to a
major arterial in this area. The General Plan analyses the City's needs and balances land
uses and roadway designation to establish compatibility.
Construction activities required to complete the proposed project will generate short term
impacts to surrounding and adjacent land uses, including construction noise and the
potential for blowing dust (please see noise and air quality discussions below). The
construction project will also include retaining/sound walls which have the potential to
improve conditions for adjacent land uses.
The impacts of the proposed project to surrounding land uses is expected to be less than
significant.
Mitigation: Construction activities are to be conducted during those hours permitted in the
City of La Quinta Municipal Code only. The City shall comply, or cause contractors to
comply with all City standards regarding dust control and vehicle maintenance throughout
the construction process (also see mitigation measures for air quality and noise impacts
below).
Monitoring: Construction activities will be supervised by the contractor and the City of
La Quinta. The City of La Quinta Public Works and Building Departments will be
responsible for enforcing City standards for working hours and dust control.
II.b) Population and Housing
Finding of Fact: The proposed action involves the widening of Washington Street to its
ultimate width, as required by the City's General Plan. The construction of the proposed
project will not, in and of itself, cause growth in the area. The improved capacity and traffic
flow, however, may accelerate the rate at which projects occur in this area. The City is
23
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
experiencing a high rate of growth, and has analysed the buildout of land use designations
and their impact on the circulation system. This resulted in a major arterial designation for
the affected portion of Washington Street. No changes to the land use pattern or increase in
density can be expected as a result of the widening project. The proposed project should
improve conditions for future growth in the southern portion of the City, as anticipated in
the General Plan. Impacts to induced growth are expected to be less than significant.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
Monitoring: None required.
III.a & b) Geologic Problems
Finding of Fact: The City is subject to significant groundshaking as a result of regional
faulting. The proposed project is not located in a seismic hazard (Alquist-Priolo) zone. The
proposed project is located in a Zone III groundshaking zone. An inferred fault occurs
within approximately one mile of the proposed project. This inferred fault trace, however,
has not demonstrated Holocene movement, and is not considered activel. The City
enforces building standards mandated for seismically active zones. The proposed project is
being designed to meet these standards and provide appropriate seismic reinforcements.
Mitigation: All plans for the proposed project shall meet or exceed City standards for
construction in place at the time construction is initiated. Implementation of these standards
will lower the potential impacts of groundshaking to the proposed project to a level of
insignificance.
Monitoring: The City Engineer shall review and approve all engineering and construction
plans prior to the initiation of any work, and shall inspect construction throughout the
process.
IIIJ) Geologic Problems
Finding of Fact: The proposed project includes the construction of bridge support
structures in the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. Construction of these pilings will result in
excavation activities which have the potential to both increase siltation, should a significant
storm occur during the construction period; and unstable soils should the pilings be placed
on improperly compacted material.
The soil in the project area is characterized as Coachella Fine Sand, found in alluvial fans
and flood plains in the Valley. The erosion hazard is slight, runoff is medium, the hazard
due to wind erosion is high, and the risk of corrosion for cement is low2. The pilings
proposed for this project, therefore, should not be impacted by soil conditions.
Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of La Quinta General Plan. BRW, Inc., 1992.
Soil Survey of Riverside County -Coachella Valley. Prepared by the US Department of Agriculture Soil
Conservation Service and the University of California Agricultural Experiment Station. September, 1980.
24 , ;
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
During construction, the proposed project will generate excavated material in the Channel
bed. Should stockpiling of materials occur coincident with a significant storm event, the
stockpiled material could pose a hazard (also see water quality discussion, below). With
mitigation, however, this impact can be reduced to a level of insignificance. Once
completed, the project's pilings should not represent significant obstacles, and should
therefore not impede functionality of the channel.
It is expected that the proposed project will require approximately 10,000 cubic yards of
additional fill material. Underlying soils for the bridge structure must be properly
compacted, and consist of approved fill material. The City, or contractor for the City will
be required to conform to the standards contained in the Standard Specifications for Public
Works Construction, 1997 edition or with Section 19-7 of the State of California Standard
Specifications.
Mitigation: The City shall, or shall cause all contractors to remove any soils excavated for
pilings or other purpose within the channel bed immediately upon excavation. Should
stockpiling be necessary, the equipment staging area or another site, at the City's
discretion, should be used for this purpose.
The City shall submit the plans for the proposed bridge to the Coachella Valley Water
District for its review and comments regarding functionality of the channel during and after
construction, and shall incorporate CVWD's recommendations into construction activities
where necessary.
Any and all fill material required for the proposed project shall conform to the standards
contained in the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, 1997 edition or
with Section 19-7 of the State of California Standard Specifications. All fill materials shall
be compacted to meet standards set by the design engineer. The City shall retain the
services of a soils engineer during construction to test compaction and ensure that standards
are met.
Monitoring: The City Engineer and Public Works Department shall monitor all
construction activity, and shall review and approve compaction testing as required.
IV. c) Water
Finding of Fact: Construction of the proposed project could impact water quality should
a storm event occur during the excavation and construction process. Potential impacts
include siltation and contamination, should any chemical or other substance be released as a
result of construction activity. Chemicals or other contamination could include gasoline and
other liquids from construction equipment, battery acids, and similar substances. This
potential impact must be mitigated.
25
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
The completed bridge structure will have no impact on the water quality within the
Channel, because no storm water flows will discharge into it3.
Mitigation: All construction equipment shall be maintained in proper operating condition
during all phases of construction. Should an equipment leak occur, the contractor or
operator shall be required to immediately excavate the impacted area and remove all
materials to an approved disposal site. The City shall, at its option, have the area tested by a
qualified soils engineer to ensure that all materials have been removed. No equipment shall
be stored in the Channel during the evening or weekends. All equipment shall be removed
to the staging area on a daily basis.
Monitoring: The City Engineer and Public Works Department shall monitor construction
activity and enforce mitigation measures.
IV e) Water
Finding of Fact: The construction of the proposed project could have a short term
impact on water flow in the channel, if not mitigated (please see section III.f. above).
Properly mitigated, construction will not have an impact on the flows in the channel.
After construction, additional pilings will occur within the Channel bed. In order to ensure
the smooth flow of flood waters past this new barrier, proper maintenance programs must
be implemented.
Mitigation: The City shall submit the plans for the proposed bridge to the Coachella
Valley Water District for its review and comments regarding functionality of the channel
during and after construction, and shall incorporate CVWD's recommendations into
construction activities where necessary. The City shall cooperate with CVWD in
implementing on -going maintenance of the Channel to keep the project area free of debris
or excess siltation.
Monitoring: The City Engineer shall coordinate with CVWD in review and approval of
any plans submitted to the District. The Coachella Valley Water District shall implement a
regular maintenance program.
V. b) Air Quality
Finding of Fact: The proposed action is expected to have a limited impact on ambient air
quality, due to the short term duration of the construction project. Construction will require
a period of approximately 5 months, with a 90 day period during which most earth moving
activities will occur4. The project engineer has estimated the types of equipment required,
3 Hydrological Assessment, Washington Street Bridge Widening Project, City of La Quinta. Holmes & Narver,
Inc. October, 1998.
4 Telecom, Pat Somerville, Holmes & Narver, Inc.
26 �i _
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
and the operating hours for each type of equipments. Calculations for emissions provided
below are based on this data.
Emissions are well below SCAQMD threshold criteria, as set forth in the SCAQMD EIR
handbook6. Emission thresholds for construction equipment are in tons per quarter.
Clearly, as shown below, the proposed construction, which will occur over two quarters,
will generate emissions well below those set by the SCAQMD.
Construction Emissions in Pounds
CO
ROC NOx Sox
PM10
369.7
93.7 1,053.7 112.4
102.5
SCAQMD Quarterly Thresholds (tons)
CO
ROC NOx Sox
PM10
24.75
2.5 2.5 6.75
6.75
The potential for generation of PM10, beyond that potential as a result of the above
estimated construction vehicle emissions, could exceed the permitted threshold if not
appropriately mitigated. For purposes of calculating the potential for unmitigated PM10
generation a factor of 55 pounds per day per acre (551b./ac/day) is used for each acre being
actively graded. Based upon planned earth moving activity, it is estimated that
approximately 3 acres will be disturbed per day, resulting in an unmitigated potential of up
to 165 pounds per day.
Mitigation: Mitigation measures similar to those to be applied to control blowing sand
and dust are expected to be applied to implement the PM10 mitigation program for the
project. The City shall review and approve a dust control plan submitted by the contractor
prior to the initiation of work. Typical actions required as conditions of approval include
site watering and near and long-term site stabilization with vegetation and/or an approved
surface stabilizer. Pre -grading site watering and on -going watering during the grading
process will serve as the principal means of erosion and dust control. Soil erosion and
fugitive dust emissions can be kept to insignificant levels, below the 150 pound per day
threshold, through the application of these and an appropriate mix of the following
measures.
To minimize emissions, the project contractor shall implement the following:
Memorandum dated December 29, 1998. Patrick Somerville, Holmes & Narver.
CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Chapter 6, Section 6.4 and Table A9-8-A. Prepared by the South Coast Air
Quality Management District.
r-n ,
27 _ .J
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
• Thoroughly pre-soak areas to be graded to increase soil cohesion
• Water site and equipment morning and evening
• Use soil binders or keep soils watered on site, unpaved access roads, and staging
areas
• Clean up the access roads and public roadways surrounding the project area
• Wash off trucks leaving the site
• Properly tune and maintain construction equipment
• Use low sulfur fuel for construction equipment
Pre -site grading, grading activities and long-term site stabilization shall also be
accomplished in compliance with the dust control plan approved by the City. Compliance
with the dust control plan shall be required during all phases of bridge construction.
Monitoring: The City Engineer and Building Department shall assure that the dust
control/PM 10 Management Plan is implemented throughout the project. No further
monitoring is required.
VI. a) Transportation/Circulation
Finding of Fact: Construction of the proposed bridge structure is likely to create a short
term impact to traffic congestion. In order to construct the bridge, plans currently are to
close one half of Washington Street at a time, leaving the other half of the roadway for
two-way traffic. Capacity will be reduced by 50%, and further reduced by construction
slow -downs.
Average traffic volumes on Washington Street, north and south of 50th Avenue were
15,482 in 1997, representing Level of Service A and D, respectively7. The constriction
of traffic flow caused by the reduction to two lanes over the current bridge is the cause of
the LOS D south of Avenue 50.
During construction, it is likely that the half -width of Washington being used for two-way
traffic will not be able to carry peak season traffic volumes efficiently. Although this impact
will create inconveniences and traffic delays, its short duration (for a 5 month period during
construction), limits its significance. The City should attempt to alleviate congestion,
however, through the following mitigation measures.
Mitigation: Since construction of the proposed improvements will require approximately
5 months to complete, the City should consider the construction during the less congested
summer months. A construction period of June 1 to October 30, when traffic volumes are
lower throughout the City, would facilitate movement on the reduced roadway.
In addition, the City shall employ the following measures to relieve traffic volumes on
Washington Street before and during the construction period:
City of La Quinta traffic counts on 3/4/97. Study performed by Newport Traffic Studies.
28 ���
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening :Project
November, 1998
• Prior to the initiation of construction, post signs north of 50th Avenue on
Washington Street, east of Washington Street on 50th Avenue, and at Washington
and Calle Tampico, warning of traffic delays during the construction period, and
suggesting Eisenhower Drive as an alternate route.
• During construction, post signs north of Eisenhower Drive on Washington Street,
warning of traffic delays, and recommending Eisenhower Drive as an alternative.
• During construction, publicize traffic delays through local newspapers, television
news programs and radio stations, and advise the use of alternate routes.
• All detours and lane closures shall be clearly marked and delineated, and speed
limits lowered within the construction area, to improve traffic safety.
• Flagmen shall be used by the City and/or contractor at all times when construction
equipment is entering or leaving the construction area. Flagmen will also be utilized
when and if only one lane of traffic is available.
Monitoring: The City Engineer and Public Works Department shall monitor traffic flow
in the project area, and implement the mitigation measures listed above.
VI. b)Transportation/Circulation
Finding of Fact: As discussed in section VI.a. above, traffic flow will be reduced to one
half the current road width during the 5 month construction period. It is expected that one
lane will be available for north and south bound traffic. Because of the temporary nature of
this traffic flow, conflicts and hazards are possible. This impact, however, is short term,
and is not expected to be significant, with the implementation of the mitigation measures
listed in section VI.a. above.
Mitigation: See section VI.a.
Monitoring: See section VI.a.
VII. a) Biological Resources
Finding of Fact: The project area has previously been disturbed, or is currently
developed as landscaping or parkway. The bed of the Evacuation Channel is composed of
imported fill, and some natural vegetation occurs. No significant biological resources are
expected to occur within these areas.
Cliff swallows are known to nest under the existing bridge. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act
requires that the City implement a mitigation plan should construction occur during the
swallows nesting season.
29 ,�
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
Mitigation: If construction of the proposed project is to occur during the months of
March through August, the City shall consult a qualified biologist, who shall prepare a
mitigation plan for the protection of the swallows and their nests. No construction, earth
moving or other activity shall be initiated prior to the implementation of this mitigation plan.
Monitoring: The City Engineer and Planning Manager shall coordinate and monitor
construction scheduling. The Planning Manager shall retain a qualified biologist and
monitor development of the mitigation plan.
X.a & b) Noise
Finding of Fact: A noise analysis was conducted for the proposed project. The complete
analysis can be found in Appendix B of this document$. The study and its recommended
mitigation measures are summarized below.
The City's General Plan noise standard is 60 dBA CNEL (a weighted average of 24 hour
noise levels). Noise levels along Washington Street in the vicinity of the project area
currently approach the City's General Plan standard. Construction of the proposed project
will not, in and of itself, impact noise levels surrounding the project site. Increased traffic
due to increased capacity, coupled with future growth, will cause noise levels to exceed the
City's existing standards, unless mitigated.
Residential uses are considered sensitive receptors. Residential uses occur adjacent to the
project area on both sides of Washington Street, with the exception of the southeast corner
of Washington Street and 50th Avenue to the Evacuation Channel, which is currently
vacant but designated for High Density Residential development on the City's General
Plan.
Noise monitoring was conducted for the project vicinity, at seven locations along
Washington Street, outside the roadway right-of-way. The results of the noise monitoring,
as well as the monitoring locations, are included in Appendix B. All of the noise
measurements for current conditions are within acceptable levels.
The proposed project will impact surrounding ambient noise levels in two areas:
construction noise, a short term but potentially significant impact; and post -project future
noise, a long term impact. Each of these conditions is discussed below.
Construction noise will affect surrounding properties during the noisier daytime hours, and
could reach 79 to 89 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the roadway centerline during
grading operations, without mitigation. Other construction activity will also generate noise,
but is considerably less noisy than grading activity. During construction, the closest
residences will be 200 feet away from the project area boundary on the south side of the
Evacuation Channel. The noise analysis concluded that during construction, with the
existing mitigation provided by existing retaining walls in this area, noise levels can be
8 Washington Street Bridge Widening/Improvements Project Noise Analysis. LSA Associates, Inc., November,
1998.
00
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
expected to be 70 dBA Lmax or less. Construction noise is exempt from noise standards in
the City's Municipal Code, provided it occurs within the normal business hours listed in
the Code. Construction noise, therefore, will not represent a significant impact to
surrounding lands.
The project, in and of itself, will not generate operational noise increases. The improvement
of traffic flow due to the widening of the roadway may, however, cause additional vehicle
trips, which are currently using other routes of travel. Furthermore, improved roadway
conditions combined with future growth in the Cove area of the City will increase traffic
volumes. The future noise environment, therefore, was also modeled as part of the noise
analysis. This modeling included future noise levels without the project, and future noise
levels with the project, to better determine the impact of the project on ambient noise levels
(see Appendix B, Table E). The model included existing and planned shielding (or
mitigation) such as retaining/sound walls, landscaping and similar features. The same
seven receptor locations were modeled. Converted to CNEL noise levels, to match the
City's standards, the noise level will exceed standards at three locations: at the second floor
level, south of the Evacuation Channel, and east of Washington (location N 1); 300± feet
north of Avenue 50, on the east side of Washington Street (location N3); and at the
northeast corner of Avenue 50 and Washington Street. The no project scenario shows that
ambient noise levels at location N4 will exceed the City's standard. The increase of less
than 3 dBA between future no project and future with project is considered to be less than
significant, and will not require mitigation. Locations NI and N3, however, will
experience 5 dBA increases in noise levels, which should be mitigated.
Finally, the City's General Plan Environmental Impact Report established that certain
impacts to the environment were unavoidable, including an increase in noise levels. As a
result, the City adopted, in conjunction with adoption of the General Plan and certification
of the EIR, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, recognizing that the implementation
of the General Plan would impact the noise existing environment. The City has established
standards for new development to mitigate this impact, but cannot require that impacts to
existing development be mitigated. The City will, however, implement the mitigation
measures below, in an effort to minimize any potential impact beyond that required by the
General Plan, its EIR, and the adopted Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Mitigation: The City shall implement, or cause to be implemented, the following
mitigation measures:
Except in an emergency, all construction activity shall occur during the construction hours
permitted in the City of La Quinta Municipal Code only.
Any portable mechanical equipment such as generator, should be located as far away from
residential land uses as possible during construction.
Construction staging areas and vehicle repair should occur as far away from residential land
uses as possible.
31 �,`
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
The City shall periodically monitor sound levels along Washington Street, between post
miles 44+00 and 49+00, to assure that exterior noise levels do not exceed City standard.
At such time as noise levels exceed City standard, the City shall construct, or cause to be
constructed, a sound wall designed to lower the noise levels to within acceptable standards.
The City shall continue to assess developer impact fees associated with traffic impacts
along Washington Street, and shall utilize these fees to implement the construction of sound
wall(s) when necessary.
Monitoring: The City Engineer shall monitor noise levels and implement mitigation
measures when necessary.
XII.e) Storm Water Drainage
Finding of Fact: The proposed project will alter existing drainage patterns within and
adjacent to the project area. A Hydrological Assessment was prepared for the proposed
project, and is included in Appendix A of this document9. The discussion and results of
the study are summarized below.
There are five drainage areas within the project area. None of the current drainage patterns
flow into the Evacuation Channel. The construction of the proposed project will result in an
improved condition for storm water drainage, insofar as flows which currently leave
Washington Street and cross onto private property will be contained within the roadway,
and into the City's storm drainage system. The proposed project will reduce or eliminate
impacts to adjacent properties, and result in a less than significant impact.
Mitigation: No mitigation required.
Monitoring: No monitoring required.
XIII. b & c) Aesthetics
Finding of Fact: The proposed bridge widening will include widening of the existing
roadway, and improvement of the area with landscaping and parkway treatments. The
project will also include retaining wall on the west side of Washington Street, north of the
Channel, which has the potential to impact aesthetics. Improvements on the east side
include slopes, which will be graded to meet existing improvements. These slopes will be
hydroseeded. The bridge and approaches to the bridge, on both the north and south side of
the Channel, are currently located at a higher grade than surrounding properties.
Hydrological Assessment, Washington Street Bridge Widening Project, City of La Quinta. Holmes & Narver,
Inc. October, 1998.
32
TN/City cf La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
All improvements, including slopes to meet existing improvements, will either be
landscaped or hydroseeded, resulting in a visually pleasing environment on and adjacent to
the bridge. The addition of a landscaped median will relieve the concrete expanse, and
provide for a softening of an urban structure. The primary vistas -- to the mountains to the
south and east, will not be impacted by the construction of the retaining wall. The proposed
project includes the potential for addition of art in public places, which would also improve
the appearance of the bridge.
The addition of man-made structures, including the retaining wall proposed as part of this
project, has the potential to increase light and glare. The construction of the bridge will not,
in and of itself, cause this impact. Once improvements are complete, however, the added
traffic will increase the amount of light currently occurring during evening hours. It is
expected, however, that retaining walls and the grade at which the bridge is located will
mitigate this impact by containing the increased light levels. Reflection of headlights on
inappropriate surfaces could increase glare if unmitigated. The mitigation measures
provided below will mitigate these potential impact to a level of insignificance.
Mitigation: The City shall assure that all improvement plans include landscaping to the
greatest extent possible, including landscaping adjacent to retaining walls, to soften the
man-made structures when viewed from surrounding properties.
No reflective surfaces shall be permitted on any improvements on the bridge, including any
Art in in Public Places installations, other than reflectors required for the public health and
safety.
Monitoring: The City Community Development Department shall review the project
construction plans and assure compliance with the City's requirements.
XIX. a) PaleontoIog_ical Resources
Finding of Fact: A paleontological assessment was conducted for the proposed project,
and is included in its entirety in Appendix C of this document10. The report is summarized
below.
The project area lies below the historic high shoreline of ancient Lake Cahuilla.
Paleontological resources have been found in Lake Cahuilla sediments. The records search
and site investigation performed for the proposed project found that the existing Evacuation
Channel and adjacent approaches are composed of alluvium and artificial fill materials
(non-native) at elevation of 40 feet above sea level and higher. The fill material occurs on
the western side of Washington Street, the eastern 30 feet on Washington Street, both sides
of Avenue 50, and along the banks of the Channel. There have been no paleontological
resources recorded within one quarter mile of the proposed project site. The closest
10 Paleontological Resource Assessment - Washington Street Bridge Widening Project, La Quinta, Riverside
County, California. LSA Associates, Inc., November, 1998.
33
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
recorded site is located approximately 6 miles north of the project site. No resources were
observed during the field survey. The paleontological assessment recognizes that some
excavation will occur below the historic shoreline of ancient Lake Cahuilla, and that
resources could occur at this depth. The City will mitigate this impact as outlined below.
Mitigation: Should any paleontological resources be observed during grading or
excavation of the proposed project, all work activity shall cease in the area of the
observation, until such time as a qualified paleontologist can observe the find, determine
appropriate actions to be taken, and develop a mitigation plan for such find.
Furthermore, during the drilling of pilings for the proposed project, a paleontologic
monitor shall be on -site to observe all drilling activity occurring in Lake sediments, as
outlined in the paleontological report prepared for this project. The monitor shall collect and
process samples, following protocol established by the San Bernardino County Museum
for such activities.
Monitoring: The City Community Development Department shall coordinate with the
City Engineer during grading and excavation to ensure that any paleontological observation
at the site is properly recorded and monitored. The City Engineer shall assure that the
project grading and excavation contractor(s) is aware of the responsibility of equipment
operators to report any paleontological observation and to stop work on the area.
XIV.b) Archaeological Resources
Finding of Fact: An archaeological assessment was conducted for the proposed project.
The report is included in its entirety in Appendix D of this report11. The results of the
analysis are summarized below.
A records search and site survey were completed for the project site and surrounding
locations. There were no archaeological resources recorded within the project area. Three
known archaeological sites do occur within one -quarter mile of the project area. The
National Register of Historic Places lists one site within one -quarter mile of the project.
Twelve studies have been completed surrounding the project area. No resources were
observed on -site during the field survey. The area has previously been disturbed by
previous roadway, bridge and private construction. The conclusion of the archaeologist
was that the proposed project will not impact archaeological or historic resources, and no
further analysis is required.
Mitigation: If any archaeological resources are observed during grading or excavation of
the proposed project, all work activity shall cease in the area of the observation, until such
time as a qualified archaeologist can observe the find, determine appropriate actions to be
taken, and develop a mitigation plan for such find.
1 1 Negative Archaeological Assessment for the Washington Street Bridge Widening Project, City of La Quinta,
County of Riverside, California. LSA Associates, Inc., August, 1998.
34
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
Monitoring: Should an archaeological observation be made, the City Community
Development Department shall coordinate with the City Engineer to ensure that it is
properly recorded and monitored. The City Engineer shall assure that the project grading
and excavation contractor(s) is aware of the responsibility of equipment operators to report
any archaeological observation and to stop work on the area.
X V I . Mandatory Findings of Significance
While the proposed project will disturb the existing environment, the area has previously
been disturbed due to previous construction activity, and the implementation of the
proposed project, as mitigated above, is not expected to have a significant impact on the
environment. The project will not be disadvantageous to long term environmental goals.
None of the impacts discussed above represent a significant cumulative impact. The project
will not have adverse effects on human beings.
Checklist Items Identified as Less Than Significant or No Impacts
The Environmental Checklist review involves the examination of technical data, maps and other
information, as well as the individual aspects of the site and the relevance of the various
environmental issue areas being considered. The following Checklist items were reviewed and
determined to not be relevant or to clearly have less than significance impacts and do not warrant
individual discussion.
Land Use: I.a, b, d, e; Population and Housing: H. a & c; Geologic Problems: M. c, d, e, g, h, i;
Water: IV. a, b, d; Air Quality: V. a, c, d; Transportation/Circulation: VI. c, d, e, f, g; Biological
Resources: VH. b, c, d, e; Energy and Mineral Resources: VIII. a, b, c; Hazards: IX. a through e;
Public Services: XI. a through e; Utilities and Service Systems: XII. a through d, f, g; Aesthetics:
XHI. c; Cultural Resources: XIV. c, d, e; Recreation: XV. a & b.
35
1
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DETERMINATION
The proposed project would have a significant effect on the environment if unmitigated. The
mitigation measures listed above, however, reduce the impacts of the proposed project to a level of
insignificance. A Negative Declaration will be prepared.
36
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
Appendix A
Hydrological Assessment
A-1 r :.9
HYDROLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
WASHINGTON STREET BRIDGE WIDENING PROJECT
City of La Quinta
October 27,1998
Prepared for: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253-1504
Prepared by: Holmes & Narver, Inc.
999 Town & Country Road
Orange, CA 92868
Purpose
Holmes & Narver has conducted a hydrological assessment to determine the impacts of
the Washington Street Bridge Widening project located in the City of La Quinta, County
of Riverside, California. This project will widen the existing bridge on Washington
Street over the Evacuation Channel. Additional improvements, including widening,
landscaping and the installation of curb and gutter, on Washington Street will also occur
from approximately 450-feet south of the bridge to approximately 150-feet north of
Avenue 50.
Methods
Existing topography maps generated from aerial mapping and field survey were utilized
to determine the existing hydrological features. A field investigation of the project area
was conducted on September 30, 1998.
Existing Conditions
The project site has five defined drainage areas as shown in Figure 1.
n ,
3
Figure 1- Existing Drainage Areas
The description of each area is as follows:
Area I
WASHINGTON STREET
W
N
This area is south of the Evacuation Channel, along the west half of Washington
Street, consisting of an 18-foot to 48-foot wide asphalt paved street section and a
30-foot wide parkway with landscaping. Existing storm water flow is conveyed
within the street section, and flows southerly.
Area 2
This area is south of the Evacuation Channel, along the east half of Washington
Street. The street width varies from 18-feet to 48-feet and has a 12-foot
landscaped parkway. Storm water flow is southerly within the street section, with
a portion of the unimproved parkway flowing easterly down a slope onto private
property.
Area 3
This is the area within the Evacuation Channel and is owned and maintained by
the Coachella Valley Water District. The channel is trapezoidal shaped with a
concrete lining approximately 150-feet on either side of Washington Street.
Outside of the concrete lined section, the channel is landscaped within the golf
course. Flow within the channel is to the northeast.
Area 4
This area consists of the west side of Washington Street, north of the Evacuation
Channel, and a portion of the residential development to the west. Storm water
flow within this area is conveyed to several locations. Washington Street flows in
a northwesterly direction with a portion entering the residential complex and the
remaining flow near the Avenue 50 intersection entering an existing drainage
inlet. Storm water flow within the residential complex enters either a man-made
lake at the golf course or the Evacuation Channel. The existing street width
varies from 18-feet to 30-feet with the remaining right-of-way being unimproved
with minimal landscaping.
Area 5
This area includes the east side of Washington Street, north of the Evacuation
Channel, and the large undeveloped parcel to the east. The existing asphalt paved
street section vanes from 18-feet to 25-feet and flows easterly onto the
undeveloped parcel. This parcel is sparsely covered with natural vegetation and
flows in a northeasterly direction.
Proposed Improvements
Washington Street will be widened approximately 43-feet on the west side and 13-feet on
the east side. Concrete curb and gutter will be installed throughout the project. North of
the Evacuation Channel, a 12-foot parkway will be constructed on the west side of the
street and will include a 6-foot sidewalk, 5-foot of landscaping and a retaining wall. The
east side will be graded with a level 5-foot section and a down slope to join the existing
grade. Parkway improvements south of the Evacuation Channel will match existing
conditions.
Impacts & Mitigation
The impacts of the street widening on existing conditions are minimal. The increased
paved street area will cause a slight increase the storm water runoff rate as the infiltration
decreases. With the existing drainage areas being small in size (approximately one acre),
the impact is negligible.
A breakdown of the impacts to each drainage area is listed below.
Area 1
The widening within this area is minimal. Storm water will continue to flow
southerly with no net change in the storm water runoff.
Area 2
The area to be widened wiil keep the storm water flow within the street right-of-
way, as opposed to flowing easterly onto private property. This additional flow,
which must be carried within the street section, will not have an impact to the
storm water carrying capacity of the street.
Area 3
The bridge widening over the Evacuation Channel has no impact on the existing
hydrological features of the channel.
Area 4
The portion within the street right-of-way which currently flows onto private
property will now be conveyed in the street in a northerly direction to the
intersection at Avenue 50. The proposed street grade will restrict the flow beyond
the intersection therefore a drainage inlet must be installed to convey into an
existing underground storm drain system. This project will reduce the on -street
flows onto the residential complex, and has no further off -site impacts.
Area 5
The widening will route on -street flows northerly to Avenue 50. As with Area 4,
this flow will be collected into a drainage inlet and conveyed to the existing
underground storm drain system. Flow onto the unimproved parcel will be
slightly reduced due to this project and has no further impacts.
Conclusion
The only mitigating factors identified are the installation of storm drain facilities in Areas
4 and 5. Installation of facilities such as this is to be expected for a project of this nature,
and may be accomplished at minimal cost. It is Holmes & Narver's opinion that the
overall hydrological features of the project site will be not be impacted by this project.
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
Appendix B
Noise Assessment
B-1
WASHINGTON STREET BRIDGE
WIDENING/IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
NOISE ANALYSIS
November 20, 1998
Prepared for:
Holmes & Narver
999 Town & Country Road
Orange, CA 92868
For use by:
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Prepared by:
LSA Associates, Inc.
1 Park Plaza, Suite 500
Irvine, California 92614
(949) 553-0666
LSA Project #HNA830
LSA Associates, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................... I
2.0 SETTING ................................................2
2.1 NOISE DEFINITIONS ................................ 2
2.2 NOISE MEASUREMENT SCALES ........................ 2
2.3 REGULATORY BACKGROUND ......................... 3
3.0
EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................... 8
3.1 FIELD MEASUREMENTS ..............................
8
3.2 MODEL CALIBRATION ..............................
10
4.0
IMPACTS ...............................................10
4.1 CONSTRUCTION ..................................
10
4.2 OPERATIONS ......................................
12
5.0
MITIGATION MEASURES ..................................
15
5.1 CONSTRUCTION ..................................
15
5.2 OPERATIONS .....................................16
6.0
CONCLUSION ..........................................17
7.0
REFERENCES ...........................................17
APPENDICES
* - SOUND32 NOISE MODELING OF EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
* - SOUND32 NOISE MODELING OF FUTURE NO BUILD ALTERNATIVE
C - SOUND32 NOISE MODELING OF FUTURE BUILD ALTERNATIVE
11/20/98(P:\HNA830\HNA830.NSE) ii
A
LSA Associates, Inc.
LIST OF FIGURES
PAGE
1 - State of California Land Use Compatibility Guidelines ............ 5
2 - Noise Measurement/Modeling Locations ....................... 9
LIST OF TABLES
A - Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC)................................. 4
B - Land Use Compatibility for Exterior Community Noise ............... 6
C - Exterior Noise Standards ...................................... 7
D - Noise Level Measurements .................................... 11
E - Peak Hour Noise Levels at Sensitive Receptor Locations ............. 14
11/20/98(P:\. INA830\HNA830.NSE) iii
LSA Associates. Inc.
1.0 LNTRODUCTION
City of La Quinta proposes to widen the Washington Street bridge across the La
Quinta Evacuation Channel. The bridge widening will incorporate designated
improvements from approximately 500 feet south of the bridge to approxi-
mately 500 feet north of Avenue 50. The widening/improvements will assist in
increasing level of service on this segment of Washington Street to accommo-
date future growth in this area.
The following analysis provides a discussion of the fundamentals of sound;
examines State and City noise guidelines and policies; reviews noise levels at
representative existing sensitive receptor locations; evaluates potential noise
impacts associated with the proposed project; and provides mitigation for
identified significant impacts. Because of the complex terrain involved with the
travel lanes, retaining wal /sound barriers, and receptor locations in the project
area, this evaluation was prepared utilizing procedures and methodologies
specified by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Caltrans SOUND32 traffic noise
model, a version of the FHWA Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA 7-7-3)
utilizing the Calveno emission factors, was used. This model uses peak hour
traffic volumes, speed, vehicle mix, and roadway configuration, including travel
lane and receptor elevations, as well as any man-made or natural barriers, to
calculate the peak hour equivalent continuous noise level, or Leq. This peak
hour Leq value is then used to calculate the 24 hour weighted community noise
equivalent level (CNEL) used by the City for exterior noise standards. Modeled
traffic noise levels are based upon existing and future average daily traffic data
and existing peak hour traffic volume provided by the City of La Quinta (Octo-
ber 7, 1998) along Washington Street both north and south of Avenue 50.
Future peak hour volume along this segment of Washington Street was derived
with existing peak hour traffic volume proportional to the growth in average
daily traffic volumes. The 24 hour traffic counts by the hour along Washington
Street south of Avenue 50, provided by the City, were used to calculate the
traffic dominated CNEL, as will be described in more detail below. The techni-
cal noise data, including model run results, are provided in Appendices A
through C.
The analysis shows that existing noise levels within the project area are well
below the FHWA and Caltrans peak hour criterion of 67 dBA Leq, but, when
converted to the CNEL scale, are approaching the City's 60 dBA CNEL exterior
noise standard. Future increases in area traffic will add to these existing noise
levels. Implementation of the proposed project would not significantly change
the projected future noise levels in areas outside the project improvement area.
However, the proposed project would result in noticeable changes in the noise
exposure along Washington Street.
11/20/98 (P:\HNA830\HNA830. NSE)
LSA Associate; Inc.
2.0 SETTING
2.1 NOISE DEFINITIONS
Sound is a pressure wave transmitted through the air. It is described in terms
of loudness or amplitude (measured in decibels), frequency or pitch (measured
in Hertz [Hz] or cycles per second), and duration (measured in seconds or
minutes). The standard unit of measurement of the loudness of sound is the
decibel (dB). Typical human hearing can detect changes in sound levels of
approximately three dB under normal conditions. Changes of one to three dB
are detectable under quiet, controlled conditions, and changes of less than one
dB are usually undiscernible.
The human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies. Sound waves below
16 Hz are not heard at all and are "felt" more as a vibration. Similarly, while
people with extremely sensitive hearing can hear sounds as high as 20,000 Hz,
most people cannot hear above 15,000 Hz. In all cases, hearing acuity falls off
rapidly above about 10,000 Hz and below about 200 Hz. Since the human ear
is not equally sensitive to sound at all frequencies, a special frequency depen-
dent rating scale is usually used to relate noise to human sensitivity. The
A -weighted decibel scale (dBA) performs this compensation by discriminating
against frequencies in a manner approximating the sensitivity of the human ear.
Noise is defined as unwanted sound, and is known to have several adverse
effects on people, including hearing loss, speech and sleep interference, physi-
ological responses, and annoyance. Based on these known adverse effects of
noise, the federal government, the State of California, and many local govern-
ments have established criteria to protect public health and safety and to pre-
vent disruption of certain human activities.
2.2 NOISE MEASUREMENT SCALES
Several rating scales (or noise "metrics') exist to analyze adverse effects of noise
(including traffic generated noise) on a community. These scales include the
equivalent continuous noise level (Le ), the community noise equivalent level
(CNEL), and the day -night average noise level (Ldn). Leq is a measurement of
the sound energy level averaged over a specified time period (usually one
hour). Leq represents the amount of variable sound energy received by a recep-
tor over a time interval in a single numerical value. For example, a one hour
Leq noise level measurement represents the average amount of acoustic energy
that occurred in that hour. Other values of concern include the Lmin and Lmax.
These are the minimum and maximum values recorded over a designated time
interval or event.
Unlike the Leq metric, the CNEL noise metric is based on 24 hours of
measurement. CNEL also differs from Le in that it applies a time weighted
factor designed to emphasize noise events that occur during the evening and
nighttime hours (when quiet time and sleep disturbance are of particular con-
cern). Noise occurring during the daytime period (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.)
receives no adjustment. Noise produced during the evening time period (7:00
11/20/98 (P:�HNA830\HNA830. NS E)
LSA Associates, Inc.
p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) is adjusted by five dBA, while nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00
a.m.) noise is adjusted by ten dBA.
The Ldn noise metric is similar to the CNEL metric except that the period from
7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. receives no adjustment. Both the CNEL and Ldn met-
rics yield approximately the same 24 hour value (within one dBA), with the
CNEL being the more restrictive of the two, or approximately one dBA higher
than the Ldn value.
2.3 REGULATORYEACKGROUArD
2.3.1 State Guidelines and Standards
California Department of Transportation
Caltrans indicated in its Project Development Procedure Manual (January 1,
1997) that reasonable and feasible noise abatement measures should be incor-
porated into new or reconstruction highway projects.
Caltrans has established a noise abatement criterion (NAC) of 67 dBA (exterior
Le) for noise sensitive activities/land uses. Table A lists the NAC for various
land use categories. "Sensitive" land uses are defined as picnic areas, recreation
areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels,
schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals.
Noise attenuation requirements under California law (i.e., the California Envi-
ronmental Quality Act [CEQA]) differ from the requirements of the FHWA,
which are based on Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 772 (23 CFR,
Part 772). Under CEQA, a substantial increase in noise will result in a signifi-
cant effect and must be mitigated or "Findings" made. Under FHWA regula-
tions, a traffic noise impact must be mitigated when the predicted noise levels
"approach or exceed" the NAC or when the predicted noise levels substantially
exceed predicted noise levels without the project and it is reasonable and
feasible to mitigate.
The determination of whether a noise increase is considered to be substantial is
dependent, in part, on the existing noise level. Caltrans considers a noise level
increase to be substantial when the proposed project will result in an increase
of the following amounts at a sensitive receptor:
When the future noise level, Leq(h), without the project, exceeds the
NAC, and the increase is expected to be at least 5 dBA, Leq(h).
When the future noise level, Leq(h), without the project, is more than 20
dBA below the NAC, and the expected increase results in a predicted
noise level, Leq(h), to within 5 dBA below the NAC, or higher.
When future noise levels, Leq(h), without the project, are between 20
dBA below the NAC, and on a sliding scale, increases between at least
15 and 5 dBA, Leq(h), respectively, are expected.
11/20i98(P:ViNA830\HNA830.NSE 3
LSA Associates, Inc.
Table A - Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC)
Activity Hourly A -Weighted
Category
Noise Levels, Leg (dBA)
Description of Activity Category
A
57
Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary sig-
(exterior)
nificance and serve an important public need and where
the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is
to continue to serve its intended purpose.
B
67
Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports
(exterior)
areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches,
libraries, and hospitals.
C
72
Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in
(exterior)
Categories A or B, above.
D
—
Undeveloped lands.
E
52
Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools,
(interior)
churches, libraries, hospitals, and auditoriums.
Source: State of California Department of Transportation, Project Development Procedures Manual, January 1, 1997
For the purposes of noise analysis on new highway construction or reconstruction
projects, when the predicted noise level reaches one dBA less than the NAC, it is
considered to be approaching the NAC for all land use categories.
The California Department of Health Services' (DHS) Office of Noise Control has
studied the correlation of noise levels and their effects on various land uses. As a
result, the DHS has established four categories for judging the severity of noise
intrusion on specified land uses.
The types of land uses addressed by the DHS and acceptable noise levels, by cate-
gory, are presented in Figure 1 and Table B.
Noise in the "normally acceptable" category is generally acceptable with no mitiga-
tion necessary. Noise in the "conditionally acceptable" category may require some
mitigation as established through a noise study. The "normally unacceptable"
category would require substantial mitigation while the "clearly unacceptable"
category is probably not mitigatable to a level of less than significant. As noted in
Figure 1, there is some overlap between categories.
2.3.2 City of La Quints Noise Standards
Noise Element of the General Plan
The City in its General Plan has an Environmental Hazards Element that contains a
"Noise Hazards" section in which the effects of noise, noise conditions in the City,
and land use planning implications are discussed. It indicates that residential uses
11/10/98(P:\I-INA830\HNA830.NSE) 4
V 6
• : i � • • IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII■■
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ■
• nuunnunnuuuuuunn
• � �. �Exlunuuunuumm�unuu■
• • • • • • • • uuuuuunnnmul ■
ME
• • mnn�ll�uum-■
MEMOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
® NORMALLY ACCEPTABLE
Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the
assumption that any buildings involved are of normal
conventional construction, without any special noise
CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTABLE
® NORMALLY UNACCEPTABLE
New construction or development should generally be
discouraged. If new construction or development does
proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction
requirements must be made and needed noise insulation
features included in the design.
New construction or development should be undertaken ® CLEARLY UNACCEPTABLE
only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction
requirements is made and needed noise insulation features New construction or development should generally not
included in the design. Conventional construction, but be undertaken.
with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air
conditioning will normally suffice.
iource: California Department of Health, Guidelines for the Preparation and Content of Noise Elements of the General Plan. February. 1976.
'z7i9s�rAs3o) Figure 1
LSANoise and Land Use
Compatibility Guidelines
LSA Associates, Inc.
Table B - Land Use Compatibility for Exterior Community Noise
Land Use Category
Passively used open spaces
Auditoriums, concert halls, amphitheaters
Residential -low density single family, duplex,
mobile homes
Residential --multifamily
Transient lodging -motels, hotels
Schools, libraries, churches, hospitals, nursing
homes
Actively used open spaces --playgrounds, neigh-
borhood parks
Golf courses, riding stables, water recreation,
cemeteries
Office buildings, business commercial and pro-
fessional
Industrial, manufacturing, utilities, agriculture
Noise Range (Ldn or CNEL), dB
I
II
III
IV
50
50-55
55-70
70+
45-50
50-65
65-70
70+
50-55
55-70
70-75
75+
50-60
60-70
70-75
75+
50-60
60-70
70-80
80+
50-60
60-70
70-80
80+
50-67
--
67-73
73+
50-70
--
70-80
80+
50-67
67-75
75+
---
50-70
70-75
75+
---
Noise Range I -Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings
involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.
Noise Range II -Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed
analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design.
Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning, will normally
suffice.
Noise Range III -Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new
construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and
needed noise insulation features included in the design.
Noise Range IV -Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken
Source: Office of Noise Control, California Department of Health, 1976.
11/20/98(P:V1NA830WNA830.NSE) 6
LSA Associates, Inc.
are compatible in areas with exterior noise level of 60 dBA CNEL or lower in
outdoor living areas. For commercial, employment and manufacturing uses, 75
dBA CNEL or lower in exterior noise are acceptable.
Zoning Ordinance
Section 9.100.210, Noise Control, of the City's Zoning Ordinance, establishes
exterior noise standard for both noise sensitive, including residential, property,
schools, hospitals, and churches, and other nonresidential uses. Table C lists
the exterior noise standards for these uses.
Table C - Exterior Noise Standards
Receiving Land Use Noise Standard Time Period
Noise Sensitive 60 dBA 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m.
50 dBA 10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m.
Other Nonresidential 75 dBA 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m.
65 dBA 10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m.
If the noise consists entirely of impact noise, simple tone noise, speech or
music, or any combination thereof, each of the noise levels specified in the
table shall be reduced by five (5) dBA.
Source: City of La Quinta, Zoning Ordinance.
It shall be unlawful for any person at any location within the City to create any
noise, or to allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occu-
pied or otherwise controlled by such person, when such noise causes the noise
level, when measured on any adjacent property, to exceed:
• The noise standard for a cumulative period of more than 30 minutes in
any hour;
• The noise standard plus five dBA for a cumulative period of more than
15 minutes in any hour:
• The noise standard plus ten dBA for a cumulative period of more than
five minutes in any hour;
• The noise standard plus 15 dBA for a cumulative period of more than
one minute in any hour; or
• The noise standard plus 20 dBA for any period of time.
If the ambient or background noise level exceeds any of the preceding noise
categories, no increase above such ambient noise level shall be permitted.
Construction activities regulated by Section 6.08 of the La Quinta Municipal
Code are exempt from the noise restrictions of the Zoning Ordinance.
1120i98(P:\IiNA830\IiNA830.NSE) 7
LSA Associates. Inc.
La Quinta Municipal Code
Section 6.08, Nuisances, of the La Quinta Municipal Code specifies noise nui-
sance and disturbances by construction noise. The permitted hours of con-
struction work are from 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, and
from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturday during the period of October 1 through
April 30. No construction is permitted on Sundays and government code
holidays. During the period of May 1 through September 30, the permitted
hours of construction for weekdays (Monday through Friday) are from 6:00
a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Permitted construction hours for Saturdays are from 8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
2.3.3 Method Used in This Noise Impact Analysis
As indicated previously, due to the complex terrain involved with the travel
lanes, retaining wall/sound barriers, and receptor locations in the project area,
Caltrans SOUND32 traffic noise model, a version of the FHWA Highway Noise
Prediction Model (FHWA 7-7-3) utilizing the Calyeno emission factors, was
used. This model uses peak hour traffic volumes, speed, vehicle mix, and
roadway configuration, including travel lane and receptor elevations, as well as
any man-made or natural barriers, to calculate the peak hour equivalent contin-
uous noise level, or Leq.
Based on a 24 hour traffic count on Washington Street south of Avenue 50
(Newport Traffic Studies, March 4, 1997), the peak hour Leq can be converted
to a traffic dominated CNEL value by adding 0.2 dBA to the Leq. The converted
CNEL value is then compared to the City's 60 dBA CNEL exterior noise stan-
dard for residential uses.
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 FIELD MEASUREMENTS
There are existing residences along both sides of Washington Street (Figure 2).
Existing and planned/approved multifamily homes are located on the west side
of Washington Street, north of the bridge to be widened. A vacant lot is located
on the west side of Washington Street, south of the bridge. Several apartment
complexes are located to the west of the vacant lot. Existing single-family
homes are located on the east side of Washington Street, south of the bridge.
These are considered sensitive receptors. Currently, the land on the east side
of Washington Street north of the bridge is vacant.
The most significant and common source of noise in the project area is trans-
portation related, mostly on -road vehicles. Motor vehicle noise is of concern
because of its high rate of occurrence and roadway proximity to sensitive areas.
11/10/98(P:1IiNA830\11NA830.NSE) 8
LSA Associates, Inc.
This was confirmed in the field study, where existing noise levels in the project
area are those typical of urban/suburban development and consist mainly of
vehicular traffic. Aircraft and birds constitute occasional short-term noise
intrusion, but their integrated contribution is small.
Noise monitoring was conducted on August 11, 1998, using a Larson -Davis
Model 720 Type 2 Integrating/Logging Sound Level Meter. The unit meets the
American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard S1.4-1983 for Type 2,
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 651 - 1979 for Type
2, and IEC Standard 651 - 1979 for Type 2 sound level meters. The unit was
calibrated prior to the first set of readings. The accuracy of the calibrator is
maintained through a program established through the manufacturer and is
traceable to the National Bureau of Standards. The unit meets the require-
ments of the ANSI Standard S1.4-1984 and the IEC Standard 942: 1988 for Class
1 equipment.
The study included 15 minute readings in the morning hours between 9:00
a.m. and 12:00 p.m. at seven representative locations along both sides of Wash-
ington Street. Monitoring locations are shown in Figure 2. Each reading is
summarized in Table D.
3.2 MODEL CALIBRATION
Existing peak hour traffic volumes provided by the City were used to calculate
peak hour Le under the existing condition. The model was then adjusted with
a calibration ?actor at each receptor location based on the monitored results to
account for factors not included in the modeling. This process will be shown
later in this report.
4.0 IMPACTS
4.1 CONSTRUCTION
Construction noise represents a short-term impact on ambient noise levels, as
noise levels produced by construction activities can reach relatively high levels.
Noise typically associated with the use of construction equipment is best esti-
mated in a study sponsored by the U.S. EPA (Bolt, Beranek, and Newman,
1971), and is estimated at an Le of between 79 and 89 dBA at a distance of 50
feet from the construction effort for the grading phase. Later phases of con-
struction, such as the pouring of forms, typically involve smaller and quieter
pieces of equipment. At its nearest point, construction (i.e., road/bridge widen-
ing and retaining/sound wall construction) would take place within a distance
of about 100 feet from those receptors located along Washington Street south
of Avenue 50. Construction would occur at a distance of about 200 feet from
the residences located along the east side of Washington Street south of the
bridge. The projected maximum noise from construction of the road widening
1120/98(PAJiNA830UiNA830.NSE) 10
LSA Assodatex Inc.
Table D - Noise Level Measurements)
Location/Start Time Lem, dBA Noise Sources; Other Observation
N-11
56.8 Washington Street traffic; bridge over La Quinta
9:25 a.m.
Evacuation Channel has 2 foot safety curbs
blocking most tire noise at this location; there is
an existing 6 foot block wall along the right-of-
way of Washington Street.
N-2/
55.3 Washington Street traffic; chirping birds; road
9:45 a.m.
approximately 12 feet above residential pad;
there is an existing 6 foot block wall along the
right-of-way.
N-3/
58.7 Washington Street traffic; chirping birds and
10:05 a.m.
aircraft overflight; distant construction noise;
road is approximately 5 feet above residential
grade; existing 6 foot block wall along the right-
of-way.
N-4/
59.0 Washing Street and Avenue 50 traffic; road ap-
10:25 a.m.
proximately 4 feet below residential grade; exist-
ing 4 foot retaining wall along the right-of-way.
N-5/
51.0 Washington Street traffic; site currently vacant;
10:45 a.m.
planned apartment use; road higher than resi-
dential grade with 8 foot wall on top of varying
height earthen berm.
N-6/
54.4 At 78515 Avenida Ultimo; transformer at Mar-
11:05 a.m.
shall Street substation; Washington Street traffic
behind existing retaining wall with varying
height from 16 to 20 feet from the residential/
substation grade; some construction activities
occurring behind the substation.
N-7/
53.3 At 78500 Avenida Tujunga; air conditioning
11:25 a.m.
units and chirping birds; Washing Street traffic
on the other side of retaining wall with varying
height from 6 to 8 feet from the residential
grade; mail delivery truck.
Noise measurements taken on August 11, 1998. 15 minute measure-
ments.
11/20/98 (PAHNA830V3NA830.NSE)
11
LSA Associates, Inc.
and retaining wall at receptors located along Washington Street is estimated at
between 79 and 85 dBA without mitigation. However, with shielding provided
by existing retaining walls along the right-of-way of Washington Street, con-
struction noise would be reduced to 70 dBA Lmax or lower. As indicated in the
City's Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code, construction noise is exempt
from the noise restrictions specified in the Zoning Ordinance, as long as it
occurs within the permitted hours specified in the Municipal Code. No signifi-
cant construction noise impacts would occur with compliance of these require-
ment.
Noise will also be created by the vehicles that transport both workers and
materials to the site. This analysis assumes that construction involves as many
as 25 workers at any one time. The pieces of heavy equipment that will per-
form grading and construction activities will be moved on site, will remain for
the duration of each construction phase, and will not add to the daily traffic
volume. When added to the current traffic volumes along Washington Street,
as well as Interstate 10 and other local arterials, the projected volume of con-
struction traffic will add less than 0.5 dBA Leg or Ldn to traffic generated noise
and will not be audible. However, there will be a relatively high single event
noise exposure potential with construction related vehicles at a maximum level
of 87 dBA at 15 meters (50 feet). This would be a short-term intermittent
annoyance to noise sensitive receptors adjacent to the access roads. Construc-
tion hour restrictions established by the City of La Quinta should be followed
by project construction contractor. The permitted hours of construction work
are from 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, and from 8:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m. Saturday during the period of October 1 through April 30. No con-
struction is permitted on Sundays and government code holidays. During the
period of May 1 through September 30, the permitted hours of construction for
weekdays (Monday through Friday) are from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Permitted
construction hours for Saturdays are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
4.2 OPERATIONS
Potential noise impacts associated with project operations are solely from traffic
noise created by vehicles that use the system of roadways. It should be noted
that the proposed project is a roadway/bridge widening project that will help
improve the level of service (LOS) along Washington Street. Future increases in
traffic volumes are expected due to improvement of the LOS. Therefore, there
would be project related noise impacts that may be attributed to changes in
traffic volumes. Changes in roadway configuration caused by the proposed
project will also affect noise exposure along the roadway.
SOUND32 noise modeling was performed for existing (1998) levels, as well as
future without and with project alternatives. Receptors modeled are similar to
those monitored and are illustrated in Figure 2. Because the project involves
the restriping and widening of Washington Street between 500 feet north of
Avenue 50 and 500 feet south of the bridge, northbound and southbound
travel lanes on Washington Street between these two project limits were
"gridded" and these data used in the modeling. Noise receptor locations and
natural and man-made obstructions or shielding, such as roadway edge and
11/20/98(P:\HNA830\HNA830.NSE) 12
LSA Associates, Inc.
retaining walls, were also gridded for the model input. For existing and the
future project alternatives, this involved six separate links with the projected
noise levels logarithmically added together. (A link is a stretch of road that is
demarcated by such things as changes in roadway geometrics [e.g., lane config-
uration, curves, bridges, etc.] and additional traffic entering or leaving the
roadway [e.g., an intersection]). Link and receptor locations were scaled off
1:40 scale maps (Holmes & Narver, August 1998). The afternoon (p.m.) peak
hour traffic volumes with soft site geometry were modeled. Vehicle count data
were provided by the City for the project area (pers. comm., Marcus Fuller,
August 28, 1998).
The SOL;ND32 model is extremely sensitive to the volumes of trucks on the
roadway, as they contribute disproportionally to the traffic noise. The ratios of
autos, medium trucks, and heavy trucks in the project area were assumed to be
90, 6, and 4 percent, respectively, based on field observation results.
In addition to vehicle ratios, the noise model is sensitive to vehicle speeds.
Speeds used included the following:
All passenger vehicles were modeled at an average speed of 45 mph.
All medium trucks were modeled at an average speed of 40 mph.
Heavy-duty trucks were assigned an average speed of 35 mph.
For existing and future no project scenarios, the current roadway configuration
is used for the travel lanes and roadway edges. Travel lanes and roadway edges
are modified to accommodate the changed associated with the proposed road-
way/bridge widening for the proposed project. Existing afternoon peak hour
traffic volumes are used for the Washington Street near Avenue 50 for existing
traffic noise modeling. Under the future with and without project scenarios,
Washington Street, north and south of Avenue 50, has different projected ADTs
based on the improvement width on each segment and associated maximum
capacity for the LOS (City of La Quinta, October 7, 1998).
Table E lists the noise level at the seven receptor locations for existing, future
no project, and future with project conditions. The existing monitored noise
levels were used to calibrate the modeled traffic noise to compensate shielding
not factored in the model. The difference between the monitored and mod-
eled noise levels were incorporated into the model for future projections for
more accurate predictions.
Based on Table E results, it is noted that all receptor sites, with shielding pro-
vided by existing retaining walls, are located in areas that are outside of the
impact zone of the 67 dBA Leq during peak hours. When converted to the 24
hour weighted CNEL, two sites, N3 and N4, are approaching the City's 60 dBA
CNEL exterior noise standard. Future traffic volumes for the no project alterna-
tive will add to the existing noise, raising local levels. Table E indicates that,
under the future without project scenario, traffic noise levels at these seven
receptor locations would increase by 0.6 to 0.9 dBA from their corresponding
1120P98(PAHNA830VHNA830.NSE) 13
LSA Associates, Inc.
Table E - Peak Hour Noise Levels at Sensitive Receptor Locations'
Leq, dBA
Scenario N12 N2 N3 N4 N5 N6 N7
Existing (Monitored)
Existing (Modeled with Calibration)
Converted Existing CNEL3
Future No Project
Converted Future No Project CNEL3
Future with Project
Project related increases
Converted Future with Project CNEL3
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. 1998
56.8
55.3
58.7
59.0
51.0
54.4
53.3
56.8
55.3
58.7
59.0
51.0
54.4
53.3
57.0
55.5
58.9
59.2
51.2
54.6
53.5
57.5
55.9
59.3
60.1
51.6
55.1
53.9
57.7
56.1
59.5
60.3
51.8
55.3
54.1
62.4
56.1
63.6
63.0
57.0
59.6
58.4
+4.9
+0.2
+4.3
+2.9
+5.4
+4.5
+4.5
62.6
56.3
63.8
63.2
57.2
59.8
58.6
' Soft site noise drop off rate of 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance was
used.
2 Represents upper floor units or rooms in planned residential develop-
ment.
3 Based on a 24 hour traffic count along Washington Street south of
Avenue 50.
11R0/98(P:\iiNA830\I-INA830.NSE) 14
LSA Associates. Inc.
existing levels. These increases would be due to area growth and other devel-
opments in the City of La Quinta and surrounding areas and to the worsening
of LOS along Washington Street. All seven receptor locations modeled will
continue to experience traffic noise below the 67 dBA L,q standard. However,
the converted CNEL will exceed the City's 60 dBA CNEL criterion at receptor
N4 under the no project scenario.
With the proposed widening, traffic noise levels at these seven receptor loca-
tions would increase from their no project level by 0.2 to 5.4 dBA. Traffic noise
would be shielded by the widened roadway edge at receptor N2, thereby mini-
mizing the increase in traffic noise level at this location. Table E shows that the
increase in traffic noise levels at receptors N2 and N4 would be less than three
dBA from their corresponding future no project levels and, therefore, the
increase is considered less than significant. Traffic noise level increases at the
other five locations would be greater than three dBA. All receptor locations
would continue to experience traffic noise level lower than the 67 dBA Le
q
standard. However, when converted to the 24 hour weighted CNEL, three of
the seven receptor locations, N1, N3, and N4, would experience traffic noise
exceeding the 60 dBA CNEL standard. Mitigation measures are required for
consideration by the City for receptors N1 and N3 due to potential significant
project related impacts. No mitigation is required for receptor N4 due to less
than significant contributions.
Receptor N1 was modeled to represent upper floor units or rooms in the
planned multifamily residential development northwest of the bridge. Typical
Southern California residential buildings would provide sufficient exterior to
interior noise attenuation, when windows and doors are closed, for the upper
floor units/rooms to achieve the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. How-
ever, if outdoor active uses, such as balconies or decks, are proposed for these
upper floor units/rooms, or when windows and doors cannot remain closed for
prolonged periods of time due to lack of an air conditioning system, a sound
barrier is required, either along the roadway edge or on the edge of the balco-
nies/decks, to mitigate the exterior or interior noise from the traffic. Prelimi-
nary assessment indicates that a five foot sound wall attached to the proposed
upper floor units would be more effective and less costly.
Receptor N3 is an existing residence on the west side of Washington Street with
block walls. In order to mitigate traffic noise for residences in this area, exist-
ing block walls have to be raised.
5.0 MITIGATION MEASURES
5.1 CONSTRUCTION
Initial construction has the potential to create significant impacts at the homes
located along Washington Street, and mitigation is warranted to reduce these
impacts to the extent feasible. Applicable mitigation includes the following:
Construction should be restricted to between the hours of 7:00 a.m.
and 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on
1120i98 (P: VH NA830\HNA830. N S E)
15
LSA Associates, Inc.
Saturday, and not permitted on Sundays and federal holidays, during
the period between October 1 and April 30.
Construction should be restricted to between the hours of 6:00 a.m.
and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on
Saturday, and not permitted on Sundays and federal holidays, during
the period between May 1 and September 30.
Portable equipment should be located as far as possible from the noise
sensitive locations.
Construction vehicle staging areas and equipment maintenance areas
should be located as far as possible from sensitive receptor locations.
Implementation of these measures would reduce construction noise impacts to
less than significant.
5.2 OPERATIONS
Based on the results of the modeling and monitoring effort, local noise levels
do not exceed the 60 dBA CNEL criterion. They will increase over time due to
area growth and other clevelopment in the project area. Implementation of the
proposed project, i.e., widening portions of Washington Street and bridge over
the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, would improve the LOS and increase traffic
volumes in the project area, and would affect traffic noise along Washington
Street due to proposed roadway configuration changes. Traffic noise at the
receptor locations modeled would increase from their corresponding no pro-
ject levels. The changes would be small, less than three dBA at receptors N2
and N4. Changes in traffic noise level would be greater than three dBA at
receptors N1, N3, N5, N6, and N7. Projected future traffic noise levels at recep-
tors N1, N3, and N4, with the implementation of the project, would exceed the
60 dBA CNEL exterior noise standards for residential uses. However, mitiga-
tion is not required at receptor N4 due to the less than significant project
contribution. The following mitigation measures are identified for the City's
consideration to reduce noise impacts at residences along Washington Street:
The City shall periodically monitor sound levels along the west side of
Washington Street, between post miles 44+00 and 49+00, to assure
that exterior noise levels do not exceed the City standard.
At such time as noise levels exceed the City standard, the City shall
construct, or cause to be constructed, a sound wall designed to lower
the noise levels to within acceptable standards.
The City shall continue to assess developer impact fees associated with
traffic impacts along Washington Street, and shall utilize these fees to
implement the construction of sound wall(s) when necessary.
1120/98 (P:\F3NA830UiNA830. NSE)
16
C� ,
LSAAssociates, Inc.
6.0 CONCLUSION
Noise sensitive receptor locations along Washington Street in the project area
currently experience traffic noise levels below the 60 dBA CNEL standard for
residential use. With the implementation of the proposed project, these recep-
tors will experience an increase in their traffic noise exposure. Receptors N1
and N3 will be exposed to traffic noise exceeding the 60 dBA CNEL noise stan-
dard with more than a 3 dBA increase from implementation of the project.
With implementation of the identified mitigation measures, traffic noise im-
pacts will be reduced to below the City's 60 dBA CNEL for residential uses, and
are considered less than significant.
7.0 REFERENCES
Caltrans, Project Development Procedure Manual, January 1, 1997
Caltrans, SOUND32 Noise Prediction Model, Released July 30, 1991
Caltrans, Technical Analysis Notes, March 13, 1991
Harris, Cyril, Handbook of Noise Control, 1991
City of La Quinta, General Plan Noise Element, Zoning Ordinance, and Munici-
pal Code.
City of La Quinta, Traffic Volumes along Washington Street, October 7, 1998.
Newport Traffic Studies, 24 Hour Volumes on Washington Street South of
Avenue 50, March 4, 1997.
U.S. EPA 1971. Bolt, Beranek, and Newman. Noise From Construction Equip-
ment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home Appliances, December
31, 1971.
11/20i98(P:\HNA830\HNA830.NSE) 17
LSA Associates, Inc.
APPENDIX A
SOUND32 NOISE MODELING OF EXISTING TRAFFIC
VOLUMES
11/20/98 (P: V-INA830\HNA830. NSE)
,ington Street Bridge Widening Existing Conditions
shington Street NB, 1
, 45 , 40 , 40 , 27 35
shington Street NB, 2
, 45 , 40 , 40 , 27 35
shington Street SB, 3
45 , 40 , 40 , 27 35
shington Street SB, 4
, 45 , 40 , 40 , 27 35
shington Street NB, 5
45 , 40 , 40 , 27 35
shington Street SB, 6
45 , 40 , 40 , 27 35
shington Street NB Seg 1, 1
40.,5048.5,41,
00.,5046.5,41.5,
00.,5045.5,44,
00.,5045.5,46.5,
00.,5040.5,49.8,
00.,5041.5,52,
00.,5037.5,53.6,
00.,5036.5,54.8,
00.,5040.5,55.5,
00.,5042.5,54.3,
00.,5048.5,53.2,
00.,5047.5,51.3,
00.,5047.5,48.4,
00.,5047.5,44.1,
D0.,5047.5,44.1,
shington Street NB Seg 2, 2
D0.,5047.5,44.1,
D0.,5047.5,43.1,
D0.,5048.5,43.3,
D0.,5049.5,43.6,
50.,5049,43.6,
shington Street SB Seg 2, 3
50.,5000,43.6,
25.,5018,43.6,
30.,5036.5,43.6,
30.,5036.5,43.3,
)0.,5036.5,43.6,
30.,5036.5,44.1,
)0.,5036.5,45.4,
)0.,5036.5,48.4,
)0.,5036.5,51.3,
D0.,5036.5,52.2,
)0.,5029.5,54,
)0.,5024.5,55.5,
)0.,5022.5,54.8,
)0.,5022.5,53.6,
)0.,5024.5,52,
shington Street SS Seg 3, 4
)0.,5024.5,52,
)0.,5016.5,50,
)0.,5013.5,47.5,
)0.,5013.5,44,
)0.,5013.5,42.1,
10.,5013.5,41.5,
shington Street NB Seg 3, 5
50.,5049,43.6,
)0.,5042.5,43.5,
)0.,5040.5,44.3,
shington Street SB Seg 1, 6
)0.,5000.5,44.6,
)0.,4993.5,43.5,
50.,5000,43.6,
fisting 8' Wall SW of Bridge, 1 2 0 ,0
.,4932.5,41.5,49.5,
.,4945.5,47.5,55.5,
.,4942.5,51.5,59.5,
.,4930.5,50,58,
.,4868.5,35,43,
fisting 8' Wall SE of Bridge, 2 2 0 ,0
.,5072.5,41.3,49.3,
.,5072.5,50.3,58.3,
.,5072.5,54.7,62.7,
st Edge of Road/Bridge, 3 , 1 0 ,0
.,4964.5,51.2,51.2,
.,4962.5,51,51,
.,5012.5,53.3,53.3,EX Only
;.,5012.5,55,55,EX Only
;.,4962.5,50.2,50.2,
:isting 6' Wall NW of Bridge, 4 , 2 , 0 ,0
.,4962.5,37.6,43.6,
.,4962.5,40.2,46.2,
.,4962.5,39.5,45.5,
.,4962.5,43.2,49.2,
.,4960.5,44.5,50.5,
.,4860.5,45,51,
:fisting 6' Wall NW of Ave 50, 5 2 , 0 ,0
.,4860.5,45,51,
.,4944.5,45,51,
.,4962.5,46.5,51.5,
.,4962.5,47.4,52.4,
67 ,50
,4889,50.6,N1
, 67 ,50
,4913,41.2,N2
, 67 ,50
,4929,39.6,N3
67 ,50
,4935,46.5,N4
67 ,50
,4887,31.7,N5
, 67 , 50
,5178,38.O,N6
, 67 ,50
,5131,39.O,N7
.5
ALL
1
7
2
.1
3
3
2
5
.6
5
.2
7
CT 000 NN NN YY YY CCCC
T 00 00 NNN NN YY YY CC CC
00 00 NNNN NN YY YY CC
00 00 NN NNNN YYYY CC
00 00 NN NNN YY CC
00 00 NN NN YY CC CC
C 000 NN NN YYYY CCCC
C RRRRRR W W 444
RR RR W W 4444
RR RR W W 44 44
RRRRR W W 44 44
RR RR W W 4444444
RR RR WW 44
RRR RR W 4444
> 3333
33 33
33
i 333
i6 33
;6 33 33
3333
'98 4:08:23 PM
d 1.
IND32 - RELEASE 07/30/91
'LE:
:hington Street Bridge Widening Existing Conditions
EFFECTIVENESS / COST RATIOS
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
0 1 2
3
4 5
6 7
---------------------------------------------------
- 0.*
B1 P1
- 0.*
B1 P2
- 0.*
B1 P3
- 0.*
B1 P4
- 0.*
B2 P1
- 0.*
B2 P2
- 0.*
B3 P1
- 0.*
B3 P2
- 0.*
EX Only
- 0.*
EX Only
- 0.*
B4 P1
- 0.*
B4 P2
- 0.*
B4 P3
- 0.*
B4 P4
- 0.*
B4 P5
- 0.*
B5 P1
- 0.*
B5 P2
- 0.*
B5 P3
---------------------------------------------------
0 1 2
3
4 5
6 7
BARRIER DATA
++++++++++++
BARRIER
HEIGHTS
BAR
0 1 2
3
4 5
6 7
ID
LENGTH
TYPE
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
- 8.*
B1 P1
230.4
MASONRY
- 8.*
B1 P2
226.1
MASONRY
- 8.*
B1 P3
23.4
MASONRY
- 8.*
B1 P4
70.9
MASONRY
- 8.*
B2 P1
330.1
MASONRY
- 8.*
B2 P2
300.0
MASONRY
- 0.*
B3 P1
84.0
BERM
- 0.*
B3 P2
51.5
BERM
- 0.*
EX Only
210.0
BERM
- 0.*
EX Only
54.1
BERM
- 6.*
B4 P1
330.0
MASONRY
- 6.*
B4 P2
300.0
MASONRY
- 6.*
B4 P3
295.0
MASONRY
- 6.*
B4 P4
12.2
MASONRY
- 6.*
B4 P5
100.0
MASONRY
- 6.*
B5 P1
84.0
MASONRY
- 6.*
B5 P2
28.4
MASONRY
- 5.*
B5 P3
185.0
MASONRY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 1 2
3
4 5
6 7
' REC
ID DNL PEOPLE
LEQ(CAL)
-----------------------------
N1
67.
50.
56.8
N2
67.
50.
55.3
N3
67.
50.
58.7
V4
67.
50.
59.0
N5
67.
50.
51.0
N6
67.
50.
54.4
N7
-----------------------------
67.
50.
53.3
:BIER TYPE COST
------------------------------
zM 0.
iONRY 150922.
;ONRY/JERSEY 0.
7CRETE 0.
TOTAL COST = $ 151000.
:BIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH BARRIER SECTION
. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
:RESPONDING BARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH SECTION
8. 8. 8. S. 8. 0. 0. 0. 0. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6.
.'TT 000 NN NN YY YY CCCC
T 00 00 NNN NN YY YY CC CC
00 00 NNNN NN YY YY CC
00 00 NN NNNN YYYY CC
00 00 NN NNN YY CC
00 00 NN NN YY CC CC
'T 000 NN NN YYYY CCCC
I RRRRRR VV VV 444
RR RR VV VV 4444
RR RR VV VV 44 44
RRRRR VV VV 44 44
RR RR VV VV 4444444
RR RR VVVV 44
I RRR RR VV 4444
6 555555
55
55555
6 55
66 55
66 55 55
6 5555
/98 4:08:32 PM
6. S.
w
LSAAssociates, Inc.
APPENDIX B
SOUND32 NOISE MODELING OF FUTURE NO BUILD
ALTERNATIVE
1120/98(PA NA830\HNA830.NSE)
ington Street 3ridge Widening Future No Build Conditions
shington Street AB, 1
45 , 47 , 40 , 31 35
shington Street NB, 2
45 , 47 , 40 , 31 , 35
shington Street SB, 3
45 , 47 , 40 , 31 35
shington Street SB, 4
45 , 47 , 40 , 31 , 35
shington Street NB, 5
, 45 , 55 , 40 , 36 35
shington Street SB, 6
, 45 , 55 , 40 , 36 35
shington Street NB Seg 1, 1
10.,5048.5,41,
)0.,5046.5,41.5,
)0.,5045.5,44,
)0.,5045.5,46.5,
)0.,5040.5,49.8,
)0.,5041.5,52,
)0.,5037.5,53.6,
)0.,5036.5,54.8,
)0.,5040.5,55.5,
)0.,5042.5,54.3,
)0.,5048.5,53.2,
)0.,5047.5,51.3,
)0.,5047.5,48.4,
)0.,5047.5,44.1,
)0.,5047.5,44.1,
;hington Street NB Seg 2, 2
)0.,5047.5,44.1,
)0.,5047.5,43.1,
)0.,5048.5,43.3,
)0.,5049.5,43.6,
;0.,S049,43.6,
;hington Street SB Seg 2, 3
;0.,5000,43.6,
5.,5018,43.6,
10.,5036.5,43.6,
10.,5036.5,43.3,
0.,5036.5,43.6,
10.,5036.5,44.1,
10.,5036.5,45.4,
0.,5036.5,48.4,
0.,5036.5,51.3,
0.,5036.5,52.2,
0.,5029.5,54,
0.,5024.5,55.5,
0.,5022.5,54.8,
0.,5022.5,53.6,
0.,5024.5,52,
hington Street SB Seg 3, 4
0.,5024.5,52,
0.,5016.5,50,
0.,5013.5,47.5,
0.,5013.5,44,
0.,5013.5,42.1,
0.,5013.5,41.5,
hington Street NB Seg 3, 5
0.,5049,43.6,
0.,5042.5,43.5,
0.,5040.5,44.3,
hington Street SB Seg 1, 6
0.,5000.5,44.6,
0.,4993.5,43.5,
0.,5000,43.6,
sting 8' Wall SW of Bridge, 1 2 0 ,0
,4932.5,41.5,49.5,
,4945.5,47.5,55.5,
,4942.5,51.5,59.5,
,4930.5,50,58,
,4868.5,35,43,
sting 8' Wall SE of Bridge, 2 2 , 0 ,0
,5072.5,41.3,49.3,
,5072.5,50.3,58.3,
,5072.5,54.7,62.7,
t Edge of Road/Bridge, 3 , 1 0 ,0
,4964.5,51.2,51.2,
,4962.5,51,51,
,5012.5,53.3,53.3,EX Only
t �P
.,5012.5,55,55,EX Only
.,4962.5,50.2,50.2,
:isting 6' Wall NW of Bridge, 4 , 2 , 0 ,0
.,4962.5,37.6,43.6,
.,4962.5,40.2,46.2,
.,4962.5,39.5,45.5,
.,4962.5,43.2,49.2,
.,4960.5,44.5,50.5,
.,4860.5,45,51,
isting 6' Wall NW of Ave 50, 5 2 , 0 ,0
.,4860.5,45,51,
.,4944.5,45,51,
.,4962.5,46.5,51.5,
.,4962.5,47.4,52.4,
67 ,50
,4889,50.6,N1
, 67 ,50
,4913,41.2,N2
67 ,50
,4929,39.6,N3
, 67 ,50
,4935,46.5,N4
, 67 ,50
,4887,31.7,N5
, 67 ,50
,5178,38.O,N6
67 ,50
,5131,39.O,N7
.5
ALL
1
7
2
.1
3
3
4
2
5
6
5
.2
7
PT 000 NN NN YY YY CCCC
T 00 00 NNN NN YY YY CC CC
00 00 NNNN NN YY YY CC
00 00 NN NNNN YYYY CC
00 00 NN NNN YY CC
00 00 NN NN YY CC CC
C 000 NN NN YYYY CCCC
C RRRRRR VV VV 444
RR RR VV VV 4444
RR RR VV VV 44 44
RRRRR VV VV 44 44
RR RR VV VV 4444444
RR RR VWV 44
C RRR RR VV 4444
77 444
77 4444
77 44 44
7 44 44
4444444
44
4444
198 4:47:30 PM
fND32 - RELEASE 07/30/91
'LE:
hington Street Bridge Widening Future No Build Conditions
EFFECTIVENESS / COST RATIOS
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
---------------------------------------------------
0 1
2 3
4 5 6
7
- 0•*
B1 P1
- 0•*
B1 P2
- 0•*
B1 P3
- 0•*
B1 P4
- 0•*
B2 P1
- 0•*
B2 P2
- 0•*
B3 P1
- 0.*
B3 P2
- 0•*
EX Only
- 0•*
EX Only
- 0.*
B4 P1
- 0•*
B4 P2
- 0•*
B4 P3
- 0•*
B4 P4
- 0•*
B4 P5
- 0•*
B5 P1
- 0•*
B5 P2
---------------------------------------------------
- 0•*
B5 P3
0 1
2 3
4 5 6
7
BARRIER
DATA
++++++++++++
BARRIER
HEIGHTS
BAR
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 1
2 3
4 5 6
7 ID
LENGTH
TYPE
- 8•*
B1 P1
230.4
MASONRY
- 8•*
B1 P2
226.1
MASONRY
- 8•*
B1 P3
23.4
MASONRY
- 8•*
B1 P4
70.9
MASONRY
- 8•*
B2 P1
330.1
MASONRY
- 8•*
B2 P2
300.0
MASONRY
- 0•*
133 P1
84.0
BERM
- 0.*
B3 P2
51.5
BERM
- 0•*
EX Only
210.0
BERM
- 0•*
EX Only
54.1
BERM
- 6•*
B4 P1
330.0
MASONRY
- 6•*
B4 P2
300.0
MASONRY
- 6•*
B4 P3
295.0
MASONRY
- 6•*
B4 P4
12.2
MASONRY
- 6•*
B4 P5
100.0
MASONRY
- 6•*
B5 P1
84.0
MASONRY
- 6•*
25 P2
28.4
MASONRY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
- 5•*
B5 P3
185.0
MASONRY
0 1
2 3
4 5 6
7
REC
ID DNL
PEOPLE
LEQ(CAL)
•----------------------------
N1
67.
50.
57.5
N2
67.
50.
55.9
N3
67.
50.
59.3
N4
67.
50.
60.1
N5
67.
50.
51.6
N6
67.
50.
55.1
N7
----------------------------
67.
50.
53.9
.IER TYPE COST
------------------------------
art 0.
SONRY 150922.
SONRY/JERSEY 0.
HCRETE 0.
TOTAL COST = $ 151000.
BRIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH BARRIER SECTION
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
RRESPONDING BARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH SECTION
. 8. 8. 8. 8. 8. 0. 0. 0. 0. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6.
rTT 000 NN NN YY YY CCCC
r T 00 00 NNN NN YY YY CC CC
r 00 00 NNNN NN YY YY CC
r 00 00 NN NNNN YYYY cc
r 00 00 NN NNN YY cc
r 00 00 NN NN YY cc cc
rT 000 NN NN YYYY CCCC
CI RRRRRR VV VV 444
C RR RR VV VV 4444
C RR RR W VV 44 44
C RRRRR VV VV 44 44
C RR RR VV VV 4444444
C RR RR VVVV 44
CI RRR RR VV 4444
777 2222
77 22 22
77 22
'7 222
' 22
' 22 22
' 222222
1/98 4:47:20 PM
6. 5.
t
LSAAssociates, Inc.
APPENDIX C
SOUND32 NOISE MODELING OF FUTURE BUILD
ALTERNATIVE
11/20/98(P:\HNA830\f iNA830.NSE)
ington Street Bridge Widening Future Conditions
shington Street NB, 1
9 , 45 , 137 , 40 , 91 35
shington Street NB, 2
9 , 45 , 137 , 40 , 91 35
shington Street SB, 3
9 , 45 , 137 , 40 , 91 35
shington Street SB, 4
9 , 45 , 137 , 40 , 91 35
shington Street NB, 5
6 , 45 , 83 , 40 , 56 35
shington Street SB, 6
6 , 45 , 83 , 40 , 56 35
shington Street NB Seg 1, 1
40.,5048.5,41,
)0.,5046.5,41.5,
00.,5045.5,44,
)0.,5045.5,46.5,
30.,5043.5,49.8,
30.,5044.5,52,
)0.,5042.5,53.6,
)0.,5042.5,54.8,
)0.,5043.5,55.5,
)0.,5042.5,54.3,
)0.,5042.5,53.2,
)0.,5042.5,51.3,
)0.,5042.5,48.4,
)0.,5042.5,44.1,
)0.,5042.5,44.1,
;hington Street NB Seg 2, 2
)0.,5042.5,44.1,
)0.,5042.5,43.1,
)0.,5042.5,43.3,
)0.,5042.5,43.6,
i0.,5042.5,43.6,
;hington Street SB Seg 2, 3
i0.,5000,43.6,
>.5.,4999.5,43.6,
)0.,4999.5,43.3,
)0.,4999.5,43.4,
)0.,4999.5,43.6,
)0.,4999.5,43.1,
)0.,4999.5,45.4,
)0.,4999.5,48,
)0.,4999.5,50.4,
)0.,4999.5,53.1,
)0.,4999.5,55.2,
10.,4999.5,55.8,
10.,4999.5,54.8,
10.,4999.5,53.6,
10.,4999.5,52,
shington Street SB Seg 3, 4
10.,4999.5,52,
10.,4999.5,50,
10.,4999.5,47.5,
10.,4999.5,43.2,
10.,4999.5,41.5,
:0.,4999.5,41,
shington Street NB Seg 3, 5
;0.,5042.5,43.6,
10.,5042.5,43.5,
0.,5040.5,44.3,
;hington Street SB Seg 1, 6
0.,5000.5,44.6,
0.,4993.5,43.5,
0.,5000,43.6,
.sting 8' Wall SW of Bridge, 1 2 , 0 ,0
,4932.5,41.5,49.5,
,4945.5,47.5,55.5,
,4942.5,51.5,59.5,
,4930.5,50,58,
,4868.5,35,43,
.sting 8' Wall SE of Bridge, 2 2 0 ,0
,5072.5,41.3,49.3,
,5072.5,50.3,58.3,
,5072.5,54.7,62.7,
;t Edge of Road/Bridge, 3 , 1 0 ,0
,4964.5,51.2,51.2,
,4962.5,51,51,
,4962.5,51,51,FT
.,4962.5,50.2,50.2,FT
.,4962.5,50.2,50.2,
ised Road Edge NW of Bridge, 4 , 1 , 0 ,0
.,4962.5,55,55,
.,4962.5,51.3,51.3,
.,4962.5,44.1,44.1,
.,4962.5,43.2,49.2,
.,4960.5,44.5,50.5,
.,4860.5,45,51,
fisting 6' Wall NW of Ave 50, 5 2 , 0 ,0
.,4860.5,45,51,
.,4944.5,45,51,
.,4962.5,46.5,51.5,
.,4962.5,47.4,52.4,
, 67 ,50
,4889,50.6,N1
, 67 ,50
,4913,41.2,N2
, 67 ,50
,4929,39.6,N3
67 ,50
,4935,46.5,N4
67 ,50
,4887,31.7,N5
67 ,50
,5178,38.O,N6
67 ,50
5131,39.O,N7
5
ALL
7
1
I
i
6
2
.IT 000 NN NN YY YY CCCC
T 00 00 NNN NN YY YY CC CC
00 00 NNNN NN YY YY CC
00 00 NN NNNN YYYY CC
00 00 NN NNN YY CC
00 00 NN NN YY CC CC
000 NN NN YYYY CCCC
RRRRRR VV VV 444
RR RR VV VV 4444
RR RR W VV 44 44
RRRRR VV VV 44 44
RR RR VV VV 4444444
RR RR WVV 44
RRR RR vV 4444
'7 666
'7 66
7 66
66666
66 66
66 66
6666
98 5:00:05 PM
ND32 - RELEASE 07/30/91
LE:
hington Street Bridge Widening Future Conditions
EFFECTIVENESS / COST RATIOS
---------------------------------------------------
0 1 2
3
4 5 6
7
- 0•*
B1 Pi
- 0•*
B1 P2
- 0.*
B1 P3
- 0.*
B1 P4
- 0•*
B2 Pl
- 0.*
B2 P2
- 0.*
B3 P1
- 0.*
B3 P2
- 0.*
FT
- 0.*
FT
- 0•*
B4 P1
- 0•*
B4 P2
- 0•*
B4 P3
- 0.*
B4 P4
- 0.*
B4 P5
- 0.*
B5 P1
- 0.*
B5 P2
--------------------------------------------------
- 0.*
B5 P3
0 1 2
3
4 5 6
7
BARRIER DATA
BARRIER HEIGHTS
BAR
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 1 2
3
4 5 6
7 ID
LENGTH
TYPE
- 8.*
B1 Pl
230.4
MASONRY
- 8.*
B1 P2
226.1
MASONRY
- 8.*
B1 P3
23.4
MASONRY
- 8.*
B1 P4
70.9
MASONRY
- 8.*
B2 P1
330.1
MASONRY
- 8.*
B2 P2
300.0
MASONRY
- 0.*
B3 P1
84.0
BERM
- 0.*
B3 P2
.0
BERM
- 0.*
FT
202.0
BERM
- 0.*
FT
.0
BERM
- 0.*
B4 P1
330.0
BERM
- 0.*
B4 P2
300.1
BERM
- 3.*
B4 P3
295.0
BERM
- 6.*
B4 P4
12.2
BERM
- 6.*
B4 PS
100.0
BERM
- 6.*
B5 P1
84.0
MASONRY
- 6.*
B5 P2
28.4
MASONRY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
- 5.*
B5 P3
185.0
MASONRY
0 1 2
3
4 5 6
7
REC
ID DNL PEOPLE
LEQ(CAL)
----------------------------
N1
67.
50.
62.4
N2
67.
50.
56.1
N3
67.
50.
63.6
N4
67.
50.
63.0
N5
67.
50.
57.0
N6
67.
50.
59.6
N7
----------------------------
67.
50.
58.4
IER TYPE COST
-----------------------------
M 5230.
ONRY 96362.
ONRY/JERSEY 0.
CRETE 0.
TOTAL COST = $ 102000.
BIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH BARRIER SECTION
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
RESPONDING BARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH SECTION
8. 8. 8. 8. 8. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 3. 6. 6.
IT 000 NN NN YY YY CCCC
T 00 00 NNN NN YY YY CC CC
00 00 NNNN NN YY YY CC
00 00 NN NNNN YYYY CC
00 00 NN NNN YY CC
00 00 NN NN YY CC CC
r 000 NN NN YYYY Cccc
RRRRRR W VV 444
RR RR W VV 4444
RR RR VV VV 44 44
RRRRR VV VV 44 44
RR RR W VV 4444444
RR RR VVVV 44
RRR RR VV 4444
77 8888
f7 88 88
F7 88 88
8888
88 88
88 88
8888
'98 5:00:20 PM
6. 5.
J�1
IS1 Associates, Inc.
APPENDIX D
24 HOUR TRAFFIC COUNTS ON WASHINGTON STREET
SOUTH OF AVENUE 50
9/15/98«P:\HNA83OV-FNA830. NSE»
t _: i:-, i 3 1:5:34 71--e7777i55
CITY ,F LA QUI.yTa
PAGE _ ..
2 4 HOUR VOZ,U'NIE S
STREET : WA.SHINGTON ST
LOCATION : S/O 50TH
ra QU-NTA
DATE : 03-04-97
12:00
NORTHBOUND
S OUTHBOUND
TOT.kL
1:00
22
� 53
r 75
2:00
20
i 33
I 53
3:00
19
2D �
44
4:00
17
i 16
33
5:00
69
23
92
6:00
171
74
245
7:00
402
187
i
569
8:00
668
f 343
1,011
9:00
525
I 392
917
10:00
459
, 377 i
836
11:00
410
I 399
809
AM
12:00
433
459
892
PM
1:00
437
473
910
2:00
443
475
918
3:00
471
641
1,112
4:00
482
116
5:00
486
662
r
1,148
6:00
535
805
1,340
7:00
438
595
1,033
8:00
287
423 I
710
9:00
190 I
371
561
10:00
176
300
476
11:00
108
198
306
12:00
52
122
274
8,162 I
i
5,482
PreDa_ed by NEWPORT TRAFFIC STUDIES
t1// L777 1J:3 CCi �1J7 LII Y :,F LAN GUIN7A FAGE !4
I� 15 MINUTE COUNTS
STREET WASHINGTON ST
LOCATION : S/O 50TH
ALM
I NORTH SOUTH T ►'
'A QUINTA
DATE : 03-04-97
FM
BOUND
HOUND
O_AI,
TOTAL
NORTH
SOUTH
TOTAL
S
17
22
12:00
BOUND
SOUND
TOTAL
7
12
29
127
106
233
4
12
16
92
130
222
6
12
is
124
123
247
6
.6
16
1:00
94
141
114
122
2os
7
3
6
13
106
125
263
231
4
10
7
13
86
109
195
6
7
11
13
110
119
229
4
8
2:00
107
135
242
6
9
12
108
155
263
3
15
135
160
295
4
1
3
4
7
121
191
312
6
3
9
3-00
116
191
307
4
3
7
105
163
268
3
7
10
122
191
313
12
8
20
139
171
310
9
7
4:00
112
174
286
29
1
16
30
128
166
294
19
7
26
121
163
284
25
9
34
5:00
125
151
159
192
284
36
58
17
53
120
223
343
343
52
16
32
74
84
124
i95
319
62
31
93
6:00
140
134
195
167
335
301
$4
134
46
51
130
100
140
240
122
59
183
181
107
152
259
141
62
203
7:00
97
76
136
107
233
156
216
79
235
105
113
183
218
155
74
128
290
283
61
97
158
122
11.4
236
8:00
45
45
106
100
151
134
109
243
52
145
152
94
246
86
138
127
75
192
45
96
141
123
93
216
9:00
48
53
89
137
lld
91
191
89
142
113
102
215
38
86
124
113
10_
214
45
72
2.17
103
72
175
i0:00
40
45
53
66
93
111
110
106
96
119
206
225
24
52
76
91
112
203
19
44
63
110
98
208
11:00
20
13
36
56
103
112
215
10
38
51
108
118
226
41
51
112
131
243
16
25
41
13
18
31
Prepared
by NEwpoRT
TRAFFIC
STUDIES I,
t1,, -c. -7�3 15:3= r'bt;777 155
CITY Y OF LA CUI;V7a
FAGE _
I
a7C TMA.g, Vp=,UME PLOT
STREET: WASHINGTON ST DATE': 03-44-97
LOCATION: S/0 SGTH DIRECTIONAL VO:.UME
12:00
75
1:00
53
2:00
44
3:00
f
EQ
33
4:00
92
5:00
245
6:00
589
?:00
I,G11
8:00
917
9:00
836
10 : oo
.
609
11:00
892
12:00
910
1:00
418
2:OD
1,112
3:00
1,198
4:Q0
1,148
S:QO
1,340
6:00
1,033
7:00
710
8:00
561
9:Od
476
10:00
306
11:00
I
174
12:00
�
500
1000 1500 2000 2500
VEHICLES / HOUR II
LA QUIN'TA
Prepared by NEWFORT TRAFFIC STUDIES ��
A'l=3,1:�=9 15:3_ 6E777 _=5 CITY C= LA QUiNTti
PAGE 16
D = �2.3✓ GT 2 ON�..z, VOLL7ME Pz,caZ'
STREET = WASHINGTON ST
LOCATION : SIO So2H
NORTHBOUND
I2:00
I:00
F§2
2:00
19
3:00
17
4:00
69
5:00
171
6:00
402
7:00
668
:.
525
9":00flO
459
10:00
410
11:00
l
12:00
433
437
1:0fl
443
2:00
471
i 3:00
482
4:00
�0
48 6
5:00
535
6:00
438
7:00
287
8:00
190
9:00
176
10:00
108
11:00
052
.2:00
DATE : 0 3-04-9 7
SOUTHHOUND
53 11
33
25
15
23
74
187
343
392..
377
399i
459
473��
475
64-
716
662
805
595
423
i
371
f
300
198
122
Prepared ty NEWPCRT TF FIC STUDIES
n
. r, moo: 17-.D i7:,i_ -0�7 , 155 CIT, 3F L,- Q L L` , 7 4 Fc;Gc 17
� HOV�,�' D 2R�CT=OVAL VOLU?�iES
STR=T WASHINGTON ST '
LA QUIN'_A,l
12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11112 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
AM ( PM it
liCitTHwum
$OQTSBOLIND
nepazed by NEWPORT TR FIC STUDIES
_ _=33 15:3_ 7607777155 CIT'r' 7F LA RUIN-4 —
rr�u= _ c
STREET
LOCATION
3PE:AK HC7LTR
WASHINGTON ST
Sj0 50TH
131VAZ4,v!3 = S
DATE :03-04-97
AM PEAK HOUR
A.N_A.LYS I S
j
I
NORTHBOUND
SOUTHBOUND
TOTAL E
HOUR BEGINNING
07:15AM
08:OOAM
07:45AM
141
128
290
156
114
283
216
109
236
155
94
243
PEAK HOUR TOTAL
668
445
1052
PEAR HOUR FACTOR
0.77
0.86
PERCENT OF LEG
9.06
5.52
PERCENT OF TOTAL
4.32
2.87
6.79
NOON PEAR HOUR ANALYSIS
NORTHBOUND
SOUT:-TBOUIM
TOTAL
HOUR BEGINNING
12:OOPM
12:OOPM
:,2:OOPM
112
131
243
127
106
233
92
130
222
124
123
247
?EAK HOAR TOTAL
455
490
945
?EAK HOUR FACTOR
0.89
0.93
0.98
?ERCENT OF LEG
6.17
6.08
'ERCEN'T' OF TOTAL
2.93
3.16
6.10
PM PEAK HOUR ANALYSIS
NORTHBOUND
SOTJTHBOUND
TOTAL
;OUR BEGINNING
05:15PM
05:15PM
05:15PM
151
192
343
120
223
343
124
.195
319
140
195
335
EAK HOUR TOTAL
535
805
1340
EAK HOUR FACTOR
0.88
0.90
1.02
ERCENT OF LEG
7.25
9.99
ERCEDiT OF TOTAL
3.45
5.19
8.65
LA
Pzenared by NEWPORT TP.AFFIC
STUDIES i
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
Appendix C
Paleontological Resource Analysis
C-1 n
nJ k
PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT - WASHINGTON
STREET BRIDGE WIDENING PROJECT, LA QUINTA, RIVERSIDE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
November 12, 1998
Prepared for:
Holmes and Narver
999 Town and Country Road
Orange, California 92868
Prepared by:
Steven W. Conkling and Brooks Smith
LSA Associates, Inc.
1 Park Plaza, Suite 500
Irvine, California 92614
(949) 553-0666
LSA Project #HNA830
Paleontological Data Base Information:
Type of Study: Assessment Survey
Localities Recorded: None
USGS Quadrangle: La Quinta 7.5 Minute
Formation Encountered: Fluvial and Lacustrine Sediments
Key Words: Lake Cahuilla
LSA Associates, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
ABSTRACT....................................................1
INTRODUCTION...............................................4
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................... 4
PURPOSE OF THE INVESTIGATION .......................... 4
PERSONNEL.............................................6
METHODS..............................................6
NATURAL SETTING.............................................6
GEOLOGICAL SETTING .................................... 6
PALEONTOLOGICAL SETTING .............................. 7
RESULTS......................................................7
GEOLOGICAL RESULTS....................................7
PALEONTOLOGICAL RESULTS .............................. 8
CONCLUSIONS................................................8
REFERENCES CITED...........................................10
LIST OF FIGURES
1 - Project Location .......................................... 3
2 - Stylized Cross Section and Profile of the Project ................ 5
APPENDIX
A - Records Search Letter
827P98<<P:\HNA830\CULTURAL\PALEO. RPTP>
ii
LSAAssociates, Inc.
ABSTRACT
LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) was retained by Holmes and Narver to conduct a
paleontological resource assessment for the Washington Street Bridge widening
project, located within the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, California
(Figure 1). The project involves the widening of the Washington Street Bridge
over the La Quinta Evacuation Channel (Channel) and improvements to Wash-
ington Street from approximately 450 feet south of the bridge to approximately
150 feet north of Avenue 50. The assessment was conducted to identify
paleontological resources as required by guidelines developed by the County of
Riverside and the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology. A records and literature
search was conducted for the subject property at the San Bernardino County
Museum (SBC ), and a field survey of the parcel was completed on August 11,
1998. The records search did not identify any paleontological resources within
the project area. It did determine that the project area is located on within the
high shoreline of ancient Lake Cahuilla, and that the native sediments under
the project consist of lake sediments and near shore alluvium. These types of
sediments are known to contain paleontological resources elsewhere in the
Coachella Valley. The field survey did not identify any paleontological resources
within the project boundaries.
Because no paleontological resources were identified by either the records
search or the field survey, and because there will be only limited amounts of
excavation in native sediments, monitoring will not be required during ground
disturbing activities, unless paleontological resources are discovered during
construction activities. If paleontological resources are discovered during
project construction, the following conditions are recommended by the SBCM:
A trained paleontological monitor should be present during all ground
disturbing activities within the project area in sediments that are likely
to contain paleontological resources. The monitor shall be empowered
to temporarily halt or redirect construction activities to ensure avoid-
ance of adverse impact to paleontological resources.
During monitoring, samples will be collected and processed for
microvertebrates. Processing will include, but not be limited to, screen-
ing and microscopic examination of the residual materials to identify
small vertebrate remains. If small fossils of this type are encountered, a
standard, 6,000 pound bulk matrix sample will be collected from each
locality. These sediments will be processed to allow collection of small
fossils.
All fossils collected during the project will be prepared to a reasonable
point of identification. Itemized catalogues of all material collected will
be provided to the museum repository with the specimens.
In the event a large deposit of bone in encountered, salvage of all bone
in the area shall be conducted in accordance with modern
paleontological techniques.
All fossils collected during this work, along with copies of all relevant
field notes and reports from the project, shall be donated to the San
827/98<<P:\IiNA830\CULTURAL\PALEO. RPT>>
LSA Associates, Inc.
Bernardino County Museum (SBCM) for permanent curation and stor-
age. SBCM currently charges a one-time curation fee of $75 per cubic
foot for all paleontological materials.
Compliance with these recommendations will ensure that impacts to the
paleontological resources are below a level of significance.
827/98<<P: U i W 30\C ULTURAL\PALEO. RP'P>
2
i/24/98(HNA830) Figure 1
N
LSD
Scale in Feet
1000 2000
Project Location
LSA Associates, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) was retained by Holmes and Narver to conduct a
paleontological resource assessment for the Washington Street Bridge widening
project, located within the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, California
(Figure 1). The project involves the widening of the Washington Street Bridge
over the La Quinta Evacuation Channel (Channel) and improvements to Wash-
ington Street from approximately 450 feet south of the bridge to approximately
150 feet north of Avenue 50. Minor widening will also be done to Avenue 50
from its intersection with Washington Avenue to 300 feet to the east This work
was completed in compliance with the guidelines of the Society of Vertebrate
Paleontology and the Paleontological Resource Mitigation Standards of the San
Bernardino County Museum. This survey also serves to assess potential im-
pacts to paleontological resources, as mentioned in the California Environmen-
tal Quality Act (CEQA) .
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project involves the widening of the Washington Street Bridge over the La
Quinta Evacuation Channel and improvements to Washington Street. The
major improvement to Washington Street will be widening the west side of the
street an average of 50 feet from the bridge to Avenue 50. Currently the road-
way is at an elevation of 43' to 55' Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL). All elevations
over 38' to 40' AMSL are in artificail fill, and all elevations below this are in
native sediments (see Figure 2)
Specifically, the project is located on Washington Street between Stations
35+50 to 51+35, with the majority of the work occurring on the west side of
the roadway. Additionally, Avenue 50 will widened from its intersection with
Washington Street (Avenue 50 Station 50+65) to Avenue 50 Station 54+05,
The widening of Avenue 50 will be a maximum of 30 feet on each side of the
street at Station 50+65 and will taper to no widening at Station 54+05. Geo-
graphically, the project is located on the La Quinta 7.5' topographic map
within the northern half of the northern half of Section 6, Township 6 South,
Range 7 East, San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian.
PURPOSE OF TILE INVESTIGATION
Paleontological, or fossil, resources are considered to be a significant, non-
renewable resource. They are afforded protection by both CEQA and the devel-
opment standards of the County of Riverside. As such, the presence and poten-
tial for adverse impacts to these resources should be assessed before impacting
activities are allowed in an area. This can be completed through an assessment
survey to determine whether paleontological resources are present on, or likely
to be contained within, a particular parcel; or monitoring of excavation can be
conducted to recover fossils encountered during development. The current
study provided a paleontological resource assessment of the Washington Street
Bridge widening project.
8/27/98<<P:V-eW30\CULTURAL\PALEO.RPD> 4
54'
WEST
PROPOSED EXISTING
WIDENING ROADWAY
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 50'
EAST
................
....................
ARTIFICIAL FILL
(Monitoring Not Required)
TRANSITION ZONE (Monitoring Not Required)
LAKE SEDIMENTS (Monitoring Required)
CROSS SECTION MIDWAY BETWEEN
WASHINGTON STREET BRIDGEAND AVENUE SO
SOUTH
WAS14NGTON ST
BRIDGE
ELEVATION
EXISTING
GROUND
SURFACE
T ri'T—rrrrrf-. f;= 38'
NORTH
EXISTING
ROADWAY
.................. AVENUE
50
..............................
• •' •' " • "'ARTIFICIAL FILL ,'. ; ::::: :'.:'. .
ELEVATION
(Monitoring Not Required)
,,,,,,,, ,,,, ,,, ,,.,,,.,.,.,.,,,,,,,,
430
10
,a 40'
TRANSITION ZONE iM onitorin Not Re uired
g
�j(jI jI rfnn��
:�:n-,nr��V ifitif rrrRn`n.
Il I(I�IIIII
III�
38'
LAKE SEDIMENTS (Monitoring RequiredIF
�i���►Ilfilllillllllflliilllillli
PROFILE FROM WASHINGTON STREET BRIDGE TO AVENUE SO
8/31/98(HNA830) Figure 2
Stylized Cross Section and Profile of
LSD Washington Street Widening Project Depicting
Not to Scale Areas Requiring Paleontological Monitoring
LSA Assodatex Inc.
PERSONNEL
METHODS
The field survey was performed by Brooks R. Smith, a paleontologist with LSA.
Mr. Smith has completed similar surveys and assessments for a variety of pro-
jects throughout California. The records search was completed by Robert
Reynolds at the San Bernardino County Museum. This report was written by
Mr. Smith and Steven W. Conkling, a Paleontologist with LSA. Mr. Conkling is
a research associate at the San Bernardino County Museum, and has completed
similar assessments for a variety of projects throughout the United States. Mr.
Conkling has been actively involved in paleontological resource management
for 12 years.
A records search was conducted through the Regional Paleontological Locality
Inventory (RPLI), located at the San Bernardino County Museum, to identify all
previous paleontological resource assessments and localities that are within
one -quarter mile of the project area.
A field survey of the project area was conducted on August 11, 1998. The
pedestrian survey included all areas that will be impacted by the widening of
the bridge and the road. The entire project area was surveyed using systematic
transects spaced approximately three meters apart. This included a 75 foot
wide strip of land on the east side of Washington Street from Avenue 50 to the
Channel that will be used to gain access to the staging area and the Channel.
The staging area will be in the northeast corner of the Channel and Washington
Street and could be as large as 200 feet north and 200 feet east from the corner;
this area was also surveyed.
NATURAL SETTING
The Washington Street Bridge widening project is located within northwestern
Colorado Desert and, in the less disturbed areas, contains vegetation typical of
the salt bush scrub type. The western side of the project has been landscaped
with non-native species of plants such as lawn grasses, oleander (Nerium olean-
der), and date palms (Pheonix dactilfera) Drainage into the area is derived
from Eisenhower and Indio mountains to the west.
GEOLOGICAL SETTING
The project area is located in the northwestern portion of the Colorado Desert
province in an area known as the Coachella Valley. The boundaries of this
province are somewhat arbitrary and can vary from author to author. In gen-
eral, however, the Colorado Desert province is bounded on the north by the
southern edge of the eastern Transverse Ranges, on the east by the Colorado
River, on the south by the Mexican border, and on the west by the Peninsular
ranges (Norris and Webb, 1976).
827/98KP:\HNA830\CULTURAL\PALEO.RPZ>> 6
LSAAssoctates, Inc.
A major feature in the Colorado Desert province is the Salton Trough, a large
180 mile (290 km) structural depression that extends from the area around
Palm Springs to the head of the Gulf of California. Movement along the San
Andreas Fault from the Miocene to the present created the Salton Trough.
During the Pleistocene and Holocene, the Salton Trough was filled with over
4,000 feet of sediment (Proctor, 1968). The term Salton Trough refers to the
entire basin from San Gorgonio Pass to the Gulf of California; the term Salton
Basin refers to the region that drains directly into the Salton Sea.
The majority of the Colorado Desert lies at low elevations. The Colorado River
Valley at the Riverside -San Bernardino County Line is at an elevation of 350 feet
(107 m) above sea level; the elevation at Winterhaven in the southeast corner of
the province is 130 feet (40 m) above sea level. The lowest elevation is the
Salton Basin, which is divided into the Imperial Valley in the south and the
Coachella valley in the north. The Salton Sea is located in the central portion
of the basin, and has a surface elevation of 235 feet (72 m) below sea level.
Lake Cahuilla is the name that is given to the freshwater lake that occupied the
basin in the past. Evidence for this lake is preserved by fossil gastropods,
pelecypods, vertebrate remains, and travertine (lime) deposits. The travertine
deposits were secreted by algae below the waterline along the edge of Lake
Cahuilla. Although the entire history of the lake is not known, it is likely that
Lake Cahuilla filled on several occasions when the distributaries on the Colo-
rado River delta changed their course from the Gulf of California into the basin
(Norris and Webb, 1976). Between fillings of the lake, evaporation lowered the
level of the lake, leaving a salty crust on the basin floor. The last lake filling,
prior to the formation of the Salton Sea in 1905, has been dated to around 300
years ago (Norris and Webb, 1976)
The sediments exposed on the surface of the project area are Quaternary allu-
vium and Pleistocene lacustrine (lake) deposits. Artificial fill is also present in
areas near the existing roadway and Channel walls.
PALEONTOLOGICAL SETTING
Many paleontological localities are known from Lake Cahuilla sediments. They
range from gastropods and bivalves to vertebrate remains of fish, birds, reptiles,
amphibians and mammals. The vertebrate remains range in size from very
small fish to large mammals such as: Camels (Camelops sp); Bison (Bison
antiquus); and horses (Equus sp.).
RESULTS
GEOLOGICAL RESULT'S
No desert varnish was present on rocks in the area, and the sediments appear
to be from alluvium, lacustrine deposits, and artificial fill. The alluvium and
lacustrine deposits were present mostly in an area 30 feet and more east of
Washington Street. Alluvium and lacustrine deposits are known to exist in the
area below the fill. The artificial fill primarily occurred at elevations above 40
8R7/98<<P:\HNA830\CULTURAL\PALEO.RPT>> 7
LSAAssodates, Inc.
feet above sea level. This fill is along most of the western portion of Washing-
ton Street, the eastern 30 feet along Washington Street, the north and south
sides of Avenue 50, and along the sides of the Channel. The fill was indicated
by artificial slopes and the presence of concrete, asphalt, and other modem
debris mixed into the desert soil. The southwest corner area of Washington
Street and Avenue 50 has been landscaped with grass, and the soil is not visible.
The lacustrine deposits in the project area consist of light grayish -green slit to
clayey silt with abundant mica. The alluvial sediments consist of grey to white
silty sand with some gravel.
PALEONTOLOGICAL RESULTS
The results of the records search (Attachment A) indicated that there have been
no paleontological assessments conducted within the project boundaries or
within one -quarter mile of the project area. In addition, there are no previ-
ously recorded paleontological localities within the project boundaries or
within one -quarter mile of the project area.
Reviews of geologic mapping (Rogers, 1965) indicate that the project is located
within the high shoreline of ancient Lake Cahuilla, and that the sediments in
the project area are composed of lake sediments and near shore alluvium. The
RPLI indicates that paleontological resources have been recovered from similar
sediments, six miles north of the project area.
There were no paleontological resources observed during the field survey.
Ground visibility averaged 50 percent due to paving and vegetation. Although
paleontological remains were not observed, recent bones from a cow, a jack
rabbit, a domestic cat, and possibly a pig were noted in the proposed staging
area to the northeast of the existing bridge. Many of the cow bones, and the
possible pig bones, were burned, and several had saw -cut butcher marks, indi-
cating they are fairly recent (less than 50 years old).
CONCLUSIONS
Because no paleontological resources were identified during either the records
search or the field survey of the project area, and because there will be only
limited excavations into native material, paleontological monitoring is not
recommended. However, if any paleontological resources are discovered
during ground disturbing activities associated with the project, the SBCM and
LSA recommends that a paleontological resources mitigation program that
conforms to the guidelines of the County of Riverside and the Society of Verte-
brate Paleontology be initiated This program must include, but shall not be
limited to, the following:
A trained paleontological monitor should be present during all ground
disturbing activities within the project area in sediments that are likely
to contain paleontological resources. The monitor shall be empowered
to temporarily halt or redirect construction activities to ensure avoid-
ance of adverse impact to paleontological resources.
8/27/98<<P:\HNA830\CULTURAL\PALEO.RP'P> 8
LSA Associates, Inc.
During monitoring, samples will be collected and processed for
microvertebrates. Processing will include, but not be limited to, screen-
ing and microscopic examination of the residual materials to identify
small vertebrate remains. If small fossils of this type are encountered, a
standard, 6,000 pound bulk matrix sample will be collected from each
locality. These sediments will be processed to allow collection of small
fossils.
• All fossils collected during the project will be prepared to a reasonable
point of identification. Itemized catalogues of all material collected will
be provided to the museum repository with the specimens.
• In the event a large deposit of bone in encountered, salvage of all bone
in the area shall be conducted in accordance with modern
paleontological techniques.
• Preparation of a report documenting the results of the monitoring
activities.
• All fossils collected during this work, along with copies of all relevant
field notes, reports, and the itemized inventory of all specimens from
the project shall be donated to the San Bernardino County Museum
(SBCM) for permanent curation and storage. SBCM currently charges a
one time curation fee of $75 per cubic foot for all paleontological mate-
rials.
Compliance with these recommendations will ensure that impacts to the
paleontological resources are below a level of significance.
827/98<<P:\I-INA830\CULTURAL\PALEO.RP"P> 9
ISAAssociates, Inc.
REFERENCES CITED
Norris, Robert M., Robert W. Webb
1976 Geology of California. John Wiley and Sons. New York
Proctor, R. J.
1968 Geology of the Desert Hot Springs - Upper Coachella Valley Area, Cali-
fornia. California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Report 94.
Rogers, T. H.
1965 Geologic Map of California, Santa Ana Sheet. California Division of
Mines and Geology, Scale 1:250,000.
8/27/98<<P:\HNA830\CULTURAL\PALEO.RYD> 10
LSAAssociates, Inc.
APPENDIX A
RECORDS SEARCH LETTER
827/98<<P:\i iNA830\CULTURAL\PALEO.RP'P>
PARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
D CULTURAL RESOURCES
IERNARDINO COUNTY MUSEUM
3range Tree Lane - Redlands, CA
July 31, 1998
92374 - (909) 798-8570
Fax (909) 798-8585
LSA
One Park Plaza, Suite 500
Irvine, CA 92614
Attention: Brooks Smith
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PUBLIC SERVICES GROUP
RECEIVED
AUG 0 3 1998
Subject: Washington Street, La Quinta, Riverside County, California (LSA Project
HNA830)
Gentlemen:
At your request, I have conducted a paleontologic resources records search through the
Regional Paleontological Locality Inventory (RPLI) in the Earth Sciences Division at the
San Bernardino County Museum. The records search is for the proposed widening of a
portion of Washington Street in the City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California. (LSA
Project HNA830). This portion of Washington Street is south of Avenue 50, and north of
Calle Durango. Specifically, it is in the northern'/2 of the north '/ of Section 6, Township
6 South, Range 7 East, SBBM, as shown on the La Quinta 7.5' USGS quadrangle map.
BACKGROUND
Summaries of geologic mapping (Rogers1965) indicate that the proposed project lies
within the high shoreline of ancient Lake Coahuilla, and that the project is located on
lake sediments and near shore alluvium. Review of the RPLI at San Bernardino County
Museum indicates that no previous paleontologic resource assessments have been
conducted for this site and thus no paleontologic assessment localities are recorded
along this portion of Washington Street. Review of the RPLI does indicate that
paleontologic resources do occur six miles north of the site in similar sediments.
Review of the RPLI indicates that the sediments at the site have high potential for
significant non-renewable paleontological resources.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The project proponent must retain a qualified vertebrate paleontologist to conduct a field
assessment and to develop a paleontological resources impact mitigation program that
conforms to the guidelines of Riverside County and the Society of Vertebrate
Paleontologists. This program must include but not be limited to:
JA".'cS J. HLA%V7-K _
'LATHY .a. DAVIS . ... ...... ..
,e s. -: C jun:y A7mi i_E. . .... . _
=ubl�c Scr icas Sroup
LSA
July 31, 998
Page 2
1. Conduct a pre -construction field assessment to locate fossils at surface
exposures. Salvage of fossils from known localities, including processing
standard sample of matrix for recovery of small vertebrates, and trackway
replication.
2. Monitoring of excavation in areas likely to contain paleontologic resources
by a qualified vertebrate paleontologic monitor. The monitor should be
equipped to salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction
delays and to remove samples of sediments which are likely to contain the
remains of small fossil vertebrates. The monitor must be empowered to
temporarily halt or divert equipment to allow removal of abundant or large
specimens.
3. Preparation of recovered specimens to a point of identification, including
washing of sediments to recover small fossil vertebrates.
4. Identification and curation of specimens into a museum repository with
retrievable storage.
5. Preparation of a report of findings with an appended, itemized inventory of
specimens. The report and inventory, when submitted to the appropriate
lead agency, signifies the completion of the program to mitigate impacts to
paleontologic resources.
Sincerely,
fgj"� G►
Robert E. Reynolds, Curator ��°
Earth Sciences
RER:ma
REFERENCES
Rogers, T.H, 1965. Geologic Map of California, Santa Ana Sheet,
California Division of Mines and Geology, Scale 1:250,000
TN/City of La Quinta
Washington Street Bridge Widening Project
November, 1998
Appendix D
Archaeological Resource Assessment
D-1 i .�
LSA .{,,uc.t:es. I,_
LSD
August 20, 1998
Er.:•:ror, r. � n4tl .� na: •. ,:,
and
flabitat h"d,tor,u:or
Re,ourc .'Lsnagemer:
Curnrnu,:.i and Lana ; ..:nnm;
LandstaPe Architec:u,e
Archaeolog) and P.::rorr iogr
Mr. Pat Somerville
P r i n c i p a 1,
Holmes and Narver
999 Town and Country Road
Rob Ba:en
Orange, California 92868
Sheila Brtdi
Les Carl
David Clore
Ross Dob; erree'n
ste_,,
Subject: Negative Archaeological Assessment for the Washington Street
R:ch.ira Harl.s;;•er
Bridge Widening Project, City of La Quinta, County of Riverside,
Roger Ham
California (LSA Project: HNA830)
Art Homri^baa,er.
Lam- Kerning,
Laara L.:'ler
Dear Mr. Somerville:
Carollin L
Bill.1ta)er
LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) is under contract to provide an archaeological assess -
Rob .McCann
ment for the Washington Street Bridge Widening project located within the City
.Anthon, Petro,
of La Quinta, County of Riverside, California (Figure 1). The project involves
Rob Schonhnl:z
the widening of the Washington Street Bridge over the La Quinta Evacuation
Channel (Channel) and improvements to Washington Street from approxi-
.1 s s o c t .t t e ,
mately 450 feet south of the bridge to approximately 150 feet north of Avenue
50. The assessment was conducted to identify cultural resources as required by
James Baum
the California Environmental Quality Act.
Connie Calica
Steven T Corkhng
Specifically, the project is located on Washington Street between stations
Garr Do;
35+50 to 51+35, with the majority of the work occurring on the west side of
Richard Erick,on
Kevin Fincher
the roadway. In addition, Avenue 50 will widened from its intersection with
Frank H.t;elton
Washington Street (Avenue 50 station 50+65) to Avenue 50 station 54+05,
Clint Kellner
The widening of Avenue 50 will be a maximum of 30 feet on each side of the
Benson Lee
street at station 50+65 and will taper to no widening at station 54+05. Geo-
Judith 11..MaLt�.u:
the ro project is located on the USGS La Quinta 7.5 too hic ma
graphically, P 1 Q P $mP P
ri Nic
Sabrina .�•iehal:,
Sabrina
(1959, photorevised 1980) within the northem half of the northern half of
O'Connell
M.Deborab
Section 6, Township 6 South, Range 7 East, San Bemardino Baseline and Me-
Prac.lso
L)net:c :_tr.; :.:.:
ridian.
Jill trihon
Lloyd B. Zol.t
Methods
A records search was conducted through the Eastem Information Center,
located at the University of California, Riverside, to identify all previous archae-
ological survey areas, prehistoric sites, and all historic sites over 45 years old
that are within one -quarter mile of the project area.
8/19/98«P:\HNA830\CULTURALWRCHAEO. LTR»
One Park Plaza, Suite JCC Telephone 714 553-0666 Other otfices located it Berkeley
,'r-ine, Caarornia 92614 Facsimile 714' 553-8.'76 Pt. Richmond, R:.ers:,ie anal 5.tcramento
17
E-mad ir-jme.lsaCalsa-assoc.com L%
8/24/98(HNA830) Figure 1
LSD
Scale in Feet
1000 2000
Project Location
LSA.-Usoczates, Inc.
On August 11, 1998, a pedestrian field survey of the project area was performed
by LSA archaeologist Brooks Smith. The survey included all areas that will be
impacted by the widening of the bridge and the road. The entire project area
was surveyed using systematic transects spaced approximately three meters
apart. This included a 75 foot wide strip of land on the east side of Washington
Street from Avenue 50 to the Channel, which will be used to gain access to the
staging area and the Channel. The staging area will be in the northeast comer
of the Channel and Washington Street and could be as large as 200 feet north
and 200 feet east from the corner. This area was also surveyed.
Results
The results of the records search (Attachment A) indicated that there are no
previously recorded prehistoric or historic archaeological sites within the pro-
ject boundaries. However, there are three known archaeological sites (CA-RIV-
1180, RIV-1980, and RIV-6074) within one -quarter mile of the project area.
There is one property listed on the National Register of Historic Places within
one -quarter mile of the project. It is the archaeological site CA-RIV-1180, and is
listed as part of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel Archaeological District.
There are no properties listed on the California Historical Landmarks (1990), or
California Points of Historical Interest (1992), within one -quarter mile of the
project.
A review of the USGS Palm Desert 15 topographic map (1959), and the Gen-
eral Land Office Plat map for Township 5 South, Range 7 East (1904), indicated
that there were no historic buildings, structures, or features present in 1904 or
1959.
There have been 12 studies completed within one -quarter mile of the project
area: Berryman (1977), Craib (1980), Jertberg and Farrell (1980a, and b),
Swenson (1980), Chace (1994a, b, and c), Drover (1994), Chace and Reeves
(1995), Chace and Reeves (1996a and b). Berryman (1977), Craib (1980),
Jertberg and Farrell (1980a, and b), and Swenson (1980) include the project
area (see Attachment B for report titles).
No cultural resources were observed during the field survey. Ground visibility
averaged 50 percent due to paving and vegetation. Artificial fill was present
along most of the western portion of Washington Street, the eastern 30 feet
along Washington Street, and the north and south sides of Avenue 50. The fill
was delineated by artificial slopes and the presence of concrete, asphalt and
other modern debris mixed into the desert soil. The southwest corner area of
Washington Street and Avenue 50 has been landscaped with grass, and the soil
is not visible. Although prehistoric cultural remains were not observed, recent
bones from a cow, a jack rabbit, and a domestic cat were noted in the pro-
posed staging area. Many of the cow bones were burned, and some had
butcher marks from a saw.
8/19/984<P: \HNA830\CULTURAL\ARCHAEO. LTR>>
LSA .-'ioczarei, Inc.
Impacts Analysis
Because the records search and field survey did not identify any cultural re-
sources within the project area, it is LSA's opinion that this project will not
affect any prehistoric or historic archaeological sites or any properties that are
listed, eligible for listing, or potentially eligible for listing in the California State
Historic Resources Inventory.
If human remains are encountered during any construction activities associated
with this project, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no
further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determi-
nation of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section
5097.98. If the remains are determined to be Native American in origin, the
Native American Heritage Commission shall be notified for a determination of
Most Likely Descendent (MLD). The MLD will be given the opportunity to
become involved with final disposition of the remains following scientific analy-
sis.
In the event that any other cultural material is encountered, work in the imme-
diate vicinity of the find should be diverted, and a qualified archaeologist noti-
fied. The archaeologist will assess the find and provide mitigation recommenda-
tions.
Thank you for the opportunity to assist you on this project. If LSA can be of
further assistance, or if you have any questions concerning this report, please
contact me at (949) 553-0666.
Sincerely,
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Deborah McLean
Project Manager, Archaeologist
Attachments: A - Records Search Letter
B - References
8/19/98<<P:\�-iNA830\CULTURAUARCHAEO. LTR» 4
f
LSA .{Usocza:es. Inc.
ATTACHMENT A
RECORDS SEARCH LETTER
8/1"8<<P:\HNA830\CULTURAL\ARCHAEO. LTR»
,ZLIFORNIA
HISTORICAL
RESOURCES
INFORMATION
SYSTEM
Deborah McLean
LSA Associates, Inc.
One Park Plaza, Suite 500
Irvine, CA 92614-5981
RECEIVED
MONO -
f ,= :�►:"`° AUG 0 3 1998
�� RNE;U1DE
Eastern Information Center
Department of Anthropology
University of California
Riverside, CA 92521-0418
Phone (909) 787-5745
Fax (909) 787-5409
July 30, 1998
RS #1971
Re: Cultural Resources Records Search for the Washington Street Bridge Project (LSA job
number HNA830)
Dear Ms.McLean:
We received your request on July 30, 1998 for a cultural resources records search for the project
designated Washington Street Bridge Project located in Section 6, T.5S, R.7E, SBBM, near the
city of La Quinta in Riverside County. We have reviewed our site records, maps, and
manuscripts against the location map you provided.
Our records indicate that three cultural resources surveys have been conducted on portions of
the subject property and three cultura resources surveys have been conducted that are adjacent
to or within a one -quarter mile radius of the subject property. These reports are listed on the
attachment entitled "Archeological Reports" and are available upon request at $0.15/page plus
$7.50 per 1/2 hour. The. KEYWORD section of each citation lists the geographic area, quad
name, listing of trinomials (when identified), report number in our manuscript files (MF #), and
the number of pages per report.
No archaeological sites are known within the project boundaries; however, our records indicate
that three archaeological sites (CA-RIV-6074, CA-RIV-1980, and CA-RIV-1180) have been
recorded within a one -quarter mile radius of the project area.
The above information is reflected on the enclosed map. Areas that are shaded in yellow
indicate areas that have been surveyed. Numbers in pencil indicate the report number in our
manuscript files (MF #). Areas in red show the location of cultural resources, and their
corresponding numbers in black represent the state trinomial.
In addition to the California Historical Resources Information System, the following were
reviewed:
The National Register of Historic Places Index (07/31/96): Site CA-RIV-1180
is isted as part of La Quinta Evacuation Channel Archaeological District.
Ms. McLean
July 30, 1998
Page 2
Office of Historic Preservation, Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility
(listed through 01/15/97): None of the properties or sites have been evaluated for
eligibility.
Office of Historic Preservation, Directory of Properties in the Historic Property
Data File (dated 01/14/97): None.
A review of USGS Palm Desert 15' (1959) topographic map, and the General
Land Office plat map for T.SS, R.7E (1904), indicated no historic structures or
features are present.
This statement does not constitute a negative declaration of impact. This statement reports only
known archaeological materials on or in the vicinity of the property in question. The presence
of cultural resources on the property cannot be ruled out until a systematic survey is conducted
and on the entire property.
Federal and State law requires that if any cultural resources are found during construction, work
is to stop and the lead agency and a qualified archaeologist be consulted to determine the
importance of the find.
As the Information Center for Riverside County, it is necessary that we receive a copy of all
archaeological reports and site information pertaining to this county in order to maintain our map
and manuscript files. Site location data provided with this records search are not to be used for
reports unless the information is within the project boundaries. This information is confidential.
Sincerely,
�Cilvc�Q.�
Victoria Avalos
Information Officer
Enclosures
4 � f
L.SA .-bSOLIX0, hL.
ATTACHMENT B
REFERENCES
Berryman, Stanley R.
1977 Archaeological Investigations of the Evacuation Channel for
the Coachella Valley. Toups Corporation. Submitted to
Coachella Valley Water District. Ms on file at the Eastern Infor-
mation Center, UCR (Information Center reference number
MF# 0204, Document No. 1080271).
Chace, Paul G.
1994a A Cultural Resources Survey for La Quinta Village Shopping
Center, City of La Quinta. The Keith Companies. Ms on file at
the Eastern Information Center, UCR (Information Center refer-
ence number MF# 4158, Document No. 1084662).
Chace, Paul G.
1994b Report of an Archaeological Monitoring Program for La Quinta
Village Shopping Center, City of La Quinta. Keith Companies.
Ms on file at the Eastern Information Center, UCR (Information
Center reference number MF# 4158, Document No. 1084681).
Chace, Paul G.
1994c Report of An Archaeological Monitoring Program for the Sea-
sons Residential Project, Tract 2801, City of La Quinta. Keith
Companies. Ms on file at the Eastern Information Center, UCR
(Information Center reference number MF# 4199, Document
No. 1084731).
Chace, Paul G.
1995 A Cultural Resources Survey for La Quinta Elementary School
No. 2, Desert Sands Unified Schools District. Keith Companies.
Ms on file at the Eastern Information Center, UCR (Information
Center reference number MF# 4245, Document No. 1084792).
Chace, Paul G.
1996a A Cultural Resources Survey for the Terracina Apartments
Tract, City of La Quinta. The Keith Companies. Ms on file at
the Eastern Information Center, UCR (Information Center refer-
ence number MF# 4417, Document No. 1085052).
Chace, Paul G.
1996b Report of an Archaeological Monitoring Program for the
Terracina Apartments Tract, City of La Quinta. The Keith
Companies. Ms on file at the Eastern Information Center, UCR
(Information Center reference number MF# 4417, Document
No. 1085050).
8/19P98«P:\ELNA830\C ULTURAL\ARCHAEO. LTR»
d i"
LSA .lssoczxe>. Inc.
Craib, John L.
1980 Archaeological Test Sampling of Sites within the La Quinta
Flood Control Channel Easement. Archaeological Resource
:Management Corporation. Submitted to U. S. Corps of Engi-
neers. Ms on file at the Eastern Information Center, UCR (Infor-
mation Center reference number MF# 0204, Document No.
1040695) .
Drover, Christopher E.
1994 Environmental Impact Evaluation: An Archaeological Assess-
ment of the Williams Development Corporation Specific Plan
Parcel of Parcel Map No. 19730, La Quinta California. Ms on
file at the Eastern Information Center, UCR (Information Center
reference number MF# 4199, Document No. 1084736 ).
Jertberg, Patricia and Nancy Farrel
1980a A Study of Late Prehistoric Subsistence and Settlement Patterns
Along the Northwestern Shoreline of Lake Cahuilla: An Archae-
ological Salvage Project of Sites CA-RIV-119, 158, 1180, 1838.
Archaeological Resource Management Corporation. Submitted
to Coachella Valley Water District. Ms on file at the Eastern
Information Center, UCR (Information Center reference number
MF# 0204, Document No. 1080270).
Jertberg, Patricia and Nancy Farrel
1980b A Preliminary Report of the Archaeological Salvage Project: La
Quinta Evacuation Channel. Archaeological Resource Manage-
ment Corporation. Ms on file at the Eastern Information Cen-
ter, UCR (Information Center reference number MF# 0204,
Document No. 1083205).Swenson, James D.
1980 An Archaeological Assessment of an Unnumbered Parcel East of
La Quinta, Riverside County, California. Archaeological Re-
search Unit. Ms on file at the Eastern Information Center, UCR
(Information Center reference number MF# 0858, Document
No. 1080996) .
8/19/98<<P:\H,NA830\CULTUR L\ARCHAEO.LTR» 11
L � �
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 98-09
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 98-09
CITY OF LA QUINTA
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did, on the 12th day of January, 1999, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing for
consideration of conceptual landscape improvement plans for Washington Street, from
500 feet south of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel to Avenue 50; and,
WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments,
if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did
make the following mandatory findings recommending approval of said Capital
Improvement Project 98-09:
Finding Number 1 - Consistency with General Plan:
A. The Circulation Element of the General Plan designates Washington Street as
a primary arterial street. As such, development of landscaped parkways
adjacent to and landscaped medians within Washington Street are allowed. In
this way, the project is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La
Quinta General Plan Circulation Element.
Finding Number 2 - Consistency with Zoning Code:
A. Washington Street parkway and median landscaping is consistent with the
City's Zoning Code in that water efficient and drought tolerant plant material,
subject to the approval of the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner and
the Coachella Valley Water District are proposed.
B. Washington Street parkway and median landscape lighting is consistent with
the City's Zoning Code in that adequately shielded and filtered outdoor
landscape light fixtures are proposed which will not produce a detrimental effect
on astronomical observations, will not inefficiently utilize electrical energy, nor
create a public nuisance or safety hazard.
Finding Number 3 - Compliance with CEQA:
A. Capital Improvement Project 98-09 is subject to the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act per Public Resources Code Section 65457
(a), and as such, the Community Development Department has prepared an
Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 98-374).
P:\PCreso-CIP.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Capital Improvement Project 98-09
Finding Number 4 - Landscape Design
A. The proposed landscaping improvements incorporate native plants, shrubs, and
trees within the Washington Street parkways and median which will provide a
visual relief against perimeter walls, emphasize improvements related to the
Washington Street bridge, provide a harmonious transition between adjacent
land uses, and provide an overall unifying influence to enhance the visual
continuity of the project.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of
the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment.
2. That it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council of Capital
Improvement Project 98-09 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 12th day of January, 1999, 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
2 +s
PAPCreso-CIP.wpd L
ATTACHMENT 2
Architectural & Landscaping Review Committee Minutes
November 20, 1998
Mr. Fedderly, representing the applicant, stated they would a tree facing
ington Street to hide the two utility doors. asked Mr. Fedderly
what res t would be going in. Mr. erly stated it would be called
"The Back Tee" would in some personal furniture of Arnold
Palmer along with his
5. It w ved and seconded by Cunningham/Mb ' to approve the Plot Plan
4-543, Amendment # 1 as recommended by staff. Unan' a ,sly approved.
I. Capital Improvement Project 98-09; a request of the City for approval of median
parkway landscaping.
1. Assistant Engineer Marcus Fuller presented the information contained in the
staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department.
2. Commissioner Bobbitt questioned how many lanes would be provided across
the bridge. Staff stated three lanes, sidewalk and bike lanes on each side of
the median and proceeded to explain the traffic flow on Washington Street
and 50' Avenue. The landscaping plan was prepared for the City by Ray
Lopez, landscape architect, and is consistent with the approved median and
parkway landscaping plans.
3. Mr. Wayne Nystrom, representing the Homeowners' Association for Duna
La Quinta, stated they approved of the plan, especially that portion that goes
over the bridge. In addition, they stated their appreciation of staff and how
they have been working with them. They have two problems remaining they
would like to address. If possible, the HOA would like to take possession of
the 13 Palm trees which the HOA intends to plant at locations of their choice
and expense. Half are to be relocated onto 50th Avenue and the remainder
distributed throughout their compound. They would like to request that small
dwarf Palm trees (Mediterranean Fan Palm) be planted in the five foot
setback adjacent to Duna La Quinta.
4. Committee Member Bobbitt stated they were not called out on the plans, but
he would have no difficultly approving them.
5. Mr. Wayne Nystrom stated secondly, they have 13 fluorescent light fixtures
lighting the existing wall on the outside. Staff has stated they will be
replaced with 90 watt halogen lights. His question was why do they have to
be replaced with such high wattage bulbs. The City's Dark Sky Ordinance
does not allow the flourescent. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated
landscaping lighting is allowed and the lights mentioned on the plans are to
highlight the landscaping per the City's Ordinance.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\ALRCI I-20-98.wpd 8
Architectural & Landscaping Review Committee Minutes
November 20, 1998
6. Committee Member Bobbitt commented the difference is accent lighting
versus spot lighting. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated landscaping
lighting with a wattage under-160 watts is exempt and the other lighting has
to be shielded.
7. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the Country Club has been using the 13
watts which cast a smaller highlight. What needs to be considered are the
lumans and not the wattage. Thirteen watts is 625 lumans. Some of the
Country Clubs are going to the 13 watts which last longer and produce better
accent lighting. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated staff would look
at the wattage and review this in accordance with the City's landscaping
lighting regulations.
Committee Member Bobbitt asked what treatment would be given to the west
side of the sound wall. Assistant Engineer Marcus Fuller stated that all is
available to them will be grass due to the existing street. It will be reduced
to about two feet. Their major concern was the treatment of the concrete used
for the retaining wall.
8. Mr. Wayne Connell, also with the HOA, stated his concern was the height of
the wall above grade as it gets closer to 50"' Avenue for sound mitigation.
There is a direct line from road grade against the houses to the existing wall.
The proposed wall will be higher than the existing wall. It is his
understanding the wall can be raised if the sound is a problem. They would
appreciate the City's consideration that as the grade raises going up the
bridge, the houses will be less impacted by the noise. First they will be set
down, but the houses closest to the street will be affected by the noise. They
would like to have the wall raised a foot as long as the footings are called for.
Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the City has done the sound study and the
wall proposed does meet the sound mitigation requirement. If the level of
sound goes above what has been mitigated, the City will raise the wall.
9. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the wall would have a top cap that
would be 12-inches to look like a band so it did not appear like an add on.
Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated this is an issue for the City Council to
decide as they do not want to raise the wall any higher than is needed.
10. Mr. Connel stated his concern was that sound is raised due to the speed of the
vehicles traveling on the street. Since it is difficult to lower the speed limit,
they discussed having a round -a -bout to reduce the impact on the speed.
Committee Member Cunningham stated the only issues this Committee
would discuss are the landscape and architectural plans.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\ALRC11-20-98.wpd 9
Architectural & Landscaping Review Committee Minutes
November 20, 1998
11. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the round -a -bout was discussed at
meetings with the HOA. Presently, however, staff is not comfortable with the
a round -a -bout concept at this location. This project will be going to the City
Council for approval of the geometric layout and if the HOA wants the
round -a -bout, the HOA could suggest the idea to the City Council.
Discussion followed regarding round -a -bouts.
12. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated the Zoning Code allows the
unshielded outdoor illumination of any building or landscaping plan is
prohibited excepted with incandescent fixtures less than 160 watts.
Discussion followed regarding what light fixtures could be used.
13. Committee Member Cunningham stated he would like to suggest that when
room is available around a proposed bridge, landscaping be used to make a
statement. One site where this could be used is the area on either side of the
bridge on Washington Street north of the Whitewater Channel to soften the
appearance.
14. Assistant Engineer Marcus Fuller explained the art design that would be
incorporated into the bridge as the railing. Discussions followed as to the
design and detail work that would be used.
15. There being no further discussion it was moved and seconded by Committee
Members Bobbitt/Cunningham to adopt Minute Motion 98-013
recommending approval of Capital Improvement Project 98-09 as submitted.
Unanimously approved.
VI. \CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MA'
V. COMMITT4�E MEMBER ITEMS:
VI. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further usiness, it was mo and seconded by Committee Members
Bobbitt/Cunningh o adjourn this regular meeting e Architectural and Landscaping
Committee t e next regular meeting to be held on December 3, This meeting was adjourned
at a. November 16, 1998.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\ALRC11-20-98.wpd 10
DATE:
CASE NO.:
APPLICANT:
SIGN COMPANY:
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
JANUARY 12, 1999
SIGN APPLICATION 98-441
STARBUCKS COFFEE
PROMOTIONAL SIGNS
B 1 #A
REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A A DEVIATION TO AN APPROVED SIGN
PROGRAM TO PERMIT A CORPORATE SIGN FOR A NEW
BUSINESS
LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111 IN THE ONE -ELEVEN LA
QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER, WEST OF BOSTON MARKET
(78-742 HIGHWAY 1 1 1)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THIS SIGN
APPLICATION IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT
TO SECTION 15311, CLASS 11, OF THE GUIDELINES FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT.
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: M/RC (MIXED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
ZONING: CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
BACKGROUND:
Starbucks Coffee will be opening in the south end of the building under construction
at the Simon Drive entrance, west of Boston Market, in the One -Eleven La Quinta
Shopping Center. This tenant will be one of several in the building.
SIGN REQUEST:
The shopping center has an approved sign program which requires 24" high internally
illuminated helvetica style channel letters. Length is permitted to be 75% of the lease
width, up to a maximum of 50 square feet. A provision in the sign program allows a
national tenant with 5 or more outlets to request approval to use their corporate sign.
The applicant is requesting approval to use their standard corporate signs and logo.
cApc rpt sa 98-441
Starbucks Coffee has stores throughout the western United States which qualifies
them to use their corporate signs. The landlord has approved the requested sign as
submitted.
The request is for two signs and two logos on the building. "STARBUCKS COFFEE"
is proposed on the south side of the building facing Highway 111, with "STARBUCKS"
on the west side facing the parking above the entry. These 3" deep block letter signs
will be halo illuminated reverse pan channel letters mounted 1.5" off of the stucco
fascia with the transformers behind the fascia. The letters are solid aluminum letters
painted green. The illumination will be around the letters due to the clear backing and
1.5" space between the sign and wall.
Facing Highway 111, "STARBUCKS" will be 14'-6" long and 18" high, with "COFFEE"
9 feet long by 18" high. The total square footage as placed on the wall will be
approximately 39.75 square feet.
Adjacent to the entry on the west side of the building, "STARBUCKS" will be 16" high
by 12'-10.5" long for a total of 17.3 square feet. Both signs will be on centered on
the facia, evenly spaced between the cornice and horizontal score line below it.
Facing the driveway to the east, a 48" diameter, 9" deep internally illuminated logo is
proposed on the tower. This logo will be centered vertically between the cornice and
false window arch below and horizontally between the ends of the tower. The logo
will be green, black, and white, with the white and green "STARBUCKS COFFEE" and
white mermaid illuminated. The can retainer and returns will be black.
A small 24" diameter illuminated logo matching the larger one is proposed to hang
inside behind the glass window next to the public entrance. This logo functions as a
pedestrian sign since the main sign above is not visible to those approaching the
business from the north on the sidewalk.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE:
Issue 1 - Consistency
National tenants are permitted to use corporate or their standard signs with approval
of the Planning Commission. To date, a number of tenants have chosen to do this in
the center. The style of the letters is compatible with the approved "Helvetca"style
letters.
Issue 2 - Tower logo
The sign company has drawn the tower for the 48" logo taller than the construction
plans show it. If drawn to scale, the logo would have only 6" of clearance from the
top cornice and from the bottom false window treatment. This would overpower the
tower space. Staff recommends the logo be reduced to 36" in diameter.
cApc rpt sa 98-441
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Minute Motion 99-_, approving the requested sign, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Obtain a building permit prior to any work on the sign being started.
2. Final plans shall be reviewed by the Community Development Department prior
to obtaining building permit.
3. The logo on the tower shall be reduced to 36" in diameter and centered on the
stucco surface.
Attachments:
1. Sign exhibits
Prepared by:
Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner
Submitted by:
Christine di lorio; Planning Manager
cApc rpt sa 98-441
lei
DATE:
CASE NO.:
APPLICANT:
SIGN COMPANY:
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
JANUARY 12, 1999
SIGN APPLICATION 98-447
QUIZNO'S SUBS
ULTRANEON SIGN COMPANY
REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A DEVIATION TO AN APPROVED SIGN
PROGRAM TO PERMIT A CORPORATE SIGN FOR A NEW
BUSINESS
LOCATION:
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
ZONING:
BACKGROUND:
NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111 IN THE ONE -ELEVEN LA
QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER, WEST OF BOSTON MARKET
THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THIS SIGN
APPLICATION IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT
TO SECTION 15311, CLASS 11, OF THE GUIDELINES FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT.
M/RC (MIXED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
Quizno's Subs will be opening in the space north of Starbucks in the the building under
construction at the Simon Drive entrance, west of Boston Market, in the One -Eleven
La Quinta Shopping Center. This tenant will be one of several in the building.
SIGN REQUEST:
The shopping center has an approved sign program which requires 24" high internally
illuminated helvetica style channel letters. Length is permitted to be 75% of the lease
width, up to a maximum of 50 square feet. A provision in the sign program allows a
national tenant with 5 or more outlets to request approval to use their corporate sign.
The applicant is requesting approval to use their standard corporate sign on the fascia
in front of their business location. Quizno's Subs has stores throughout the California
which qualifies them to use their corporate signs. The landlord has approved the
requested sign as submitted.
cApc rpt sa 98-447
The request is for an internally illuminated sign on the front of the building facing the
west and on the back facing the Simon Drive entry into the shopping center. Each
sign will read "Quizno's Subs" with their logo between the words. The sign is
approximately 14' long by 11.5" high for a total of approximately 13.5 square feet.
The logo is 2" long by 1 '-2" high.
"Quizno's" will have a face that is a translucent hunter green with thin white stripes,
with the trim caps a matching green and returns red. "Subs" will be a translucent red,
with matching trim cap and hunter green returns. The logo will be hunter green and
red with white lettering reading "oven baked classics", and a hunter green trim cap and
return.
The sign will be 5" deep and mounted flush with the stucco facia, with the
transformer hidden behind the facia. On each side of the building, the sign will be
centered on the stucco facia
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE:
Issue 1 - Acceptability
National tenants are permitted to use corporate or their standard signs with approval
of the Planning Commission. To date, a number of national or regional tenants have
chosen to do this in the center. The style of the letters is compatible with the other
signs in the center. The signs proposed are typical of other Quizno's Subs locations.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Minute Motion 99-_, approving the requested signs, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Obtain a building permit prior to any work on the sign being started.
2. Final plans shall be reviewed by the Community Development Department prior
to obtaining building permit.
Attachments:
1. Sign exhibits
Prepared by:
Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner
(LL-'
tted by:
n
Christine di lori0, Planning Manager
cApc rpt sa 98-447
Stand Up For California!
"Citizens making a difference"
atandup.qutknet.com
awyl &hwt, CO-Di(rwftr
AnjNeyfv CoAmtor
November 20,1998
Dear Friends and Supporters of Stand Up For California:
I wish to thank the many individuals who worked for the defeat of proposition 5- the
Tribal Casino Gambling Initiative. Many of you distributed brochures and flyers, wrote
letters, contributed money, time and effort. Most importantly, you voted.
There are two principal reasons why Prop 5 passed: MONEY and SYMPATHY.
Backers of Prop 5 spent 80 million dollars in the campaigning effort as well as
contributions to political candidates and current public figures. The proponents came at
us from every angle, saturation TV advertising, radio, billboards, tons of direct mail,
debates and high profile media events. Our voice was drowned out.
Sovereignty was a code word for self regulation or NO regulation. Sovereignty was used
as a. shield to deflect all questions and criticisms. But lets think this through. It is
important that citizens have input as to the locations of new casinos or casino expansion.
City Mayors, city councilmen and county supervisors, and planning personnel need to
have oversight to mitigate, traffic patterns, pollution, sanitation, zoning, building codes
and basic health and safety concerns. Without these very basic concerns addressed,
citizens are denied their civil and property rights.
All of us wish to see Indians be self reliant, but there is a right way and a wrong way of
going about this issue. Through the Governors office citizens had input into the tribal
state compact that was negotiated. We requested the need for environmental standards,
tough regulations for gambling laws, worker and patron protections, and the
empowerment of our local governments to negotiate county or city participation
agreements that would be legal and binding.
The enforcement mechanism that we requested was two fold. First the agreements would
be :legal and binding because they are embodied in federal law, the law that regulates
gambling for tribes. Secondly, the limited waiver of sovereignty would return to citizens
their right that is currently denied by tribal sovereignty, the right to due process of law.
Tribes would give a limited waiver of sovereignty so that disputes could be resolved
peacefully in a court of law, with respect to each others sovereign rights.
As a direct result of Proposition 5, many other groups are wanting to install slot machines.
If the Indians can have slots, why can't the race tracks have them? Or the card rooms?
Or lodges? Or veterans' organizations? Or bowling allies? Bingo Halls? Fraternal clubs?
Or County and State Fair grounds that have satellite wagering facilities. etc.? There will
be much infighting among the vested interests to open California to full service casinos.
Where do we go from here?
We again follow the process that has been provided for citizens to resolve their
differences in a peaceful and respectful way. We go to court. On Friday November 20,
1998, a lawsuit representing California citizens and businesses filed a case in the State
Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 5, the Casino Gambling
Initiative passed on November 3. The suit contends that Proposition 5 violates the State
constitution in several key areas and also circumvents federal law governing Indian
gaming.
Prop 5 attempts to authorize casino gambling in violation of Article IV Section 19 of the
California Constitution, which specifically prohibits Nevada and New Jersey casino style
gambling the kind found in most California tribal casinos.
Prop 5 authorizes unlimited use of slot machines, blackjack and banked and percentage
games.
It violates federal law by precluding the negotiation of the tribal state compact and instead
requires the Governor to accept the Standard Gambling Agreement in the initiative.
Last but far from least, it violates the Constitution separation of powers by delegating to
the Governor the authority of the Legislature to establish state gambling policy. All future
governors, legislatures and citizens would be forced to accept this policy. It denies you
your rights.
This brings up the subject of money. Stand Up has refused to take money from gambling
interests. Stand Up started as a grass roots movement. We are still very much grass
roots. We have nowhere else to turn for funds but to you who represent the citizens of
this state. Telephone, postage, printing and travel have exhausted our modest bank
account. Stand Up needs funds to continue the battle against gambling expansion.
We need several thousand dollars just to stay even. Our web master donated his time
during the campaign (http://standup.quiknet.com), but updating the web, printing,
postage and telephone calls must be paid for by check. This truly is an effort of citizens
sharing their time, talent and resources. Please be generous.
Most Sincerely,
Cheryl Schmit - Co Director
STAND UP FOR CALPFORNM
Citizens Making A Difference
P.O. Box 355
Penryn, CA 95663
T,i-ht 4 4QurKrw
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM. JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: JANUARY 12, 1999
SUBJECT: CANCELLATION OF THE MARCH 231 COMMISSION MEETING
The Chairman of the Planning Commission has requested this issue be placed on your agenda due
to the conflict with the Planning Commissioners Institute Conference scheduled for Wednesday,
March 24' through Friday, March 26" in Monterey. In the past, as the Conference starts early on
Wednesday, Commissioners have chosen to travel to the Conference the day before. If this is the
case for this year as well, it would necessitate the cancellation of the March 231 meeting.
The issue of canceling the March 231 Planning Commission is before you for consideration and
determination.
As in the past all Commissioners are encouraged to attend. Spouses/significant others are also
welcome to attend at your expense. As we would like to make arrangements as soon as possible, we
ask that you contact staff as soon as possible so arrangements can be made.
Commission ccnf
Ti-ly 4 44"
MEMORANDUM
DATE: JANUARY 12, 1999
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION]j
FROM: JERRY BERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORC1
SUBJECT: ITEM A - TTM 28964 OLIPHANT AND WILLIAMS -RECOMMENDED
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FROM THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMISSION
The following Historic Preservation Commission conditions for the revised Data Recovery Plan and
implementation schedule have been combined into two primary conditions in order to keep those
items relating to the revision of the Plan together and those items relating to scheduling together.
These two conditions shall be included :
85. The Archaeological Data Recovery Plan shall be required to consist of 100% hand excavation
for total recovery of the potentially significant site areas as identified by the Phase II report.
The use of a backhoe shall be limited to the two accepted uses: (1) to remove culturally sterile
overburden, and (2) to trench a cross-section of a dune for the purposes of determining
geomorphological structure and potential chronology of the archaeological site.
The Data Recovery Plan shall clearly state that the excavation will continue until sterile levels
are reached, irregardless of depth, and that it shall be clearly stated that Phase III will consist
of a total recovery program.
The Data Recovery Plan shall include a detailed discussion connecting the significance
determinations and the stated research goals given in the Phase II Interim Testing Report with
the proposed Phase III data recovery plan methodology.
The Data Recovery Plan shall include a discussion of proposed procedures of the laws
pertaining to the treatment of human remains. In addition, the report shall provide a
discussion of proposed provisions for the scientific study of the remains prior to final
disposition.
The Data Recovery Plan shall clarify what is included in the $5,000 line item for testing with
the consideration that radiocarbon testing and obsidian hydration tests be included in this line
item.
The resumes of all proposed crew members shall be placed in an appendix to the Data
Recovery Plan. Documentation by the Native American Heritage Commission for Mr. Marc
Benitez shall be included in another appendix.
The Data Recovery Plan shall include a discussion of the proposed provisions for publication
and dissemination of the final report of the Phase III component of work.
The map prepared by RBF shall be revised to factor for depth of the cultural deposits where
known, and reviewed for accuracy by the consulting archaeologist. This map shall be
submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval.
The applicant shall provide current tribal boundaries for the purposes of correct disposition
of any human remains.
The potentially human cremation bone material referenced in the Phase II Interim Testing
report and subsequently determined "not large enough for a positive identification" as human
by Consulting Biological Anthropologist Debbie Gray shall be submitted with all other bone
material to a qualified zooarchaeologist for study and possible identification. The results of
this study are to be included in the final Phase III Data Recovery report.
86. The approved Data Recovery Plan field work shall be completed prior to issuance of any
project -related grading permits or ground disturbance. Progress reports for the data recovery
field work, certified by the Principal Investigator, shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department every two weeks beginning with the on -set of field work. A draft
of the final report for the Data Recovery Plan shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department within 60 days from the conclusion of the field work and prior to
the issuance of any grading permits. A final report shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department prior to issuance of any building permits or within 6 months of
completion of the Data Recovery Plan. Draft and Final Reports for the Phase III Data
Recovery shall follow the "Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR):
Recommended Format and Contents" for completeness and organization. Prior to issuance
of a grading permit, the completed Final Report for the Phase II Testing Investigation shall
be submitted for review and acceptance by the City's Historic Preservation Commission. This
report shall also follow the ARMR format.
Archaeological monitoring of the entire project site shall be required. Prior to issuance of a
grading permit, the name and qualifications of the archaeological monitors shall be submitted
to the Community Development Department. The archaeological monitors shall be notified
of, and attend all, pre -grade meetings conducted by the developer/contractors. The developer
shall notify the archaeological monitors of the intent to begin grading within 72 hours of on-
set. A report of the results of the monitoring activities shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department for review by the Historic Preservation Commission, prior to the
first final building inspection conducted for the project.
C:\Mydata\Cond85TTM289640-Warchaeo.wpd
PETITION TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA
As Washington Street becomes a major North/South throughfare, the City is preparing to
increase the traffic lanes on Washington St. to six lanes. .
This petition strongly recommends that the City consider the problems associated with the
Washington and 50th St. intersection. This intersection currently is the site of several
accidents a year, and has become hazardous to those that must transit it. This intersection
is a major gambling pool as drivers approaching the light at either the speed limit or above
must often quickly decide whether they are going to slam on the brakes or enter the
intersection on a red light. This dangerous condition is common where red lights are
utilized to control high speed traffic. There is a point where the driver must either apply
maximum braking or pass through the intersection as the light turns red. There is no
manipulation that can be done with the timing of signals to mitigate these conditions and it
will become even greater at Washington and 501h as the street is improved and traffic
speeds increase.
Suggestion: Change the traffic control method at the intersection from a light to an
"Australian Roundabout." These circles are smaller than those you may have experienced
in England, requiring speeds of around 15 MPH and would fit in the existing intersection.
These traffic control devices have the following advantages:
I . Actually improves the flow of traffic. On average, traffic moving North/South
would get to their destination quicker. Traffic moving East/West, which now must
stop on most trips, would reach their destination much quicker.
2. Dramatic increase in safety.
3. Cost less to install and maintain.
4. Would put La Quinta in the forefront of traffic control and make a unique entrance
to that part of the city.
NAME
ADDRESS PHONE
MA
>f
PETITION TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA
As Washington Street becomes a major North/South throughfare, the City is preparing to
increase the traffic lanes on Washington St. to six lanes. .
This petition strongly recommends that the City consider the problems associated with the
Washington and 50" St. intersection. This intersection currently is the site of several
accidents a year, and has become hazardous to those that must transit it. This intersection
is a major gambling pool as drivers approaching the light at either the speed limit or above
must often quickly decide whether they are going to slam on the brakes or enter the
intersection on a red light. This dangerous condition is common where red lights are
utilized to control high speed traffic. There is a point where the driver must either apply
maximum braking or pass through the intersection as the light turns red. There is no
manipulation that can be done with the timing of signals to mitigate these conditions and it
will become even greater at Washington and 50a' as the street is improved and traffic
speeds increase.
Suggestion: Change the traffic control method at the intersection from a light to an
"Australian Roundabout." These circles are smaller than those you may have experienced
in England, requiring speeds of around 15 MPH and would fit in the existing intersection.
These traffic control devices have the following advantages:
1. Actually improves the flow of traffic. On average, traffic moving North/South
would get to their destination quicker. Traffic moving East/West, which now must
stop on most trips, would reach their destination much quicker.
2. Dramatic increase in safety.
3. Cost less to install and maintain.
4. Would put La Quinta in the forefront of traffic control and make a unique entrance
to that part of the city.
NAME
ADDRESS
PHONE