1999 01 26 PCz
5
CF'y OF TN��
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 26, 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 99-007
Beginning Minute Motion 99-003
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 January 12, 1999
B. Department Report
PC/AGENDA
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A.
B.
C.
Case ..................... CONTINUED - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98
369, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28982, SITI
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-631, AND TRACT 24230
AMENDMENT #1
Applicant ............... Mainiero, Smith and Associates, Inc. for A. G. Spano
Corporation
Location ................ Southwest corner of Adams Street and 47b Avenue
Request ................. Approval and recommendation to the City Council fo
Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration o
Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-36(
and approval of a 160 unit airspace condominium subdivisioi
project on 10.17 acres; review of the building elevations ani
development plans; and the elimination of Condition #41 o
Tract 24230 requiring affordable housing units within thi
project.
Action ................... Resolution 99- Resolution 99- Resolution 99-
Resolution 99-
Case ..................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-635
Applicant ................ The Woodard Group
Location ................. 43-576 Washington Street.
Request ................... Approval to building elevations, site, landscaping, and lightin;
plans for a 24,000 square foot medical office building
Action ................... Resolution 99-
Case ..................... ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-372 ANI
TENTATIVE TRACT 25691
Applicant ............... World Development
Location ................ North side of Miles Avenue between Dune Palms Road an
Jefferson Street.
Request ................. Recommendation for Certification of a Mitigated Negativ
Declaration and approval of a 10 acre subdivision into 38 sing]
family residential units.
Action ................... Resolution 99-_ Resolution 99-
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Case .................... MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES 99-002
Applicant .............. Pacific Trades - Dave Miller
Location ............... Throughout the Cove.
Request ................ Approval of master design guidelines for construction of sing]
family residences.
Action .................. Minute Motion 99-
PC/AGENDA
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS
A. Commission report on the City Council meeting of January 19,1999
IX. ADJOURNMENT
PC/AGENDA
PH #A
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: JANUARY 26, 1999 (CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 24,
1998)
CASE NUMBERS: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28982, SITE DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT 98-631, TRACT 24230 (AMENDMENT #1) AND
EA 98-369
REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO CERTIFY
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-369 APPROVING A
160-UNIT AIRSPACE CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION
PROJECT ON 10.17 ACRES; REVIEW OF THE BUILDING
ELEVATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS; AND
ELIMINATION OF CONDITION #41 OF TRACT 24230
REQUIRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS WITHIN THE
PROJECT.
LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ADAMS STREET AND 47T"
AVENUE
APPLICANT/
ENGINEER: MAINIERO, SMITH AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PROPERTY
OWNER: A. G. SPANOS CORPORATION
GENERAL PLAN/
ZONING
DESIGNATIONS: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (12-16 DWELLINGS PER
ACRE)
ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT: THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT COMPLIES WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF "THE RULES TO IMPLEMENT THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970",
AS AMENDED (RESOLUTION 83-63), IN THAT THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS
CONDUCTED AN INITIAL STUDY (EA 98-369) AND HAS
DETERMINED THAT ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED PROJECT
COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT, THERE WOULD NOT BE A SIGNIFICANT
EFFECT IN THIS CASE BECAUSE APPROPRIATE
MITIGATION MEASURES ARE MADE CONDITIONS OF
STPC Spanos Rev.-29
Page 1 of 7
APPROVAL, AND A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SHOULD BE FILED.
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
NORTH: ACROSS 47T" AVENUE, VACANT COMMERCIAL
PROPERTY AND A CVWD WELL SITE
SOUTH: ACROSS DULCE DEL MAR, VACANT AND DEVELOPED
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IN LAKE LA QUINTA
EAST: ACROSS ADAMS STREET, VACANT COMMERCIAL
PROPERTY (FUTURE LA QUINTA AUTO MALL)
WEST: VACANT AND DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IN
LAKE LA QUINTA
BACKGROUND:
Planning Commission Action
On November 24, 1998, the Planning Commission, on a 4-0 vote (Commissioner Abels
absent), continued the public hearing for this request to this meeting, permitting the
developer additional time to meet with the Lake La Quinta property owners and
consider making plan changes that may include lowering building heights, adding
additional garages, landscaping enhancements, reorientation of second floor balconies,
etc. Public testimony from Lake Quinta residents was taken. A copy of the Minutes
is attached (Attachment 1).
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC)
On November 20, 1998, the ALRC recommended approval of the project's original
architectural and landscaping plans on a 2-0 vote. The Committee recommended
minor design changes to the exterior building elevations, enhancements to the
perimeter landscaping, and increased the height of the Dulce Del Mar wall (Attachment
2 - Original Site Plan). Plan changes shall be made prior to building permit issuance.
Conditions recommended by the Committee have been included in the attached
material (i.e., Site Development Permit Conditions) or have been addressed by the
applicant in the revised plans. A copy of the Minutes is attached (Attachment 3).
Site Description
The 10.17 acre vacant, previously graded site is located at the southwest corner of
47`h Avenue and Adams Street. The site backs onto Dulce Del Mar, a private street
in Lake La Quinta. Parkway landscaping improvements exist on the perimeter streets,
and masonry block wall exists on Adams Street and along the west property line.
STPC Spanos Rev.-29
Page 2 of 7
Revised Project Request
On January 4, 1999, the developer submitted revised plans to the City for this 160-
unit development (Attachment 4, Revised Site Plan). The design changes proposed
by the developer are described below:
Site Plan
1. Freestanding carport parking structures along the west property boundary have
been converged to garages.
2. Two story buildings adjacent to Dulce Del Mar have been shifted to the center
of the project. Now proposed is a two-way drive aisle, a minimum 22' wide
landscaping strip and carports/garages parallel to Dulce Del Mar. The two story
buildings proposed to be located 20' from the south property line are now 75-
feet away (or more) from the property line. Second story balconies face interior
courtyards except for the building complex located at the southeast corner of
the project.
3. The two story building complex at the southwest corner of the project is now
a proposed single story building. All other multiple family building structures are
proposed to remain two story.
4. The number of parking spaces has increased from 322 to 325.
Grading and Drainage
1. Finished grade elevations along the south side of the development have been
lowered by approximately one foot, from 62.5' to 61.5'.
2. Slight changes to the drainage plan were made on the south side of the project
to accommodate the site plan design changes.
Landscaping
1. Mature trees (24" box to 48" box sizes) are proposed along the west and south
areas of the site to buffer the two story buildings. Smaller trees were originally
proposed. Additionally, the number of trees proposed has also increased from
approximately 65 to 78 within the perimeter planting strip.
2. Queen palms have replaced Date palms at the main project entrance on 47tn
Avenue and adjacent to the pool.
Project Description
The two story buildings are a maximum 30'-2" height and 4:12 roof pitch, and
grouped in clusters around common open space with the exception of the four unit
building complex at the southwest corner of the project which is one story. Perimeter
garage setbacks on the west are typically 10-feet from property lines, and along Dulce
STPC Spanos Rev.-29
Page 3 of 7
Del Mar the carport setbacks are 22-feet from the property line. Floor plans are one -
and two -bedrooms ranging in size from 792 square feet to 1,121 square feet.
Each proposed building type's roof will be covered with flat concrete tiles and walls
will be clad with stucco. Proposed roof styles are a combination of modified hip and
gable. Desert color tones are proposed (e.g., beige, etc.). The color material sample
board will be available for viewing at the meeting. Multi -pane windows are proposed,
on the first floor, with single pane single hung sash windows on the second story.
The proposed first floor windows will have stucco surrounds. All proposed windows
including the sliding glass doors will have aluminum frames. Each of the proposed
units have covered outdoor patios or balconies.
Project access is limited to two access driveways on 47th Avenue, an existing two lane
public street. No access is proposed on Adams Street and Dulce Del Mar. Automatic
swing gates are to be used to control access into the project at the main entrance with
emergency access proposed for the western -most access point.
Private on -site access lanes are typically 28-feet in width, accommodating two-way
traffic. The looping street pattern provides access to each building complex. Parking
for the project consists of open parking for guests to covered parking (carports and
garages) for residents. Attached garages are proposed for several of the building
types. Carport structures are freestanding and constructed of prefabricated metal.
The total number of parking spaces for the project is 325, with 280 spaces being
covered. This is a ratio of 2.03 parking spaces per unit.
The recreation complex, proposed within the northeast corner of the project area, will
be single story (3,144 square feet) and a maximum 23'-9" in height (i.e., 7:12 roof
pitch). The buildings will have an open air breezeway. Each building will have a hip
roof covered with flat concrete tiles. The proposed walls will be clad in stucco to
match other on -site buildings. Solid, flat roofed patio covers are provided at each of
the four building entrances. A pool/spa, fountain, putting green, and basketball court
(two half courts) are also proposed. Open parking spaces are provided near the
recreation building to accommodate sales activities and temporary guest parking.
Pedestrian sidewalks connect the buildings to the parking and recreation areas.
Landscaping plans reflect a varied plant palette for the project. Palm trees, varying in
height from 12' to 16', will accentuate the project entrance at the recreation building.
Trees are spread throughout the development in clusters or a linear pattern depicted
along the west property line. Other trees consist of African sumac, California pepper
and Bottle for parking areas, and other types for interior common areas. New walls
and open fencing is proposed along the frontages of 47th Avenue and Dulce Del Mar.
The on -site lighting plan is attached to the landscaping plan, and consists of various
type of lighting (i.e., landscaping, parking, game courts, etc.) throughout the project.
STPC Spanos Rev.-29
Page 4 of 7
Tentative Tract Amendment
The applicant has also requested to eliminate Condition 41 of Tract 24230 requiring
5% of the units to be set -aside for low and moderate income families, allowing all
units to be priced at market values.
Public Notice
A public hearing notice was published in the Desert Sun Newspaper on November 1,
1998, and mailed to all affected property owners within 500-feet informing them of
the hearing. Letters received from Lake La Quinta residents opposing the project were
delivered to the Planning Commission on November 20, 1998, and are on file with the
Community Development Department.
Public Agency Review
Staff mailed a copy of the applicant's request to all public agencies on September 11,
1998, for response by September 30, 1998. All comments have been incorporated
into the attached draft Conditions of Approval, as appropriate.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
Pursuant to Sections 13.12.120 and 9.210.010 of the Subdivision and Zoning Code,
the following discussion of the findings is provided:
Site Development Permit
In order to facilitate noise screening for future residents and preserve visual openness,
Chapter 9.50 (Residential Development Standards) of the Zoning Code requires
structures along Adams Street, a Secondary Image Corridor, to be one-story in height
(22') within 150-feet of the edge of the right-of-way. The height of the recreation
building is recommended to be reduced in height to comply with these requirements.
The proposed two story residential buildings have been laid out beyond the 150'
setback along Adams Street.
Covered and uncovered parking is required for this project. A minimum of 355 parking
spaces is required according to the provisions of Table 1501 of Chapter 9.150
(Parking) of the Zoning Ordinance. The number of parking spaces required within the
development may be reduced if supportive data is provided pursuant to Section
9.150.070 (Shared Parking) of the Zoning Ordinance. The property owner requests
a reduction of 30 parking spaces, based on research they have done on properties they
own or manage and from other sources, concluding two parking spaces per unit is
adequate. Information taken from an Urban Land Institute Shared Parking Report
states 1.6 spaces per unit is a reasonable peak demand value for multi -family
residential parking, and that the time of year does not play a significant factor in
parking demand. On -site parking greatest demand is between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00
a.m.
STPC Spanos Rev.-29
Page 5 of 7
Architectural/Site Plan Design
The design changes proposed by the developer enhance the quality of the project by
increasing the distance from 20' to 75' of two story buildings from the south property
line adjacent to Dulce Del Mar and previously proposed building with the only balconies
overlooking the residences to the west has been removed to a one story unit along the
south project boundary. Additional design enhancements recommended for the project
by staff are as follows:
1. Metal carport structures adjacent to Dulce Del Mar shall be stuccoed and have
side and back walls with parapets to lessen noise created when vehicle doors
are slammed shut and ensure lighting glare does not affect adjacent residential
houses. The design enhancement also ensures architectural compatibility with
existing Lake La Quinta houses.
2. Relocate the proposed trash enclosure at the southwest corner of the project
to the north side of the two-way lane to lessen nuisance noise created from
use by residents and service trucks.
3. A minimum of one disabled parking space shall be located at the southeast
corner of the project to insure proper parking coverage is achieved.
The Public Works Department recommends that the developer install oil/water
separators on the subsurface drain lines exiting the south end of the site to ensure free
flow of storm runoff and prevent migration of debris and pollutants to the Lake La
Quinta development.
Tract 24230 (Condition Amendment)
The City`s Housing Element contains several components to achieve a variety and
diversity of housing in the City. These components include the provision of adequate
housing sites through land use and zoning regulations, land banking, and density
bonuses. Provisions for affordable housing are provided by a redevelopment set -aside
fund, first-time home buyer down payment assistance programs, mortgage revenue
bonds to support the development of owner and rental multiple and single family
housing, Section 8 rental assistance, equity sharing, Section 202 elderly or disabled
housing, second units, mortgage credit certificate programs, and other financing and
tax credit programs. Because of the many programs listed above and as defined
further in the Environmental Assessment, the need to uphold conditions placed on this
subdivision prior to the adoption of the current Housing Element requiring set -aside
housing is no longer necessary. The amendment of Tract 24230 to eliminate
Condition 41 should result in no impacts regarding affordable housing in the City.
STPC Spanos Rev.-29
Page 6 of 7
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-_, recommending to the City
Council certification of Environmental Assessment 98-369 for Tentative Tract
Map 28982, Site Development Permit 98-631 and Tract 24230 (Amendment
#1); and
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99- , recommending to the City
Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 28982, subject to Findings and
Conditions of Approval as attached; and
3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99- , recommending to the City
Council approval of Site Development Permit 98-631 for Tentative Tract Map
28982, subject to Findings and Conditions of Approval as attached; and
4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of an amendment to Tract 24230, subject to the attached
Findings and Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Minutes of November 24, 1998
2. Original Site Plan
3. ALRC Minutes of November 20, 1998
4. Revised Site Plan - Reduced
5. Large Exhibits (Commission only)
Prepared by:..
Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner
Submitted by:
r I:
Christine di lorio, Planning Manager
t
STPC Spanos Rev.-29
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 98-369 FOR TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 28982 TO ALLOW THE SUBDIVISION OF
10.1 ACRES INTO ONE CONDOMINIUM LOT, SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-631 TO CONSTRUCT 160
MULTI -FAMILY UNITS AND ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, AND
TRACT MAP 24230 AMENDMENT 1 TO ELIMINATE
CONDITION NO. 41 PERTAINING TO AFFORDABLE
HOUSING.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-369
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did, on the 24th day of November, 1998, and the 261h day of January, 1999, hold
a duly -noticed Public Hearing as requested by A. G. Spanos on the Environmental
Analysis for Tentative Tract Map 28982, Site Development Permit 98-631, and Tract
Map 24230 (Amendment 1), located at the southwest corner of the intersection of
47th Avenue and Adams Street; and,
WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment complies with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970" as amended, Resolution 83-63, in that the Community Development Director
has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 98-369) and has
determined that although the proposed subdivision, development, and amendment
could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a
significant effect in this case because appropriate mitigation measures were made
conditions of approval for Environmental Assessment 98-369, and a Mitigated
Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning
Commission did make findings to justify the recommendation for certification of said
Environmental Assessment; and,
WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing, said recommendation for certification
was based on findings and subject to certain mitigation measures; and,
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Planning Commission on the 26th day of
January, 1999, did find the following facts to justify recommendation for certification
of said Environmental Assessment:
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
1 . The proposed tentative tract map, site development permit, and amendment
will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, with the
implementation of mitigation measures.
2. The proposed tentative tract map, site development permit, and amendment
will not have the potential to achieve short term goals to the disadvantage of
long-term goals, with the successful implementation of mitigation.
3. The proposed tentative tract map, site development permit, and amendment
will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively
considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the
immediate vicinity.
4. The proposed tentative tract map, site development permit, and amendment
will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect human, either
directly or indirectly, with the implementation of mitigation.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of
the Planning Commission in this case;
2. That it doers hereby concur with the environmental determination and
certification of Environmental Assessment 98-369 for the proposed Tentative
Tract Map 28982, Site Development Permit 98-631, and Tract Map 24230
Amendment No. 1.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 261h day of January, 1999, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
P:lpcearesTTM28982Aventine.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
P:lpcearesTTM28982Aventine.wpd
INITIAL STUDY - ADDENDUM
FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-369
Aventine
Tentative Tract 28982
Site Development Permit 98-631
Tract 24230 (Amendment #1)
Applicant:
A. G. Spanos
Prepared by:
City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Revised
January 14, 1999
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODIUCTION.............................................. 3
1.1 Project Overview ............................................. 3
1.2 Purpose of Initial Study ........................................ 4
1.3 Background of Environmental Review ............................. 4
1.4 Summary of Preliminary Environmental Review ...................... 4
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................... 5
2.1 Project Location and Environmental Setting ..........................
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 ENVIR0114MENTAL ASSESSMENT ............................... 6
3.1
Land Use and Planning ........................................
6
3.2
Population and Housing .......................................
8
3.3
Earth Resources ............................................
10
3.4
Water ....................................................
13
3.5
Air Quality ................................................
17
3.6
Transportation/Circulation....................................
19
3.7
Biological Resources ........................................
21
3.8
Energy and Mineral Resources ................................
22
3.9
Hazards ..................................................
23
3.10
Noise ....................................................
25
3.11
Public Services .............................................
26
3.12
Utilities ..................................................
28
3.13
Aesthetics ................................................
30
3.14
Cultural Resources ..........................................
32
3.15
Recreation ................................................
34
4 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE .................... 34
5 EARLIER ANALYSIS ......................................... 35
IIAEA98-369Aventinempd 2
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The purpose of this Initial Study is to identify the potential environmental impacts of a
proposed development resulting in 160 new multi family units with garages, covered parking
areas, a swimming pool, basketball court, golf putting area, administrative office, and other
accessory amenities, located at the southwest corner of the intersection of 47`, Avenue and
Adams Street (A.P. N. 643-090-014). Tentative Tract Map 28982 proposes to subdivide
10.17 acres into one; single family condominium residential lot. Site Development Permit 98-
631 would ensure that the development and design standards of this Zoning Code, including
but not limited to permitted uses, development standards, and supplemental regulations are
satisfied. The site development permit process provides a means of achieving this purpose
through City review of detailed plans for proposed development projects. The proposed
one -bedroom unit will have 792 square feet of living space. There are 2 two -bedroom unit
floor plans: Unit B having 960 square feet, and Unit C with 1,121 square feet. The applicant
proposes to name the development, "Aventine."
The project site is a part of a previously approved Tract Map 24230, which involved the
division of 151 gross acres into 1 multi -family lot at the southwest corner of 47"' Avenue and
Adams Street, 3 commercial parcels along the east frontage of Washington Street south of
47`h Avenue, and 281 single family residential lots located between these commercial and
multi -family areas. TM 24230 was approved by the City Council on July 5, 1989, by
Resolution 89-85.
The applicant is also requesting an amendment to Tract 24230 for deletion of Condition No.
41, which sets forth the reservation of a fixed percentage of units for low and moderate
income persons.
The single family development within Lake La Quinta was approved under Tract Map 26152,
on July 31, 1990, by Resolution 90-64. This subdivision created 281 lots for single family
custom homes on 103.5 acres at the northwest corner of 48`" Avenue and Adams Street,
south of the proposed multi -family project site. In addition, Zone Change 89-037 was
approved and changed the zoning designations of the property from R-2-9600, R-2-2500, and
R-5 to R-2, R-1, and C-1 to implement a tract map for 281 single family lots, 22.58 acres of
commercial retail -office, 10.1 acres for multi -family residential, and a 24-acre lake. The tract
map and change of zone were assessed for environmental impacts in Environmental
Assessment 89-110, for which a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was certified
by the City Council. Subsequently, Tract Map 26152 was approved on July 31, 1990, and
is within TM 24230 as a partial resubdivision to adjust multiple residential lot lines.
The City of La Quinta is the Lead Agency for the project review, as defined by Section 21067
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Lead Agency is the public agency
which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project which may have
a significant effect upon the environment. The City of La Quinta, as the Lead Agency, has the
authority to oversee the environmental review and to approve amendments to projects.
PAEA99-369Aventine.wpd 3
1.2 PURPOSE OF INITIAL STUDY
As part of the environmental review for the proposed Tentative Tract Map and Site
Development Permit, the City of La Quinta Community Development Department staff has
prepared this Initial Study. This document provides a basis for determining the nature and
scope of the subsequent environmental review for the proposed requests. The purposes of the
Initial Study, as stated in Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines, include the following:
To provide the Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to
prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a Mitigated Negative Declaration
of Environmental Impact for the proposed development;
To enable the applicant, or the City of La Quinta, to modify the requests, mitigating
adverse acts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the projects to qualify for a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact;
To assist the preparation of an EIR, should one be required, by focusing the analysis
on those issues that will be adversely impacted by the proposed project;
To facilitate environmental review early in the review of the Tentative Tract Map,
Tract Map Amendment, and Site Development Permit,
To provide documentation for the findings in a Negative Declaration that the
Tentative Tract Map, Tract Map Amendment, and Site Development Permit will not
have significant effects on the environment;
To eliminate unnecessary EIR's; and,
To determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project.
1.3 BACKGROUND OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed Tentative Tract Map, Tract Map Amendment, and Site Development Permit
applications were deemed subject to the environmental review requirements of CEQA in light
of the intended development and potential impacts upon the property and surrounding area.
This Initial Study Checklist and Addendum was prepared for review by the City of La Quinta
Planning Commission and certification by the City Council.
1.4 SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
This Initial Study indicates that there is a potential for adverse environmental impacts related
to geological problems, water, transportation/circulation, biological resources, noise, public
services, aesthetics, and cultural resources, and recreation issues contained in the
Environmental Checklist. The degree of some of these adverse impacts is significant,
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
11A1`A98-369Aventine.wpd 4
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 28982 would create one residential condominium lot within
a gated development consisting of 160 residential units with garages and accessory structures.
The project is located to the northeast of the Lake La Quinta development, and all access for
the multi -family units will be off of 47"' Avenue. The project site is currently vacant land that
is a part of Tract Map 24230.
2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed development will operate as a multi -family residential project within a gated
community.
2.4 OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the proposed Tentative Tract 28982 and Site Development Permit 98-631
are to provide multi -family residential units. The request to eliminate Condition #41 of Tract
24230 is to relieve the applicant from the responsibility to provide for affordable housing.
2.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
A discretionary action is an action taken by a government agency that calls for the exercise
of judgment in deciding whether to approve a project. For this project, the government
agency is the City of La Quinta. The proposed Tentative Tract Map and Site Development
Permit will require discretionary recommendation of approval by the Planning Commission,
and approval by the City Council. Certification of a Declaration of Environmental Impact for
Environmental Assessment 98-369 must be determined prior to action on the subdivision or
development approvals.
2.6 RELATED PROJECTS
Proposed Tentative Tract Map 28982, Site Development Permit 98-631, and Tract 24230
Amendment # 1 are companion applications for one project. There are no other current
P:\I;A98-369Aventinc.wpd 5
applications related to this project. Tract Map 23240 was approved in 1989, for the Lake La
Quinta project, of which the Aventine project site is a part of.
SECTION 3: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the land use and
subdivision design approval of the proposed tentative tract and site development permit. The
CEQA Checklist issue areas are evaluated in this addendum. For each checklist item, the
environmental setting is discussed, including a description of the existing conditions within
the City and the areas affected by the proposed subdivision. Thresholds of significance are
defined either by standards adopted by responsible or trustee agencies, or by referring to
criteria in CEQA (Appendix G). Mitigation measures are discussed for each issue and are
formalized in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan that is a part of the project conditions of
approval.
3.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Regional Environmental 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.
Local Environmental.4etting
The local setting for Aventine project is a relatively flat desert parcel with small sand dunes
that overlay the ancient Lake Cahuilla shoreline. Elevations on the parcel vary with an average
of 63-feet above nwan sea level. The proposed project is located near the northern -central
portion of the City, to the northeast of the Lake La Quinta project. Near the project site are
vacant, commercially -designated parcels to the east and north, and developing residential
areas within Lake La Quinta to the south and west. The proposed project would not be a part
of the Lake La Quinta development, which is a single family, gated community.
A. Would the project conflict with the general plan designation or zoning?
No Impact. Adjacent land uses and their designations to the subdivision boundary consist
of Low Density Residential (RL) zoned developed residential and vacant residential parcels
to the south and west, vacant Regional Commercial (CR) zoned parcels and a CVWD well
site to the north, and Regional Commercial (CR) zoned parcels to the east where an
approved auto mall will be located. The General Plan land use designations are compatible
11:U:A98-369Aventine.wpd 6
with the zoning designations for the surrounding parcels. These adjacent land uses and their
designations are compatible with the proposed high density residential land use of Tentative
Tract 28982 as the high density residential will serve as a transition between the single family
land uses and the commercial land uses. The subject property is designated as High Density
Residential (HDR) on the City's General Plan, and High Density Residential (RH) on the
City's Zoning Map. A perimeter wall around the proposed project will serve to separate the
various land uses. There are no adverse impacts or conflicts identified for this request, thus,
no mitigation is required for this issue (Source: La Quinta General Plan, 1992, La Quinta
Master Environmental Assessment; La Quinta Zoning Map; La Quinta Housing Element).
B. Would the project conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
No Impact. The City of La Quinta has jurisdiction over the proposed Tentative Tract Map,
Tract Map Amendment, and Site Development Permit. The primary environmental plans and
policies pertinent to this project are identified in La Quinta's General Plan, the General Plan
EIR, the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment, EA 98-110, and the City's CEQA
Guidelines. The proposed development does not conflict with the above referenced
documents adopted by the City Council. Specific environmental issues area could have
impacts that will be individually mitigated by measures identified in this document. No
mitigation is required for this issue.
C. Would the proposal be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
No Impact. The proposed development is a continuation of existing and planned
development in the project area (Source: EA 98-110). There are no impacts identified for this
issue, and no mitigation is required other than the development standards for projects in the
RH Zoning District (Source: La Quinta General Plan, 1992; La Quinta Zoning Map; EA 98-
110).
D. Would the project affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils
or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)?
No Impact. The La Quinta General Plan does not contain an agricultural land use designation
although there are agricultural land uses extant in the south and southeastern portions of the
City. Historically, there has been farming activity in several sections of the City. There is no
indication that the project site itself has been tilled, since being graded in 1990. Construction
of this project with the accompanying extensions and improvements to the infrastructure
system will encourage owners of adjacent properties to develop their land. Active farming in
the area ceased many years ago in anticipation of development. Thus, the impact on prime
agricultural resources or operations in the immediate area has already occurred. Urban
development of particular historically -agricultural lands is essential to achieving the objectives
of the adopted La Quinta General Plan (Sources: La Quinta General Plan, 1992; 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)?
P:TA98-369Avcntinc.vipd 7
No Impact. Existing single family residential land uses are located to the west and south of
the project site. The proposed gated multi -family development will not affect the physical
arrangement of the! existing or planned nearby neighborhoods as it is adjacent to 47`h Avenue
and Adams Street, and does not propose to disrupt or divide the existing circulation system
(Sources: Site Survey, TTM 28982). No mitigation measures are required for this issue.
3.2 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Regional Environmental.4etting
Between 1980 and 1990, the population of La Quinta expanded 125%, as reported by the
U.S. Census, making the City the second fastest growing city in the Coachella Valley. During
that time period, the number of residents in La Quinta blossomed from 4,992 to 11,215. From
1990 to January of 1996, the population grew from 13,070 to 18,050. The current population
is estimated at 20,444. These figures are based upon information provided by the U.S. Census
Bureau, the State Department of Finance, and the Coachella Valley Association of
Governments (CVAG). La Quinta's population ranks sixth largest of the nine cities in the
Coachella Valley. Annual average growth rate has been approximately 10% in recent years.
The projected population of La Quinta by the year 2000 is anticipated to be 23,000, and by
2010, the population could be 32,786 (Source: Community Development Department, 1998).
The average age ofa City resident is 32.2 years. Persons over the age of 45 make up 27% of
the City's population. The average household income is $56,126 (Source: U. S. Census).
In addition to permanent residents, La Quinta has approximately 9,300 seasonal residents who
spend three to six, months in the City. With more resort opportunities being created in the
City, the numbers of visitors increases. It is estimated that 30% of all housing units in the City
are used by seasonal residents (Source: Community Development Department, 1998).
The total housing stock as of 1996, is listed at 9,352 units. Single family units make up 68
percent of the available housing stock. The housing unit breakdown is as follows: 8,624
detached single family, 481 multi -family units, and 247 mobile homes. The average number
of persons per household is 3.15 (Source: Department of Finance 1996). Median home values
in La Quinta are approximately $110,000 which is lower than the average for Riverside
County ($115,240), and less than other Southern California counties and the state median
price of $177,630 (Source: La Quinta Economic Overview 1996 Edition).
Ethnicity information from the 1990 Census revealed that the composition of La Quinta's
population is 701X3 Caucasian, 26% Hispanic, 2% Afro-American, 1.5% Asian, and 1.0%
Native American. The 1990 Census indicates that 81 % of the La Quinta residents are high
school graduates and 21 % are college graduates (Source: 1990 Census/Estimates).
Local Environmental, -Vetting
A. Would the project cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projections?
IIAEA99-369Aventinempd 8
No Impact. The development planned for the proposed project will ultimately result in the
development of 160 new multi -family units, with garages, covered parking areas, a swimming
pool, basketball court, golf putting area, administrative office, and other accessory amenities.
The proposed project is projected to have a 2.85 per unit population, for a total population
of approximately 4.56 people. The potential population of this project has been included in the
1992 General Plan analysis and associated EIR. Therefore, this issue has been previously
considered by the City Council and does not require additional study or mitigation.
Temporary construction -related jobs will be created as the new units are built. A limited
number of new permanent or part time jobs will be created as a result of the project related
to administration, landscaping and maintenance of the development. No jobs are anticipated
to be lost as a result of the project. New jobs will benefit the community, and result in a
positive economic impact. It is not foreseen that any significant impacts to population growth
rate or location will occur. No mitigation measures are required for this issue.
B. Would the project induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)?
Less Than Significant Impact. If the Aventine project is developed, there will be changes
in the location, distribution, and density of population in the project area. It is anticipated that
because the project will have growth inducing impacts (see the preceding Land Use section),
the project will also result in an increase in the growth rate of the population in the area. This
anticipated growth has been planned for in the 1992 La Quinta General Plan, and is
considered minor relative to surrounding planned development (Source: 1992 General Plan
and EIR). Also see discussion above in Subsection A. No mitigation measures are required
for this issue.
C. Would the project displace existing housing, especially affordable housing?
No Impact. EA 98-110 stated that the overall project (Tract 24230) could create some
demand for affordable housing, above that demand which exists today. The multi -family area
should be required to provide affordable units as set forth in Policy #20 of the Draft Policies
for the Highway 111 Corridor, and the 1989 Draft Housing Element of the City. A minimum
of 5% of the units proposed in the multi -family parcel will be required to be affordable units.
It should be noted that the Draft Highway I I I Corridor Plan was not adopted by the City and
that there is a recently adopted Housing Element with different policies and programs for
affordable housing issues. However, Tract 24230 was conditioned to provide 5% of the total
units for the multi -family parcel to be set aside for affordable households. This would amount
to 8 of 160 potential units.
The proposed project will not have an impact upon existing housing, as there are no existing
housing units on the subject property. However, Tract Map 24230 was conditioned to require
11AE.A99-369Aventine.wpd 9
set -aside housing for low income buyers. Tract Map 24230 was approved by the City Council
in 1989, prior to the adoption of the Housing Element in 1995, and certification by the
Department of Housing and Community Development on September 11, 1995. The Housing
Plan contains several components to achieve a variety and diversity of housing in La Quinta.
These components include the provision of adequate housing sites through land use and
zoning regulations, land banking, and density bonuses. Provision for very low, low, and
moderate income housing is provided for by a redevelopment affordable housing set -aside
fund, first-time home buyer down payment assistance programs, mortgage revenue bonds to
support the development of owner and rental multiple and single family housing, Section 8
rental assistance, equity sharing, Section 202 elderly or handicapped housing, second units,
mortgage credit certificate programs, and other financing and tax credit programs.
Additionally, there are provisions for housing rehabilitation, removal of constraints that affect
the cost of housing, energy and water conservation opportunities, promotion of equal housing
opportunities, and the monitoring and administration of the Housing Element to ensure that
it remains viable and useful. Because of the many programs and provisions listed above, the
need to uphold conditions place on subdivisions approved prior to the Housing Element
requiring set -aside housing is no longer necessary. (Sources: Site visit; Housing Element,
1995).The amendment of Tract 24230 to eliminate Condition #41 should result in no impacts
regarding affordable housing in the City. No mitigation measures are required for this issue.
3.3 EARTH RESOURCES
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta has a relatively flat, but gently sloping topography, except for the
hillside area on the southern and western portions of the City. Elevations in the southeastern
portion of the City reach 1,400 feet above msl. Slopes on the valley floor area of the City are
gentle, except in the: rolling sand dune areas. The alluvial soils that make up most of the City
are underlain by igneous -metamorphic rock, as seen in outcrops in the Santa Rosa Mountains
and the Coral Reef 'Mountains. Soils on the valley floor are made up of very fine grain
unconsolidated silty sands. The Coachella Valley is underlain by hundreds of feet to several
thousand feet of Quaternary fluvial, lacustrine, and aeolian soil deposits.
Local Environmental. Setting
A review of historical aerial photographs indicates that the project area has been vacant for
many years. The elevation of the property averages 63 feet above mean sea level (msl), with
a range of 57 to 69 feet above msl (Source: USGS La Quinta 7.5' Quad Map).The project site
is currently vacant of structures and is fairly level with the exception of some small dunes to
approximately two feet in height. Scattered desert vegetation exists throughout the site and
landscaping debris was evident in the south-central region of the property (Source: Earth
Systems Consultants, July, 1998). The entire 10.17 acres are proposed for development
(Source: TTM 28982, SDP 98-631).
There is an inferred earthquake fault line located through the area west of the project site, that
transects in a northwest to southeast trend. There has been no recorded activity along this fault
IIAE.A99-369Aventine.wpd 10
line, and these faults traces are not considered active. However, the City of La Quinta lies in
a seismically active region of Southern California, and major earthquakes are predicted to
occur. Major active faults in the region include the San Andreas and Mission Creek faults
located several miles to the north and west, and the Elsinore Fault Zone located to the
southwest. The project lies within Groundshaking Zones III and IV of the Modified Mercalli
Scale, with Zone X11 being the most hazardous. Very strong groundshaking, as well as the
possibility of ground rupture, can occur during a major earthquake along these regional faults
and represent the primary source of geologic hazard for the City. Should groundshaking occur,
the grain size distribution and unconsolidated nature of alluvial sediments located within the
City contributes to the potential for ground rupture, liquefaction and dynamic settlement,
landsliding and geologic instability (Sources: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan,
1992 La Quinta General Plan; 1992 La Quinta MEA).
A geotechnical reconnaissance investigation was conducted for the project by Earth Systems
Consultants, in July 1998. Borings were drilled for soil profiling and sampling. The borings
indicate the site soils to be Silty Sands (SM) to Sandy Silts (ML). Thin layers of clay were
encountered in all borings at various depths. The report indicates that the project site has
underlying ancient lake deposits. The report states that the bearing soils showed expansion
indices of zero when tested. All indications are that the soils on the site will allow for the
proposed residential development, if the recommendations of the report are implemented.
A. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
seismicity: fault rupture?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development of Tentative Tract Map
28964/Site Development Permit 98-631 could be effected by potential fault rupture hazards
in the event of a large earthquake. The seismically -induced ground rupture, or earth cracking
is not considered a significant hazard due to the absence of known active faulting located
within City boundaries. Ground rupture produced through groundshaking of regionally active
faults is not considered likely, although the possibility cannot be entirely discounted (Source:
1992 La Quinta MEA Earth systems Consultants, July 1998; EA 98-110). 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 on the
border between Groundshaking Zones III and IV, which indicates that there is a potential for
hazardous groundshaking from seismically induced earthquakes. Mitigation for this potential
hazard consists of constructing all habitable structures to specific standards for Seismic Zone
IV, as outlined in the Uniform Building Code (Source: EA 98-110; La Quinta MEA).
C. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
seismicity: ground failure or liquefaction?
No Impact. Liquefaction and ground failure are produced in geologically seismic areas where
11AEA99-369Aventinempd 11
poorly consolidated soils mix with perched (trapped) groundwater causing dramatic decreases
in the elevation of the ground. While groundwater depths can vary significantly over short
distances, due to the presence of localized perched aquifers, the presence of known shallow
water tables increases the potential for liquefaction throughout the region. The subdivision site
is west of the known liquefaction hazard area in the City, thus an adverse impacts are assumed
to be less than significant (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992). The geotechnical engineering
report indicates that the absence of groundwater in the upper 50 feet, the potential for
liquefaction and the related surficial affects (liquefaction induced settlement) of liquefaction
impacting the site are considered negligible. Groundwater was not encountered during boring
work and is expected to be in excess of 50 feet below the existing ground surface (Source:
Earth Systems Consulting, July 1998; EA 98-110).
D. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
seismicity: seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazard?
No Impact. The City is located in an inland valley, separated from the Pacific Ocean by
mountain ranges. and would not be subjected to a tsunami. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made
reservoir located in the southeast portion of the City, might experience some moderate wave
activity as a result of an earthquake and groundshaking. However, the lake is not anticipated
to affect this project in the event of a levee failure or seiche because the lake is approximately
five miles south of the southern boundary of the project (Source: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta
USGS 7.5' Quad Map; EA 98-110). The man-made lakes within the Lake La Quinta
development are not anticipated to be any potential hazard to the proposed Aventine project.
No mitigation is required for this issue.
E. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
landslides or mudflows?
No Impact. No mudflows are anticipated for this project, as the adjacent hills and mountains
are formed of rocky granitic material. The proposed subdivision will not be effected by this
hazard issue as Tentative Tract 28982 is 2,800 feet east of the closest rocky hillsides (Source:
1992 La Quinta MEA; EA 98-110).
F. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,
grading, or rill?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. As the proposed subdivision is developed there
will be slight changes in the topography as a result of grading and excavation. Approved
grading plans are required prior to any such activity. Finished grade elevations along the south
side of the development have been lowered by approximately one foot to facilitate minor
changes to the drainage plan to accommodate site plan design changes.
The geotechnical engineering report identifies specific hazards and mitigation measures for the
proposed development type. This report states that the soil types found on the subdivision
area have a moderate potential for wind erosion (defined as wind removal and/or soil
accumulation in hummocks up to 24-inches high). In addition, due to silty nature of the surface
IIAEA99-369Aventine N%pd 12
soils, severe dust storms can be expected locally in areas not covered by vegetation. Therefore,
an increase in wind erosion can be anticipated during grading and during development until
ground cover is reestablished on the site. Impacts from erosion shall be mitigated by design or
by implementation of the approved PM-10 Mitigation Plan (Chapter 6.16 of the Municipal
Code) to be submitted and approved by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit.
G. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
subsidence of the land?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is not located in an area designated for
subsidence hazards. Dynamic settlement results in geologically seismic areas where poorly
consolidated soils mix with perched groundwater causing dramatic decreases in the elevation
of the ground (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992, EA 98-110). The proposed Tract/Site
development Permit will not have any significant effects from subsidence hazards if the
recommendations of the geotechnical engineering report are implemented.
H. Would the; project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
expansive soils?
No Impact. The underlying soils of the site have a low potential for expansion, thus future
construction is not expected to be subject to problems from soil expansion. The soil types
identified within the project site include fine grained windblown sands, silty sands, and sandy
silts. The City requires compliance with the Uniform Building Code and the recommendations
of a soils investigation report prior to issuance of building and grading permits (Sources:
U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Riverside County, California - Coachella
Valley Area; Earth Systems Consultants, July 1998, EA 98-110). Mitigation consists of
implementing the recommendations of the projects' geotechnical engineering report for this
issue.
I. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
unique geologic or physical features?
No Impact. The Coral Reef Mountains and Santa Rosa Mountains represent unique geologic
features in the La Quinta area. These unique features are located over 2 miles south/southwest
and approximately one-half mile west of the project site and will not be impacted by the
proposed subdivision (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA; EA 98-110). No mitigation is required
for this issue.
3.4 WATER
Regional Environinental.4elting
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
PAM98-369Aventine.wpd 13
Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD).
La Quinta is located primarily in the lower Thermal Subarea of the groundwater basin. The
Thermal Subarea is separated into the upper and lower valley sub -basins near Point Happy,
located southwest of the intersection of Washington Street and State Highway 111. CVWD
estimates that approximately 19.4 million acre feet of water is stored within the Thermal
Subarea which is available for use. Water pumped from the aquifer is treated and distributed
to users through the existing (potable) water distribution system. Water is also pumped for
irrigation purposes to water golf courses and the remaining agricultural uses in the City. Water
supplies are augmented with surface water from the Colorado River transported via the
Coachella Canal.
The quality of water in the La Quinta area is highly suitable for domestic purposes. However,
chemicals associated with agricultural production in nearby areas and the use of septic tanks
in the Cove area alfect groundwater quality. Groundwater is of marginal to poor quality at
depths of less than 200 feet. Below 200 feet, water quality is generally good and water depths
of 400 to 600 feet are considered excellent.
Percolation from the; tributaries of the Whitewater River flowing into La Quinta from the Santa
Rosa Mountains provide a natural source of groundwater replenishment. Artificial recharging
of groundwater will be necessary in the near future (Source: CVWD).
Surface water in La Quinta is comprised of Colorado River water supplied via the Coachella
Canal and stored in the Lake Cahuilla reservoir; lakes in private developments which are
comprised of canal water and/or untreated groundwater; and the Whitewater River and its
tributaries. The watersheds in La Quinta are subject to intense storms of short duration which
result in substantial runoff. The steep gradient of the Santa Rosa Mountains accelerates the
runoff flowing in the intermittent streams that drain the mountain watersheds. La Quinta is
protected from this runoff by the existing flood control facilities located throughout the City.
One of the primary sources of surface water pollution is erosion and sedimentation from
development construction and operation activities. Without controls, total dissolved solids
(TDS) can increase significantly from the development activities. The Clean Water Act
requires all communities to conform to standards regulating the quality of water discharged
into streams, including stormwater runoff. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) has been implemented as a two-part permitting process, for which the City
of La Quinta participates.
La Quinta is protected from storm water runoff by a stormwater system designed by Bechtel
for the Coachella Valley Water District to protect currently developed and potentially
developable areas of the City from damage during a major rainflood event. The system project
was based on a flood control plan for the general area developed by Bechtel Engineering for
the Coachella Valley Water District, in 1970. Construction was completed in November 1986.
Local Environmental.Setting
The project site does not have any natural standing water. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made
reservoir is located approximately 5.25 miles to the south. The Whitewater River channel is
IIA .n99-369Aventine.wpd 14
located approximately one-half mile to the north of the project site, and is dry except during
seasonal storms. The La Quinta Stormwater Channel is located approximately 1 mile to the
east of the project site, and is a part of the community -wide network of flood control facilities.
The City currently has only limited areas which are still subject to storm water flow or
flooding. Flood prone areas are designated with a specific zoning district (Watercourse,
Watershed and Conservation Areas: W-l). The City also implements flood hazard regulations
for development within flood prone areas (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA).
A. Would the project result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed development will require some
grading to level the project site. Once structures and on -site street improvements are
constructed, there will be changes in the absorption rates and the rate and amount of surface
runoff within the project. Storm drain improvements will be constructed to transport water
runoff from the interior streets into the facilities located within Lake La Quinta, as designed
by Tract 24230 (;Source: EA 98-110). The outlet structure will include a facility to control
nuisance water. Mitigation will consist of implementing the design of the subdivision pursuant
to the requirements of the hydrology study prepared by Mainiero, Smith and Associates, Inc.,
for Tentative Tract 28982. Slight changes to the drainage plan were made on the south side
of the project to accommodate the site plan design changes.
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 have offsite drainage entering the project from the perimeter
streets. The area is protected from regional stormwater flows by a system of channels and
dikes, and may be considered safe form regional stormwater flows except in rare instances
(Source: FEMA Flood Hazard Map).
C. Would the project result in discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)?
No Impact. There are no existing natural bodies of surface water on or adjacent to the
project site (Source: Aerial photographs; EA 98-110). The proposed project will not have any
effect upon surface waters. Runoff from the project site is required to be directed into the
retention system already in place south of the project site (Source: Tract 24230; EA 98-1 10).
Oil/water separators will be required on subsurface storm drain lines exiting the south end of
the project site to prevent migration of debris and pollutants to the Lake La Quinta
development.
D. Would the project result in changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body?
11AEA98-369Aventine.iwpd 15
No Impact. There are no bodies of water on or immediately adjacent to the project site. The
Lake La Quinta development does have a man-made lake within its boundaries. There are no
impacts identified fbr this issue, and no mitigation is required.
E. Would the project result in changes in currents, or the course or direction of
water movements?
No Impact. The proposed project will not have any effect upon currents or water movements,
as the project site is a dry desert parcel (Source: Site visit; EA 98-110). There are no impacts
identified for this issue.
F. Would the project result in changes in quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawal, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
by excavations?
Less Than Significant Impact. The impact of the proposed project on the existing domestic
water service will have a cumulative effect upon the subsurface water resources available. The
Coachella Valley Water District has submitted a comment letter, dated October 1, 1998,
stating they can serve the project. Another water well is located south of the project site, near
the intersection of 48" Avenue and Adams Street (Source: 1992 La Quinta MEA; EA 98- 110).
G. Would the project result in altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
Less Than Significant Impact. The depth of local groundwater has been relatively stable
since water has been imported from the Colorado River, with the level ranging from 60 to 90
feet below the surface. The District has indicated they can serve the development (Source:
CVWD, October 1, 1998, EA 98-110).
H. Would the project result in impacts to groundwater quality?
Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the subdivision will include concrete and
asphalt pavement of'portions of the site, and landscaping areas. This pavement will reduce the
absorption ability of the ground. Storm water runoff will be discharged into on -site basins and
pipes. Following a heavy rain, contaminates could be transported into the basins that could
contribute to groundwater and/or surface water pollution. The use of Best Management
Practices as defined by the Regional Water Quality Control Board- Region 7 Colorado River
Basin in the application of chemicals, solvents, cleansers, oils, etc. is the only practical
mitigation identified. A condition of approval has been recommended by staff for the applicant
to install and maintain oil/water separator on subsurface storm drain lines exiting the south end
of the property. The; separator would ensure free flow of storm runoff and prevent migration
of debris and pollutants to the Lake La Quinta development.
Information obtained from Bruce Kassler, of Mainiero, Smith and Associates, indicates that
the existing water well located to the north of the project site was shut down 5 years ago by
11AEA99-369Avcntine w?d 16
the water district clue to high nitrate levels, pending an investigation of the well by the water
district. The investigation has not been completed (Source: Bruce Kassler, Mainiero, Smith
& Associates, Personal Communication, September 25, 1998).
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 development will result in a cumulative use of
water resources available for public consumption (Source: EA 98-110).
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 Vetting
The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, which has an and climate,
characterized by hot summers, mild winters, infrequent and low annual rainfall, and low
humidity. Variations in rainfall, temperatures, and localized winds occur throughout the valley
due to the presence of the surrounding mountains. Air quality conditions are closely tied to the
prevailing winds of the region.
The City of La Quinta is subject to the SCAQMD AQMD, a plan which describes measures
to bring the SCAB into compliance with federal and state air quality standards and to meet
California Clean Air Act requirements. The General Plan for the City contains an Air Quality
Element outlining mitigation measures as required by the Regional AQMP.
P:U?A99-369Aventine.wpd 17
La Quinta is located within Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30, which includes two air quality
monitoring stations, one located in the City of Palm Springs, and the other in the City of Indio.
The Indio station monitors conditions which are most representative of the La Quinta area.
The station has been collecting data for ozone and particulates since 1983. The Palm Springs
station monitors carbon monoxide in addition to ozone and particulate and has been in
operation since 1985.
A. Would the project violate any air standard or contribute to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development will contribute cumulatively to
air quality impacts. However, the threshold for significant impacts from a condominium
residential development is 286 units, and from an apartment development is 259 units. The
proposed development will have 160 units, therefore, there will not be a significant impact
(Source: AQMD Draft CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1992; EA 98-110).
Grading of the project areas will cause temporary adverse impacts on the air quality due to
blowing dust and sand, but will be addressed as part of the City's review and approval of a
dust control plan. per the City's PM-10 Ordinance.
B. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision would result in new multiple family
multi -family residential buildings in an area with existing and planned residential development.
Residential units are; sensitive receptors. The addition of new residential units will contribute
cumulatively to the air quality impacts in the City. There are no anticipated significant adverse
impacts identified with the proposed subdivision (Source: AQMD CEQA Handbook; EA 98-
1 10). No mitigation is required for this issue.
C. Would the project alter air movements, moisture, temperature, or cause any
change in climate?
Less Than Significant Impact. Moisture content may increase as landscape areas are planted
and irrigated. There are no significant climatic changes anticipated with the proposed
development (Source: EA 98-110). No mitigation is required for this issue.
D. Would the project create objectionable odors?
No Impact. The proposed development will not result in a land use that might create
objectionable odors, such as waste hauling or chemical products. Vehicles traveling on nearby
and internal project streets generate gaseous and particular emissions that may be noticeable
on the project site. However, these would be short-term odors that should dissipate quickly.
No mitigation is required for this issue.
PA1`..A99-369Aventine. wpd 18
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 111, Washington
Street, Jefferson Street, Fred Waring Drive, and Eisenhower Drive.
Traffic volumes in La Quinta experience considerable seasonal variation, with the late -winter,
early spring months representing the peak tourist season and highest traffic volumes.
Existing transit service in La Quinta is limited to three regional fixed -route bus routes operated
by SunLine.Transit Agency. One bus route along Washington Street connects the Cove and
Village areas with the community of Palm Desert to the west. Two lines operate along
Highway I I I serving trips between La Quinta and other communities in the desert.
There are only a -few existing pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian facilities in La Quinta,
however, these systems will be expanded as the City grows. These facilities, both existing and
future, are designated in the La Quinta General Plan.
Local Environmental.Setting
The intersection of 47' Avenue and Adams Street is currently controlled by a stop sign on 47'
Avenue. 47" Avenue is a local roadway with a 60-foot right of way. Adams Street is
designated as a collector street with a 64 to 72-foot right of way. The La Quinta General Plan
gives design standards for the various street classifications.
Buildout traffic capacity for 47`h Avenue is projected at 4,000 daily trips. Adams Street
buildout is projected, south of Highway 111, at 14,000 trips. A detailed explanation of
buildout traffic conditions and levels of service is found in the La Quinta General Plan (Source:
La Quinta MEA, 1992).
A. Would the project result in increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development is anticipated to generate
approximately 6 to 10 average daily trips per unit, for a range of 960 to 1,600 average trips
per day. Street improvements to 47h Avenue exist. The additional trips are not anticipated to
be significant, but rather cumulative to the community (Source: TTM 28982; EA 98-110).
B. Would the project result in hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
No Impact. There are no identified hazards from design features in proposed circulation
system. The internal roadways will be private. Automobile and motorcycle traffic are the only
11AEA98-369Aventine.wpd 19
types of vehicles that typically use private residential streets, with the exception of delivery
trucks. There will be incremental vehicle trips and miles traveled, resulting in a correlated
increase in traffic hazards. Road and Signal improvements, alternative means of transportation
will resolve this impact to an acceptable level (Source: EA 98-110).
C. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access to nearby uses?
No Impact. The project would not be permitted to obstruct emergency access to surrounding
land uses. An emergency access is proposed for the project near the northwest corner of the
development, that would provide access on to 47h Avenue (Source: EA 98-110; TTM 28982).
No additional emergency accesses are required for this project.
D. Would the project result in insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site?
Less Than Significant Impact. Parking will be required for each multi -family unit, which will
consist of a garages, covered parking, and open parking spaces. The applicant proposes 2
spaces per unit. The Planning Commission will review the developer's request to reduce the
number of parking spaces from 355 required by the Zoning code, to 325. No on -street parking
will be allowed on the private internal roadways as the roadway widths are too narrow to
accommodate this.
E. Would the project result in hazards or barriers for pedestrian or bicyclists?
No Impact. Designated bike paths exist on Adams Street and 47"' Avenue. It is anticipated
that hazards to bicyclists and pedestrians will not be increased significantly as a result of the
proposed development because a 6-foot wide sidewalk exists on the south side of 47"' Avenue
and west side of .Adams Street for the length of the project boundaries (Source: 1992 La
Quinta General Plan; TT 28982).
F. Would the project result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
No Impact. There are no proposed bus turn -outs as the SunLine Transit Agency bus system
does not have a route near the subdivision, the closest route is along Washington Street,
approximately'/z mile west of the project. However, there will be a bus turn -out installed at
Highway I I I and Adams Street in conjunction with the auto mall project that has been
approved. The City has not received a letter from SunLine Transit, requesting bus facilities on
471h Avenue or Adams Street, as of November 2, 1998. No mitigation is required for this
issue.
G. Would the project result in rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
No Impacts. There is no rail service in the City of La Quinta. The closest rail line is
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
PAEA99-369Aventine.Nvpd 20
these issues. The closest airports are the Bermuda Dunes Airport, a small private facility
located just south of Interstate 10, approximately six miles north of the project site and the
Desert Resorts Regional (Thermal) Airport, located approximately 7.5 miles southeast of the
project, on Airport Boulevard in the Thermal area of Riverside County (Sources: La Quinta
MEA; USGS La Quinta 7.5' Quad Map; Site Survey). The proposed development will not
impact this issue.
3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Regional Environmental .'Vetting
The City of La Quinta lies within the Colorado Desert regional environment. Two ecosystems
are found within the; City, the Sonoran Desert Scrub and the Desert Transition. The disturbed
environments within the City are classified as either urban or agricultural. A detailed discussion
of these ecosystems is found in the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment (1992).
Local Environmental Setting
The project site is located in the Sonoran Desert Scrub ecosystem. The Sonoran Desert Scrub
is the most typical, environment found in the Coachella Valley desert floor. It is generally
categorized as containing plants which have the ability to economize water use, go dormant
during periods of drought, or both. The variations of desert vegetation result from differences
in the availability of water. The most dense and lush vegetation in the desert is found where
groundwater is most plentiful. Typically, undeveloped land within these ecosystems is rich in
biological resources and habitat.
The Sonoran Scrub areas are considered habitat for a number of small mammals. These
animals escape the summer heat through their nocturnal and/or burrowing tendencies.
Squirrels, mice and rats are all common rodent species in this environment. The black -tailed
hare is a typical mammal. Predator species include kit fox, coyote, and mountain lion in the
higher elevations. Birds and amphibians/reptiles can also be found in the Sonoran Scrub area.
A. Would the project result in impacts to endangered, threatened or rare species or
their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and
birds)?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The La Quinta General Plan identifies the property
as being within the habitat of the Fringe -toed Lizard (Sources: La Quinta MEA; EA 98-110).
The project site is also within the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation
Habitat Development Fee area, which serves as mitigation for habitat destruction. Payment
of this fee was made on November 16, 1989, in conjunction with grading of Tract 24230.
Staff transmitted a copy of the proposed tentative tract to the California State Department of
Fish and Game and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service on September 11, 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
11:F?A98-369Aventine. wpd 21
trees)?
No Impact. There are no locally designated biological resources within the City of La Quinta.
All significant biological resources are designated by the California Department of Fish and
Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. No response has been received from these
agencies regarding this project (Source: La Quinta MEA).
C. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated natural communities
(e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have locally designated natural communities.
(Source: La Quinta MEA).
D. Would the project result in impacts to wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian, and
vernal pool)?
No Impact. There are no known natural wetlands, marshes, riparian communities, or vernal
pools on the project site or nearby (Source: Site Visit).
E. Would the project result in impacts to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
No Impact. The project site is not located in or nearby any wildlife dispersal or migration
corridors. There are no designated corridors in the City's General Plan (Source: La Quinta
MEA; Site Survey).
3.8 ENERGYAND MINERAL RESOURCES
Regional Environmental.4etting
The City of La Quinta contains both areas of insignificant and significant Mineral Aggregate
Resource Areas (SMARA), as designated by the State Department of Conservation. There are
no known oil resources in the City. Major energy resources used in La Quinta come from the
Imperial Irrigation District (IID), Southern California Gas Company, and various gasoline
companies.
Local Environmental.Setting
There are no oil wells or other fuel or energy producing facilities or resources on or near the
project site. While the project site is undeveloped, there is no significant resource to be mined,
such as rock or gravel. The project site is located within MRZ-1. The MRZ-1 designation is
applied to those areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits
are present or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence (Source: La
Quinta MEA; Site Survey).
A. Would the project conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
IIAEA99-369Aventinempd 22
No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have an adopted energy plan, however, there are
goals, objectives, and policies in the General Plan pertaining to conservation of prime soil and
mineral resource areas, and energy efficiency. Objective 6-5.1 states, "Where feasible, the City
shall conserve prime soil and mineral resources through a variety of alternative means".
Policies 6-5.1.1 encourages that areas historically utilized as agricultural production remain
as open space as long as possible. Policy 6-5.1.2 states that Mineral Resource Areas shall be
reserved for mineral extraction activities, after which be reclaimed to a similar natural
condition. Policy 6-5.1.3 states that the loss of soils through erosion shall be minimized
through conservation of native vegetation, use of permeable ground materials and careful
regulation of grading practices. Goal 6-6 states that public and private sector development
projects which demonstrate that the best available technologies of energy efficiency and energy
conservation techniques. Objective 6-6.1 states the City shall encourage that the best available
technologies of energy efficiency and energy conservation techniques are incorporated into
both public and private sector development projects. Policies 6-6.1.1, 6-6.1.2, 6-6.1.3, and 6-
6.1.4 provide a variety of methods to achieve the stated goal. The project site has no
identifiable mineral resources, thus, no mitigation is required.
B. Would the project use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient
manner?
Less Than Significant Impact. Natural resources that may be used by this development
include air, mineral, water, sand and gravel, timber, energy, and other resources. State of
California Title 24. requirements shall be complied with for energy conservation prior to
building permit issuance. Any landscaping will also be required to comply with the City's
landscape water conservation ordinance as well as the requirements of the Coachella Valley
Water District (Source: La Quinta MEA; Water Conservation Ordinance; Coachella Valley
Water District; EA 98-110).
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, et present in the City of La Quinta, the existence of chemicals utilized in
dry cleaning operations, agricultural operations, restaurant kitchen cleaning, landscape
irrigation and exposure to large scale electrical facilities may pose significant threats to various
sectors of the population. Currently, there are no hazardous disposal waste sites located in
Riverside County, although transportation of such material out of, and around, La Quinta takes
place on Interstate 10.
Local Environmental Setting
In order to comply with AB 2948-Hazardous Waste Management Plans and Facility Siting
11AF.A98-369Aventine.wpd 23
Procedures, the City of La Quinta adopted Ordinance 184 consisting of a Hazardous Waste
Management Plan. The project area has not been used for any type of manufacturing or
industry, other than perhaps agriculture, and there has not been any known dumping of
hazardous substances on the property (Sources: Aerial Photos).
A. Would the project involve a risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including not limited to oil, pesticides, chemical, or radiation)?
No Impact. There is a minimal risk of exposure from swimming pool chemicals and pesticides
that may be used for grounds maintenance and by residents of the multi -family units within the
development. No storage tanks of any kind are being proposed for the development. No other
risks are anticipated by the development (Source: TT 28982, EA 98-1 10).
B. Would the project involve possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. Construction activities will be confined to the development boundaries, except
for adjacent off -site work as is necessary for road improvements, etc. These activities will not
be permitted to interfere with emergency responses to the site or surrounding areas nor will
it obstruct emergency evacuation of the area. Needed measures to divert and control traffic
shall be implemented whenever required. Emergency access will be required for the project to
meet the requirements of the Fire Department.
C. Would the project involve the creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazards?
No Impact. There are no anticipated health hazards associated with proposed multi -family
development (Source: EA 98-110).
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 multi-
family residential development (EA 98-110).
E. Would the! proposal involve increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees?
No Impact. The proposed multi -family residential development will not have any effect upon
fire hazard issues, as the project is not in an area with significant natural fire hazards (Source:
EA 98-110).
PAEA98-369Aventine.wpd 24
3.10 NOISE
Regional Environmental Setting
Noise levels in the City are created by a variety of sources within and outside the City
boundaries. The major sources of noise include vehicles on City streets and Highway 1 11, and
temporary construction noise. The ambient noise levels are dominated by vehicular noise along
the State Highway 1 I I and major or primary arterial roadways.
Local Environmental.Setting
The ambient noise level at the project site is dominated by vehicle traffic noise from 47`h
Avenue and Adams Street. Residential areas are considered noise -sensitive land uses,
especially during the nighttime hours. The State Building Code and La Quinta General Plan
requires that the interior noise level in buildings do not exceed CNEL 45. The General Plan
of the City of La Quinta requires that exterior and outdoor living areas noise levels do not
exceed CNEL 60.
A. Would the project result in increases in existing noise levels?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. A noise study prepared for the multi -family
residential development by Mestre Greve Associates, assessed the potential effects of projected
ultimate traffic volumes on the project's proposed residential units adjacent to 47th Avenue and
Adams Street. In summary, noise barriers are required for a number of exterior living areas
along 47' Avenue and Adams Street. In order to meet the City's 60 CNEL exterior noise
standard, a noise barrier 5-feet high will be required along 47' Avenue. The barrier may
consist of a wall, a berm, or a combination of the two, as long as there is a surface density of
at least 3.5 pounds per square foot, and no openings or gaps. The applicant proposes a
combination of masonry wall and berm to ensure a minimum of 6-feet in wall height measured
from the project's multi -family unit pad elevations to meet this requirement for mitigation
(Source: Mestre Greve, September 8, 1998). There is an existing masonry wall along Adams
Street, which meets the noise mitigation requirements for the interior living areas of residential
buildings closest to Adams Street. A number of balconies in the project will need noise barriers
to meet the exterior noise standard. The Noise Study lists the required second floor noise
barrier locations and heights to meet the 60 CNEL exterior noise standard. The noise barrier
heights are relative; to the balcony floor (Source: Mestre Greve, September 8, 1998).
With the exterior noise mitigation measures specified in the Noise Study, the interior noise
levels are projected to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard without building upgrades
(Source: Mestre Greve, September 8, 1998).
B. Would the project result in exposure of people to severe noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development will result in short-term impacts
11:UiA98-369Aventine.wpd 25
associated with construction activities. During construction, heavy machinery will be capable
of generating periodic peak noise levels ranging from 70 to 95 dBA at a distance of 50 feet
from the source. 'These high noise levels are short in duration and temporary with the
construction phases of the project. Such high noise levels are not anticipated nor permitted
after construction, or during the "operation" of the development (Source: La Quinta General
Plan). Construction noise is regulated by Chapter 6.08.050 of the Municipal Code, and serves
as mitigation for this project.
3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES
Regional Environmental.Setting
Law enforcement services are provided to the City through a contract with the Riverside
County Sheriffs Department. The Sheriffs Department extends service to the City from
existing facilities located in the City of Indio. There is a small substation located within City
Civic Center. The Department utilizes a planning standard of 1.5 deputies per 1,000 population
to forecast additional public safety personnel requirements in La Quinta at buildout. Based on
this standard, the City should have a police force of 25.5 officers, but is currently underserved.
Currently, there are three officers per shift with three staggered shifts per day to serve La
Quinta In addition to patrol, there is also a target team, Community Services Officer, and
School Resources Officer assigned to the City (Source: 101-301 Police Services Supporting
Information).
Fire protection service is provided to the City by Riverside County Fire Department through
a contractual arrangement. The Fire Department administers two stations in the City; Station
#32 on Frances Hack Lane, west of Washington Street, and Station #70, at the intersection
of Madison Street and Avenue 54. The Fire Department is also responsible for building and
business inspections, plan review, and construction inspections. Based upon a planning
standard of one paid firefighter per 1,000 population, the City is currently underserved
(Source: La Quinta MEA). Currently, there are two paid firefighters per shift at each of the
two fire stations in La Quinta. Volunteers supplement the paid staff (Source: La Quinta
Building & Safety Department).
Structural fires and fires from other man-made features are the most significant fire threats to
the City. Hillside and brush fires are minimal as the hillside areas are virtually barren and the
scattered brush on the valley floor is too sparse to pose a serious fire threat.
Both the Desert Sands Unified School District and the Coachella Valley Unified School
District serve the City. There are two elementary schools, one middle school, and one high
school within the City. Additional public schools are being planned for construction by the
State of California. The City is also within the College of the Desert Community College
District (Source: La Quinta MEA, 1992).
11AEA98-369Aventine.v pd 26
Library services are provided by the Riverside County Library System with a branch library
located in the Village area of the City. The existing facility opened in 1988 and unadopted
planning standards of 0.5 square feet per capita and 1.2 volumes per capita to forecast future
facility requirements to serve the City. Utilizing this 1992 standard, the City was underserved
in space but overserved in terms of volumes (Source: La Quinta MEA).
Health care services are provided in the City through JFK Memorial Hospital in Indio, and the
Eisenhower Immediate Care Facility in the 111 Center Shopping Center. The Eisenhower
Medical Center is, located in Rancho Mirage. The Riverside County Health Department
administers a variety of health programs for area residents and is located in Indio. Paramedic
service is provided to the City by Springs Ambulance Service (Source: La Quinta MEA, 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 54 h 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 multi -family residential
development was received from the Fire Marshal on September 22, 1998, and are on file in the
Community Development Department. The proposed development will cumulatively increase
the need for fire protection services, however, this increase is not anticipated to be significant
with the implementation of the fire protection measures stated in the above referenced letter.
Conditions to mitigate the project are proposed. No significant impacts were identified with
this issue in EA 98-110.
B. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or altered
government services in relation to police protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Riverside County Sheriff's Department responded on
September 18, 1998, that they have no negative comments regarding the multi -family
residential development. There will be cumulative impacts on police protection services to the
community with the addition of 160 new multi -family residential units. No significant impacts
were identified with this issue in EA 98-110. No mitigation is required for this issue.
C. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in relation to school services?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. A comment letter, dated September 17, 1998,
11AEA98-369Avendno.wpd 27
was received from the Desert Sands Unified School District. The letter indicates that there will
be a potential impact on the school system. Mitigation for this impact is the payment of the
state mandated school impact fee at the time of issuance of building permits (Source: EA 98-
110).
D. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in relation to the maintenance of public facilities, including
roads?
Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the proposed multi -family residential project
will result in the incremental increase in maintenance of public facilities especially local roads
due to the increase in traffic (Source: EA 98-110). To mitigate this impact, the applicant shall
pay infrastructure fees in accordance with the City's adopted program in effect at the time of
issuance of building; permits for regional City improvements.
E. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in relation to other governmental services?
Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the proposed multi -family residential project
will result in an incremental increase in the demand for other governmental services (Source:
EA 98-110). Building and engineering plan checking and inspections, and planning review
needed for the project will be partially offset by application, permit and inspection fees charged
to the applicant and contractors.
3.12 UTILITIES
Regional Environmental.Services
The City of La Quinta is served by the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) for electrical power
supply and The Gas Company (TGC) for natural gas service. Existing power and gas lines and
substations are found throughout the City. IID has four substations in La Quinta, with
electricity generated by a steam plant in El Centro and hydroelectric power generated by the
All American Canal. General Telephone Exchange (GTE) provides telephone services for the
City. Media One serves the area for cable television service.
The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides water and sewer service to the City.
CVWD obtains its water from underground aquifers and from the Colorado River. CVWD
operates a water system with potable water pumped from domestic water wells in the City.
The wells range in depth from 500 to 900 feet. Potable water is stored in five reservoirs
located in the City.
The City's stormwater drainage system is administered by the CVWD, which maintains and
operates a comprehensive system to collect and transport flows through the City. The City is
served by Waste Management of the Desert for solid waste disposal. Nonhazardous, mixed
municipal solid waste is taken to three landfills within the Coachella Valley.
11AEA99-369Avcntine.wpd 28
Local Environmental Setting
The site is adjacent to vacant areas on the north and east. There are existing electrical overhead
lines, along Adams Street.
A. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to
power and gas service?
Less Than Significant Impact. Electricity for the subdivision is provided by Imperial
Irrigation District (ID) (Source: EA 98-110). The system was expanded in the mid- 1980's to
provide adequate service to the existing and anticipated development within La Quinta. There
will be cumulative impacts upon electrical services by the proposed project. The cumulative
impact of projects of this size increase the electrical demand on the IID's existing facilities at
peak loading periods, and result in the need for additional generation, transmission, substation,
and distribution facilities. The applicant will be required to coordinate the electrical engineering
for the project with IID, prior to on -site construction (Source: IID letter, December 8, 1998).
B. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to
communication systems?
Less Than Significant Impact. With development will result in an incremental need for
additional communication systems for telephone and television cable services (Source: Ea 98-
110). The applicant will have to coordinate with the providers of these services, prior to on -
site construction.
C. Would the! project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to
local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed development is anticipated to result in
cumulative impacts upon the water treatment and distribution facilities (Source: EA 98-1 10).
The Coachella Valley Water District submitted a comment letter on the project that indicates
that the district will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to the area in accordance
with the current regulations. The regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and
charges by the developer. The applicant will have to coordinate with CVWD for any additional
facilities needed for continued development as mitigation for this issue pursuant to their letter
of October 1, 1998.
D. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to
sewer services or septic tanks?
Less Than Significant Impact. The CVWD comment letter, dated October 1, 1998,
indicates that they will provide the proposed development with sanitation services. The
applicant will have to coordinate with, and meet any requirements of, CVWD for sewer
facilities (Source: EA 98-110).
E. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to
storm water drainage?
11AEA99-369Aventine.wpd 29
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed multi -family residential development has been
designed to allow storm water drainage to flow into the existing stormwater facilities located
within Lake La Quinta. An update of the hydrology report prepared in 1989 for the Lake La
Quinta development was prepared for the proposed multi -family residential development
(Source: EA 98-110�). The new report states that the preliminary grading plan for the project
is consistent with the original Hydrology Report, however, slight changes to the drainage plan
were made on the south side of the project to accommodate the site plan design changes.
Finished grade elevations along the south side of the development have been lowered by
approximately one foot (Source: Mainiero, Smith and Associates, Inc., August 27, 1998).
The CVWD comment letter, dated October 1, 1998, does not indicate that there are required
alterations, or a need for new systems, to the existing storm water drain system in the vicinity
of the project site.
F. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to
solid waste disposal?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed multi -family residential development will
require incremental increases in solid waste disposal services from Waste Management of the
Desert, the current purveyor of solid waste collection, as new residential units will be added
to the City (Source: EA 98-110; TTM 28982). No comment has been received regarding this
project, as of October 28, 1998, from Waste Management.
G. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to
local or regional water supplies?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed multi -family residential development will be
served by existing domestic water wells and supplies. The project will have a cumulative
impact on the local and regional water supplies, but not a significant effect. CVWD has
submitted a "will -serve" letter for this project, dated October 1, 1998.
3.13 AESTHETICS
Regional Environmental .Vetting
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.
Loeal Environmental .Setting
The project site is located in a residential zoned area in the north -central portion of the City.
Views from the project site consist of the Santa Rosa and Coral Reef Mountains to the south
and southwest, and the open valley floor to the north and east and north. Point Happy, a
prominent geological point, is located approximately one mile to the northeast (Source: Site
11:U:A99-369Avcntinc. v,pd 30
Survey; La Quinta NAEA).
A. Would the project affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the Non -Native Vegetation
Type as indicated on the La Quinta General Plan Master Environmental Assessment/
Environmental Impact Report Visual Assessment. This designation is defined as having a low
sensitivity for visual impacts, having high screening and within urban land. There will be
cumulative impacts as the proposed project will add more structures to the urban environment.
B. Would the project have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
No Impact. The proposed development of the residential buildings, garage, administrative,
and recreation buildings will be required to comply with architectural and landscaping policies
and ordinances of the High Density Residential (RH) Zoning District standards in effect at the
time of development. The maximum structure height allowed in the RH Zoning District is 40-
feet. The proposed residential structures will be 30-feet 10-inches, with 4:12 roof pitches. The
height of the stand-alone garage structures is anticipated to be between 12- and 14-feet. The
height of the proposed administration and recreation building is anticipated to be 22-feet. The
height of all proposed buildings is lower than the 40-foot height maximum allowed by the RH
Zoning District Development Standards.
The proposed multi -family residential buildings are proposed to be one and two story in height,
and the development surrounded by perimeter walls to provide visual distance and screening.
There is an additional requirement for a 150-foot setback for two-story structures along
Adams Street, per the Zoning Code. Development of the proposed project will result in
incremental increases in buildings and landscaping, all subject to review and approval by the
City to ensure a pleasing design and compatibility with the styles of desert architecture and
landscaping found in La Quinta.
A proposed 5-foot masonry block wall to be constructed along the south property lines will
serve to physically and visually separate the proposed multi -family residential units from the
Lake La Quinta development and other adjacent properties. City staff is recommending a
condition of approval that would require the wall to be 6-feet in height, as measured from the
project side of the wall.
There is an existing oleander hedge adjacent to the southern property line on the Lake La
Quinta side of Dulce Del Mar roadway, that will remain. The hedge is approximately 14-feet
tall. The proposed landscaping along the western and southern property line will include 10
types of 24" to 48" box sizes of trees, all of which will be mature upon planting. The trees will
be taller than the proposed 5- or 6-foot wall. The trees will provide an added measure of visual
screening. Trees proposed within the parking lot areas will be 24-inch box size upon planting.
Of the eight multi -family residential units proposed along the west boundary of the project, six
of the units have been designed so as not to have second story windows or balconies facing
west, and will be setback 90 feet from the west property line. This proposed orientation will
assist in preserving; the visual privacy of the single family homes located west of the project.
11:U?A99-369Aventino.wpd 31
The two story multi -family residential units located along the southern project boundary are
designed with a setback of 75-feet from the southern property line. In addition, Dulce del Mar
further separates for a total distance of 150 feet between the multi -family units and the single
family units. In summary, there are no balconies or windows oriented to the west or south that
would invade the privacy of residents in the single family homes.
The setback requirements for the project provide distance from the existing low density
development in Lake La Quinta. The required RH Zoning District setbacks for the project are
20-feet along 47`' Avenue, 20-feet along the southern boundary (Dulce Del Mar), 10-feet
along the west property line, and 15-feet along the east property line. The proposed project
is in compliance with these setback standards.
The proposed multi -family residential project is not anticipated to have a significant adverse
impact to this issue, but rather a cumulative impact as more structures are added to the urban
area as part of the normal, planned development of the community. No significant adverse
visual or aesthetic impacts are anticipated for this issue.
C. Would the project create light or glare?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed multi -family residential
development will potentially create additional light and glare in the community (Source: EA
98-110).Residential and accessory structures will include exterior security and landscaping
lighting which will cumulatively contribute to the existing light and glare in the City. The
applicant is proposing to use 50 watt high pressure sodium lamps in post -mounted fixtures
with reflectors to eliminate spillover light and glare. Elimination of all spill -over light is
required by the City's Lighting Ordinance. In addition, wall -mounted and ground -mounted
fixtures are also proposed. All such lighting fixtures shall be required to comply with the
lighting requirements in Section 9.60.160 and other policies of the City, in order to reduce
anticipated impacts.
3.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Regional Environmental.Setting
A portion of the prehistory of the La Quinta area is known through the archaeological record
gained from various archaeological investigations over the past twenty years and from
extensive ethnographic information. A discussion of the prehistory and history of La Quinta
is provided in the Draft Historic Context Statement of the City of La Quinta. Other discussions
are found in the La Quinta General Plan and the Master Environmental Assessment.
Local Environmental Setting
The project site is located in the north -central portion of the City. There are numerous
recorded archaeological sites within a one -mile radius of the project.
A. Would the project disturb paleontological resources?
11AF A98-369Aventine.wpd 32
No Impact. The project area is not within the Lakebed Paleontological area as indicated by
the Paleontological I.,akebed Determination Map in the Community Development Department.
B. Would the project affect archaeological resources?
Less Than Significant Impact. An archaeological and historical survey of the project site
was completed by Bowles and Salpas, in 1979, for Tentative Tract 24230, and again by
Bowles in 1981. The project parcel was included in these archaeological surveys. During these
surveys, two archaeological sites (RIV-2195 and RIV-2196) were recorded. Subsequently,
these site were reevaluated in 1989 by Daniel McCarthy, of the Archaeological Research Unit,
at the University of California. RIV-2195 was recorded in a location that could be within the
multi -family project boundaries. However, the site could not be relocated during the 1989
reevaluation effort. `,subsequent to 1989, the parcel was graded, removing up to 12-feet of the
natural topography and leaving a relatively flat area. In light of this substantial grading activity,
there is no anticipated impact to any remaining archaeological resources (Source: Grading Plan
for TT 24230).
C. Would the project affect historical resources?
No Impact. There were no historic resources identified during the cultural resources survey
of the project site. No mitigation is required for this issue. Grading activities will be monitored
for archaeological resources, which will provide a mitigation contingency if any historic
resources are exposed at that time.
D. Would the project have the potential to cause a physical change which would
affect unique ethnic values?
No Impact. There is no identifiable unique ethnic value to the proposed project area.
E. Would the project restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential
impact area?
No Impact. There are no known current religious uses or sacred uses within the project
boundaries or adjacent parcels.
3.15 RECREATION
Regional Environ,mental.4etting
The City of La Quinta has an adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan that assesses the
existing resources and facilities and the future needs of the City. The City has approximately
28.7 acres of developed parkland for Quimby Act purposes. The 845 acre regional Lake
Cahuilla Park is not included in this count. There are also unimproved bike and equestrian
corridors within the City and designated pedestrian hiking trails.
11AEA98-369Aventine.wpd 33
Local Environmental.Setting
The project site is a vacant desert parcel, with no designated or existing recreation facilities
or opportunities.
A. Would the project increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. The increase in demand for park and recreation facilities
resulting in the need for dedication of parkland is estimated to be 3 acres per 1,000 in
population. Based upon that State Department of Finance figure of 2.85 persons per
household, the population of the multi -family residential development could be approximately
456 at buildout, warranting the dedication of 1.36 acres of parkland to the City or payment of
in -lieu fees. The design of the development will include a swimming pool, basketball court, a
recreation building, and other recreational amenities. Because no public parks are designated
in the General Plan for this site, this project will be required to submit payment of in -lieu parks
and recreation fees
B. Would the project affect existing recreational opportunities?
Less Than Significant Impact. The development will contribute additional users to existing
recreation facilities located elsewhere within the City, resulting in a cumulative impact.
Payment of the in -lieu fees will off -set these impacts by making funds available for construction
of additional parks and other recreation facilities. Additionally, the project is designed with on -
site recreation amenities, which will lessen the impact on off -site recreation facilities.
SECTION 4: MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The proposed multi -family residential development will not have significant adverse impacts
on the environmental issues addressed in the checklist and addendum, that can not be mitigated
to insignificant levels The following findings can be made regarding the mandatory findings
of significance set forth in Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines and based on the results of
this environmental assessment:
• The proposed Tentative Tract 28982, Tract Map 24230 Amendment #1, and Site
Development Permit 98-631 will not have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, with the implementation of mitigation measures.
• The proposed Tentative Tract 28982, Tract Map 24230 Amendment #1, and Site
Development Permit 98-631 will not have the potential to achieve short term
goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful implementation
of mitigation measures.
• The proposed Tentative Tract 28982, Tract Map 24230 Amendment #1, and Site
Development Permit 98-631 will not have impacts which are individually limited
but cumulatively considerable when considering planned for proposed
11AF.A98-369Ave-ntine.wpd 34
development in the immediate vicinity, and the implementation of mitigation
measures.
The proposed Tentative Tract 28982, Tract Map 24230 Amendment #l, and Site
Development permit 98-631 will not have environmental effects that will
adversely affect human, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of
mitigation measures.
SECTION 5: EARLIER ANALYSES
A. Earlier Analysis Used. Utilized in the current analysis was the La Quinta ';Master
Environmental Assessment (MEA), prepared in 1991, in conjunction with the 1992 General
Plan Update and related EIR.
B. Impacts Adequately Addressed. All potential impact/issue areas are considered to
be adequately addressed with this environmental assessment. Certification of this EA by the
City Council will confirm the adequacy of the environmental assessment.
C. Mitigation Measures. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan is attached to this Environmental
Assessment. The Conditions of Approval also contain many of the required mitigation
measures.
References Cited:
EA 89-110
City of La Quinta General Plan, 1992.
City of La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment, 1992.
City of La Quinta General Plan EIR, 1992.
Tentative Tract Map 28982
U.S. Census, 1990.
La Quinta Economic Overview, 1996.
Geotechnical Report for TTM 28982, Earth Systems Consultants, July, 1998.
Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan.
La Quinta USGS '7.5' Quad Map.
U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Riverside County,
Valley Area.
Hydrology Update for Tentative Tract 28982, La Quinta 160. Mainiero,
Inc., August 27, 1998.
City of La Quinta, Aerial photographs.
Bruce Kassler, Mainiero, Smith & Associates, Personal Communication.
AQMD Draft CEQA Air Quality Handbook, May, 1992.
City of La Quinta, Water Conservation Ordinance.
Coachella Valley Water District letter, October 1, 1998.
City of La Quinta, 101-301 Police Services Supporting Information.
City of La Quinta Building & Safety Department.
Riverside County Sheriffs Department letter, September 8, 1998.
Riverside County Fire Marshal letter, September 22, 1998.
California - Coachella
Smith and Associates,
September 25, 1998.
11:U?A99-369Aventinc. vvpd 35
�A
r,
w
W
F
Q
z
¢Q
a�
U
W
OU
w
F
U
z
r
_z
�o
zz
W�
� O
w
r7
b
w
�
b
z
o
z
m
M
W
ON
Q
Ua
W
E-�
Q
w �..
z
ax
U
W
OU
d
W
H
U
z
z_
�o
zz
0
w�
n" O
w
�
a
wx
z
z
o
4
O
�
U
N
M
O
�
O
w
Q
zm
¢Q
�x
ox
U U
s�
w
a�
a t
a
b
� O
zz
o
o
w�
w
�A
�A
c�UAA
Un
•all
bio
u U
�
'r �
C7
►'�
.� ^� u N
�
� �
GTr
rn
M
00
Q
W
W
H
Q
W }.
z 0°
¢Q
a U
� W
Ov
� o �
� o
o�
C7
z
lV o
o x M
.�
a
En
a A
c�
O
0
:a � ; cl .
c A VAA�
4.
W
Ey
0
rn
M
00
all
N
Q
W }.
z
¢Q
�x
a
�w
ox
U U
v a
Coll
U
a^p
z
� �
oz
�
a
Eo
�
O
E�
c
�n a �
P•,
a�
rn
M
00
Q
W
W
E--
^Q^
z
¢Q
�x
av
w
ox
UU
Q
� �
=p C 4
z
�
�
U
Wz
?o
�
wAVArA
®Q
ed
v�d
�a
W
a�
3 �.
`l
con
�as7
rn
M
00
U
F
A
l
A
Q
J F+y
av
O�
Uv
a�
x
U
�
v
W
u
C
� ao
F
� •�
°
o a
L7
W
a �
b
44s
�0t3t
aG�
UAAcA
W
o
�
u
ti o0
.,
tomcl
Cd
F
CZ
ft
ft
ed
�,
u04
OF ��
�
as 06s
W
A
d A
aWU
Ox
U U
pG
G7
�O
oz
ac
w
�
�
a
G�Q7
O
�
o
M
®
4a
M
00
Q
U-i
F
A
�A
W
U
UV
W�
W
W
W
�O
oz
a�W�
a0
w
�
�
U
Ki
�
O
z a
rn
M
Q
w
W
A
QA
�W
�WVx
OU
Wa
a
a
0
z
u
E�
u
a
c7
�o
UAAW
or
u
c
H
F
A
�A
a�
av
O�
U U
)w
CJ
%
L7
a
4.1
co V
z�
b�
m
eta
O
AAA
u
u
t
rn
M
00
Q
W
F
A
z�
QA
�W
v
O�
U U
WW�
E�
a�
as
�O
zz
0
a�
W�
a0
w
«�
o
?+
'�
U
all
M
00
ON
Q
W
E
A
A
d
a
av
o�
UV
d
o �
a�
d
•o
H
o
C7
W
�
a
w
UAAa1A
� o
M
W
O
E-•�
� a �
rn
M
W
Q
W
F
A
pq
zU
d A
axe
av
O�
U U
H
o4°a
Q OG NCIA
0
a�
�o
w
UAA
ci
z
cl
U
�
C �
�
p
O
7 'O "C3
•��
v°i
�
rn
M
00
Q
W
F
A
�A
a�
OaW�
x
U U
U
5�
F
C7
� a
�O
zz
0
a�
a0
w
o
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 28982 TO ALLOW A ONE CONDOMINIUM LOT FOR
160-UNITS ON 10.17 ACRES, LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 47T" AVENUE AND ADAMS
STREET
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28982
APPLICANT: MAINIERO, SMITH AND ASSOC., INC. FOR A. G. SPANOS CORP.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission for the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 241h day of November, 1998, and 261h day of January, 1999, hold duly
noticed Public Hearings to review the request for a one lot (airspace) condominium
subdivision for 160 units on 10.17 acres located at the southwest corner of 47`h
Avenue and Adams Street, more particularly described as:
Assessor's Parcel Number 643-090-014; Portion of SE 1 /4 of Section
30, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian,
County of Riverside, California
WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970", as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development Director
has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 98-369) and has
determined that although the proposed project could have an adverse impact on the
environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case because appropriate
mitigation measures are made a part of the Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract
Map 28982, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be
filed.
WHEREAS at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify
a recommendation for approval of said Tentative Tract Map 28982:
A. The proposed) map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan, Zoning
Code, and Subdivision Ordinance.
The property is designated High Density Residential (HDR) by the General Plan
Land Use Element (Chapter 2.0) permitting attached single family projects of 12
to 16 units per acre pursuant to Policy 2-1.1.8. The proposed 160 unit
development is consistent with the HDR requirements.
Airspace condominium developments are allowed pursuant to Table 401 of the
Zoning Ordinance. The RH District (High Density Residential) permits attached
A:\RcsopcTTMSpanos.wpd (28)
single family housing not exceeding three stories in height. Maximum two story
buildings are proposed in compliance with City standards.
B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan.
New on -site streets and development improvements for the project conform to
City standards as outlined in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance. All
on -site streets are private and designed in accordance with Chapter 3.0 of the
General Plan Circulation Element.
C. The design of the subdivision, or the proposed improvements, are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure
fish or wildlife or their habitat.
The vacant, previously disturbed site is suitable for high density residential
development based on the recommendations of Environmental Assessment 98-
369. Development will not cause substantial environmental damage, or injury
to fish or wildlife, or their habitat provided mitigation measures are met. Urban
improvements are adjoining the property making it conducive for residential
development.
D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious
public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on
City, State, and Federal requirements.
Infrastructure improvements are readily available adjacent to the site. New
improvements required for this project will be compatible with the development
improvements to the south and west (i.e., Lake La Quinta development). To
ensure debris or pollutants do not drain into the existing Lake La Quinta
development, oil/water separators shall be installed in the subsurface drainage
system.
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.
A new median is required on Adams Street for this project. The proposed on -
site streets are planned to provide direct access to each residential unit and the
accessory parking areas. The project improvements will benefit surrounding
properties.
The design of Tentative Tract Map 28982 will not conflict with existing public
easements, as the project has been designed around, and with consideration for,
these easements.
A:\RcsopcTTMSpanos.wpd (:28)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Planning Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract
Map 28982 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the
attached conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission, held on the 26' 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
AAResopcTI'MSpanos.wpd (28)
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28982
JANUARY 26, 1999
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL
1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these
Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the
properties to which they apply.
2. The subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta
(the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding
to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this tentative map or any final map
thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
3. Tentative Tract Map No. 28982 shall comply with the requirements and standards of
§ §66410 through 66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map
Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC).
4. The tentative map shall expire within two years unless an extension of time is applied
for and granted by the City Council pursuant to Subdivision Code requirements.
5. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall
obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
The applicant (subdivider and subdivider's successors in interest in the property) is
responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions.
If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof
of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans.
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater
discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits,
the applicant shall submit a copy of the Notice of Intent received from the CWQCB
prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure
A:\CondTT28982Spanos.wpd Page 1 of 8
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28982
January 26, 1999
that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at
the project site.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
6. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall acquire or confer all easements and
other property rights required of the tentative map or otherwise necessary for
construction and use of the proposed development.
7. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to
utility lines and structures and common areas.
8. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets and properties
from all frontage along the streets and properties except access points shown on the
approved tentative map.
9. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as appropriate,
from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction,
permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur.
10. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of
this property between the date of approval by the City Council and the date of
recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the property unless such
easements are approved by the City Engineer.
FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAP(S)
11. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of
the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, on storage media and in
a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard
AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program.
If the map was not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to
AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the map.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer,"
"surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their
respective professions in the State of California.
A:\CondTT28982Spanos.wpd Page 2 of 8
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28982
January 26, 1999
12. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified
engineers, surveyors and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be
submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise
Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." 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.
13. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements
of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant may acquire the
standard materials.
14. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City
Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully
retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior
to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -
constructed conditions.
If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to
AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
15. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an
executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations
required by the City prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a
certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security
provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC.
Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures
or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements.
16. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of improvement
costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates shall comply with the
0('ondTT28982Spanos.wpd Page 3 of 8
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28982
January 26, 1999
schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in
the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies
shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or
T.V. cable improvements. However, tract improvements shall not be agendized for
final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority that
the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service to lots within the
development.
17. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals
(site development permits, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site and perimeter
improvements shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first phase
unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations
required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to occupancy of
permanent buildings within the phase and subsequent phases unless a construction
phasing plan is approved by the City Engineer.
18. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely
manner or as specified in an approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right to halt
issuance of building permits or final building inspections or otherwise withhold
approvals related to the development of the project until the applicant makes
satisfactory progress on the improvements or obligations or has made other
arrangements satisfactory to the City.
19. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security for applicant's required share of
improvements which have been or may be constructed by others (participatory
improvements).
Participatory improvements for this development include:
A. Adams Street landscape median - 50% of total cost for the length of the
applicant's frontage.
The applicant's obligations for all or a portion of the participatory improvements may,
at the City's option, be satisfied by participation in a major thoroughfare improvement
program if this development becomes subject to such a program.
GRADING
20. The applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and a grading plan
prepared by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the
AACondTT28982Spanos.wpd Page 4 of 8
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28982
January 26, 1999
recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer
or engineering geologist. The plan must be approved by the City Engineer prior to
issuance of a grading permit. A statement shall appear on final maps (if any are
required of this development) that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section
17953 of the Health and Safety Code.
21. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting properties
and between separate tracts and lots within this development. Building pad elevations
on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within a
tract, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed
five feet. If compliance with this requirement is impractical, the City will consider and
may approve alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and
neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential.
22. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall
submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with
Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the
city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit.
23. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water
erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with
other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public
Works Departments.
24. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad
certifications stamped and signed by a civil engineer or surveyor. The certifications
shall list approved pad elevations, actual elevations, and the difference between the
two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed cumulatively
if submitted at different times.
DRAINAGE
25. Stormwater and nuisance water handling shall conform with the approved hydrology
and drainage plan for the Lake La Quinta development and as follows:
A. The applicant shall install oil/water separators on subsurface storm drain lines
exiting the south end of the property.
B. The applicant shall make provisions for perpetual maintenance of the oil/water
separators and of the drainage swale along the west property boundary to ensure
free flow of storm runoff and prevent migration of debris and pollutants to the
Lake La Quinta development.
kACondTT28982Spanos.wpd Page 5 of 8
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Tentative Tract Map 28982
January 26, 1999
C. The applicant shall deed or dedicate to the City drainage easements over the
drainage swale along the west property boundary and the drainage line from
Adams Street to Dulce Del Mar. The easements shall include the right of access
through the tentative tract area for maintenance, construction and reconstruction
of these facilities.
UTILITIES
26. Existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall
be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv are exempt from this
requirement.
27. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. The applicant shall
provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
28. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program.
Any property within this development which has not been subdivided in accordance
with this tentative map 60 days after the program is in effect shall, at the City's
option, be subject to the program.
29. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following:
A. Avenue 47 - Sixty -foot -wide primary access centered approximately 335 feet
west of the centerline of Adams Street.
B. Avenue 47 - Alternate access for emergency vehicles only near the west end of
this development.
30. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LOMC,
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved by the
City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be
stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
31. The applicant shall design pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20-
year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading
(including construction traffic). The minimum structural section for streets and parking
areas is 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. or equivalent.
A:\CondTT28982Spanos.wpd Page 6 of 8
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Tentative Tract Map 28982
January 26, 1999
40. Prior to final map approval by the City Council, the property owner/developer shall
meet the Parkland Dedication requirements by payment of in -lieu fees as set forth in
Section 13.48 of the Subdivision Ordinance.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
41. Prior to recordation of the final map, applicant/developer will furnish one blueline copy
of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review/approval. Plans will
conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system will meet the
fire flow requirements. Plans will be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and
the local water company with the following certification: "Icertify that the design of
the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside
County Fire Department."
42. Phased improvernents shall be approved by the Fire Department.
ENVIRONMENTAL
43. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the property
owner/developer shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community
Development Department demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval
and mitigation measures of TTM 28982 and EA 98-369. Mitigation monitoring of the
project site during grading is required.
MISCELLANEOUS
44. All agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for
plan checking purposes.
45. Prior to final map approval by the City Council, proposed street names shall be
submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. Three
names shall be submitted for each proposed private street. Street signs shall be
installed by the developer.
46. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development
Department for review a copy of the proposed Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions
(C. C. and R's) for the project. Approval of the C. C. and R's by the City Attorney is
required.
ACondTT28982Spanos.wpd Page 8 of 8
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, CITY
OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-631 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
PLANS FOR A 160 MULTI -FAMILY UNITS IN A HIGH
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICT
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-631
APPLICANT: MAINIERO, SMITH AND ASSOC., INC. FOR A. G. SPANOS CORP.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did
on the 241h day of November, 1998, and 26" day of January, 1999, hold a duly noticed
Public Hearings to review the building elevation and development plans for a 160-unit
project on 10.17 acres located at the southwest corner of Adams Street and 47th Avenue,
more particularly described as:
A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE QUARTER OF
SECTION 30, TSS, R7E SBBM
WHEREAS, the City's Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee, did
on the 20th day of November, 1998, hold a public meeting and recommended to the
Planning Commission approval of the 160-unit project subject to minor plan changes being
made prior to building permit issuance; and
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970"
as amended (Resolution 83-63). The Community Development Department has prepared
a Mitigated Negative Declaration under Environmental Assessment 98-369 for this project
which states the project will not have a significant impact on the environment based on
mitigation measures; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify a
recommendation for approval to the City Council of said Site Development Permit 98-631:
The proposed multi -family development is consistent with the City's General Plan
in that the property is designated High Density Residential. The Land Use Element
of the General Plan (Policy 2-1.1.8) allows attached residential houses up to 16
units per acre as a permitted use. A density of 15.7 is requested. Therefore, the
project is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General
Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2) provided conditions are met.
ResopcSDPSpanos- 28
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Site Development Permit 98-631
January 26, 1999
2. The units are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance (RH
Zoning District) in that the project is a permitted use and will comply with the
development standards and design guidelines provided conditions are met.
3. One- and two -bedroom units are proposed with ancillary parking and open space.
The site design of the proposed project is compatible with the high quality of
residential development in the immediate area.
4. The existing Oleander hedge on Dulce Del Mar will be retained to screen the two
story project from surrounding single story buildings. Common open space has
been provided throughout the site, creating internal and external areas for active
and passive recreation. Active recreation areas are located at the northeast corner
of the project away from existing Lake La Quinta houses to reduce noise impacts.
The perimeter landscape design is in conformance with existing Lake La Quinta
landscaping.
5. The building materials will be aesthetically pleasing, and provide a blend of varied
surfaces and variety of textures, provided conditions are met as recommended by
the City's Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee. The proposed
landscape screening, setbacks and building orientations lessen the visual impact
of the two story structures, provided conditions are met.
6. Parking for the project will consist of garages, carports and open parking stalls as
required by the Chapter 9.150 of the Zoning Ordinance. Enclosed parking is
recommended along the south property boundary to be architecturally compatible
with the Lake La Quinta development. Shared parking is proposed and consists of
two parking spaces per unit, exceeding a general parking standard of 1.6 spaces
per unit pursuant to Urban Land Institute (ULI) research studies.
7. Exterior project lighting is proposed for common areas and parking as required by
Chapter 9.150 (Parking) of the Zoning Ordinance. Light fixtures shall be hooded to
eliminate glare. Lighting adjacent to existing residential houses shall be low level
not exceed eight feet in height to be consistent with Section 9.60.160 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
8. The sign design of the project will provide project identity using common elements
of size, color, and materials.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
ResopcSDPSpanos- 28
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Site Development Permit 98-631
January 26, 1999
That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case; and
2. That it does recommend to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit
98-631 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached
conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission, held on the 261h 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
ResopcSDPSpanos- 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-631
JANUARY 26, 1999
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL
1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these
Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation
against the properties to which they apply (Assessor's Parcel Number: 643-090-
014).
2. The Site Development Permit shall expire within one year from approval, unless
building permits are issued pursuant to Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning
Ordinance. Time extensions may be granted pursuant Section 9.200.080.
3. The applicant shall comply with all applicable Conditions of Approval of the
underlying tract map (Tract Map 24230).
4. The property owner 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.
5. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction or building permit, the
applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public
agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
The applicant/developer is responsible for any requirements of the permits or
clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of
improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to
obtaining City approval of the plans.
CondSDP Spanos -29
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Site Development Permit 98-631
January 26, 1999
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES
construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the Notice of Intent
received from the CWQCB prior to issuance of a grading or site construction
permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution
Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
6. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access
to utility lines and structures and common areas.
7. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets and
properties from all frontage along the streets and properties except access
points shown on the approved site plan.
8. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as
appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining
wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as
"engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed
to practice their respective professions in the State of California.
9. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of
qualified engineers, surveyors and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans
shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading,"
"Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." 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.
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Site Development Permit 98-631
January 26, 1999
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the
City Engineer.
10. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for
elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant
may acquire the standard materials.
1 1. 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 fides to reflect as -constructed conditions.
If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be
converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the
plans.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
12. 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 issuance of a building permit.
Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing
structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements.
13. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of
improvement costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates
shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or
ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of other
agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for
telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements.
14. If improvements are phased, off -site and perimeter improvements shall be
constructed or secured prior to approval of the first phase unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations required of each
phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to occupancy of permanent
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Site Development Permit 98-531
January 26, 1999
buildings within the phase and subsequent phases unless a construction phasing
plan is approved by the City Engineer.
15. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely
manner or as specified in an approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right
to halt issuance of building permits or final building inspections or otherwise
withhold approvals related to the development of the project until the applicant
makes satisfactory progress on the improvements or obligations or has made
other arrangements satisfactory to the City.
16. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security for applicant's required share
of improvements which have been or may be constructed by others
(participatory improvements).
Participatory improvements for this development include:
A. Adams Street landscape median - 50% of total cost for the length of the
applicant's frontage.
The applicant's obligations for all or a portion of the participatory improvements
may, at the City's option, be satisfied by participation in a major thoroughfare
improvement program if this development becomes subject to such a program.
GRADING
17. The applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and a
grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform
with the recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by
a soils engineer or engineering geologist. The plan must be approved by the
City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit.
18. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting
properties and within this development. Building pad elevations on contiguous
lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within a project, 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.
19. 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
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Site Development Permit 98-631
January 26, 1999
a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance
with the provisions of the permit.
20. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and
water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or
provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community
Development; and Public Works Departments.
21. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad
certifications stamped and signed by a civil engineer or surveyor. The
certifications shall list approved pad elevations, actual elevations, and the
difference between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by building
number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times.
DRAINAGE
22. Stormwater and nuisance water handling shall conform with the approved
hydrology and drainage plan for the Lake La Quinta development and as follows:
A. The applicant shall install oil/water separators on subsurface storm drain
lines exiting the south end of the property.
B. The applicant shall make provisions for perpetual maintenance of the
oil/water separators and of the drainage swale along the west property
boundary to ensure free flow of storm runoff and prevent migration of
debris and pollutants to the Lake La Quinta development.
C. The applicant shall deed or dedicate to the City drainage easements over
the drainage swale along the west property boundary and the drainage
line from Adams Street to Dulce Del Mar. The easements shall include
the right of access through the site for maintenance, construction and
reconstruction of these facilities.
UTILITIES
23. 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.
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Site Development Permit 98-631
January 26, 1999
24. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. The
applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the
City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
25. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement
program. Any property within this development which has not been subdivided
in accordance with this tentative map 60 days after the program is in effect
shall, at the City's option, be subject to the program.
26. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
following:
A. Avenue 47 - Sixty -foot -wide primary access centered approximately 335
feet west of the centerline of Adams Street.
B. Avenue 47 - Alternate access for emergency vehicles only near the west
end of this development.
27. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC,
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved
by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking
areas shall be; stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
28. The applicant shall design pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure
(20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic
loading (including construction traffic). The minimum structural section for
streets and parking areas is 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. or equivalent.
29. The applicant: shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the
time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete.
The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design
procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include
recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation
test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current
production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix
designs are approved.
30. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings
only when the buildings have improved street access to publicly -maintained
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Site Development Permit 98-631
January 26, 1999
streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices,
pavement markings and street name signs.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
31. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
32. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and
testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program but required by
the City as evidence that construction materials and comply with plans and
specifications.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
33. 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.
34. The applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the Infrastructure
Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits.
35. Within 24 hours after review by the City Council, the property owner/developer
shall submit to the Community Development Department two checks made out
to the County of Riverside in the amount of $78.00 and $1,250.00 to permit
the filing and posting of the Notice of Determination for EA 98-369.
36. 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).
ENVIRONMENTAL
37. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the
applicant/developer shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community
Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of
Approval and mitigation measures of SDP 98-631 and EA 98-369. The
Community Development Director may require inspection or other mitigation
monitoring measures to assure such compliance.
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Site Development Permit 98-631
January 26, 1999
LANDSCAPING AND PERIMETER FENCING
38. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
architect, and approved by the Community Development Department pursuant
to Chapter 8.13 of the Municipal Code. Prior to submission of the plans to the
City, the developer shall obtain approval by the Coachella Valley Water District
and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. The plans are not
approved for construction until they have been approved and signed by each
approval agency.
39. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are
coordinated to provide visual screening of aboveground utility structures.
40. Date palm trees shall not be installed in close proximity to the common area
pool.
41. Mature evergreen trees, measuring 10-feet high, shall be installed along the
west and south property lines to provide privacy screening (i.e., 40' wide
spacing). Once the trees have been delivered to the site for installation, a field
inspection by the Community Development Department is required before
planting.
42. A six-foot high wall shall be constructed along Dulce Del Mar to the north of the
existing Oleander hedge. The height of the wall is to be measured from the top
of curb height on the street. The wall shall be constructed to match the
existing Lake La Quinta perimeter wall.
43. Landscaping shall be added within the terraced planter areas adjacent to the
project entry signs.
FIRE MARSHAL
44. Fire hydrants in accordance with CVWD Standard W-33 shall be located at each
street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no
portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum
fire flow shall be 1500 g.p.m. for a 2-hour duration at 20 p.s.i. Blue dot
reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of the streets directly in line with fire
hydrants.
45. Applicant/developer will provide written certification from the appropriate water
company that the required fire hydrants(s) are either existing or that financial
arrangements have been made to provide them.
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Site Development Permit 98-631
January 26, 1999
46. Note on plans: "All buildings, other than Group R, Division 3 occupancies, will
be equipped with an automatic fire sprinkler system approved by the Fire
Department." Prior to the issuance of building permits, system plans will be
submitted for approval.
47. Prior to building permit issuance, applicant/developer will furnish one blueline
copy of the water system plans to Fire Department for review/approval. Plans
will conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system will
meet the fire flow requirements. Plans will be signed/approved by a registered
civil engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "/
certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the
requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department. "
48. The required water system including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted
by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being
placed on the site.
49. 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.
50. 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 streets and gates shall be submitted
to the Fire Department for review/approval prior to installation.
51. If public use type buildings are to be constructed, additional fire protection may
be required. Fire flows and hydrant locations will be stipulated when building
plans are reviewed by the Fire Department.
52. Gate entrances shall be at least two feet wider than the width of the traffic
lane(s) serving that gate. All gates providing access from a road to the
driveway shall be located at least 30' from the roadway and shall open to allow
a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the public road. Where a one-
way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 40'
turning radius shall be used.
MAINTENANCE
53. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of drainage,
landscaping and on -site improvements.
LIGHTING
54. Lighting plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department
Director prior to issuance of building permits. Freestanding pole mounted
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Site Development Permit 98-631
January 26, 1999
lighting for parking and common areas shall not exceed eight feet in height
above finished grade pursuant to Section 9.60.170 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Exterior lighting for the project shall comply with Sections 9.60.160 and
9.100.150 of the Zoning Ordinance.
55. Interior security lighting for carport structures (i.e., recessed flourescent tubes)
shall be mounted to the underside of the roof.
ARCHITECTURAL/SITE DESIGN
56. Prior to issuance of building permits, subject to the Community Development
Department approval, the building elevations shall be modified as follows:
A. Remove the middle gable eave-end from the garage elevations;
B. Modify eave mounted architectural popouts on side building elevations of
Buildings 6, 7, 9 and 10 so as to appear functional;
C. Install decorative colored concrete (or pavers) for the main entrance
(circular turnaround area) and 20-foot wide entrance lanes;
D. Submit construction plans for detached garage structures ensuring tile,
hip roofs will be used;
E. Carport structures located adjacent to Dulce Del Mar shall be enclosed on
three sides with parapet walls clad in stucco to match other on -site
buildings; and
F. The overall height of the recreation building will be reduced to 22-feet to
comply with Section 9.50.020 of the Zoning Ordinance.
57. A minimum of one disabled parking space shall be located at the southeast
corner of the project to insure proper parking coverage is achieved.
58. Trash enclosures shall be located a minimum distance of 80-feet from west and
south property boundaries.
MISCELLANEOUS
59. All agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file
documents for plan checking purposes.
60. A centralized or gang -box mailbox delivery system shall be used for the project
pursuant to any requirements of the U.S. Postal Service.
61. Prior to building permit issuance, trash and recycling areas for the project shall
be approved by the Community Development Department pursuant to Section
9.60.220 of the Zoning Ordinance. The plan will be reviewed for acceptability
by applicable trash company prior to review by the Community Development
Department.
Planning Commission Resolution 99-.
Site Development Permit 98-631
January 26, 1999
62. Permanent identification signs for the development shall be lit by an indirect
source as required by Chapter 9.160 (Signs) of the Zoning Ordinance.
Temporary and permanent signs for the development shall be approved by the
City prior to installation.
63. A Minor Use Permit is required to establish temporary sales facilities and/or
construction trailers for the project (i.e., Section 9.60.250 of the Zoning
Ordinance).
64. Each housing unit shall be allocated one garage parking space for vehicle
storage measuring 10-feet wide by 20-feet deep inside clear dimension. All
carport and open parking spaces shall be unassigned and open for use by
residents and guests of the development. Oversized vehicles, recreational
vehicles and trailers shall be prohibited. Parking restrictions shall be enforced
by the property owner and/or manager.
65. Vertical support poles for carport structures shall be mounted within the first 6'
of the front of the stall (including overhang) pursuant to Section 9.150.080 (B5)
of the Zoning Code.
66. Prior to building permit issuance, proposed street names shall be submitted to
the Community Development Department for review and approval unless a
building numbering plan with common address is utilized (e.g., 78-705 47th
Avenue, Building #1 (Units 1-8), etc.). Three names shall be submitted for each
proposed private street. Street signs shall be installed by the developer.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TRACT MAP 24230
(AMENDMENT #1) TO ELIMINATE CONDITION #41 OF
RESOLUTION 89-85 REQUIRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING
ON 10.17 ACRES, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF 47T" AVENUE AND ADAMS STREET
CASE NO.: TRACT MAP 24230, AMENDMENT #1
APPLICANT: MAINIERO, SMITH AND ASSOC., INC. FOR A. G. SPANOS CORP.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission for the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 241h day of November, 1998, and 261h day of January, 1999, hold duly
noticed Public Hearings to review the request to eliminate Condition #41 of Tract Map
24230 requiring affordable housing units to be built on 10.17 acres located at the
southwest corner of 47th Avenue and Adams Street, more particularly described as:
Assessor's Parcel Number 643-090-014; Portion of SE 1 /4 of Section
30, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Base and Meridian,
County of Riverside, California
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 5" day of July, 1989, under Tract Map 24230 require a certain percentage of
future houses (5%) to be for low and moderate income families pursuant to draft
General Plan Policies; and
WHEREAS, the Tract Map 24230 was recorded with the County of
Riverside on February 28, 1990; and
WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970", as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development Director
has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 98-369) and has
determined that the proposed 160 unit residential project associated with the Tract
could have an adverse impact on the environment; a Mitigated Negative Declaration
of Environmental Impact will be filed.
WHEREAS at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and argurnents, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify
a recommendation for approval of said Tract Map 24230 (Amendment #1):
A. The proposed map amendment is consistent with the City of La Quinta General
Plan, Zoning Code, and Subdivision Ordinance.
AAResopcTTM24230Spanos.wpd (28)
The property is designated High Density Residential (HDR) by the General Plan
Land Use Element (Chapter 2.0) permitting attached single family projects of 12
to 16 units per acre pursuant to Policy 2-1.1.8. The proposed development of
160 multi -family units under Tentative Tract Map 28982 is consistent with the
HDR requirements.
The Housing Element of the General Plan lists programs available to provide
affordable housing. The amendment of Tract 24230 to eliminate Condition #41
should resuit in no impacts regarding affordable housing in the City as stated in
EA 98-369.
The RH District (High Density Residential) permits attached single family housing
not exceeding three stories in height. Conditions are recommended to insure
compliance with City Code requirements.
B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan.
Existing off -site improvements were constructed during construction of the Lake
La Quinta development. New on -site streets and development improvements
for the project will be completed by Tentative Tract Map 28982, the companion
development application.
C. The design of the subdivision, or the proposed improvements, are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure
fish or wildlife or their habitat.
The vacant, previously disturbed site is suitable for high density residential
development based on the recommendations of Environmental Assessment 98-
369.
D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause
serious public; health problems.
Infrastructure improvements are readily available adjacent to the site and were
constructed in the early 1990's.
E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of
property within the proposed subdivision.
Off -site infrastructure improvements have been constructed as required by
Tentative Tract Map 24230.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Planning Commission in this case; and
A:\ResopcTTM24230Spanos.wpd (28)
2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract
Map 24230 (Amendment #1) for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and
subject to the attached conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission, held on the 26' 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
AAResopcTTM24230Spanos.wpd (28)
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TRACT MAP 24230, AMENDMENT #1
JANUARY 26, 1999
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL,
Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these
Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against
the properties to which they apply (APN: 643-090-014).
2. Condition #4'1, requiring affordable housing units, shall be deleted. All other
Conditions of Resolution 89-85 are still valid and remain enforceable for Tract
24230.
CondTTM24230 Spanos -28
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1
Planning Commission Meeting
November 24, 1998
1 l.b., correct the spelling of the word "objection" to "objective"; Page 8, Item 12.c.
correct the spelling of the word "wall" to "walk". There being no other correction,
it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Robbins to approve the
minutes as corrected.
B. Department Report: None.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Environmental Assessment 98-369, Tentative Tract Map 28982, Site Development
Permit 98-631 and Tract 24230-Amendment #1; a request of Mainiero Smith and
Associates, Inc. for A. G. Spanos for approval and recommendation to the City
Council for Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact: for Environmental Assessment 98-369 and approval of a 160 unit airspace
condominium subdivision project on 10.17 acres; review of the building elevations
and development plans; and the elimination of Condition #41 of Tract 24230
requiring affordable housing units within the project.
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.
2. Commissioner Kirk asked why the applicant was being required to install
median improvements. Associate Engineer Fred Bouma stated the Updated
General Plan changed the designation of this street to a higher level which
required the median improvements. This project is subject to the conditions
at the time of approval, therefore, to bring the project into conformance with
the General Plan, it is being required to have the median improvements for
a Primary Arterial.
3. Chairman Tyler asked staff to indicate where the single car garages and
carports would be located on the project. Staff indicated the location on the
site plan.
4. Commissioner Robbins asked if the carports were assigned to a unit or are
they open parking. Staff stated it was a requirement that a covered parking
space be provided for each unit and the remainder will be unassigned
parking. Commissioner Robbins asked if every unit would have a garage.
Staff stated there is a garage for each space.
5. Chairman Tyler questioned the height of the wall along Dulce Del Mar. Staff
stated they were recommending a six foot wall as measured from the project
grade elevation.
C:Wy Documents\WPDOCS\pc11-24-98.wpd 2
Planning Commission Meeting
November 24, 1998
6. Commissioner Kirk stated that most of the letters received in objection to the
project expressed concern about the apartments; are these apartments or
condominiums? Staff stated the applicant would address this.
7. Commissioner Robbins asked if the original plans for the Lake La Quinta
project showed the approved drainage plan. Staff stated the drainage plan
was approved under the original tract approval for Lake La Quinta and went
on to explain the line of drainage.
8. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Tyler asked if the
applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Marvin Roos, Mainiero
Smith and Associates, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the
project from its inception. He further clarified the units were to be rental
apartments, but they are requesting the condominium map be approved at this
time. The rent structure is proposed to range from $80041,000 a month.
There will be no access to the single family areas. All access will enter off
47`' Avenue. The signal will be shared jointly with the proposed Auto Mall.
The recreation area is located furthest from the Lake La Quinta residential
units. It was their intention to minimize view obstructions by use of
landscaping. This project was disclosed at the time of purchase to each of the
residents. Roof pitches were dropped to reduce the appearance of mass, a
garage will be provided for each unit and most parking spaces are covered.
All units have laundry and dryers built in. They will install larger plant
materials upon onset to mitigate some concerns raised by the Architectural
and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC). The buildings are well
articulated so no one mass is seen at any one location.
9. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to read the disclosure regarding the high
density designation for the subject property, that was given to each of the
property owners within Lake La Quinta when they purchased their property.
Planning Manager Christine di Iorio read Item #3 on the Disclosure
Statement (a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department).
10. Chairman Tyler asked if this was a recorded document. City Attorney Dawn
Honeywell stated it is unknown how the seller handled this document.
11. Commissioner Kirk asked how the parking was to be handled. Mr. Roos
stated staff had requested them to provide background information on multi-
family parking. The City's ordinance sets forth a basic standard, however,
based on ULI studies, the applicant can propose parking space requirements
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc11-24-98.wpd
Planning Commission Meeting
November 24, 1998
different than the Code. The normal standard for most Spanos projects is 1.9
spaces per unit. They have provided staff with a number of standards from
other jurisdictions in the area which averaged 2.0 spaces per unit. This is
their basis for what they are requesting.
12. Commissioner Butler stated his understanding was this was to be a
condominium project and he is inclined to change his focus on how this will
be handled based on the information being provided.
13. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell clarified that the standards for apartments
and condominiums are the same. The tract map before the Commission is for
a condominium development. It is up to the developer as to whether or not
to record the map. If they were not proposing a condominium development,
they would not have had to bring the tract map to the Commission for an
apartment use. They would have only brought a Site Development Permit.,
This is an extra step they are doing for potential use as a condominium.
14. Commissioner Butler asked if the Commission had any latitude in regard to
the use of the land. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated it is zoned for
either use.
15. Commissioner Robbins stated a letter was sent to the Coachella Valley Water
District protesting some of their fees on the basis this was a condominium
project. He too is concerned over a high density project this close to
relatively low density residential uses.
16. Chairman Tyler stated he was not satisfied as to why they were not meeting
the City's requirement for 365 parking spaces. Mr. Roos stated they could
meet the requirement, but it would require them to delete some of the planters
distributed throughout the project. Long term statistics do not justify the
need for 365 spaces. They chose the additional landscaping instead of the
asphalt.
17. Commissioner Kirk stated he did read the information provided by the
applicant on parking and it did present a compelling story. Of 60 studies the
highest parking rate was 1.9 and the average was one car per apartment.
What the applicant is proposing is higher than the highest of 60 studies. He
would rather have open space and greenery rather than more carports. Maybe
they should look at the Zoning Code to possibly reduce the parking standards.
18. Chairman Tyler stated the Spanos organization has a number of projects,
where is the closest? Mr. Roos stated San Diego would be the best. They
could provide a map if the Commission would like one.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-24-98.wpd 4
Planning Commission Meeting
November 24, 1998
19. Chairman Tyler stated this development is of great concern to the residents
of Lake La Quinta. The City has received numerous letters and petitions and
all have been carefully reviewed. The Commission appreciates the time and
effort that has been expressed. In regard to some of the concerns, he would
like to state the following:
a. The original ten acre parcel is designated as multi -family.
b. Lake La Quinta's CC&R's constitute a legal agreement between the
HOA and developer and not the City.
C. Pedestrian and vehicle access to the single family residences is now
going to have a six foot wall separating the two uses.
d. In regard to the potential use of the name Lake La Quinta, the City
has no jurisdiction over the use of names.
The purpose of the Commission is to see that the project meets all
requirements and codes of the City. If it meets all those criteria, then the
Commission must make a favorable decision to the City Council. Since a
large number of people have expressed a desire to speak, please limit your
remarks to something new and not contained in the letters that have been
received.
20. Mr. Jay Roberts, 47-790 Via Jarden, representing the Lake La Quinta
Homeowners' Association (HOA), stated these homeowners are permanent
homeowners in the community and have invested in the community. They
are proud of their neighborhood and community. The Board of Directors for
the HOA is not opposed to development, but welcome developers who will
add to the community. They have met three times with Mr. Jack Lucas,
Manager of The Spanos Company, and have repeatedly stated they would
like to work with them to resolve their concerns. The Spanos Company has
indicated they will not make any changes to alleviate any of their concerns.
They do not oppose the development of the site, but vehemently oppose this
proposed use. First, the unit density is at the maximum permitted by zoning
regulations; all the residential buildings are to be two story and this is not in
character with the adjoining residential units. Second, it is their believe that
Spanos is not entitled to cross private property to utilize Lake La Quinta as
a retention basin for surface water run off. Provisions should be made to
handle the surface water run off within the proposed project site. Third, the
open carports should be replaced with closed carports to be compatible with
the entire community. Fourth, a five foot wall is proposed to be constructed
around the project, and has now been changed to six feet. A taller wall on
a raised berm would be more appropriate. Fifth, the Environmental Impact
Report for this project was performed nine years ago and even though a
Supplemental EIR has been prepared, they suggest this project will have an
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc11-24-98.wpd 5
Planning Commission Meeting
November 24, 1998
adverse affect on the site, specifically with regard to traffic on 47`h Avenue
as well as Washington Street and Adams Street. This project with the
planned density will exacerbate any traffic problems created by the
previously approved Auto Mall at the intersection of Adams Street and 47`h
Avenue. Desert Sands Unified School District has indicated this project and
any other residential project will potentially result in an impact on their
school system. They urge the Commission to withhold approval of this
project as presented, to carefully review their comments and suggestions to
evaluate their merit, and advise the Spanos Company of the changes that
must be made to satisfy the serious concerns of the HOA. With appropriate
modifications they will wholeheartedly support the project.
21. Mr. Jay Baden, 47-415 Via Cordova, distributed pictures he had taken of the
Lake La Quinta development. He stated the first pictures showed a balloon
flying on a 30-foot tether and the balloon is two feet in height which makes
it 32 feet above the existing grade. It was his impression that this showed the
impact on the community the proposed buildings would have as you enter the
Adams Street gate. Picture #2: the Oleander hedge is 14-16 feet high, but as
the Oleanders are currently being exposed to a disease, they could be lost.
Due to the grade the six foot wall would not be six feet on the other side as
the pads are to be raised four feet higher. Picture #3 is a typical residence in
Lake La Quinta and you can see the balloon above the home. The balloon is
twice as high asthe house. The setback is the beginning of the ridge in the
buildings. Picture #4 is similar to #3. Picture #5 is the backyard of a
residential house facing the Spanos project to the east. The balloon is placed
back at the first ridge or about 100 feet. This gives the Commission a visual
impact of how the project will impact them.
22. Commissioner Kirk asked if the balloons were placed at the beginning of the
roof line. Mr. Baden stated they were placed at the top of the ridge of the
gable ends. It is not the true height because this is 32 feet maximum above
existing grade and the grade is to be raised 2-4 feet higher.
23. Mr. Benjamin Rosker, 47-675 Via Montessa, stated his issue was whether
they were apartments or condominiums. He asks that the Commission
consider 1) everyone recognizes Mr. Spanos originally owned all the land.
When he sold this parcel to Wilma, it became an item in their CC&R's. In
the CC&R's the prospective homeowners were told 39 times that
condominiums were to be built on that tract. The disclosure statement
presented by Mr. Roos stated they are for sale or for rent units it does not
mean they are to be apartments automatically. The CC&R's state specifically
they will be condominiums. The State Statue that is quoted in the CC&R's
governs the development of condominiums. There is a great deal of
difference between an apartment and condominium. Condominiums are
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc11-24-98.wpd 6
Planning Commission Meeting
November 24, 1998
pride of ownership and apartments are transient in nature. Noise is the
common denominator of apartments. Apartments are operated by the owners
and no CC&r's go along with them. Private ownership is important to pride
of ownership. In his opinion, they have every right to expect this tract to be
developed as told to them by Mr. Spanos in the CC&Rs. .
24. Mr. Bill Hatchett, 78-975 Dulce Del Mar, stated he had bought a
condominium in Palm Springs ten years age and enjoyed this Valley every
weekend they were here. They researched every community in the Valley and
determined that La Quinta was developing and growing that was consistent
with their wishes and seemed to be well managed with strong community
orientation. Now their dream home is in jeopardy as their home will border
this high density project. Their concern is the proposed setbacks and how
they will render his property less than appealing to him, his family and any
future sale he may make. As proposed directly across the Dulce Del Mar
property line and set back 20 feet will be a 30 foot apartment building with
an overall height of 34-36 feet. This is unacceptable to him. Further west on
Dulce Del Mar are three additional 30 foot buildings set on pads that could
increase the height to 34-36 feet. These buildings will become a 34-36 foot
high wall running approximately 240 to 280 feet long setback 20 feet from
the Dulce Del Mar property line. As their property line turns north they
propose 38 open ended carports at a 10 foot setback with only a six foot high
masonry wall to block out car lights, noise, and other noxious odors. They
also intent to install 11 open parking spaces along this line creating a
potential nightmare of annoyance for the property owners only ten feet away.
The City needs to reconsider setbacks on Adams Street to allow buildings on
Adams Street. Spanos must reduce the high density by at. least reducing all
existing perimeter buildings to one story. All carports facing single family
must be redesigned to garages and no open parking or garages should be at
10 foot setback to these residences backyards. This project is too dense for
compatibility with surrounding low density high end residential development
and must be redesigned to be compatible with 'the surrounding residential
community and the City of La Quinta.
25. Ms. Theresa Tasso, 78-810 Via Avante, stated she and her husband visited
the Valley in 1992, and appreciated the desert. They considered many
developments and after a couple years search they found Lake La Quinta.
They agree with the petition she signed to prevent the Spanos
condominium/apartment project from being built as presented. She
understands the developer has the right to develop his land and make money,
but why should his development cause them to lose money on their
investment and home. The Commission has a moral obligation to the
CAMy Documents\WPDOC3\pcl 1-24-98.wpd 7
Planning Commission Meeting
November 24, 1998
residents of Lake La Quinta to protect their investment, security, and prestige.
The use of the name Lake La Quinta is unauthorized and deceptive. There
cannot be any connection between the Lake La Quinta name and apartments
development. Please deny the apartments as presented.
26. Mr. Frank Tasso, 78-810 Via Avante, stated that at one time Spanos owned
the entire piece and they set aside two pieces; the high density area and the
commercial area. He had this area zoned high density and at that time the
City did not take into consideration the future residences of Lake La Quints
which was a single story, low density, upscale prestige community. This was
the City's first mistake. There are currently only two areas zoned high
density in the City. Please do not approve this in its current shape. If this is
approved, litigation will occur. Don't compound the original mistake. What
was the trade off; what is the hidden deal? This may bear some investigation
in the future.
27. Mr. Tom Oglesby, 78-885 Dulce Del Mar, stated their home is directly across
from the southwest corner of the project. In accordance with the General
Plan and Zoning Ordinance the developer has the right to built to the density
of 16 units to the acre on these ten acres. He also has the right to put all of
those units in two story buildings. This is a case where two rights make a
wrong. The General Plan and Zoning Maps look great on paper but it is at
the time of implementation that their flaws appear. As described in the staff
report, two sides of the parcel abut existing single story homes of light
density. The other two sides abut the same streets as Lake La Quinta and
because one third of the 47" Avenue frontage of this proposed development
is across from the Coachella Valley Water District parcel, the ten acre site has
less exposure to commercial use than does Lake La Quinta. The adopted
General Plan only designates three sites as high density residential which
indicates there isn't much demand. As the site is only ten acres in size, it
would not be a great loss to change the density more in keeping with the
existing development in the area. The developer may own the property but
he does not own the zoning. That is a policy matter under the control of the
City and since the General Plan is a living document, it is subject to change
when the policy makers determine that there are inequities. This is the case
with this project. The developer wishes to construct two story buildings next
to a project where they are not allowed. Within the Washington
Street/Adams Street corridor south of Highway 111 there is only one two
story house. The reservoir tank at the corner of 47`h Avenue and Adams
Street. As. you drive north on Adams Street you are the same distance from
the tank as you would be if you were in front of their home. Imposing as that
tank is, it is only 24 feet tall. Add another six feet and this is the height of the
CAMv Documents\WPD0CS\pc11-24-98.wpd 8
Planning Commission Meeting
November 24, 1998
buildings that are proposed to be built in front of their home. Then it has to
be raised another four feet since the pads are that much higher than their pad.
City development standards require that two story buildings maintain a 150
foot setback from Adams Street. People driving on Adams Street are
protected from the imposition of the buildings. Should not the same standard
be supplied to them. Representatives of Lake La Quinta have expressed their
concerns to the developer and they have been ignored. They are therefore,
turning to the Planning Commission for redress. Send the project back to the
staff with directions to reduce the density by eliminating the two story
buildings. If the developer continues to not cooperate, adopt a resolution of
denial on the basis of incompatibility with the surrounding development,
request the City Council to initiate an amendment to the General Plan
reducing the density. In so far as apartments are concerned, he spent the last
33 days in an apartment in San Diego area due to his wife's medical
condition and it was not a pleasant experience.
28. Mr. Dutch Dilsaver, 78-835 Dulce Del Mar, stated La Quinta is a model city.
The City has worked diligently to see that it remains a model city. Another
city with a similar problem resolved their problem by getting the city,
developer and homeowners together to work out the problems and keep that
city a model. The same can be done here with the proper cooperation of all
entities. He has met with staff and discussed the concerns of the HOA. Mr.
Roos has stated they met with the homeowners and made some changes to
their plan to address some of their concerns. They did change the 5/12 pitch
to a 4/12 pitch which reduced the ridgeline two feet. They still have the pads
four feet high above street level. If they were to drop the pitch to a 3/12 it
would drop it another two feet. If they lowered the ceilings inside the two
stories six inches, it would drop it another foot and if they lowered the grade
another two feet it would drop it another two feet. A lot can be done if they
apply themselves. They can work in cooperation with staff, homeowners,
and Planning Commission to come up with a project everyone can be proud
of.
29. Mr. Wayne Guralnick, 74-399 Highway 111, Palm Desert, general counsel
for the Lake La Quinta HOA, displayed the carport elevation on the site plan
to show the impact on the neighboring homes. These people were told these
units would be condominiums.. They read the CC&R's and believed their
views would be preserved. If there were to be condominiums, the CC&R's
would be there to control what happens there. The Commission does not
need to grant the density as it is, there are several options available to the
Commission. They can require changes to make the project more compatible
with the surrounding residents.
CAW Documents\WPDOCSI\pcI1-24-98.wpd 9
Planning Commission Meeting
November 24, 1998
30. Mr. Dave Wagner, 47-815 Via Traiss, stated this zoning was approved before
the houses were built. Now that there are houses this project is proposed.
They are two separate entities. It would not be approved if it were introduced
at this time.
31. There being no further public comment, this portion of the public hearing was
closed and open to Commission discussion.
32. Commissioner Butler stated he was not certain that apartments are better than -
a condominium project. Modifications are needed to make it acceptable to
each party and he is not sure it is possible at this meeting. He would like to
continue the project.
33. Commissioner Robbins stated he was concerned in the trend of a lot of the
subdivision having the maximum density and minimum lot sizes. This plan
is a mass of building and asphalt. As nice as Spanos projects are in San
Diego, this is not San Diego and it is not appropriate for the area. They have
a right to built 16-units to the acre and it is zoned for that many units, but
they should only have that right if they can satisfy all the other conditions and
concerns. It is his opinion they have not done that, therefore, he cannot
support the project as it is submitted.
34. Commissioner Dirk stated he is very sensitive to the concerns raised and the
rights of the developer. This site has been designated as' multi -family
development for some time. It was incorporated into a larger scheme for
Lake La Quinta and there have been disclosure statements. It sounds like
there is some confusion as to whether the disclosure statements and CC&Rs
apply just to a condominium or multi -family apartment. He has a question
as to whether it was made known whether apartments or condominiums
would be built. In terms of supporting or rejecting the project, he has not
reached a decision. Constructive comments have been made by residents and
the project could move forward with some changes. Reducing building
heights, altering grading plans, and utilizing the Adams Street setback to
build more units. His concerned would be too much asphalt and cars. The
Auto Mall related impacts would be much greater than the building impacts.
The buildings are high for the surrounding area, but with the landscape
treatment maybe it will not be as big an impact as hearing cars coming in and
out. Maybe the City could work with the applicant to reduce the number of
parking spaces required, redesign the parking, placing buildings further away
from existing community or perhaps into the Adams Street setback. Before
supporting any recommendation, he would like to hear the applicant respond
to some of the concerns raised.
CAMy Documents\WPDOC3\pc11-24-98.wpd 10
Planning Commission Meeting
November 24, 1998
35. Chairman Tyler stated he agreed with what had been stated. He would
support replacing the open carports with enclosed garages to minimize the
noise and glare for the homeowners that abut that wall. Secondly, the four
foot grade differential with this project being higher than Dulce• Del Mar. and
the same height as the property to the west. For every foot you grade down
it lowers the roof line. The Zoning Code does not allow two story houses
next to existing one story houses for compatibility. Even though this is not
the same, it seems you could achieve some change by having the perimeter.
buildings one story to minimize the impact. He too, would like to allow time
for both the applicant and staff to resolve some of the issues raised.
36. Mr. Marvin Roos, stated the CC&R's were required of the home builder
Wilma Pacific. The possibility of this property annexing into that was set
forth in that document. The reference to apartments or condominiums was
not part of the Spanos representation. The Spanos Company would like to
continue to work on how they can reduce the impact on the community. They
can look at those items presented and others. The matter of one story does
not begin to approach the kind of property value and demand that this is. The
General Plan does set high density to buffer the commercial. They would
like to come back with a design that might soften the areas. Not sure what
the planning process would be to explore the setbacks on Adams Street. He
would also like the flexibility to explore other design alternatives. Based on
this information, they would like to request a continuance.
37. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Butler/Robbins to continue this application to January 26,
1999. Unanimously approved with Commissioner Abels being absent.
38. Community Development Director Jerry Herman clarified that in order to
allow flexibility to the developer as it relates to the Adams Street setback, it
is a zoning requirement that it is one story along Adams Street. The only way
to deviate from that requirement is to do a specific plan and the specific plan
would allow the applicant the ability to modify that standard to the Zoning
Code. This is the only way they would be allowed to have more than one
story adjacent to Adams Street.
Chairman Tyler recessed the meeting at 8:52 p.m. and reconvened at 9:00 p.m.
B. Continued Tentative Tract Map 28964; a request of Oliphant and Williams
Associates, Inc. for approval and recommendation to the City Council for
Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for
Environmental Assessment 98-365 to subdivide 39 acres into 78 residential lots and
other common lots for the property located on the north side of 501 Avenue,
approximately 1,600 feet west of Jefferson Street.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCa\pc11-24-98.wpd 11
Attachment 2
Id a Iad�d dd�de$
R
y ;
19 BO R^884 R
dddd. 4 d ri dddddddddd e d ddd d ei ? IV 5 J
rig w d `F Y83R _ $Fx^BfiSi gB g8 igR S 8 bb d
a s WWI
��d� ��k� � C �� 9 g �Y� �3§ � g � _.+S�.AmRie= �8$� F � yry `�• a & � ��
Attachment 3
'P,
ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
November 20, 1998 9:00 A.M.
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Architecture and Landscaping Committee was called to order at
9:02 a.m. by Planning 10ager Christine di Iorio who lead the flag salute.
B. Committee MemIrs present: Bill Bobbitt and Dennis Cunningham.
C. Staff present- anning Manager Christine di Iorio, Principal Planner Sawa, Associate
Planner Gr Trousdell, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COM ENT: None
III. CONFIRMAT�1OF.IWOR1.UENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Planning :Manager Christine di Iorio asked if th were any changes to the Minutes
of October 20, 1998. There being no changeb seconded by
Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to approve the minutes as submitted.
Unanimously approved.
V. BUSINESS ITE-14:
A P-4't-hhe%reWvbimt i6equest of Mainiero Smith and Associates, Inc.
for A. G. 'Spanos Corporation for approval of architectural and landscaping plans for
160 condominium units on 10.17 acres.
Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy
of which is on file in the Community Development Department.
2. There being no questions of staff at this time, the applicant was.asked to
address the commission. Mr. Jack Lucas, Project Manager for the Spanos
Corporation and this project, explained the architectural detail changes that
had been made. He further explained the building fascia was drawn
incorrectly by the architect. It will be tight to the building, compatible with
the rest of the project, and will be a plastered overhang.
3. Committee Member Cunningham stated that the overhang was an excellent
added detail and asked what material would be used on the garage doors. Mr.
Lucas stated metal.
.R C 11-20-9R_wnd
Architectural & Landscaping Review Committee Minutes
November 20, 1998
4. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the notch over the garage could be
taken straight across. Staff stated this was one of the recommendations. He
stated that as this was a multi -family area with single family residences across
the street, that by not bringing a lot of attention to the buildings by use of the
hips on the ends, it is better to keep it clean to create subtlety to the building.
This will blend with the neighborhood as the applicant is not building stacked
rows of condominiums. There is some variation between the roof elements.
In regard to the exterior colors shown on the color board, they are lighter than
the color elevations and he has no objections.
5. Committee Member Bobbitt agreed with Committee Member Cunningham's
architectural recommendations. He would prefer to have the lines cleaner to
fit in better with the existing single family homes.
6. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that in regard to the landscaping, he has
no problem with most of the plants proposed. The Phoenix Date palms that
are being proposed, from a safety standpoint, have a certain inherent
propensity for crown breakage as compared to the Washingtonia Palms that
do not. This can create a safety concern and he is only making it known that
they can be a problem. He would suggest using a less mature palm.
7. Committee Member Cunningham asked about the use of landscaping in the
parking lots where there are small planter areas as these palm trees do not
work well in the planters and can be a problem.
8. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that any type of tree in a planter in a
parking lot does not have enough room to grow. Upon installation it can look
beautiful, but ten years down the road the homeowner's association has
responsibility and are stuck with hardscape replacement that is very costly.
He would Iike to work toward altering the guidelines dealing with trees and
where to plant what species. Trees that are planted around residential units
need to be of a variety that the full growth width of the head of the tree is
acceptable for the area in which it is planted. Date Palms should be located
at an entrance, not in highly populated recreation areas.
9. Mr. Jose Estrada, RHA Landscape Architects, commented on the Phoenix
Palms or Phoenix Canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm) in that he thought
the problem was mostly due to disease. Discussion followed as to problems
that had been found in the Date Palm trees. Committee Member Bobbitt
believes trees should be kept away from the concrete due to its root growth.
vri t_,)n-UA. ti 2
Architectural & Landscaping Review Committee Minutes
November 20, 1998
10. Committee Member Cunningham asked for additional information regarding
the proposed trees on Dulce Del Mar and if the existing Oleanders will
remain. If they are not destroyed by disease, the proposed trees will be
dispersed throughout the site. Staff is recommending they be more
cylindrical.
11. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the proposed trees were a nice mix to give
a variety of shape and colors.
12. Committee Member Cunningham suggested there be more and spaced better.
Mr. Lucas stated the engineers had done a line of sight drawing which
showed they needed to be sensitive to the location and size of the trees to
mitigate the line of sight and insure privacy. They will add more trees as
needed and some of them will be site specific. The existing Oleanders are
healthy and 14 feet in height which will help mitigate the issue of privacy.
Discussion followed as to plants that could be used.
13. Committee Member Cunningham recommended the landscaping proposed
for the five foot wall along the Dulce Del Mar be increased. Planning
Manager Christine di Iorio suggested additional trees be planted along the
perimeter wall on Dulce Del Mar to better buffer the view of the residents.
Trees could be relocated and added to better screen the project from the
adjacent residences. Increase the box or tree size.
14. Committee Member Bobbitt suggested the removal of the Agapanthas unless
used on the north side and suggested the removal of the Date Palms from the
pool area.
15. Committee Member Cunningham asked if there was anyone in the audience
that would like to speak regarding this project. Mr. Bill Hansch, 78-175
Dulce Del Mar, asked when this project would be referred to as rental
apartments, which they actually were.
16. Committee Member Cunningham clarified this meeting was for architectural
and landscaping purposes only. Mr. Hansch stated that in front of his house
he is going to have a 32-33 foot building. It only has a 20 foot setback and
something needs to be done to change that setback. He suggested there be
greater setbacks and/or move the building closer to Adams Street. Associate
Planner Greg Trousdell clarified it was 20 feet to the street and then the street
width. Mr. Hansch stated he would like to see the building heights reduced.
Mr. Lucas stated they had met with the homeowners and they had requested
moving the building, lower the heights, etc., and it was the opinion of the
Spanos company that they had mitigated as many of their concerns as
possible and still create a usable plan for the land use.
., .....vwvnnr4Q\At.RCt1_20-9R_wnd 3
Architectural & Landscaping; Review Committee Minutes
November 20, 1998
17. Committee Member Cunningham asked the height of the buildings.
Associate Planner Greg Trousdell stated they were 30 feet. Committee
Member Cunningham stated the Oleanders were currently 14 feet high. The
view from Mr. Hansch's property would only be affected by the loss of a
small portion of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The applicant has created a good
land use plan. Mr. Lucas stated there was no view from the buildings within
Lake La Quinta. The second floor windows that face the lake are all glass
block which you cannot see out of or into.
18. Mr. Dutch Dilsaver, 78-835 Dulce Del Mar, stated his property is Lot 200.
He was an owneribuilder and had to go through the City process to build his
house. Across the street from him is a single family house that sits back 30-
feet. Their windows look down into his yard because of the pad differentials
at Lake La Quinta. The oleanders on Dulce Del Mar currently stand at 14
feet high from curb level. The builders stated the pads will be built up five
feet. Add to that the 30 feet to the ridge line. This will be 36 feet above curb.
Put 3 8 feet on top of 14 feet and now there is 24 feet extending above the
Oleanders with a 20 foot setback. The buildings will be twice as high and
closer to the curb. Something has to be done to prevent this oppression
created by the buildings. He suggested helium balloons be placed at each of
the building locations to determine the impact. It is up to the City to stop this
at the beginning and consider the existing homeowners and those who have
built up the City.
19. Mr. Ben Rosger, 47675 Via Montessa, stated he did not live adjacent to the
project, but several hundred yards away, but he can see this will be an
architectural monstrosity. People who have moved into an affluent
community who are basically retired and want the beauty of the community
are being asked to accept this project. Lake La Quinta is a gem for the La
Quinta community. It should be noted that architecturally speaking this
project does not fit next door to the existing community. Why would the City
want to do this to a community that has built a pleasant community. Open car
garages adjacent to their homes is not acceptable. He was told this was going
to be a condominium project, not apartments. It is bad architecture to place
this project next to single family homes.
20. Ms. Terry Tasso, Lake La Quinta resident, stated her concern was the second
story balconies facing the single family yards and being able to look down
into their bedrooms and yards. Mr. Lucas stated there are architectural details
that are proposed that are higher than the allowable height of the rear yard
fencing. It would be an architectural barrier that- would not be as attractive
as landscaping. Ms. Tasso asked why there have to be two story units. Mr.
Lucas stated the entitlements for the property allow two or even three story
1-20-98.wnd 4
Architectural & Landscaping; Review Committee Minutes
November 20, 1998
units. The land use plan that was developed to utilize this property is for two
story units. Ms. Tasso asked how this was allowed in an upscale community.
Mr. Lucas stated that if the property entitlements allow the property owner
to do this, then they can do so.
21. Committee Member Cunningham clarified that this is not the place for these
type of comments. We would like to keep the comments to architectural and
landscaping issues. The project has already been through the Code review
process of determining what uses can be allowed. If the Lake La Quinta
People want to change those uses, they need to address this under a different
forum. Due to those property entitlements it is now this Committee's
responsibility to make sure the plan complies with all applicable architectural
and landscaping requirements. As a property owner he has the right to
develop his property within those guidelines. The complaints that are being
raised are not valid at this meeting. As to balconies, this Committee believes
that with the use of landscaping and additional trees, based on the zoning and
entitlements, this plan is valid. If the balconies are negatively impacting the
surrounding neighborhood, they need to look at this.
22. Nis. Tasso stated that to use trees as camouflage does not keep out the noise.
Mr. Lucas stated that in regard to the balconies a sound mitigation measure
could be used similar to that used for the balconies that face Adams Street or
47' Avenue. A plastic or glass sound mitigation shield could be used to go
on top of the balcony wall. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio asked how
rnany balconies are proposed that will face the residents to the west. Mr.
Lucas stated there are two buildings or a total of four balconies. All others
have windows that face the street consisting of glass block which prevent
view into the adjacent yards.
23. Committee Member Cunningham stated there is a substantial distance
between the yards and the units .with balconies. There is also the fact that
there is a line of sight into the backyards. However, he does believe this
could be mitigated by the use of trees that are substantial in size. Otherwise
you can move the balconies. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio asked if
garages were proposed to be constructed in front of the units with balconies;
what is the height of the garages. Mr. Lucas stated their height would be 12
feet. The balcony would be above the roof. Committee Member
Cunningham suggested the applicant be required to plant full grown trees to
block visibility from the balconies and he would like this added as a
condition.
24. Mr. Jay Baden, stated his concern was regarding the five foot wall that it
would not be sufficient, especially if they were to lose the existing Oleanders.
The raised grade on the Spanos side would reduce the height of the wall.
The wall needs to be placed on the raised pad or berm to maintain the five
.�.�xa.. n-.,,.. "tcXWPn0CRVLRC11-20-98.wvd 5
Architectural & Landscaping Review Committee Minutes
November 20, 1998
foot, and he would prefer a six foot. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell stated
it was a five feet wall proposed above curb height. Discussion followed
regarding the pad elevations. Mr. Lucas stated the wall could be placed on
the berm. Commissioner Cunningham stated this should be added to the
conditions.
25. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee
Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 98-010
recommending approval of the architectural and landscaping plans for Site
Development Permit 98-633 as followed:
a. Specimen trees (24-, 36- and 48-inch boxes) shall be used for
planting purposes around the project perimeter and adjacent to open
parking spaces.
b., The overall height of the recreation building shall be reduced to 22
feet to comply with Section 9.50.020 of the Zoning Ordinance. This
design change shall be made before building permits are issued.
C. Prior to issuance of building permits, subject to the Community
Development Department approval, the building elevations shall be
modified as follows: 1) remove the middle gable eave-end from
garage elevations; and 2) modify eave mounted architectural popouts
on side building elevations of Buildings 6, 7, 9 and 10 to match other
buildings.
d., Detached garage structures shall be architecturally compatible with
other on -site buildings including stucco walls and hip, and tile roofs.
e. Relocate and add landscaping/trees per the view analysis to best
screen the adjacent residences along Dulce Del Mar.
f. Relocate the Date Palms and use a different species in the
common/pool areas.
g. Provide trees large enough to block the view into the single family
homes from the balconies that face to the west.
h. Provide berm and wall combination along Dulce Del Mar at six feet
high from the pad deviation of the project.
Unanimously approved.
G. Site Development Permit 98-638: a request of Citrus Development, LLC (Peter
Jacobs), for approval of architectural plans for a new prototype residential unit.
Drii_7fl_OAumA 6
CJ�
b�
I
1
A
a
e
o
"
�2
P.�. M
$ Za
i�
a
a_ Z
O
z a
WW o
a_Z
O
_J 08
Wa Q
0
F-
CO
Attachment 4
ao
dad ddd d d d d d d d d dh d
o
va
� 6SR�^3am�R8�� ggSS
8 €
gg
� b
Rtea 89 a
Cd odo o "
o r sC:RAVV"�oad ;a A 9A
+ dd0dodo d odd
s"=
d $�
$Sxp;
albR� 8
SmA @�8,'.�:Xr
yyE
" a
$
s
I
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: JAN UARY 26, 1999
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-635
REQUEST: APPROVAL OF SITE, LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING PLANS
AND BUILDING ELEVATIONS FOR A 24,000 SQUARE FOOT
TWO-STORY MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING
LOCATION: 43576 WASHINGTON STREET
APPLICANT: THE WOODARD GROUP
PROPERTY OWNER: SALOK TRUST
REPRESENTATIVE: STEWART WOODARD, AIA
ZONING: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC)
GENERALPLAN
DESIGNATION: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-320 WAS CERTIFIED
BY THE CITY COUNCIL. AN ADDENDUM HAS BEEN
PREPARED TO EVALUATE THE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH MINOR CHANGES IN THE
PROJECT. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT NO SIGNIFICANT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE
MITIGATED WILL RESULT FROM THIS PROJECT.
THEREFORE, NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENTATION IS NECESSARY.
SURROUNDING
ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH: /VACANT
SOUTH: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (C-P) /VACANT
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
EAST: /VACANT
WEST: PLANNED RESIDENTIAL FOUR (PR.)
/CONDOMINIUMS (CITY OF PALM DESERT)
BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW:
Property Description
The project is located at 43576 Washington Street on two parcels comprising 1.82 acres
(80,340 square feet) of land. The M.E.A. Medical Clinic occupies A.P.N. 609-070-029. The
two existing structures and parking lot on this parcel were built under the County of
Riverside jurisdiction with County development standards. The property is currently
serviced with gas, water, and electricity. The second project parcel, A. P. N. 609-070-028,
is vacant. Adjacent properties, directly and to the north and east are vacant, to the south
is an abandoned single family residence. To the west of the project, directly across
Washington Street is a condominium complex.
Development Request
The Site Development Permit application is for a two-story 24,000 square foot medical
office building on two parcels totaling 80,340 gross square feet. General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance designations allow for the proposed use and development intensity. This
project was approved under Plot Plan 96-597 in 1996 by the City Council and Planning
Commission, but the two year conditional approval has expired. The following items
provide a brief narrative of the site plan; architectural design; landscape, sign, and lighting
plans:
Site Plan
The two-story 24,000 square foot building is centered on the subject properties. The Floor
Area Ratio (F.A.R.) is calculated at .30 which is the maximum allowable for the Community
Commercial Zoning Distract. F.A.R. is the gross building area of 24,000 square feet
divided by the site area of 80,340 square feet. The building is set back 20 feet from the
new property line on Washington Street; this set back is a landscape easement. Vehicle
entry/exit driveways are 26 feet wide. Vehicles circulate the building within a 136 space
parallel surface parking lot which surrounds the perimeter of the building with eleven
spaces under the second floor. There are five handicapped parking spaces provided close
to the building entrances. The amount and type of parking required by code is 136
spaces of which five need to be handicapped accessible.
The total landscape area is 25,000 square feet; this includes the lagoon and landscape
areas directly adjacent to the building, the landscape easement, and a landscape buffer
around the outside perimeter of the parking lot. Trash and recycling service enclosures
are located to the rear of the property providing convenient access to the building service
entrance. There are 2,094 square feet of sidewalk providing access to the building from
the parking lot and a meandering sidewalk along Washington Street within the landscape
set back easement. There are 860 square feet of hard scape improvements surrounding
the building.
The facilities within the building include the following areas: outpatient surgery, birthing
center, medical laboratories, physical therapy, a pharmacy, dental and optometry services,
reception and atrium, staff offices and lounges, conference room, rest rooms, and storage
and mechanical areas.
Architectural Design
The proposed two-story structure is anticipated to be 26 feet in height with its highest
point, the mechanical penthouses, reaching 29 feet from ground level. A series of three
translucent skylights with hipped roofs and bronze reflective glass, projects above the
parapet from the west side of the building. There is a skylight covered atrium near the
front or east end of the building. The west end of the building is ground level parking with
a second story structure over it. Wall materials consists of stucco finish with horizontal
bans of brown reglet insets. The structure is to have multi -pane windows with rust colored
frames at all elevations on both levels
Landscape Plan
The preliminary landscape plan consists of date trees and shade trees. Several existing
Palm trees may be reused. The ground cover and shrub plant material are low water
consumptive native to the area. Landscaping surrounds the structure and the outside
perimeter of the parking lot. The front of the structure has a pond feature which
incorporates a public art piece. There are raised fountain elements on each side of the
pond feature. A six-foot wide sidewalk is incorporated in the landscape easement
meandering in front of the raised fountain elements, pond feature, and public art piece.
Sign Plan
The site plan shows conceptual signing design, size and location. There are sign
envelopes on both the north and south wing walls for name identification. There are two
entry monument signs at the north and south vehicular entrances.
Exterior Lighting Plan
Exterior lighting for the parking lot consists of 18 light standards, twenty-two feet in height.
The lights are high pressure sodium boxes which illuminate an average of one foot candle
in all parking areas. The face sheet colors of the luminaries are greenish blue, aqua, ice
blue, and rose.
COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES:
The project was sent out for comment to City Departments and affected public agencies
on December 7, 1998 requesting comments returned by December 23, 1998. No major
comments were received regarding this project. This correspondence is on file at the
Community Development Department and their comments have been incorporated into the
attached Conditions of Approval.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper and posted on January 14, 1999,
setting January 26th as the day to hold the Planning Commission public hearing. All
property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice.
ANALYSIS AND ISSUES:
The proposed medical office is compatible with the General Plan Community Commercial
Land Use designation in that the medical services offered will meet the needs of a multi -
neighborhood area. The project conforms to the General Plan and Zoning Code Floor
Area Ratio (F.A.R.) standards. The site design also meets the General Plan policy
encouraging travel by bicycling and public transit in that the street will be improved to
include a bike lane, bus stop and shelter.
The site plan and building elevations are consistent with the Zoning Code development
standards with regards to driveway widths, building heights, and landscape setbacks. The
amount and type of parking required by the Zoning Code is 136 spaces of which five need
to be handicapped accessible. The applicant is proposing 136 spaces.
The landscape design complements the building with the raised fountain, pond, public art
piece in front of the building providing a prominent design element. The high quality of
materials and design will set a precedent for design standards in the surrounding
commercial area. Design characteristics are sensitive to the desert environment with
suitable use of textured materials, muted colors, and numerous panels of windows and
atriums.
The conceptual sign plan conforms to applicable provisions of the Sign provisions of the
Zoning Code. A sign program will need to be submitted for approval by the Planning
Commission within 30 days of issuance of a building permit. A detailed drawing of the
pond with the incorporated art piece, located in front of the building, will need to be
submitted for the Director's approval. The art piece will need to be submitted to the Art in
Public Places Commission if it is to be considered as meeting the required in lieu fee.
The Community Development Department recommends approval based on the attached
information and the attached recommended Conditions of Approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98- , approving, Site Development
Permit to allow construction of a 24,000 square foot two-story medical office at
43567 Washington Street, subject to conditions.
Attachments
Location Map
Plans and Elevations (Reduced)
Prepared by:
Fred Baker, AICP
Principal Planner
Submitted by:
Christine di lorio
Planning Manager
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA GRANTING APPROVAL OF SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-635 TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION
OF A 24,000 SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98- 635
APPLICANT: SALOK TRUST
THE WOODARD GROUP
WHEREAS, Architecture and Landscape Review Committee of the City
of La Quinta, California, did on the 6T" day of January, 1999 hold a duly noticed Public
Meeting to consider the request of the Salok Trust and recommended approval to the Planning
Commission for a 24,000 square foot Medical office building on a 1.82 acre site located at
43576 Washington and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 26T" day of January, 1999 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for a 1.82 acre site
with a 24,000 square foot Medical office building located at 43576 Washington more
particularly described as:
APN: BOOK 609-070-029 and 609-070- 028
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the requirements
of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended
(Resolution 83-63) in that the Community Development Department Director has conducted
a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was certified for EA 96-320, on
July 9, 1996. An Addendum has been prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts
associated with minor changes in the project. The Community Development Department has
determined that no significant environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated will result
from this project. Therefore, no further environmental documentation is necessary.
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning
Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify a
recommendation for approval of said Site Development Permit 98-635.
1 . The proposed commercial building is consistent with the City's General Plan in that:
A. The property is designated Mixed/Regional Community Commercial (CC). The
Land Use Element (Policy 2-4.1) of the 1992 General Plan Update allows office
business. The project is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La
Quinta General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2) provided conditions are met.
B. The General Plan Circulation Element identifies Washington Street as a Primary
Arterial and Primary Image Corridor; the project will have street improvements
with abundant landscaping contiguous to the street right-of-way consistent with
Circulation Policy 3-4.1.2. The landscape setbacks are consistent with
Circulation Element Policy 3-4.1.1 1. The project, as conditioned, is consistent
PCRESO.SDP 98-635
RESOLUTION 99-
with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan Circulation Element.
2. The site design of the proposed project is compatible with the high quality of
commercial development in the area.
3. The landscape design of the proposed project complements the building and the
surrounding commercial area in that it enhances the aesthetic and visual quality of the
area and uses a high quality of materials.
4. The architectural design of the project is compatible with surrounding development and
establishes a design theme for future development in that it is consistent with the
scale of the development in the area; the building materials are a durable, aesthetically
pleasing, low maintenance, and a blend of surfaces and textures are provided.
5. The conceptual sign program of the project is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance in
that it complies with the requirements of size and materials.
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 Commission in
this case;
2. That it does approve Site Development Permit 98-635 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution and subject to the attached conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City
Planning Commission, held on this the 26`h 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
PCRESO.SDP 98-635
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 98-
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-653
WOMEN'S HEALTH SOURCE, MEDICAL CENTER
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
JAN UARY 26,1999
GENERAL
1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is authorized to file these
Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the
properties to which they apply.
2. Prior to the issuance of a grading, improvement or building permit, the applicant shall
obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies:
- Fire Marshal
- Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
- Community Development Department
- Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
- Desert Sands Unified School District
- Coachella Valley Water District
- Imperial Irrigation District
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from
those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans,
applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the
plans.
3. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's
adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building
permits.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
4. All required easements, rights of way and other property rights shall be granted prior
to issuance of a grading, improvement or building permit for this development.
5. The applicant shall 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.
Property rights required of this development include:
A. Washington Street - 60' half of 120' right of way
Grant deeds shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left
turn lanes, bus turnouts, etc.
'C.COA.SDP.98-635
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Site Development Permit 98-635
Women's Health Source, Medical Center
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
January 26, 1999
6. The applicant shall grant any easements necessary for placement of and access to
utility lines and structures.
7. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall furnish proof of easements
or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on
which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments
are to occur.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer,"
"surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their
respective professions in the State of California.
8. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified
engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be submitted on 24"
x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets &
Drainage," and "Landscaping." 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 sidewalks, bike paths, entryways,
and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include irrigation improvements,
landscape lighting and perimeter walls.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
9. 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.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
10. Prior to issuance of a grading, improvement or building permit, the applicant shall pay
cash or enter into a secured agreement for the applicant's share of the cost of off -site
improvements required of this development but which have been or will be
constructed by others (participatory improvements). Security provided, and the
release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC.
This development is responsible for the following participatory improvements:
'C.COA.SDP.98-635
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Site Development Permit 98-635
Women's Health Source, Medical Center
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
January 26, 1999
A. Raised landscape median on Washington Street, and
B. Underground installation of existing overhead utilities.
1 1 . The applicant shall provide approved estimates of participatory improvement costs.
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.
GRADING
12. 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.
13. 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. In accordance with said Chapter, 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.
14. The applicant shall comply with the City's flood protection ordinance.
15. The applicant shall conduct a thorough preliminary geological and soils engineering
investigation and shall submit the report of the investigation ("the soils report") with
the grading plan.
16. A grading plan, which may be combined with the on -site paving and drainage plan,
shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must meet the approval of 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.
17. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide a separate document,
bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer or surveyor, that
lists actual building pad elevations. The document shall list the pad elevation
approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and the difference between the
two, if any.
'C.COA.SDP.98-635
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Site Development Permit 98-635
Women's Health Source, Medical Center
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
January 26, 1999
DRAINAGE
18. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm shall
be retained within the development unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets.
19. Stormwater and nuisance water shall be retained in retention basins or other
approved retention/infiltration systems. In design of retention facilities, the soil
percolation rate shall be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides
site -specific data that indicates otherwise.
20. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1 and depth shall not exceed six feet.
21. No fence or wall shall be constructed around retention basins except as approved by
the Community Development Director and the City Engineer.
22. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity
to flow out of the development through a designated overflow outlet and into the
historic drainage relief route.
23. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and
retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route.
UTILITIES
24. 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..
25. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities
shall be installed prior to construction of surface improvements. The applicant shall
provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City
Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
26. The following minimum street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the
General Plan street type noted in parentheses (Public street improvements shall
conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.):
A. Washington Street (Major Arterial) - Half of 102' (curbface-to-curbface)
improvement plus sidewalk. The improvement shall include half of a 14'
C.COA.SDP.98-635
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Site Development Permit 98-635
Women's Health Source, Medical Center
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
January 26, 1999
landscaped center median which will be constructed by others. This
improvement, at the City's option, may be constructed by the applicant or
deferred until a later date to be constructed by others as specified in the
participatory improvement section herein.
Bus turnouts, acceleration/deceleration lanes, and/or other features contained in the
approved construction plans may warrant additional street widths, raised medians or
other mitigation measures as determined by the City Engineer.
The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond development
boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street width
transitions, or other incidental work which will ensure that newly constructed
improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and conform with the
City's standards and practices.
27. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted as follows:
A. Two 26'-wide drives, at the north and south ends of the Washington Street
frontage - right-in/right-out only or as approved by the City Engineer.
28. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization
markings and street name signs.
29. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design for a 20-year life and
shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading. The minimum pavement
sections shall be as follows:
Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b.
Collector 4.0"/5.00"
Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00"
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50°
The applicant shall submit mix designs for road base, portland cement concrete and
asphalt concrete, including complete mix design lab results, for review and approval
by the City. Construction operations shall not be scheduled until mix designs are
approved.
30. The applicant shall provide public transit amenities as required by Sunline Transit
and/or the City Engineer.
C.COA.SDP.98-635
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Site Development Permit 98-635
Women's Health Source, Medical Center
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
January 26, 1999
LANDSCAPING
31. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the perimeter setback areas
along Washington Street
32. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, landscape setback areas, medians,
and retention basins shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect.
Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development
Department. Landscape and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to the
Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The plans
are not approved for construction until they have been approved and signed by the
City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County
Agricultural Commissioner.
33. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas
outside the right of way.
34. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or
spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets.
35. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to
provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
36. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
37. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical
engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have their agents
provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to
furnish and sign accurate record drawings.
38. 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
39. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible
record drawings of all public improvement plans which were signed by the City
C.COA. SDP.98-635
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Site Development Permit 98-635
Women's Health Source, Medical Center
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
January 26, 1999
Engineer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings," "As -
Built" or "As -Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed
by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
40. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking
and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when
the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
41 . A final exterior lighting plan for the building and outdoor area which shows all fixture
details shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance
of a building permit.
42. Construction shall comply with all local and State building codes in effect at the time the
building permit is issued.
43. Prior to the fabrication and/or installation of the building signs, final plans including colors,
materials, and size shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission.
44. There shall be no exterior exposed roof access ladder provided. The roof access shall be
provided from within the structure.
45. Final building, landscaping, and irrigation plans shall be reviewed and approved by the
Community Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit.
46. Final landscaping and irrigation plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Agricultural
Commissioner and Coachella Valley Water District prior to issuance of a building permit.
47. Any required utility boxes, pads, meters, etc., shall be shown on the final landscaping
plans to ensure that they are property treated and screened. Compliance with the utility
company safety distance shall also have to be complied with.
48. Should any of the landscaping be provided in the perimeter street right-of-way, the
Engineering Department approval shall also be required prior to issuance of a building
permit.
49. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant/developer shall meet with the
Community Development Department to determine what solid waste materials can be
recycled. Upon that determination, recycling areas sufficient in capacity, number, and
C.COA.SDP.98-635
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Site Development Permit 98-635
Women's Health Source, Medical Center
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
January 26, 1999
distribution, to serve the project shall be provided. Enclosures shall comply with the
requirements of the City and Waste Management of the Desert (i.e., solid metal doors,
mounted on metal poles and embedded in concrete, 8-inch interior curb provided within
the enclosure, and a concrete floor and pad).
50. Mitigation fees will be' required to be paid for the Coachella Valley Fringe Toed Lizard
(CVFTL) as part of any grading permits issued for the site.
51. During grading activities, the project site shall be monitored by a professionally qualified
archaeological monitor. The monitor is authorized to temporarily divert or stop equipment
in order to investigate exposed cultural deposits.
52. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit for the building on the site, the appropriate
documentation shall be filed with the Building and Safety Department, concerning the
extent of asbestos levels and any measures necessary during demolition activities to
contain or otherwise minimize such levels to required standards.
54. Prior to issuance of building permits, a lot line adjustment shall be recorded by the
Community Development Department.
MISCELLANEOUS
54. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the
event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project.
The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole
discretion.
C.COA. SDP.98-635
ATTACHMENT 1
®CATION MAP
D#"Y ROAD
PH A
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: JANUARY 26, 1999
CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-372 AND TENTATIVE
TRACT 25691
REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION FOR CERTIFICATION OF A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND APPROVAL OF A
SUBDIVISION OF 10.12 ACRES INTO 38 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 6 LETTERED LOTS.
LOCATION: ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MILES AVENUE, WEST OF
JEFFERSON STREET AND EAST OF DUNE PALMS ROAD.
APPLICANT: WORLD DEVELOPMENT
ENGINEER: WARNER ENGINEERING
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-372 WAS PREPARED
FOR PROPOSED TENTATIVE TRACT 25691 IN
COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
CALIFORMA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970,
AS AMENDED. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR HAS RECOMMENDED THAT A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
BE CERTIFIED.
GENERAL PLAN/
ZONING/
DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR); LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL (RL)
BACKGROUND:
Site Background
The site is a vacant 10.12 acre parcel on the north side of Miles Avenue, west of
Jefferson Street and east of Dune Palms Road (Attachment 1).
P:\CHRIST1\PC CD EA 98-372.wpd
Project Request
Tentative Tract Map 25691 proposes to create 38 single family residential lots and
five lettered lots for roadways, a retention basin, and the landscaped parkway on the
southern boundary. A copy of the Tentative Tract Map is attached to this staff report
(Attachment 1). The proposed lots range in size from approximately 7,224 square feet
to 9,593 square feet. Most lots have a 61 foot frontage on proposed public streets.
Lots are generally 120 to 125 feet in depth. No common recreational amenities are
proposed. The landscaped parkway proposed on Miles Avenue includes a wall, whose
line has been broken to provide visual interest. The average width of the parkway
meets the City's minimum average width of 20 feet.
Access will be taken from the eastern boundary of the lot (shown as Lot B on the
map). Lot B will connect to the existing roadway to the north, and complete this
circulation link. The northern east -west street (Lot D) will provide a cul de sac, while
the southerly east -west roadway will extend to the western property line, to provide
a connection to future roadway access on properties to the west.
The retention basin proposed for the southwesterly corner of the property will be
landscaped, and will also provide a location for an enhanced landscaped entrance
feature. Landscaping plans have not been submitted, but would be included in the
Development Review process which will be required for the development of the
homes.
Public Notice
This map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on January 4, 1999.
All property owners within 500-feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public
hearing notice as required by the Subdivision Ordinance of the La Quinta Municipal
Code. To date, no comments have been received.
Public Agency Review
All written comments received are on file with the Community Development
Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made part of the
Conditions of Approval for this case.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:
Based on the provisions of the General Plan, Zoning Code and the Subdivision
Ordinance, the following overview of the projects findings is provided:
P:\CHRISTI\PC CD EA 98-3'72.wpd
Issue 1 - General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Consistency
The City's General Plan designates this parcel as Low Density Residential (2-4
dwellings per acre), allowing single family housing. The proposed subdivision is
consistent with the General Plan designation.
The proposed project's Zoning designation is also Low Density Residential, requiring
lots no smaller than 7,200. The proposed subdivision meets this development
standard.
Issue 2 - Tract Design/Improvements
The proposed tract includes 38 lots, generally 61 feet by 120 feet in size. In order to
effectively connect to existing sanitary sewer lines, each of the lots will be
approximately 10 feet above the existing grade of Miles Avenue. This high finished
grade also allows the applicant to drain the 100 year, 24 hour storm into the retention
basin located at the southeast corner of the property.
The proposed tract includes a north -south entry roadway (Lot B), connecting to the
existing roadway to the north. In order to limit turning movement conflicts, project
traffic will only be permitted to turn right from onto Miles Avenue from Lot B. The
extension of the southerly east -west roadway (Lot C), is expected to connect in the
future to an intersection with Miles Avenue which will provide left and right ingress
and egress. Since the proposed tract is consistent with the General Plan land use
designation assigned to it, the proposed project's traffic generation was included in the
General Plan analysis, and is not expected to have an impact on Miles Avenue.
The meandering wall proposed for the Miles Avenue frontage for the tract meets the
City's requirement for a 20 foot average landscaped parkway. Landscaping plans have
not yet been provided, but would be reviewed as part of the Development Review
process which will be required for the homes to be located within the project.
Issue 3 - Health and Safety
Potential noise impacts to residents of homes along the Miles Avenue frontage were
addressed in the project Noise Study (see discussion under EA 98-372, attached to
this staff report). The impacts to those residents can be mitigated through
construction methods, which will be required of the applicant through the
Development Review process for the proposed homes.
The proposed project has been conditioned to connect to all required services and
utilities. This includes water, sewer, streets, and other necessary improvements. All
electric services must be installed in underground piping. The health, safety and
welfare of residents is ensured based on recommended conditions.
P:\CHRISTI\PC CD EA 98-3'72.wpd
CONCLUSION:
The proposed tract map is a logical extension of development in the area, and
completes a traffic link which currently ends at the northern property boundary. The
tract map creates single family lots which meet the City's minimum standard in the
Low Density Residential designation. Findings for a recommendation for approval, as
noted in the attached Resolution, can be made.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-_, recommending to the City
Council Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-372.
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99- , recommending to the City
Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 25691, subject to findings and
conditions.
Attachments:
1. Vicinity Map
Prepared by:
Nicole Criste, Consulting Planner
PCrptTTM28797RJT
Submitted by:
Christine di lorio, Planning Manager
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 98-372 PREPARED FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT 26691
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-372
APPLICANT: WORLD DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did,
on the 26th day of January, 1999 held a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider
Environmental Assessment 98-372 for Tentative Tract 25691, generally located on the
north side of Miles Avenue, approximately 660 feet east of Dune Palms Road, more
particularly described as follows:
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 604-072-005
WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970"
(as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the
Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 98-372) and has
determined that although the proposed tentative tract could have a significant adverse
impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case because
appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the assessment and included in the
conditions of approval for Tentative Tract 25691, and 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, said Planning Commission did find the
following facts, findings, and reasons to justify recommending certification of said
Environmental Assessment:
1. The proposed Tentative Tract 25691 will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or
general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that all significant
impacts identified by Environmental Assessment 98-372 can be mitigated.
2. The proposed Tentative Tract 25691 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
P/pc Res EA 99-?.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 99-_
Environmental Assessment 98-372
January 26, 1999
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered
plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory, as no new impacts have been identified.
3. The proposed Tentative Tract 25691 does not have the potential to achieve short-
term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals,
as no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the
Environmental Assessment.
4. The proposed Tentative Tract 25691 will not result in impacts which are individually
limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed
development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not
be significantly affected by the proposed subdivision.
5. The proposed Tentative Tract 25691 will not have environmental effects that will
adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant
impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or
public services.
There is no evidence to show that State mandated school fees will not be adequate
to address impacts to school facilities, in that the tract map as proposed, does not
affect the current land use as it would be assessed at time of development, whether
or not the project was implemented.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
That the above recitations are true and correct and 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 98-372 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the
Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum on file in the Community
Development Department.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 26th day of January, 1999 by the following vote, to wit:
P/pc Res EA 99-?.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Environmental Assessment 98-372
January 26, 1999
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
P/pc Res EA 99-?.wpd
Appendix I
Environmental Checklist Form
1. Project Title: Tentative Tract Map 25691
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 di Iorio
760-777-7000
4. Project Location: North side of Miles Avenue, approximately 660 feet east of Dune
Palms Road
5. Project Sponsor's Name & Address: World Development
78-120 Calle Estado, #104
La Quinta, CA 92253
6. General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential
7. Zoning: Low Density Residential
8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases
of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach
additional sheets if necessary.)
10.12 Acre site, to be divided into 38 lots and 5 lettered lots, averaging 7,733 s.f. Streets
are proposed to be public.
9. Surrounding Lane Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings.
West: Vacant
East: Vacant
North: Single Family Residential
South: Miles Avenue
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation
agreement.)
PAEnvironmental Checklist Form.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
X
Transportation/Circulation
Public Services
X
Population and Housing
X
Biological Resources
Utilities and Service Systems
X
Geological Problems
Energy and Mineral Resources
Aesthetics
X
Water
Hazards
Cultural Resources
X
Air Quality
X
Noise
Recreation
Mandatory Finds of Significance
Determination
(To be completed by the Lead Agency.)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
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 imposed upon the proposed project.
Signature
Printed Name
Date
For
PAEnvironmental Checklist Form.wpd
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers
except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead
agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is
adequately supported if the reference information sources show that the impact simply does
not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone).
A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as
well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,
based on a project -specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole
action involved, including off -site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project -level,
indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate
if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more
"Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "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.
PAI-invironmental Checklist Form.wpd
Sample question:
I.
11.
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving:
Landslides or mudslides? (1,6)
(Attached source list explains that I is the general plan, and 6 is a USGS
topo map. This answer would probably not need further explanation.)
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation of zoning? (Source#(s): 1)
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
=�M
M�=
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by X
agencies with jurisdiction over the project. ( 1 )
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( 1, 2) FX_1
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or X
farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? ( 2 )
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established X
community (including a low-income or minority community)? ( 2 )
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? X
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)? ( I )
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( I )
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose
people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ( 3 )
PAEnvironmental Checklist Forn.wpd
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
b) Seismic ground shaking? ( 3 )
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( 3 )
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? ( 3 )
e) Landslides or mudflo%s? ( 3 )
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading, or fill? ( 1, 3 )
g) Subsidence of the land? ( 3 )
h) Expansive soils? ( 3 )
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( 3 )
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
r
M�m
=�M
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate and amount X
of surface runoff? ( 3 )
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as
flooding? ( 3 )
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water
quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? ( 3 )
MMM
PAE.nvironmental Checklist For.n.wpd
V.
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ( 3) r A I I X
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water X
movements?
( 3 )
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? ( 3 )
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( 3) X
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( 3 ) X
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise X
available for public water supplies? ( 3 )
AIR QUALITY Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or X
projected air quality violation? ( 3 )
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( 3 )
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any
change in climate? ( 3 )
d) Create objectionable odors? ( 3 )
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
PAEnvironmental Checklist Porm.wpd
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( 1, 3 ) X
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or X
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)? ( 1, 3 )
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( 2 )
d) Insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? ( 6 )
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( 4 )
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( I )
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? ( 1 )
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and
birds)? ( 1,3 )
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? ( 1,3 )
M�m
M�=
mmm
=�M
M�m
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, coastal X
habitat, etc.)? ( 1, 3 )
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ( 1, 3) X
PAEnvironmental Checklist Fortri.wpd
VIII.
IX.
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( 1, 3 )
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
Potentially
Potentially Significant
Less Than
Significant Unless
Significant No
Impact Mitigated
Impact Impact
X
=�M
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?
HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
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 X
emergency evacuation plan? (1, 3 )
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? X
(1,3)
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( 3, 4)
__1
�M�M=
PAEnvironmental Checklist Form.wpd
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( 3, 4 )
XI. 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? ( 3 )
b) Police protection? ( 3 )
c) Schools? ( 3 )
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( 1, 3 )
e) Other governmental services? ( 1, 3 )
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? ( 3 )
b) Communications systems? ( 3 )
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
X
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( 3 X
d) Sewer or septic tanks'? ( 3 )
e) Storm water drainage? ( 3 )
PAEnvironmental Checklist Form.wpd
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
f) Solid waste disposal? ( 3 )
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( 3 )
XII➢. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( 1, 3 )
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( 1, 3 )
c) Create light or glare? ( 1, 3 )
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( 3, 5 )
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( 3, 5 )
c) Affect historical resources? ( 3, 5 )
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
X
M�=
M�m
M�m
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect X
unique ethnic cultural values? ( 3, 5 )
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential X
impact area? ( 3, 5 ;I
XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other X
recreational facilities? ( 3 )
PAEnvironmental Checklist Form.wpd
XVI.
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( 3 )
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?
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
I __F_ - ] - I X
R.
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the X
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 X
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directory or
indirectly?
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering,
program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the
following on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where 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.
PAEnvironmental Checklist Form.wpd
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.
PAEnvironmental Checklist Forrn.wpd
iources Cited Above:
City of La Quinta General Plan 1992
Aerial Photograph provided by applicant, dated 6/22/98
City of La Quinta General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report 1992
Noise Impact Analysis, TT25691, Giroux & Associates, November 20, 1998
Archaeological Assessment of Tentative Tract 25691, Archaeological Associates, November 20, 199S
City of La Quinta Municipal Code, Zoning Ordinance.
PAEnvironmental Checklist Form.wpd
►ddendum, Environmental Assessment 98-372
'he discussion provided below analyses those potential impacts which may be signficant, as identified in thi
hecklist above.
H. a. & b. The City is located in a seismically active area. The proposed tract map is located in
Zone IV groundshaking zone, approximately 2.0 miles east of an inferred and inactive fault. Thi
City has implemented provisions in the Uniform Building Code for seismically active areas. Thl
project will be required to conform to these standards. This mitigation measure will ensure tha
impact from seismic activity will be reduced to a level of insignificance.
The grade differential proposed for the individual pads in this tract could potentially result h
an erosion hazard. The City requires that all soils be properly compacted. In addition, each o
the slope types will be analysed to ensure that they do not exceed the City's standards (retentiol
basin, landscaped parkway, individual lots). The Building Department and City Engineer wil
review all grading plans to ensure that City standards are met. These mitigation measures wil
ensure that impacts from erosion or unstable soil conditions are reduced to a level o
insignificance.
V. a. The construction of homes on currently vacant desert lands will reduce the permeable surfac
available for absorption, and will increase surface runoff. The proposed tract has designed;
retention basin which is of sufficient size to accommodate the 100 year, 24 hour storm. Th
retention basin will allow for the controlled release of storm flows, reducing the impact on th
rate of surface runoff. The retention basin will be re -vegetated, and will allow absorption, ani
percolation into the soil will occur. The construction of the retention basin, to the satisfactio;
of the City Engineer, will reduce the impacts to surface water runoff to a level of insignifcanci
V. C. The paving of surfaces within the proposed tract will increase the risk that pollutants will affec
surface waters. As these surface waters travel through the project, they will be subject to sue
pollution. Once in the retention basin, however, surface waters which percolate into the soil wi
benefit from the City's standards for retention basins, which include the installation of tricklin
sand filters and leachfields. These mitigation measures, in the form of conditions of approva
will decrease the potential imapcts to surface water to a level of insignificance.
IV. f. The construction of the proposed project will result in an increased demand for domestic wate
The Valley's water supplies are being recharged through contractual agreement with ti
Metropolitan Water District, utilizing California Water Project resources. Although ft
regional groundwater basin is in an overdraft condition, the efforts of the Coachella Valk
Water District, the City's water conservation requirements, and other outside agency efforts aF
mitigating the regional draw -down of groundwater.
PAEnvironmental Checklist Forn.wpd
'I. g. The proposed tract's access road occurs on Miles Avenue, approximately 660 feet east of Duni
Palms Road. The Miles Avenue traffic at this intersection will be uncontrolled. Traffic exiting
the proposed tract and turning left could result in a traffic hazard on Miles Avenue. The Cib.
Engineer has reviewed this potential impact, and determined that project traffic exiting Lot I
will only be allowed to turn right. In addition, Lot C will be constructed to the western propery
boundary to connect to future roads on adjacent property which will eventually provide
controlled intersection which will allow for left and right turns from this area.
a. The project parcel can be characterized as an area of sand dunes, created by regional winds an(
supporting a number of specieis. The proposed project is within the Coachella Valley Fringe
toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan fee mitigation area. The proposed tract will be require(
to contribute a fee of $600.00 per acre for the mitigation of impacts to this protected species. Thi
contribution for the fringe -toed lizard will also contribute to the preservation of habitat fog
other species which live in similar habitat. The site is only 10.12 acres in size, and is in an are. -
of the City which is experiencing rapid growth. The loss of this site is not expected to have s
significant impact on biological resources.
b. A noise analysis was prepared for the proposed tract map, and significant impacts were foun(
to be possible, unless mitigation measures are implemented. The noise levels along the Mile:
Avenue corridor are currently elevated, and the General Plan requires that all new developmen
mitigate these impacts, and provide an exterior noise level of 60 dBA or less for residential Ian(
uses. The noise study found that a six foot wall along the property line of individual lots whose
back yards will occur adjacent to Miles Avenue will reduce exterior noise levels to 59.5 dBA
CNEL, which will meet the City's standard. Furthermore, the study found that the use o
STC=23 or higher windows in these units will reduce interior noise levels to 45 dBA CNEL of
less, which meets the City's standards for interior noise levels in residential land uses. These
mitigation measures are sufficient to lower the potential impact to eventual residents of thi
project to a less than significant level. Should the applicant propose 2-story homes on these lots
further mitigation will be required, and should be incorporated into Development Reviev
conditions of approval at that time.
:I. c. The proposed project will generate potential new students for the Desert Sands Unified Schoo
District. The State of California has developed an impact fee for all residential and commercia
development to mitigate the impacts to school facilities. The proposed project will be require(
to contribute its share to the District, as required by City codes. The payment of the fee wil
lower the impact to the District to a less than significant level.
:I. d. The proposed tract will create new City roadways, in the form of Lots B, C and D. These
roadways will be incorporated into the City's street system, and require maintenance. Th
construction of the roadway will be the applicant's responsibility. The maintenance of a Cit.'
street is a General Fund expense for the City. Once constructed, the homes on this tract wil
generate property tax, which will be deposited into the City's General Fund. These increase)
revenues will help to offset the cost of maintenance of the roadways. The impact is expected t,
be less than significant.
P:\F.mironmental Checklist Form.wpd
III. a. The proposed tract occurs on one of the City's secondary image corridors. These corridor
require that special care and attention be given to the streetscape. The proposed project meel
the City's requirement in this regard, and mitigates the potential impact by creating
landscaping parkway with an average width of 20 feet. Once landscaped, this parkway wi
improve the image of the roadway.
UV. b. An archaeological resource assessment was conducted for the proposed project. The assessmen
which included both records search and site survey, concluded that the probability c
archaeological resources on the site is low. The study further states that no further monitorin
or additional analysis is necessary. The impact to archaeological resources is less tha
significant.
PAEnvironmental Checklist Form.wpd
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 25691 TO
DEVELOP A 38 SINGLE FAMILY AND OTHER
COMMON LOT SUBDIVISION ON 10.12 ACRES
LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MILES AVENUE
APPROXIMATELY 660 FEET EAST OF DUNE PALMS
ROAD.
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25691
APPLICANT: WORLD DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did
on the 26th day of January, 1999, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for World
Development for development of a single family residential and other common lot
subdivision on 10.12 acres generally located on the north side of Miles Avenue,
approximately 660 feet east of Dune Palms Road, more particularly described as:
APN: 604-072-005
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 recommending approval
of said Tentative Tract Map 25691:
Finding Number 1 - Consistency with General Plan:
A. The property is designated Low Density Residential (LDR). The Land Use Element
of the General Plan allows residential land uses. The project is consistent with the
goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter
2) because single family low density residential lots are proposed. The project, as
conditioned, is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General
Plan Circulation Element.
Finding Number 2 - Consistency with City Zoning Ordinance:
A. The proposed single family lots exceed the minimum size requirement of 7,200
square feet. The proposed residential lots are consistent in size with the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
B. The proposed single family lots are consistent with the development standards
contained in the City's Zoning Code
Conditions of approval are recommended ensuring compliance with the City's
Zoning Code.
Planning Commission Resolution 99-,
Finding Number 3 - Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act:
A. Tentative Tract Map 25691 is subject to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act per Public Resources Code Section 65457(a).
Finding_Number 4 - Site Design:
A. The proposed design of the subdivision conforms with the development standards
found in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance in that lot dimensions and size,
street widths, etc. are in compliance with the Zoning Code Development standards.
B. The site is physically suitable for the proposed land division, as the area is relatively
flat and without physical constraints, and the design of the tract ties into existing
improvements immediately north.
Finding Number 5 - Site Improvements:
A. Stormwater retention will be provided on -site in the form of a retention basin at the
southwestern corner of the tract.
B. All streets within the proposed tract will become public streets. All streets will
connect to existing City streets, and will be improved to City standards.
C. Infrastructure improvements such as gas, electric, sewer and water will be extended
to service the site in underground facilities as required. No adverse impacts have
been identified based on letters of response from affected public agencies.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment 98-372
assessed the environmental concerns of this Tentative Tract; and,
3. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Tentative Tract Map 25691
or the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 26th day of January, 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AAPC Res99- TTM25691
Planning Commission Resolution 99-,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
AAPC Res99- TTM25691
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25691 - WORLD DEVELOPMENT
JANUARY 26, 1999
GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
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. Subdivider agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in
the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this
project. The City of La Quinta shall have 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 25691 shall comply with the requirements and standards of §§
66410-66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and
Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) unless otherwise modified by
the following conditions. This map approval shall expire and become null and void
within two years of approval unless an extension of time is granted according to the
requirements of Section 13.12.150 of the Subdivision Ordinance.
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
• 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.
�APC COAsTTM25691• —1
Planning Commission Resolution 99-----
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 25691 - World Development
January 26, 1999
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater
discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the
applicant shall submit a copy of the Notice of Intent received from the CWQCB prior to
issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the
required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project
site.
5. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's
adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building
permits.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
6. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and
other property rights required of the tentative map or otherwise necessary for
construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights
shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City
for emergency services and for maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of
essential improvements.
7. 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.
8. Right of way dedications required of this development include:
A. Miles Avenue - 55' half of a 110' right of way
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.
9. The applicant shall dedicate ten -foot public utility easements contiguous with and
along both sides of all private streets. The easements may be reduced to five feet
with the express concurrence of IID.
A:\PC—COAs TTM25691 -2
Planning Commission Resolution 99-----
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 25691 - World Development
January 26, 1999
10. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as follows
(listed setback depth is the average depth if meandering wall design is approved):
A. Miles Avenue - 20'
The setback requirement applies to all frontage including, but not limited to,
remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes.
11. 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.
12. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets and properties
from all frontage along the streets and properties except access points shown on
the approved tentative map.
13. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as appropriate,
from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction,
permanent slopes or other encroachments are to occur.
14. 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.
15. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion
of this property between the date of approval by the City Council and the date of
recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the property unless such
easements are approved by the City Engineer.
FINAL MAPS
16. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files
of the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, on storage media and
in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard
AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program.
�APC COAs TTM25691 —3
Planning Commission Resolution 99-----
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 25691 - World Development
January 26, 1999
If the map was not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to
AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the map.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer,"
"surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their
respective professions in the State of California.
17. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified
engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be submitted on 24"
x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets and
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.
"Street and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths,
gates and entryways, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include
irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and perimeter walls.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
18. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for
elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant
may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City.
19. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the
City Engineer. The files shall utilize standards AutoCad menu items so they may be
fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and
prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to
reflect as -constructed conditions.
If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted
to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans.
A:\PC—COAs TTM25691 -4
Planning Commission Resolution 99-----
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 25691 - World Development
January 26, 1999
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
20. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an
executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations
required by the City prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a
certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements,
security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC.
Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing
structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements.
21. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of improvement
costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates shall comply with
the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not
listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of other
agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for
telephone, gas, or T. V. Cable improvements. However, tract improvements shall
not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the
telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service
to lots within the development.
22. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative
approvals (plot plans, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site improvements and
common improvements (e.g., retention basins, perimeter walls & landscaping,
gates) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first phase unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations required
of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of homes or
occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase and subsequent phases unless
a construction phasing plan is approved by the City Engineer.
23. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely
manner or as specified in an approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right
to halt issuance of building permits or final building inspections or otherwise
withhold approvals related to the development of this project until the applicant
makes satisfactory progress on the improvements or obligations or has made other
arrangements satisfactory to the City.
cTC COAs TTM25691 _5
Planning Commission Resolution 99-----
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 25691 - World Development
January 26, 1999
24. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security for applicant's required share of
improvements which have been or may be constructed by others (participatory
improvements).
Participatory improvements for this development include:
A. Underground installation of existing overhead utilities.
B. Miles Avenue - One half the cost of an 18 foot raised landscaped median and
turn pockets contiguous with this development.
C. Traffic Signal at Miles Avenue and Dune Palms Road - $8,855 (6.62% of the
City's $133,758 cost to construct). The applicant shall satisfy this obligation
prior to issuance of the first building permit for this development (including
model homes).
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 because subject to such a program.
GRADING
25. The applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and a grading
plan prepared by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the
recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by a soils
engineer or engineering geologist. The plan must be approved by the City Engineer
prior to issuance of a grading permit. A statement shall appear on final maps (if any
are required of this development) that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to
Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 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 is 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.
NAPC COAs TTM25691 -6
Planning Commission Resolution 99-----
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 25691 - World Development
January 26, 1999
26. 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.
27. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water
erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with
other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and
Public Works Departments.
28. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad
certifications stamped and signed by a civil engineer or surveyor. The certifications
shall list approved pad elevations, actual elevations, and the difference between the
two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed
cumulatively if submitted at different times.
DRAINAGE
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the
following:
29. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries,
levels or frequencies in any area outside the development.
30. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm (the
design storm) shall be retained within the development unless otherwise approved
by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of
adjacent public streets.
31. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual -lot
basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for lots
2 1/2 acres in size or larger or where the use of common retention is impracticable.
If individual -lot retention is approved, the applicant shall meet the individual -lot
retention provisions of Chapter 13.24, LQMC.
32. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated,
unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route.
33. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on site
or passed through to the overflow outlet.
OPC COAs TTM25691 -7
Planning Commission Resolution 99-----
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 25691 - World Development
January 26, 1999
34. Retention facility design shall be based on site -specific percolation data which shall
be submitted for checking with the retention facility plans. The design percolation
rate shall not exceed two inched per hour.
35. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. Maximum retention depth shall be six
feet for common basins and two feet for individual -lot retention.
36. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance
water shall be disposed of in a tickling sand filter and leachfield approved by the
City Engineer. The sand filter and leachfield shall be designed to contain surges of
3 gph/1,000 sq. Ft. (Of landscape area) and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. Ft.
In developments for which security will be provided by public safety entities (e.g.,
the La Quinta Safety Department or the Riverside County Sheriffs Department),
retention basins shall be visible from adjacent street(s). No fence or wall shall be
constructed around basins unless approved by the Community Development
Director and the City Engineer.
UTILITIES
37. 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.
38. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. The applicant
shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
39. 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 as determined by the City.
40. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with the
General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements shall
conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.)
OPC COAs TTM25691 —g
Planning Commission Resolution 99-----
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 25691 - World Development
January 26, 1999
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
Miles Avenue (Primary Arterial) - Construct 43-foot half of 86-foot
improvement (travel width, excluding curbs) plus 6 foot sidewalk.
B. ON -SITE STREETS
1. Residential serving up to 150 homes or 1,500 vpd - 36-foot travel width.
2. Residential serving over 150 homes or 1,500 vpd - 40-foot travel width.
3. Culs de sac per Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A
(offset).
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.
41. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following:
A. Miles Avenue - Main project entrance located approximately 663' east of the
Dune Palms Road centerline - Right/left turn into the project and right
turn only out of the project.
42. 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.
43. 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).
44. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC,
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved by
the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas
shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
OPC COAs TTM25691 -9
Planning Commission Resolution 99-----
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 25691 - World Development
January 26, 1999
45. Street right of way geometry for culs de sac, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs
shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and $#805
respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
46. 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.
47. 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 and Parking Areas
3.0"
a.c./4.50" a.b.
Collector
4.0"
a.c./5.0"
a.b.
Secondary Arterial
4.0"
a.c./6.0"
a.b.
Primary Arterial
4.5"
a.c./6.0"
a.b.
Major Arterial
5.5"
a.c./6.5"
a.b.
48. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time
of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The
submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design
procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent
(less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test
results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The
applicant shal[ not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved.
49. The City shall conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings only
when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to
publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control
devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets are initially
constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the
pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the tract
or when directed by the City, whichever comes first.
50. The applicant shall coordinate with the Sunline Transit Agency regarding the
provision of a bus stop pad, bus turnout, construction of a shelter and associated
amenities at the intersection of Lot B and Miles Avenue.
LAPC COAs TTM25691 -10-
Planning Commission Resolution 99-----
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 25691 - World Development
January 26, 1999
LANDSCAPING
51. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots, and park areas.
52. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians,
retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape
architect.
The applicant shall submit plans for approval by the Community Development
Department prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan
checking is complete, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the
Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for signature by the
City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City
Engineer.
Landscaping plans for the parkway adjacent to Miles Avenue, and for the entrance
feature area at the intersection of Lot B and Miles Avenue shall conform to the
requirements of the LQMC and shall be approved prior to the issuance of grading
permits.
53. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas
outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
54. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or
spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public arterial streets.
55. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, common basins and park areas
shall be designed with grades and turf grass surface which can be mowed with
standard tractor -mounted equipment.
56. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated
to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures.
57. The applicant shall construct perimeter walls and required landscaping to enclose
the entire perimeter prior to final inspection and occupancy of any homes within the
tract unless a phasing plan or construction schedule is approved by the City
Engineer.
A:\PC—COAs TTM25691
Planning Commission Resolution 99-----
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 25691 - World Development
January 26, 1999
QUALITY ASSURANCE
58. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
59. The applicant shall employ or retain qualified civil engineers, geotechnical
engineers, surveyors, or other appropriate professionals to provide sufficient
construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings.
60. 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.
61. 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 the accuracy of the drawings. The
applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City
to reflect as -constructed conditions.
MAINTENANCE
62. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all
required improvements unless and until expressly released from said responsibility
by the City.
63. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all
required improvements unless and until expressly released from said responsibility
by the City. This shall include formation of a homeowner's association or other
arrangement acceptable to the City for maintenance of retention basins, common
areas and perimeter walls and landscaping.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
64. 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.
cTC COAs TTM25691 -12-
Planning Commission Resolution 99-----
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract Map 25691 - World Development
January 26, 1999
65. Prior to ground disturbance activities, a fee of $600 per acre shall be paid to the
Community Development Department.
FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
66. Fire hydrants in accordance with CVWD Standard W-33 shall be located at each
street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no
portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow
shall be 1500 gpm for a 2 hour duration at 20 psi. Blue dot reflectors shall be
mounted in the middle of streets directly in line with fire hydrants.
A:\PC—COAs TTM25691 -13-
►
0
ATTACHMENT #1
BANNING 41 Mi.
P'30" 1990 000 FEET I THOUSAt!D PALMS 9 Mi.
Bermuda
Dunes 'MZyo
A i r po r t a-__.
w"t,
LA QUINTA41UADRANGLE
CALIFORNIA-RIVERSIDE CO.
.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) 1\10 V
NE/4 PALM DESERT IS- QUADRANGLE
1%8 1569 116 15
-3W 4 5'
%(
41
/c-
DA DUNES 33 v) o
ON L-4,vs
-B Siphonz
0.. R Y C L I
C5
u
170 -4
:8
3 733
10
G
Q;, 570000
FEET
LL
(4
/Y
VEN 44-
3732
JEC
"M
<
Trailer
Park''NUE MILES W-11 2b
33
f
O
4v 0
co 3731
1 0-1-
80
4'.
41
LIE ...46
AVENUE
OW
0
L
. . . . ................
............ ..
co
42130"
29 BM :61
%
_�2 28
om
.-C) ......
to
11 0)
I • —Lu
Trailer Park
co
0
-P Trailer �kirk
e
NUE 3729
24
pil
Well
B I #A
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: JANUARY 26, 1999
RE: MASTER DE&GN GUIDELINES FOR PACIFIC TRADES
CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT (MDG 99-002)
The Zoning Code requires additional development standards for the Cove Residential
area called Master Design Guidelines. Design Guidelines are required for any
developer/applicant constructing five or more houses in the RC District. Therefore
when a developer wants to pull a permit for the sixth house, the guidelines must have
been reviewed and accepted by the Planning Commission.
Mr. Dave R, Miller, Pacific Trades Construction and Development, seeks building
permit approval for his sixth plus house. He is submitting Master Design Guidelines
for Planning Commission review. The Guidelines contain information as to how the
developer/applicant intends to vary the exterior of the units which includes, but is not
limited to, roof types, window and entry treatment, and setbacks.
Staff has reviewed the guidelines and has determined the applicant has provided
adequate deviations to the elevations such as varied roof lines and window
treatments. In addition, upon Planning Commission approval, staff will use the
guidelines to evaluate each building permit application from this developer for
compliance with the approved guidelines.
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission accept the Master Design
Guidelines (MDG 99-002) as presented.
P:\FRED\MDG 98-002.pc.wpd
SELLER, EALY, HEMPHILL & BLASDEL, LLP
A RWIS77" UMI77a! U.WU77 PM7NP.RSHIP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
PAUL T. SELZER 777 E. TAHQU17Z CANYON WAY, SUITE 3.
W. CURT EALY PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 9221
EMILY PERRI HEMPHILL TELEPHONE(760)320-59
DIANE C. BLASDEL FACSIMILE (760) 320-951
o-ma&EPHEMPHHJ.®adca
January 26, 1999
Planning Commission
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
RE: Tentative Tract Map 28982/Site Development Permit No. 98-631, Tract
24230 (Amendment #1) and EA 98-369
Dear Commissioners:
This office represents the A.G. Spanos Company ("Spanos") with regard to the
above referenced project. As you may recall, during the Commission's last hearing on this
project, opposition was expressed by the adjacent homeowners to several aspects of the project.
We believe that some of that opposition is based upon misunderstandings as to Spanos' plan for
development of the site. Other elements of that opposition voiced concerns which Spanos has
attempted to address through redesign and modification of its plans for the property in question.
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with information needed to address the concerns
expressed by the homeowners at Lake La Quinta. The primary concerns expressed and Spanos'
response to those concerns is as follows:
1. Homeowners are concerned that the two story building height within the
project will impact views and privacy. They suggested some single story elements and
possible relocation of buildings to assure privacy.
The original project description included all two story buildings. In response to
the concerns expressed by the homeowners at Lake La Quinta, Spanos has relocated the buildings
formerly along the southern border of the project. The original plan showed the closest buildings
along that border being approximately 20 feet from the wall to be built on the property line.
Spanos has redesigned the site plan to move all buildings along the southern border at least an
additional 56 feet from the property line, with some buildings having been moved as much as 82
feet from the property line. Building set backs to the two story structures along the southern
property line now range from 75 feet to as much as 94 feet.
Also in response to concerns expressed with regard to privacy, the building located
at the southwest corner of the project has been changed to be a single story building. The pad for
this building has also been lowered an additional foot, and the building has been moved north,
away from the southern property border, an additional 61 feet, making its total set back to the
EPH70550:1/26/99
SELZER, EALY, HEMPHILL & BLASDEL, LLP
January 26, 1999
Page 2
south, 81 feet and its setback on the west, approximately 75 feet.
Also, building pad elevations for all buildings along the southern border of the
property have been lowered, ranging from .5 feet to 2 feet. Building configurations have also
been designed to assure that there are no second story balconies facing the development within
Lake La Quinta either to the west or the south.
2. Homeowners expressed concern that Spanos intended to remove the oleander
hedge on the southern border of the subject property and replace it with a five foot wall,
creating privacy issues for the adjacent homeowners.
Spanos does not intended, nor did it ever intend, to remove the oleander hedge.
This hedge belongs to the Lake La Quinta Homeowners Association ("Association"), and Spanos
therefore has no right, nor any desire, to remove the hedge. This oleander hedge creates a natural
barrier which appears to be in excess of 14 feet in height, and the Association is free to allow that
height to increase as it sees fit. Spanos does intend to build a masonry wall/berm combination
on its side of the oleander hedge, such that the finished height of the wall will be 8 feet above the
curb on Dulce Del Mar.
3. Homeowners expressed objection to open carports being constructed adjacent
to existing homes.
Spanos has revised its plans to provide that along the western boundary of the
subject property, they will be constructing single story enclosed garages rather than carports.
These garages will be located a minimum of 10 feet from the wall separating the subject property
from the adjacent property in Lake La Quinta. Carports will be used along the southern border
of the property, however, these carports will be located a minimum of 20 feet from the southern
property boundary and will be screened by the oleander hedge and the masonry wall/berm
combination discussed above.
4. Homeowners indicated concern about drainage from the project into Lake La
Quinta, and indicated that Spanos had no right to adopt such a drainage plan.
Spanos was the original developer of Lake La Quinta, and in that process,
specifically reserved to itself, its successors and assigns, drainage easements which permit
drainage from the subject property into Lake La Quinta. The homeowners are therefore incorrect
in their assertion that Spanos has no right to use such drainage easements. The original drainage
plan, approved by the City of La Quinta, specifically contemplated and called for this property
and one half of Adams Street and 47th Avenue to drain into Lake La Quinta. We therefore
EPH70550:1/26/99
SELZER, EALY, HEMPHILL & BLASDEL, LLP
January 26, 1999
Page 3
believe that Spanos is well within its rights in planning to have drainage from the property go into
Lake La Quinta. Nonetheless, in order to allay the concerns of the homeowners, Spanos has
changed its plan such that it is now installing, on its own property, a system of drywells which
will handle normal runoff on the property without the need to drain into Lake La Quinta.
Drainage into the Lake will occur only in circumstances which constitute an unusual storm event,
and Spanos retains its easement rights to so utilize the drainage easements reserved in the original
tract map for Lake La Quinta.
5. Homeowners objected to Spanos' use of the name "Aventine at Lake La
Quinta."
Spanos has agreed that the project name will simply be "Aventine."
6. Homeowners objected to the fact that Spanos intends to retain ownership of
the residential units for rental purposes, asserting that this did not constitute a
"condominium".
In the publication for the hearings on this project, the project was designated as a
"condominium" project because the proposed project does, in fact, include a condominium map
and any other form of designation would therefore be improper. The project meets the guidelines
set forth in Civil Code Sections 783 and 1351(f) which define a "condominium". Neither of these
codes sections contain any reference to a requirement that individual condominium units be sold
within a specified time frame, and in fact, there is no requirement that such units ever be sold.
Spanos, at this time, has elected to retain ownership of these units, however, the condominium
map's adoption leaves open the opportunity to sell the individual units in the future. Spanos, as
the property owner, has been involved in development in La Quinta for many years, and has been
a responsible developer who has taken great care in the maintenance of its property. In fact, it
is Spanos that maintains the landscape buffer lying between the Lake La Quinta development and
Washington Street. Furthermore, it is unfounded speculation that Spanos will somehow allow this
property, which represents a substantial investment for the company, to simply deteriorate into
the type of degraded project feared by the homeowners. In essence, this project will be
maintained by its owner, Spanos, and will exhibit pride in ownership and a sophisticated
company's best efforts to protect its investment.
7. Homeowners have objected to the density of development at 160 units.
The proposed project is within the right of zone with regard to density and all other
elements of the project's design. Spanos has not requested any variances, density increases,
density transfers or other modifications of the existing zoning for the project. The CC&R's of
EPH70550:1/26/99
SELZER, EALY, HEMPHILL & BLASDEL, LLP
January 26, 1999
Page 4
Lake La Quinta specifically reference the fact that this property is contemplated for 160
condominium units, a fact which all Lake La Quinta owners were aware of when they purchased
their property. Since this project was contemplated when the Lake La Quinta properties were
originally sold, the potential presence of the project was factored into the original prices paid for
the Lake La Quinta properties, and therefore, the alleged "loss in value" about which homeowners
are concerned is neither proven nor likely.
Since Spanos is developing this property totally within the requirements of its
existing zoning, an attempt by the City to deny the permitted density is tantamount to down -
zoning the property without proper procedure. We believe that such an effort is inappropriate
and, under the circumstances, would constitute an abuse of discretion that makes the project
economically infeasible.
8. Homeowners have expressed concerns that the proposed project is a "low
income" apartment project and that this will result in "transients" wandering the streets of
Lake La Quinta and using the amenities contained in that development.
The project is not a "low income" apartment project, and no units are reserved for
low and moderate income residents. Rather, it is a market rate project. Furthermore, the
residents of the Aventine project will not have access to the interior streets of Lake La Quinta,
nor will they have access to the recreational facilities contained within that development.
In summary, the Spanos Corporation has made significant modifications to its proposed
project in order to respond to the concerns expressed by the homeowners within Lake La Quinta.
Several of those homeowners indicated in their written correspondence to the Planning
Commission at its previous meeting that they are not against the project, but wanted the City to
assure that certain changes were made. We believe that Spanos has acted responsibly in
responding to those concerns and making many of the changes requested. While we recognize
that some of the homeowners may still prefer that the project not be built, nonetheless those
homeowners, having been advised of the property's intended purpose before purchasing at Lake
La Quinta, must likewise recognize that Spanos has complied with the requirements placed on it
under the zoning ordinance and should therefore be permitted to exercise its own rights as a
property owner. We respectfully request, therefore, that the Planning Commission approve the
above referenced project as revised.
Sincerely,
Emily Perri Hemphill
Selzer, Ealy, Hemphill & Blasdel, LLP
EPH70550:126/99
��, IM.r. lU osd.�►n,
LAKE LA QUINTA HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION
c/o 1.& w. Management Co
P.O. Sox 1398
Palm Desert, CA 92261
(760) 568-0349
Fax: (760 346-4349
November 2,1998
A.G. Spanos CO.
1341 W. Robinhood
Stockton, CA 95207
Attn: Jack Lucas
Dear Mr. Lucas,
The purpose of our meeting today, and this letter, is to set forth
Lake La Quinta community's deep concern regarding
changes tooproyouposed
d
"Spanos" project acent to us. Although
outset we urge
that we are more than
project, we want youto know at th
willing to discuss and work with your company to arrive at a
mutually acceptable project which will prove to be be Wei a yourto
City of La Quinta, the Lake La Quinta homeowners,
company.
At the present time Lake La Quinta ithin our developmens a growing t. We
We have now occupied over 140 homes
have a great deal of pride in our city and neighborhood. The Lake La
Quinta Home Owners Association is a very active abody and t time wewelook
forward to completion of our total � oject. At eeding140 acres. Our homes, by
occupy 281 homes on a land �e
La Quinta standards, are upscale and at full build -out will have a
density of 2.8 homes per acre.
We have a beautiful lake for boating, tennis enjoyment. Our recreational area has annis court, pool, picnicking
facilities and social meeting space. In addition, we are adjacent to
an exclusive Bed and Breakfast facility. Lake La Quinta, by anyone's
standard of assessment is a pride to an urban area.
Naturally, our view of an incoming project such as the "Spans"
project is measured by what w fhaveany future adjaced in nt project is
community to date. Our view
nce of that project, its density of
colored by the overall appears ty
population, its visual, health, safety and security impact and its
overall effect on our financial and personal investment.
At the present time, we believe the "Spanos" project, as it has
been made known to our Lake La Quinta-Home Owners Association,
will have an adverse affect on our community. The following items
are the most obvious concerns to us, at this point.
First. "Spanos" proposes a very high density project. We are
informed that you plan to build 160 units on 10 to this acres. density Tat number
of units per acre is much too high adjacent
community! We are presently a quiet residential neighborhood. Cars
infrequently come and go on our streets. Our boating is all powered
by wind, rowing or silent electric motors. The adjacent B&B sends
its patrons to tennis courts outside the Lake La Quinta community so
as not to impact our residents with added lighting andnoise. High
Vehicle
d
and social activity will occur throughout the daynight.
density equates to noise. Obviously, density detrimentacent to to our home wners
La
Quinta property will become a serious d ratio
and our future growth. We strongly object to the occupancy
which you propose to introduce.
Another factor associated with the density aspects of this
proposed project, and which exacerbates Lake Ia Quinta's concern, is
that we are now being told that the Spann
complex and not a home -owner condominium development. We
believe it is detrimental to ourcommunity
mm lationares ding id its n the proposed
development to have a transient pop
high density community. Managed apartments
We wionstitute a ll accept no Jesse
threat to our Lake La Quinta homeow
than condominiums. Pride of ownership must be the hallmark of
your community, as it is in ours!
Second. The visual detriment of constructing a multitude of
2.
two story buildings abutting and overlooking our single family
residential community constitutes an unacceptable intrusion.
Structures which approach 40' in height deprive us of our view,
create balconies overlooking our property, and disturb our privacy.
A residential one-story housing environment is better suited to this
area.
Third. We believe your proposal to construct open carports
immediately adjacent to Lake La Quinta homes creates an
intolerable situation. Carports contibute to blight, noise, errant
alarms and fumes. The loud noises of carstarting-up,
uing- can e'day er y and
that these
night, are exaggerated by an open carport.
irritants travel east to west in this area, thereby threatening added
nuisances to those our residents immediately west of your proposed
site. We do not believe that Mr. Spans or any other member of your
organization would accept a vast number of open carports adjacent
to their residential property.
No less than fully covered garages should be constructed on
your condominium project. Modern-day condominium projects no
longer construct open carport. It should not be done here.
Fourth. In our view the present "Spans" project plans to
funnel water drainage directly into our tormted
o
ultimately into our private lake. We canaccept the risks
associated with such a plan. you ust slake and evise an alternate plan
plan
which will guarantee no invasion ofou
Fifth. We understand that a five foot
o. c� rom and Lake La Quintaome �
are proposed in order to separate your p e, and _
That does not seem adequate to us. We
ans � ge fee gabove any your
cooperation, to construct walls higher
finished grade, thereby increasing privacy and security.
Sixth. It is our understanding that the proposed "Spans"
project will identify itself as "Aventine at Lake La Quinta" We object.
3.
In our opinion it is improper and misleading to the public and the
future landowners of your proposed community to identify with the
Lake La Quinta community and our facilities.
It is only fair to let you know that as a community we
homeowners at Lake La Quinta are very sensitive to your proposed
project. We have sought advice from legal counsel in order to assist
our cause, if necessary. Also, if necessary, we will communicate our
heartfelt opposition to your project by petition and otherwise to the
City of U Quinta.
It is our opinion that the project needs some significant degree
of redesign to eliminate the valid objections which we have
expressed. We hope you agree.
Again, please understand that we want to work with you and
arrive at a mutually beneficial project which will be good for La
Quinta, Lake La Quinta and your company.
Sincerely,
Jay Roberts
President
Lake La Quinta Home Owners Association
4.
.lanuar; z .1999
Planning Connnission
r:ity council.
City of.l a f, wnta
As a new resident of [ce La Quinta, I am Fiery troubled. When we bout our
&SMssed, bo of Trials as this -,was to be ow last home. Aswebacic
up to 47th Ave. Five have views of Eagie Hardware and MacDonalds which we are
comg for with landscaping. "What wve had not reckoned with -was tlk- tic.
Ms seems to be a popular street, especially for trucks. Now that the Spans Corp.
is fiYmmg ahez.4 Nvith then plaw fsf 160 nits (which could equate to 320 vehicles),
I'm sure a large portion of them would chose 47th Ave. as a "quick" trip to their
abode. 04v bedroom windows are 20 feet from this street. There goes the duality
of Me, peace and tranqudity,. and our untroubled sleep.
As I understand it, Spanos has made many adjustments to their original plan .
These are at best rWhative measures and do not address the three major problems -
density, height, and "rental" units. I would like Spanos to explain where on earth
they plan to find people to rent this many units. We all have hwor stories of rentals
, and the thought of our special area being adjacent to such a potentially
undesireable situation is abhorrent.
The developers, according to a ten year old agreement, are supposedly within their
rights to proceed with this plan which will benefit no one but the already cheep
pockets of a well placed and wealthy individual. If they proceed with their selfish,
greedy plazas, the :-avant lots off lake -Al continue to remain vacant, blowing sand
and tumbleweeds on our lovely homes. No one will want to purchase up- scale
single gamily homes near a large rental development, and Lake La Quinta will never
be built out to its completion.
I urge the Planning Commission to reject this development as being incompatible
with the Lake La Q-uinta, development, and the other single family up -scale
developments in the area.
Sincerely,
Geri Gau�ier
47030 Via Lorca
Curt & Mary Rathjen
47590'Vta Montiyo
fa Quin.ta, Cat 922,53
760-771-1614 or 1814
Fax 76o-P71-1814
Tuesday, January 26, 1999
La Quinta Planning Commission
City of La Quinta
As residents of Lake La Quinta, this is to express our concerns with the proposed apartment
complex to be built by the Spanos Corporation adjacent to Lake La Quinta on the 10 acre parcel
at 47th and Adams Street.
First, we vehemently object to this project being developed as an apartment complex, rather than
as condominiums owned by individuals who are concerned with the entire community and have
pride of ownership as an incentive to keep property values at a premium.
Second, a high density subdivision of this type will increase the air and noise polution level, i.e.
screaming children, noisy automobiles/motorbikes, etc., of our community and significantly affect
the serenity that we all expected when we purchased our homes in Lake La Quinta. Especially, we
object to having carports rather than enclosed garages for all residents. Starting up cars and bikes
inside garages helps muffle sounds and reduces the noise level in the area.
Third, two-story units that rise as high as 30' are higher than the Two Angels Inn which is 28' high
and is a unique and attractive building befitting our community.
Fourth, including " Lake La Quinta" in the name of their project infers that it is part of our
community and by doing so they are using that as publicity for their project.
We ask that the Planning Commission take our concerns into consideration and understand that
we are objecting because we want to retain the quality of our city and want only the best for the
City of La Quinta.
Sincerely,
yzrt "ftathj6 - �
Mary Rgihjen /
MICHAEL AND BONNIE WEXLER
47-210 VIA LORCA
LA QUINTA, CA 92253
(760) 771-1807
January 26, 1999
City of La Quinta, Planning Commission
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Dear Honorable Members,
PLANN!;rG
We are writing this letter regarding the proposed 160 unit apartment complex next to
Lake La Quinta. We currently reside at Lake La Quinta, two blocks away from the
proposed complex. We did attend the planning commission meeting held late last year
regarding the apartments. Unfortunately, we cannot attend the meeting on January 26,
1999.
We want to let it be known that we agreed with all of the objections that were raised at
the meeting. We think that the main problem with the complex as proposed is its height
and density.
We would also like to raise an issue that was not brought up at the meeting. We believe
that the complex as proposed is bad for the city of La Quinta as a whole, not just Lake La
Quinta. We are both real estate professionals who specialize in rental property. The
majority of people who rent in the desert are those with unstable income sources or
transient people. This is due to the fact that stable people can afford to buy their own
home in La Quinta. This housing affordability is one of the great features and draws of our
City. We think that the developer's projections for an "upscale" apartment complex are not
in line with the current soft rental market in our area. Most likely, the complex will just
draw tenants who currently live in other apartments, probably with the lure of cheaper
rent.
As real estate professionals, we more than anyone appreciate the rights of the land owner
to develop his property. However, as citizens of La Quinta, we think that it is in the City's
best interest to protect the City for the current and future residents. We would propose a
compromise development of no more than 80 single story units. The complex would then
actually be more geared toward the upscale or seasonal resident that the developer has
indicated is his target market.
The developer will probably state that 80 units would not be economically feasible. This
may be true given the fact that any apartment complex on that site may be economically
marginal. This is the reason that the developer is so insistent on absolutely maximizing the
housing density. It is common knowledge in the real estate industry that one can increase
the chances for profitability in a marginal project by having very high density.
It is imperative that the our City leaders protect the quality of life of our citizens. One of
the main reasons we moved here from Long Beach last year was to escape from the
problems brought about by high density housing. The Long Beach City Council still deeply
regrets the decision they made in the 1980's to allow high density housing. That decision
and the apartments that were built because of it have destroyed many neighborhoods and
led to the flight of Long Beach's higher income citizens. This high density housing has
negatively impacted both the City's quality of life as well as their financial condition.
The concept of multi family zoning was not introduced to create wealth building
opportunities for developers. It came about because of the need that citizens of a
community had for multi family housing. There is currently no shortage of rental housing
or apartments in our City. This is the reason the project is economically questionable. Our
community clearly doesn't have a strong need for high density housing, especially in our
area which currently consists of high end single family housing.
We strongly urge our City representatives to stand up and protect our beautiful city.
Respectfully,
Michael R. Wexler Bonnie S. Wexler
TENTATIVE TRACT 25691
WORLD DEVELOPMENT
10 ACRES TO BE SUBDIVIDED INTO 38 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL. UNITS.
You have on file a letter dated June 3, 1996 signed by 6 CACTUS
FLOWER property owners located to the North to this new proposed
subdivision. In that letter we requested a _16'6" foot height limitation be
imposed on Tentative Tract 25691, which I learned has been approved.
However, it was explained that the developer could erect 2-story units on the
lots that DO NO IMMEDIATELY ADJOIN our Cactus Flower properties.
We would like you to know that there are approximately _200_ units in
Cactus Flower immediately NORTH OF THIS NEW World Development
subdivision and the Cactus Flower Subdivision extends all the way to Fred
Waring. EACH AND EVERY UNIT IN CACTUS FLOWER IS OF ONE-
STORY STRUCTURES.
We respectfully request to have the units in World Development conform to
what already exists in Cactus Flower and that is that THEY ALL BE ONE-
STORY UNITS ALSO. Then this new area will be in harmony with the
existing subdi-vision.
Delores Lukina 760 345 1408
JANUARY 26, 1999
TO: LA QUINTA PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBJECT: PROPOSED SPANOS PROJECT TO BUILD 160 CONDOMINIUM UNITS
("APARTMENTS") ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 47TH AVENUE
ADAMS STREET
MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS, MY NAME IS JAY ROBERTS. I
RESIDE AT 47-790 VIA JARDIN IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA.
AS PRESIDENT OF THE LAKE LA QUINTA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, MY
REMARKS ARE INTENDED TO CONVEY THE POSITION OF THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS AND THE 281 CURRENT AND FUTURE HOMEOWNERS OF THE
LAKE LA QUOINTA DEVELOPMENT.
FIRST, LET ME THANK THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION FOR
CONTINUING THE SPANOS APPLICATION AT YOUR NOVEMBER 24TH
MEETING AND GIVING THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS
THE CONCERNS EXPRESSED BY BOTH THE LAKE LA QUINTA
HOMEOWNERS AND YOU MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
IT IS CLEAR THAT THE SPANOS REPRESENTATIVES TOOK YOUR
COMMENTS SERIOUSLY FOR THEY HAVE RELOCATED MANY OF THE
BUILDINGS TO BE FURTHER FROM PROPERTY LINES, REDUCED ONE
BUILDING TO A SINGLE -STORY UNIT, REPLACED CARPORTS WITH GARAGE
UNITS IN SOME LOCATIONS, AND PLAN TO CONSTRUCT THREE DRY WELLS
TO HANDLE SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE.
ALL OF THESE REVISIONS ARE DESIREABLE AND COMMENDABLE,
HOWEVER, IT IS STILL THEIR INTENTION TO CONSTRUCT 160 TWO-STORY
CONDOMINIUMIAPARTMENT UNITS ON THE 10 ACRE SITE AND TO PIPE
ANY OVERFLOW WATER FROM THEIR DRY WELL SYSTEM INTO LAKE LA
QUINTA, A PRIVATELY OWNED LAKE. IT IS FOR THESE REASONS THAT
THE LAKE LA QUINTA BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND HOMEOWNERS MUST
CONTINUE TO OPPOSE THE PROJECT AS IT IS CURRENTLY BEING
PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION.
IT IS OUR BELIEF THAT THE PLANNED SPANOS PROJECT IS TOTALLY
INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE ADJOINING COMMUNITY AND IS INCONSISTENT
WITH THE CITY OF LA QUINTA'S STATED OBJECTIVE OF "PRESERVING THE
OVERALL LOW -DENSITY CHARACTER OF THE CITY"
IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE ZONING OF THIS SITE TOOK PLACE
NEARLY TEN YEARS AGO. WE SUGGEST THAT THE CONDITIONS THAT
EXISTED TEN YEARS AGO HAVE CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY. GIVEN THE
CHANGES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN THE LAST TEN YEARS, WE FIND IT
UNLIKELY THAT THIS SITE WOULD BE ZONED TODAY FOR HIGH DENSITY
APARTMENTS. AS COMMISSIONER ROBBINS POINTED OUT, THIS
DEVELOPER HAS THE RIGHT TO BUILD 16 UNITS TO THE ACRE AND IT IS
ZONED FOR THAT MANY UNITS....... BUT THE DEVELOPER SHOULD ONLY
HAVE THAT RIGHT IF THEY CAN SATISFY ALL THE OTHER CONDITIONS
AND CONCERNS.
WE AT LAKE LA QUINTA FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT THE DECISION TO
BUILD TO THE ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM DENSITY PERMITED BY THE
CURRENT ZONING IS AN ECONOMIC DECISION MADE IN ORDER TO
MAXIMIZE INCOME. TO ACCOMPLISH THIS, THE DEVELOPER PLANS FOR
ALL BUT ONE OF THE APARTMENT BUILDINGS TO BE TWO STORIES. THIS
IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.
THE RELOCATION OF BUILDINGS IN THE CURRENT PLAN IS A WELCOME
ATTEMPT TO SOFTEN THE IMPACT OF TWO STORY BUILDINGS ON LAKE LA
QUINTA HOMES, BUT FALLS FAR SHORT OF MOST DESIREABLY REDUCING
THE DENSITY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY MAKING ALL PERIMETER
BUILDINGS ONE STORY IN HEIGHT. I BELIEVE CHAIRMAN TYLER
SUGGESTED THIS AS A POSSIBILITY AT YOUR NOVEMBER 24TH HEARING.
WE ARE TOLD BY THE SPANOS REPRESENTATIVES THAT THIS PROJECT
WILL NOT HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON LAKE LA QUINTA PROPERTY
VALUES. COMMON SENSE TELLS US THAT CONSTRUCTING 160 $800-$1000
PER MONTH APARTMENTS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO $500,000 OWNER -
OCCUPIED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT
EFFECT ON THE VALUE OF THOSE HOMES. IT WILL HAVE A SIMILAR
EFFECT ON ALL LAKE LA QUINTA SINGLE- FAMILY HOMES.
IF THOSE HOMES ABUTTING THE PROJECT ARE AFFECTED BY ONLY 5%
AND THOSE NOT DIRECTLY ABUTTING BY ONLY 3%, LAKE LA QUINTA
PROPERTY VALUES WILL BE REDUCED BY ALMOST $2,700,000. I'LL BE
HAPPY TO GO OVER THE ARITHMETIC WITH ANYONE INTERESTED.
REGARDLESS OF WHAT ACTIONS ANYONE MAY HAVE TAKEN IN THE
PAST, LAKE LA QUINTA HOMEOWNERS HAVE BEEN LED TO BELIEVE THAT
CONDOMINIUMS WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE PROPOSED SITE. WE
FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT 160 SMALL APARTMENTS NEXT TO SINGLE-FAMILY
OWNER -OCCUPIED HOMES IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE DIRECTION THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA SEEMS TO WANT TO GO. THIS IS NOT LOS ANGELES
OR SAN DIEGO.
THOUGH THIS PROJECT MAY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS AND CODES OF
THE CITY, WE BELIEVE THIS COMMISSION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO INSIST
UPON CHANGES THAT WILL CAUSE ANY PROPOSED PROJECT BE
COMPATIBLE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE IMMEDIATELY SURROUNDING
COMMUNITY. AS IT IS NOW BEING PRESENTED, THIS ONE DOES NOT MEET
THAT CRITERIA.
MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS, WE MUST ONCE AGAIN URGE YOU
TO REJECT THIS PROJECT AS IS NOW BEING PRESENTED. DENSITY MUST
BE REDUCED, ALL PERIMETER BUILDINGS EXCEPT THOSE FACING 47Tx
AVENUE SHOULD BE SINGLE STORY BUILDINGS, AND THE RENTAL
APARTMENT CONCEPT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH WHAT LAKE LA QUINTA
HOMEOWNERS HAVE BEEN LED TO BELIEVE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION AND CONSIDERATION.
79-665 Stagy 940100 ?z•
„& 2wwr4, 64 922053
Page 1 of 2 Pages
(hand delivered)
June 3, 1996
Mr. Greg Trousdell, Assoc. Planner
CITY OF LA QUINTA
Community Development Department
P. O. Box 1504
La Quinta, CA. 92253
RE: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25691 - 39 LOT SINGLE
FAMILVISION ON 9 ACRES R-1 ZONE
AND
RECORDED LOTS 15 THROUGH 20 INCLUSIVE TRACT
#24208 R-1 ZONE EXISTING SINGLE STORY DWELLINGS
Dear Mr. Trousdell:
We are in receipt of your NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING to be held on
June 11 in which Mr. Deman has request a one-year extension to record his
Tentative Tract Map 25691 as identified above.
Since the proposed 39 lot subdivision is located immediately south of the rear
property lines of the referenced lots described above in Tract 24208, we the
undersigned all legal owners of said property improved with single family
homes,
respectfully request that the City restrict the homes to be
constructed in Tentative Tract 25691 to be of single story
with a height limitation not to exceed 161611, excluding the
chimney height
These restrictions would be in keeping with the existing height
of our homes and would provide an over-all esthetic appearance
of all the dwellings in this immediate area.
Page 2 of 2 Pages
We have learned that the City may be considering making a revision in their
existing zoning code which may include a provision that in areas were single
family homes of one-story exist, new construction adjacent to the existing
structures must also be of one-story. Since there is a possibility of a zoning
change, we feel our request is compatible with the City's future planning and,
as such, would in no way be a burden on the Developer.
Any correspondence concerning this particular letter should be directed to the
address listed above.
Sincer
Walter J. &Delores F. Lukina PHONE: 345 1408
We the undersigned declare that we are the legal owners of the lots located in
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, TRACT NO 24208 and we join in the request as described
in this letter as we have a sincere interest in the future plans for Tentative
Tract Map 25691:
LOT 15
James W. Hutchins
Janice Bishop
79675 Star Flower Trail
Cathie Hutchins
79705 Star Flower Trail
Ltp 6
LG-U
W ter I Lukina
Steens, Ronald D.
Hartmann, Thomas W.
Delores F. Lukina
79695 Star Flower Trail
79665 Star Flower Trail
LO 17
LOT 20
J
nth Kay Rosa
Betty aspar
85 Star Flower Trail
79655 Star Flower Trail