Loading...
2000 06 27 PCT4ht 4 4 Q" Planning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-quinta.org PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California June 27, 2000 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2000-040 Beginning Minute Motion 2000-012 1. 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. 111111. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the Minutes of the regular meeting on June 13, 2000 B. Department Report PC/AGENDA V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Item ................. Applicant .......... Location ........... Request ............ Action ............... B. Item ................. Applicant .......... Location ............ Request .... 1) 2) 3) 4) Action ............... VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None VII. KI TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29800 KSL Desert Resorts, Inc. Adjacent to portions of Medallist Drive, National Drive, Tiburon Drive and Kingston Heath, within the Normar Course, north of Airport Boulevard, east of Madison Street The subdivision of 51.58 ± acres into two clubhouse lots, two future development lots, one golf course lot, twc common lots and adjustment of four singe family lots. Resolution 2000- ENVIRONMENTAL .ASSESSMENT 99-386, GENERAL PLAI1 AMENDMENT 2000-065, SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-046 ANC TRACT MAP 29436 Mainiero Smith anal Associates for U S Homes On the north side of Eisenhower Dr., east of Coachella Dr Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration o Environmental Impact; A General Plan Text Amendment to require a Corrido Master Plan for traffic signals to allow spacing less thar 1,200 feet; A Specific Plan for Eisenhower Corridor Master Plan o traffic signals; and Subdivision of 75.86 acres into 169 single family residentia lots and other amenity lots. Resolution 2000- , Resolution 2000-_, Resolutioi 2000- Resolution 2000- CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Commission report on the City Council meeting of June 20, 2000 ADJOURNMENT nr /T!`_L''TmT PH #1 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JUNE 27, 2000 CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29800 APPLICANT: KSL DESERT RESORTS, INC. PROPERTY OWNERS: KSL DESERT RESORTS, INCORPORATED, MEDALLIST GOLF DEVELOPMENTS AND TOLL BROTHERS, INCORPORATED LOCATION: ADJACENT TO PORTIONS OF MEDALLIST DRIVE, NATIONAL DRIVE, TIBURON DRIVE AND KINGSTON HEATH, WITHIN THE NORMAN COURSE, NORTH OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD REQUEST: THE SUBDIVISION OF 51.58 ± ACRES INTO TWO CLUBHOUSE LOTS, TWO FUTURE DEVELOPMENT LOTS, ONE GOLF COURSE LOT, TWO COMMON LOTS AND ADJUSTMENT OF FOUR SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: TENTATIVE TRACT 29800 IS WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN 90-015. THIS PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED, PER PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 65457(A). AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EA 90-159 FOR SP 90-015) WAS CERTIFIED ON DECEMBER 3, 1991, BY THE CITY COUNCIL. AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT WAS COMPLETED FOR AMENDMENT #1 WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THE BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 1, 1998. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS EXIST WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE 21166. ZONING: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) AND VRL (VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND (LDR) VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (VLDR) A:\SRPC Tr29800Norman.wpd BACKGROUND: In December, 1991, the City Council approved Specific Plan 90-015, of which this tract is a part. An amendment to the Specific Plan was approved by the City Council on December 1, 1998, retaining the 18 hole golf course, reducing the maximum dwelling units from 1,060 to 365, revising the layout and circulation, and amending development standards. The Plan was amended a second time by the City Council on September 7, 1999, reducing the number of residential units to 220 by adoption of Resolution 99-112. Project Request This Map proposes to create one landscape lot, one postal kiosk lot, four clubhouse lots, one golf course lot and adjusts property lines of four existing residential lots fronting onto Medallist Drive, Tiburon Drive, Kingston Heath and National Drive, existing private streets (Attachment 1). A summary is as follows: Lots 1 to 4 - Residential (1.70 acres) Lots 5 to 9 - Golf Course, Clubhouse, Clubhouse Parking, and Future Development (49.66 acres) Lots A & B - Postal Kiosk and Open Space (0.22 acres) Public Notice - This Map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on June 14, 2000. 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 written correspondence has 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. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings necessary to approve this request, per Subdivision Ordinance Section 13.12.130 can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution with the exception of the following Findings: 1. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the City General Plan, Zoning Code and any applicable specific plan. The applicant proposes new lots for the Norman Clubhouse and its parking facilities. In order to make the necessary findings that this Tract complies with the Zoning Code, staff is recommending a condition be added: A:\SRPC Tr29800Norman.wpd Condition #63 - "Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall demonstrate that clubhouse and golf course parking facilities are guaranteed for a period of at least as long as the permitted use in accordance with Section 9.150.030 (B3 a-c) of the Zoning Code." 2. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The proposed Map does not disclose the location of Bureau of Reclamation facilities as required by the Coachella Valley Water District pursuant to their letter of June 15, 2000. In order to make the necessary findings that this Tract will not conflict with existing easements, staff is recommending a condition be added: Condition #65 - "Prior to final map approval, Bureau of Reclamation facilities within the development shall be plotted and proper clearances shall be received from the Coachella Valley Water District." RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 29800, subject to attached findings and conditions. Attachments: 1 . Tract Map 29800 (Reduced) 2. TT 29800 - Large Exhibits (Planning Commission Only) Prepared by: Submitted by: l� (I - Greg Tt6tisdell, Associate Planner Christine di lorio, Planning Manager A:\SRPC Tr29800Norman.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION OF 51.58 ± ACRES INTO TWO CLUBHOUSE LOTS, ONE GOLF COURSE LOT, TWO FUTURE DEVELOPMENT LOTS, TWO COMMON LOTS AND ADJUSTMENT OF PROPERTY BOUNDARIES FOR FOUR SINGLE FAMILY LOTS CASE NO.: TT 29800 APPLICANT: KSL DESERT RESORTS, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 27th day of June, 2000, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of KSL Desert Resorts, Inc. for approval of a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 51.58 ± acres into two clubhouse lots, one golf course lot, two future development lots, two common lots and adjustment of four single family lots, located adjacent to portions of Kingston Heath, Tiburon Drive, National Drive and Medallist Drive in the Norman golf course, more particularly described as: APNS: Portions of 767-330-077, -079; 767-500-026, -027; 767-510-021; 767- 520-010 WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63). The La Quinta Community Development Department has determined that Tentative Tract 29800 is within Specific Plan 90-015 and is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, per Public Resources Code Section 65457 (a). An Environmental Impact Report (EA 90-159 for SP 90-015) was certified on December 3, 1991, by the City Council. An Environmental Assessment Addendum to the previously approved Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was completed for Amendment #1 which was approved by the by the City Council on December 1, 1998. No changed circumstances or conditions exist which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code 21 166; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said Tentative Tract Map 29800: 1. The proposed Map and its design is consistent with the General Plan and applicable Specific Plan in that the lots are intended and designated for Low A:\ResO PC T 29800 Norman.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- _ Tentative Tract Map 29800 June 27, 2000 Density Residential and common use. The development of the lots will comply with applicable development standards such as setbacks, height restrictions, density, etc. 2. The design of the subdivision and proposed improvements are not likely to cause environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish, or wildlife, since the project is primarily surrounded by development, or other urban improvements, and mitigation is required by the Environmental Impact Report and Mitigated Negative Declaration. 3. The design of the subdivision and proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems due to imposed conditions. Off -site parking facilities shall be guaranteed for a period as long as the permitted use. 4. The design of the proposed Map will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the proposed Map since none presently exist. WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map, the Planning Commission has considered, the effect of the contemplated action on housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of La Quinta and its environs with available fiscal and environmental resources; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map 29800 to the City Council for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. AAResO PC T 29800 Norman.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- _ Tentative Tract Map 29800 June 27, 2000 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27th day of June, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California A:\ResO PC T 29800 Norman.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29800 KSL DESERT RESORTS, INC. JUNE 27, 2000 GENERAL 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, a memorandum noting that the City Conditions of Approval for this application exist and are available for review at City Hall shall be recorded against the property with Riverside County. 2. The subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this tentative map or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 3. Tentative Tract Map 29800 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. This map shall expire in two years unless extended pursuant to the requirements of the City Subdivision Ordinance. 5. Prior to the issuance of a 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 • R verside Co. Environmental Health Department • Coachella Valley Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from these jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. A:\('ondP(' "I29800KSL.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Tentative Tract Map 29800 June 27, 2000 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 CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent 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. 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 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. The applicant shall comply with all applicable Conditions of Approval for Tract No. 29657 and Tract No. 29136. 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. 10. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, mailbox clusters and common areas. 1 1 . 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. 12. 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 alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent form the property owners. A:\UondP(' "1'29900KS1..wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Tentative Tract Map 29800 June 27, 2.000 13. 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) AND PARCEL MAP(S) 14. 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 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. 15. 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." Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. All other plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, entry drives, gates, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include irrigaticn improvements, landscape lighting and entry monuments. "Precise Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. A:A'ondPC T29800KSL.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Tentative Tract Map 29800 June 27, 2000 16. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 17. When final plans are approved by the City, 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 tofinal 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 18. Depending on the timing of development of the parcels created by this map and the status of off -site improvements at that time, the subdivider may be required to construct improvements, to reimburse the City or others for the cost of the improvements, to secure the cost of the improvements for future construction by others, or a combination of these methods. 19. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 20. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of improvement costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. 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 ,1A'ond11(' "r29800 CSL.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Tentative Tract Map 2980C June 27, 2000 T.V. cable improvements. However, development -wide improvements shall not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service to lots within the development. 21. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (e.g., a Site Development Permit), off -site improvements and perimeter improvements shall be constructed as outlined in the "Street and Traffic Improvements" and "Landscaping and Wall" sections of these conditions of approval. 22. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely manner or as specified in an approved phasing plan or in an improvement agreement, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. 23. The applicant's obligations for portions of the required 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 24. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard Regulations). If any portion of any proposed building lot in the development is located within or immediately adjacent to a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density. Prior to issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall receive Conditional Letters of Map Revision based on Fill (CLOMR/F) from FEMA. Prior tc final acceptance by the City of subdivision improvements, the applicant shall have received final LOMR/Fs for all such lots. 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 A: ('undK 1'29800KSL.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Tentative 'Tract Map 29800 June 27, 2000 required of this development) that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 26. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside of the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 27. 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 or parcel map, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. The; listed elevation differential limits are not an entitlement and more restrictive limits may be imposed in the map and plan approval process. If compliance with the listed limits 's impractical, the City will consider and may approve alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 28. 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. 29. 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. 30. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each pad, the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the following: 31. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. A:%CondPC T2980OKSL.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Tentative Tract Map 2980C June 27, 2000 32. 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. 33. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated, unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route. 34. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on site or passed through to the overflow outlet. 35. Retention capacity shall be based on site -specific percolation data which shall be submitted for checking with drainage plans. The design percolation rate shall not exceed two inches per hour. 36. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in a manner approved by the City Engineer. UTILITIES 37. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all above -ground utility structures, located offsite or within perimeter setbacks, to ensure optimum placement for aesthetic as well as practical purposes. These structures include, but are not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone stands. 38. Existing and proposed electric, telephone and cable utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv are exempt from this requirement. 39. 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 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.) A:CondPU T29800KSL.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Tentative Tract Map 29800 June 27, 2000 A. PRIVATE STREETS AND CULS DE SAC 1 j Residential: 36-foot travel width. Width may be reduced to 32 feet with parking restricted to one side and 28 feet with on -street parking prohibited if there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors and the applicant provides for perpetual enforcement of the restrictions by the homeowners association. 41. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, street name signs, and sidewalks. 42. 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. 43. Street right of way geometry for knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 44. 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. 45. 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 shall be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials): 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" 46. 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 A:\('ondPC T29800KSL.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Tentative Tract Map 29800 June 27, 2000 gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. 47. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly - maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the tract or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPING AND PERIMETER WALL 48. The applicant shall provide landscaping in perimeter setbacks and common lots. 49. 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. 50. 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. QUALITY ASSURANCE 51. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 52. 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. 53. 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 n:\c'oncJ c T29800KSL.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Tentative Tract Map 29800 June 27, 2000 percolation test, as approved by the City Engineer, after tributary -area improvements are complete and soils have been permanently stabilized. 54. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all public improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. MAINTENANCE 55. 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 56. 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. 57. Final maps under this tentative map shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of final map approval. FIRE DEPARTMENT With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land division, the Fire Department (760-863-8886) recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with La Quinta Municipal Code and/or Riverside County Fire Department protection standards: 58. 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 will be A:'('andPC T2990OKSL.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Tentative Tract Map 29800 June 27, 2000 1,000 g.p.m. for a two-hour duration at 20 psi. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of the streets directly in line with fire hydrants. 59. 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. 60. Prior to recordation of the final ,map, the applicant/developer shall furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review and approval. Plans will conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system will meet the fire flow requirements. Plans will be approved and signed by a registered civil engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 61. 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 an individual lot. 62. The minimum dimensions for fire apparatus access roads entering and exiting this project shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet in each direction and an uncbstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. Parking is permitted on one side of roadways with a minimum width of 28 feet. Parking is permitted on both sides of roadways with a minimum width of 36 feet. SPECIAL 63. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall demonstrate that clubhouse and golf course parking facilities are guaranteed for a period of at least as long as the permitted use in accordance with Section 9.150.030 (B3 a-c) of the Zoning Code. 64. Letters from public agencies for this project shall become plan check requirements for final map preparation. 65. Prior to final map approval, Bureau of Reclamation facilities within the development shall be plotted and proper clearances shall be received from the Coachella Valley Water District. A'('nndP(' T3990OKSI..wpd ATTACHMENTS Robert Tyler La Quinta Planning Department La Quirita, California Dear Mr. Tyler: 641 15/2000 We are writing to your office to hopefully begin discussions in regards to a possible amendment change that would be necessary for a new business location in a downtown La Quinta district/zone designated "neighborhood commercial". This business would fall under the category of "restaurants, drive-thrus" on the City's Table 9.5 (801): Permitted uses in non-residential districts. Our project would involve a 2-sided drive-thru and would not require that customers park their cars. Custom: rs would not enter the establishment at all. This concept requires that no inside ordering or seating be involved and, in fact, would have an extremely "limited" food service. Coffee and beverag-- service provided by staff at "service -windows" would be the main emphasis. (A few food products that are complimentary to coffee & beverage service would also be available to customers). This project is intended to be an independent, upscale, "privately owned" business. It is the owner's purpose to create a community -based operation that would cater to and "service" all local residents and businesses with their immediate coffee & beverage needs right in the downtown sector of La Quinta, as well as any out of area commuters who are corning to the downtown La Quinta area for business, shopping, work or pleasure. We feel that this is a "concept" whose time has come for downtown La Quinta. Based on the "neighborhood commercial" status of the "high -profile" location we are interested in acquiring for our business we would like to pursue a change in the (x - prohibited use) status that is currently designated fir this location by amending it to P= principal use, so we could further develop our concept into a "real" project. Any i nput you could give us in regards to how we might proceed with the City on this subject would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. We look forward to having more communicat ton with you in the near future. Sincerely, Chris Driggs Kris Wilson Telephone. Telephone:�- PH #2 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JUNE 27, 2000 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-386 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-065 SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-046 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29436 REQUEST: 1. CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; 2. A GENERAL PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT TO REQUIRE A CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS TO ALLOW FULL TURNING MOVEMENT INTERSECTION SPACING LESS THAN 1200 FEET 3. MASTER PLAN OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS FOR EISENHOWER CORRIDOR 4. A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29436 TO SUBDIVIDE 75.86 ACRES INTO 169 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND OTHER AMENITY LOTS APPLICANT: MAINIERO SMITH AND ASSOCIATES PROPERTY OWNERS: U.S. HOME CORPORATION LOCATION: NORTH OF EISENHOWER DRIVE, EAST OF COACHELLA DRIVE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) (LDR) AND OPEN SPACE (OS) SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES: NORTH: CITY OF INDIAN WELLS, SANTA ROSA MOUNTAINS SOUTH : LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) EAST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC Staff rpt. TT29436.wpd BACKGROUND: The proposed Tentative Tract Map 29436 is located north of Eisenhower Drive, east of Coachella Drive on 159.55 acres of vacant lands consisting of 75.86 acres of flat lands where development is proposed to occur and 83.69 acres of open space hillsides (Attachment 1). The entire property ownership consists of eight parcels (A.P.N.'S: 623-310-008, 623-310-009, 631-31 1-001, 631-31 1-003, 631-312-001, 631-312- 020 643-090-025, and 643-090-004) in both the jurisdictions of La Quinta and Indian Wells totaling 190.51 acres. Project Requests General Plan Amendment 2000-065 The applicant's requests to modify General Plan Circulation Policy 3-2.1.5 which currently states: "The City shall adopt design standards for all streets in accordance with their functional classification and recognized design guidelines. All streets within the City of La Quinta shall be designed in accordance with the standards presented in Table CIR-2, City of La Quinta Roadway Design Standards (Attachment 2). Typical sections by roadway classification are shown in Figure CIR-4, Roadway Cross Sections." The Proposed Text Amendment would add a footnote "No. 5" to Table Cir-2 which will require that a Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals be prepared to allow intersection spacing at a distance less than the currently mandated 1,200 linear feet. The Plan will be required to demonstrate that the proposed intersection and full turning movement signal can be properly and adequately coordinated with existing and future and signals and still achieve high quality mobility in the subject arterial corridor; essential to the evaluation is a signal timing and spacing study. Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals (Specific Plan 2000-046 A method for evaluating development proposals that seek non-standard signal spacing (ie as required by the General Plan) is to prepare a Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals that demonstrates the proposed new signal can be properly, and adequately, coordinated with other existing signals and likely future signals, and still achieve high quality mobility in the subject arterial corridor. In compliance with the proposed General Plan Amendment, the applicant has prepared a Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals for Eisenhower Drive between Washington Street: and Calle Tampico (Attachment 3). The applicant has prepared the master plan because the proposed full -turn intersection providing primary access to the project site is only 800 feet from the westerly access street into Laguna de la Paz and therefore does not comply with General Plan spacing requirement. The proposed full turn intersection is 1,200 feet from Coachella Drive. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC Staff rpt. TT29436.wpd The Corridor Master Plan demonstrates that it is possible to coordinate the signals on Eisenhower Drive in all three scenarios for a travel speed of forty five miles -per -hour (45 mph) if the proposed full -turn intersection is approved and subsequently warranted to have a signal. The General Plan lists the design speed for Primary Arterial streets as 50 MPH. The design speed is primarily used to make design level decisions when speed related design safety aspects are evaluated. The speed limit on Eisenhower Drive is 45 mph which is set on the basis of a speed survey prepared in accordance with the State Vehicle Code. Since the speed limit is 45 mph, it would be inappropriate to select a travel speed for signal coordination that exceeds the speed limit. Tentative Tract Map 29436 The Tentative Tract Map (Attachment 4) proposes 169 single family lots, eight lettered common lots, (180 total lots). The project also includes two remainder lots designated Open Space. The single family lots range in size from 10,008 square feet to 27,714 square feet with lot frontages ranging from 28 feet (frontages for irregular lots and lots fronting a cul-de-sac only) to 248 feet. The RL Zoning District requires a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. The lettered common lots include: Lot A, B &C Landscape Setback Lots Lot D Lake and retention area Lot E, F&G Landscape/retention area Lot H Retention/desilting basins The subdivision takes access off Eisenhower Drive near the southern end of the property. Vehicular access is proposed to be full turning movements with the completion of the signalized intersection at the project entry street and Eisenhower Drive. The internal road system is a creative curvilinear design to provide access to each single family lot. The site is relatively flat where the single family lots are located; with pad elevations comparable or lower than the adjacent development, Laguna de La Paz. There is a 25 foot greenbelt between the existing wall at Laguna de La Paz and existing residential property lines for that development. A homeowners' association will be formed to maintain the retention basins, common landscaped areas, private roads, and perimeter landscaping. A 20-foot deep landscaped lot with a meandering sidewalk and wall will be provided along Eisenhower Drive as required by the General Plan. Public Notice: The case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 23, 2000 and re -advertised on June 14, 2000. All property owners within 500 feet of the affected area were mailed a copy of the public notice as required. Written comments have been received and are on file in the Community Development Department. (Attachment 5) PABETTY\U.S.HomesTC Staff rpt. TT29436.wpd Public Agency Review: The tentative tract was sent out for comments to City Departments and affected public agencies on January 19, 2000. Agency comments received have been made a part of the Conditions of Approval. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Based on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, staff prepared Environmental Assessment 99-386 for the project. Staff recommends certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. On June 22, 2000, the City received from the Department of Fish and Game a letter dated June 19, 2000, regarding this project. (Attachment 6) The first part of the letter addresses the issue of whether or not a streambed alteration permit is required pursuant to Section 1601 of the California Fish and Game Code. An existing mitigation measure outlined in EA 99-386 requires that "If required to do so by law, the Project Applicant shall enter into a Section 1603 Agreement with CDFG and obtain a 404 Permit from the Army Corps of Engineers, and comply with any additional conditions imposed in the Agreement or Permit." [ p.16 of the EA ] With regard to the Departments request on the last page of the letter suggesting that the Bighorn Sheep Mitigation fence be constructed as part of the 1project rather than being deferred to a point in time where Bighorn Sheep actually come near the project site, staff believes that fence mitigation measure (No. 6 on pages 15 & 16 of the EA) is appropriate as drafted. The concept of installing fencing only if the need for such fencing arises was specifically mentioned in the Draft Recovery Plan for the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep, which at page 73 states that "actual fence construction could be contingent upon future use by sheep and the ineffectiveness of other potential deterrents...." STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: General Plan Amendment The findings, per General Plan Policies 3-2.1.5, 3-3.1.3, and 3-2.1.5 to deny this request, can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. Finding 1 The proposed Amendment is not consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan Circulation Element in that to allow a full turning movement intersection for the proposed tract is not consistent with the General Plan Goal, Objective, and Policy 3-2.1.5 which states: "The City shall adopt standards for all streets in accordance with their functional classification and recognized design guidelines. All streets within the City of La Quinta shall be designed in accordance with standards presented in Table CIR-2, City of La Quinta Roadway Design Standards. Typical sections by roadway classification are shown in Figure CIR-4, Roadway Cross Sections." P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC Staff rpt. TT29436.wpd The applicant's proposal is not consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element Table CIR-2, City of La Quinta Roadway Design Standards which identifies 1,200 feet as the Minimum Intersection Spacing for a Primary Arterial Roadway. The development community frequently requests the City to approve a full -turn intersection at a location where the spacing between the proposed intersection and existing intersections is less than what is allowed by the General Plan. To date, the City has consistently denied such requests for new intersections with a few exceptions allowed where drainage channels denied access to the proposed development site from the desired street at a location where the required spacing could be achieved. Although the General Plan Amendment provides a viable plan to approve full -turn intersections at spacing intervals that are less than the current General Plan requirement if high quality mobility can be maintained via signal coordination, there are other aspects to be considered. The current General Plan does not embody the highly urbanized concepts commonly found elsewhere in Southern California. The current General Plan portrays a low density future for La Quinta that imparts a more open and spacious feel to our goal of an resort/residential environment. It does not necessarily follow that simply because something works it should be approved. In the case of this particular development, there is a reasonable and viable alternative for full -turn access. The alternate access can be achieved if the tract is slightly modified to to provide a full -turn access from the Tract 29568 by sharing access to the existing signal located at Coachella Drive that was installed with public funds. Finding 2 The proposed Amendment is not internally consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element Goal 3-3 in that a full turning movement intersection requiring a traffic signal for one development project does not provide the desired and appropriate access control envisioned in this goal. Full -turn access is desirable for a developer's project if it can be achieved, however, the benefit largely accrues to the development in question at the expense of the community at large. This is due to the fact the new intersection gives high quality access to the proposed development by decreasing the mobility of other motorists using the arterial street traveling to destinations located elsewhere in the community. The decreased mobility for other motorists occurs because the new intersection, with a signal, adds delay to the motorists traveling to other locations through out the community. Finding 3 The proposal is not consistent with the General Plan Circulation Policy 3-3.1.3 which states: "The City shall restrict individual driveway access to Major and Primary Arterial wherever possible." A full turning movement intersection requiring a traffic signal for one development project is not consistent with the policy of limiting individual driveway access. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC Staff rpt. TT29436.wpd The desire to achieve high quality access to a given development site can be extremely important for certain types of development at certain locations. As a result, the reasons for allowing "one more" signal at a given location can be quite compelling from time to time. However, the General Plan policy regarding intersection spacing are in place to help ensure short term development achievements do not injure the long term vision for the community in general. The proposed General Plan Amendment is conceived with the concept of maintaining high quality mobility on the arterial street while at the same time providing the potential to achieve quality access to a given development site, if it can be demonstrated that the proposed full -turn intersection can be added to the arterial street at the desired location without degrading mobility on the arterial street. Finding 4 The proposed Amendment is not consistent with General Plan Circulation Element Goal 3-4, Policy 3-4.1.1, Policy 3-4.1.2, and Policy 3-4.1.3 in that an additional full turning movement intersection requiring an additional traffic signal does not create the Image Corridor envisioned for the design character and identity desired by the citizens Of La Quinta. This goal and the attendant policies are integrally tied together. General Plan Circulation Element Goal 3-4 which states: "A circulation system which maintains the urban design character and identity desired by the citizens of La Quinta." General Plan Circulation Policy 3-4.1.1 states: Special roadway image corridors and City gateways which evoke a unique identity and character throughout the city shall be designated on Figure CIR-5, Streetscape Image Policy Diagram. Policy 3-4.1.2 states: "...Primary image corridors shall include street traffic signals, street lighting systems, street furniture, bus shelters, street name signs, and noise berms/barriers which are designed in a coordinated and consistent theme unique to La Quinta." General Plan Circulation Policy 3-4.1..3 identifies Eisenhower Drive as a Primary Image Corridor. The accumulation of traffic signals along Eisenhower Drive is not consistent with Circulation Element Goal 3-4 and attendant Circulation Policies 3-4.1.1 and 3-4.1.2 in that additional traffic signals do not create the Image Corridor envisioned for the design character and identity desired by the citizens Of La Quinta. Finding 5 The situation and general conditions regarding the existing and anticipated development in the area have not substantially changed since the existing standards were imposed in that residential development has not created a need for adjustments to signal spacing. PABETTY\U.S.Homes\PC Staff rpt. TT29436.wpd Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals (Specific Plan 2000-046) The findings, per General Plan Policies 3-2.1.5, to deny this request can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. Without the approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment, the proposed Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals (Specific Plan 2000-046) is not consistent with the General Plan Goal, Objective, and Policy 3-2.1.5. Finding 1 That the proposed Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals (Specific Plan 2000-046) is not consistent with the General Plan Goal, Objective, and Policy 3-2.1.5 which requires 1200 foot spacing for full turning movement intersections on Arterial Streets. Finding 2 That the proposed Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals (Specific Plan 2000-046) will create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting circulation and traffic signal timing will not ensure current and future development plans and resulting traffic patterns and traffic signal timing on Eisenhower Drive are adequately provided. Findino 33 The Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals (Specific Plan 2000-046) is not compatible with the existing and anticipated area development in that the project does not provide adequate circulation and traffic signal spacing. Tentative Tract Map 29568 As Conditioned, the Tentative Tract Map findings per the General Plan, Zoning Code, and Section 13.12.130 of the Subdivision Ordinance, to approve this request can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. Finding 1 The project is consistent with the City's General Plan Low Density Residential land use designation of 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre. The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan in that the design of the Low Density Residential subdivision meets General Plan Policy 2-1.1.5 requiring a residential product type characterized by single family detached homes on large or medium size lots. 'The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development in that the net density of the proposed tentative tract is 2.22 which is within the permitted General Plan density range of 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre. PABETTYUS.HomesTC Staff rpt. TT29436.wpd Finding 2 The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the City's General Plan with the implementation of Conditions of Approval to provide for adequate stormwater drainage. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan in that the proposed lots exceed the minimum 7,200 square foot lot size, have an on -site drainage and flood water retention facility, and internal circulation system acceptable to the City Engineer. Finding 3 The design and improvements of the proposed subdivision, as conditioned, are consistent with the City's General Plan Zoning Code, and Section 13.12.130 of the Subdivision Ordinance, with the implementation of recommended conditions of approval to ensure proper street widths, perimeter walls, parking requirements, and timing of their construction. The adjacent development, Laguna de La Paz, has a block wall fence surrounding the development. At locations where the proposed development shares a common property line, the applicant is conditioned to bring the wall to the required five foot height by matching the existing wall if structurally sound with the with permission of the adjacent property owner. If this can not be accomplished, the applicant is required build the wall as close as physically possible to the existing wall and fill any empty space (Condition No. 63). 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 in that the proposed internal streets will be privately owned and maintained, and that there will be no publicly -owned improvements within the tentative tract map. Finding 4 As conditioned, the design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the subdivision. The project includes two remainder lots within the hillsides and are conditioned to be deed restricted to open space in perpetuity (Condition No. 76). Finding The design of the subdivision and type of improvements, as conditioned, are not likely to cause serious public health problems in that the Fire Marshal, Sheriff's Department, and the City's Building and Safety Department have reviewed the request for Tentative P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC Staff rpt. TT29436.wpd Tract 29436 for potential public health problems and made recommendations for conditions and mitigation measures for project approval and this issue was considered in Environmental Assessment 99-386 in which no significant health or safety impacts were identified for the proposed project. Finding 6 The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements, are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially, and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife, or their habitat, in that Environmental Assessment 99-386, prepared for Tract 29436 did not identify any significant impacts for this issue. CONCLUSION: he applicant's request for a full turning movement intersection is not consistent with the General Plan and without the proposed General Plan Amendment, the Eisenhower Corridor Master Plan of Signals (SP 2000-046) is not consistent with the General Plan. The applicant's request to subdivide 75.85 acres of land into 169 residential lots and private street, landscape, lake, and retention basin lots is consistent with the General Plan, the Zoning Code, the Subdivision Ordinance provided that the recommended Conditions of Approval are met. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_, recommending to the City Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (EA 99-386) according to the findings set forth in the attached Resolution; and, 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_, recommending to the City Council denial of a General Plan Text Amendment to require a Corridor Master Plan for Traffic Signals to allow spacing less than 1200 Feet; and, 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_, recommending to the City Council denial of the Eisenhower Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals (Specific Plan 2000-046); and, 4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 29436 subject to the attached conditions. PABETTY\U.S.HomesTC Staff rpt. TT29436.wpd Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. General Plan Circulation Element Table CIR - 3. Eisenhower Corridor Master Plan of Signals 4. Tentative Tract 29436 (reduced) 5. Public comments received 6. Department of Fish and Game a letter dated June 19, 2000 Prepared by: Fred Baker, AICP Principal Planner Submitted by: Ctdistinedi lorio -Pfanning Manager P:\BETI'Y\U.S.Homes\PC Staff rpt. TT29436.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-065, SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-046 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29436 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-386 APPLICANT: U.S. HOME CORPORATION WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 13th day of June, 2000, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and continued said Public Hearing to the 27" day of June to consider Environmental Assessment 99- 386 for General Plan Amendment 2000-065, Specific Plan 2000-046 and Tentative Tract 29436 herein referred to as the "Project" for U.S. Home Corporation, 8577 Haven Avenue, Suite 201, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730; and, WHEREAS, said Project has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970"(as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA99-386) to evaluate the potential for adverse environmental impacts; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that said Project could have a significant adverse effect on the environment unless mitigation measures are implemented, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact could be filed; and, WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify recommending certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly or directly, in that appropriate mitigation measures have been imposed which will minimize project impacts. 2. The proposed Project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. PABETTY\U.S.Homes\PC RESO EA 99-386.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Environmental Assessment 99-386 June 27, 2000 3. Considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. 4. The proposed Project 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 by the Environmental Assessment. 5. The proposed Project will not have environmental effects directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 6. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect setforth in 14 CAL Code Regulations §753.5(d). 7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record, including EA 99- 386 and the comments received thereon, that the project will have a significant impact upon the environment. 8. EA 99-385 and the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis 9. The location and custodian of the record of proceedings relating to this project is the Community Development Department of the City of La Quinta, located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 922253. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 99-386 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. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC RESO EA 99-386.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Environmental Assessment 99-386 June 27, 2000 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27th day of June, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\BET'rY\u.S.Homes\PC RESO EA 99-386.wpd Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: La Quinta Cove Project, Tentative Tract Map 29436 General Plan Amendment 2000-065 Specific Plan 2000-046 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Fred Baker, 760-777-7125 4. Project Location: North side of Eisenhower Drive, east of Coachella Drive APNs: 623-310-008, 623-310-009, 631-311-001 to 003, 631-312-001 to 020, 643-090-004, 643-090-025 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: US Homes Corp. 8577 Haven Avenue, Suite 201 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 6. General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential and Open Space 7. .Zoning: Low Density Residential and Open Space 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.) Tentative Tract Map to divide 190.51 gross acres into 169 residential lots on Low Density Residential designated land. General Plan text amendment to allow for spacing of traffic signals at a distance less than the currently mandated 1,200 lineal feet under cetain circumstances. Master Plan of Signals to implement the General Plan text amendment, and allow a signal at the project entry, approximately 1.2.00 lineal feet from the existing signal at Coachella Drive. 9. Surrounding Lane Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. North: Santa Rosa Mountains South: Low Density Residential (La Quinta Country Club) East: Low Density Residential (Laguna de la Paz) West: Vacant Hand, designated for Low Density Residential 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) None PACEQAchecklis.wpd P-nvironmentat vactors Yotenually 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. Aesthetics Hazards and Hazardous Materials Agriculture Resources Hydrology and Water Quality Air Quality Land Use Planning Biological Resources Mineral Resources Cultural Resources Noise Geology and Soils Population and Housing Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: Public Services Recreation Transpoortati o rdT'ra ffi c Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made Toy or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED 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 "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" on the environment, but at least one effect I ) 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. 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, 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, nothing further is required. r Si re Printed Name 70 a IN El to For Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less 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 XVIII, "Earlier Analysis," 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 XVIII 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. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) The analysis of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance PACEQA.checklis.wpd Sample question: Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (General Plan Exhibit CIR-5) b) Damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (General Plan EIR, page 5-12 ff.) c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Application materials) d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application materials) II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES:. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared by the Califomia Dept. Of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29, 5-32) _ b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (Aerial photographs) III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria establishes. by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to a:i existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) c) Result in a net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Applicaticn Materials) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Applicaticn Materials) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X X X X M X R9 91 X KI X X P:\CEQAchecklistEA 99-386.wpd IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by :he California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Biological Assessment, James Cornett, April, 2000, revised May 22, 2000) b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Garne or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Biological Assessment, James Cornett, April, 2000, revised May 22, 2000) c) Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Biological Assessment, James Cornett, April, 2000, revised May 22, 2000) d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? (Biological Assessment, James Cornett, April, 2000, revised May 22, 2000) e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (La Quinta Municipal Code; General Plan) f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessmen: 5-5; Biological Assessment, James Cornett, April, 2000, revised May 22, 2000) V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource which is either listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic Resources, or a local register of historic resources? (CRM Tech, Cutlural Resources Report and Phase II Analysis, 1999) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resources (i.e., an artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions, has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest or best available example of its type, or is directly associated with a scientifrcal:y recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person)? (CRM Tech, Cutlural Resources Report and Phase II Analysis, 1999) c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site? (Paleontology Lakebed Map) d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (CRM Tech, Cutlural Resources Report and Phase II Analysis, 1999) VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: X X X X X X X X X X PACEQAchecklistEA 99-386.wpd i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (General Plan EIR, Exhibit 4.2-3, page 4-35) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) iv) Landslides? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation, GeoSoils, Inc., April, 1999) c) Be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on - or off -site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? (Supplemental Rockfall Evaluation, GeoSoils, Inc., October, 1999) d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform BLilding Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation, GeoSoils, Inc., April, 1999) e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-32) VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application Materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Application Materials) c) Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Application Materials) d) Is the project located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (County Hazardous Materials Listing) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip; would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-11) h) Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildlands fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) X X X X X X X X X X X X X X li/ P:`.CEQAchccklistEA 99-386.wpd VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-26, 6-27) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? (General Plan EIR, page 4-57 ff.) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? (Hydrologic Analysis, Mainiero, Smith & Assoc., August, 1999) d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? (Hydrologic Analysis, Mainiero, Smith & Assoc., August, 1999) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control? (Hydrologic Analysis, Mainiero, Smith & Assoc., August, 1999) f) Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (Hydrologic Analysis, Mainiero, Smith & Assoc., August, 1999) g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-13) IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? (Aerial photos) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local costal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (General Plan Amendment materials) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-5) X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29) b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29) X X X X X X X X X i9 X X P^.CEQAchecklistEA 99-386.wpd XI. NOISE: Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (General Plan EIR, Exh. 4.9-1; b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (General Plan EIR, Exh. 4.9-1) c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Application materials) d) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Master Environmental Assessment) e) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive levels? (General Plan Land Use map) XII. POPULATION AND MOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) ? (General Plan, page 2-14) b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials) c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials) XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. ) Police! protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. ) Schools? (General Plan MEA, page 4-9 ff. ) Parks'? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, page 4-14 ff. ) XIV. RECREATION: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application Materials) b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application Materials) X X X X X X X X X X X X X X R. P:\CEQAchccklistEA 99-386.wpd XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (Application materials, General Plan FEIR, p. 4-126 ff.) b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (Application materials, General Plan FEIR, p. 4-126 ff.) c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (Application materials, General Plan FEIR, p. 4-126 ff.) d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (Application materials, General Plan FEIR, p. 4-126 ff.) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Application Materials) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Application Materials) g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Application materials, General Plan FEIR, p. 4-126 ff.) XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 ) b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 ) c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, page 4-27) d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, page 4-20) e) Has the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve *.e project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected c.emand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? (General Plan MEA, page 4-20) f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the projects solid waste disposal needs?(General Plan MEA, page 4-28) X X X X X X X X X X X X X PACEQAchecklistEA 99-386.wpd KVII. 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 or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current project., and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? XVIII 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. The General Plan EIR of 1992 was used in this analysis. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in az earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Not applicable. 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. See attached Addendum. X K4 X MR PACEQAchecklistEA 99-386.wpd 10 Addendum to Environmental Checklist, EA 99-386 I. a) The proposed project is located on a Primary Image Corridor, as depicted on Exhibit CIR-5 of the General Plan. The roadway is also designated as a Primary Arterial in the General Plan. The Tentative Tract Map includes a setback area of 20 feet, which will provide the required setbacks to protect the Image Corridor. By complying with the General Plan standards, the applicant is providing sufficient mitigation to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance. b), c) The proposed project occurs immediately below the toe -of -slope of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The Tract Map does not, however, propose to subdivide lots above the toe -of -slope. Rather, the slope areas along the northern boundary of the proposed project will remain in Open Space. This will preserve the scenic value of the hillsides, and reduce impacts to a less than significant level. In order to protect these areas in perpetuity, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: The 3 remainder parcels shown on Tentative Tract Map 29436 shall be deed restricted as permanent open space prior to recordation of the Final Tract Map. I. d) There will be new light sources and potential for glare from automobile headlights with buildout of the proposed project. The General Plan EIR analyzed the project site, at planned densities. The proposed project will be required to comply with the City's standards for outdoor lighting. These measures will serve to reduce potential impacts to an acceptable level. II. The project site does not involve agricultural uses. III. c) & d) The implementation of low density residential land uses on the project site was analyzed under the 1992 General Plan EIR. City-wide, impacts to air quality are expected to continue as buildout occurs. Improvements in technology which are likely to reduce impacts, particularly from motor vehicles or transit route improvements in the future have the potential to reduce impacts. The City, at the time of certification of the General Plan EIR determined that air quality impacts required a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which determined that the impacts to air quality of development of the Plan would be cumulative only when considered in conjunction with regional development, and that the City would implement all feasible measures to reduce emissions within its boundaries. The implementation of the proposed project, therefore, is not expected to have a significant impact on air quality resources. A:\EA Addendum USHomes.WPD 11 Addendum to Environmental Checklist EA 99-386 - U S Homes Grading and site preparation of the subject property is expected to occur in several distinct phases. Mass grading of the entire site is expected to occur at one time, and will take approximately 30 working days to complete. Construction equipment will include three scrapers, a motor grader, rubber -tire front end loader, bulldozer, and two water trucks. It is anticipated that precise grading will occur in four phases, each of which will encompass about 20± acres and will require about 10 working days to complete. Each phase will require the operation of a motor grader, skip loader, excavator, backhoe, water truck and dump truck. The Utilities Installation phase of development will include installation of water, sewer, curb/gutter, and dry utilities, as well as street grading. This process is expected to occur in four phases and will take approximately 60 days per phase, for a total of approximately 240 working days. Each phase will require a backhoe, motor grader, front end loader, and water truck. Each piece of construction equipment will operate for approximately eight hours per day and will require two construction workers to operate. The following table provides an estimate of construction -related emissions, including those associated with the operation of construction equipment and those from construction worker commuter vehicles. Table I Anticipated Construction -Related Emissions (pounds/day) Pollutant Development Phase Threshold Criteria * * Mass Utilities Precise Total Pounds Grading Install. Grading Per Day ROGs 11.69 14.76 27.24 80.00 Carbon Monoxide 65.02 80.08 210.72 820.00 Nitrogen Oxides 179.84 217.24 504.36 80.00 Sulfur Oxides 23.19 34.20 50.20 220.0 0 Particulates 17.17 21.80 33.64 220.00 * * Threshold criteria offered by the South Coast Air Quality Management District for assistance in determining the significance of air quality impacts. As shown in the table above, no threshold criteria are expected to be exceeded during grading and site preparation, with the exception of nitrogen oxides. This daily threshold could be exceeded during mass grading, precise grading and the A:\EA Addendum USHomes.WPD 12 Addendum to Environmental Checklist EA 99-386 - U S Homes installation of utilities. Mass grading is expected to occur for only a 30 day period, while precise grading will require about 40. The impacts from these activities are therefore short term, and will not represent a long term permanent impact. Although the installation of utilities is expected to take about 240 days to complete, it will occur in four distinct phases, each of which represents a temporary, short term impact. They are not expected, therefore, to be significant. Operational emissions include moving exhaust emissions from residents of the proposed project. Buildout of the project will result in the construction of 169 single-family homes. The following moving exhaust emission projections assume an average of 10 vehicle trips per day per dwelling unit, and an average trip length of 5 miles. Table II Anticipated Operations -Related Emissions (pounds/day) ROG CO NOx PM10 Project -Related Emissions 2.05 43.09 6.34 0.38 SCAQMD Thresholds 175.00 1 550.00 100.00 150.00 As shown in the table above, operational emissions associated with project buildout are not expected to exceed SCAQMD thresholds for any criteria polllutants. The Coachella Valley has been a non -attainment area for PM 10 (particles of 10 microns or less). The proposed project will result in 169 single family dwelling units. The primary long term air quality impact caused by these units will be frcm the operation of automobiles; short term impacts are also likely from construction activities. The proposed project shall implement the following mitigation measures to mitigate impacts to air quality. 1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. 2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary power poles to avoid on -site power generation. 3. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit AREA Addendum USHomes.WPD 13 Addendum to Environmental Checklist EA 99-386 - U S Homes opportunities. 4. The project shall submit a PM10 Plan to the City which includes adequate provisions for fugitive dust and wind erosion control, both during and after grading operations. The PM 10 Plan shall be approved by the City prior to the issuance of any grading permit on the site. 5. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of three feet prior to the onset of grading activities. 6. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on -going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall be watered at the end of each work day. 7. All disturbed areas shall be treated to prevent erosion until the site is constructed upon. Pad sites which are to remain undeveloped shall be seeded with either a desert wildflower mix or grass seed. 8. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. 9. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site. 10. Construction roads other than temporary access roads shall be paved as soon as possible, and once paved shall be cleaned after each work day. All unpaved roads shall be posted with a 15 mile per hour speed limit. 11. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. 12. All buildings on the project site shall conform to energy use guidelines in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. IV. a), b) & f) A biological Assessment was prepared for the proposed project. The assessment included field surveys to determine the presence of listed, endangered or threatened species. The survey found that portions of the project site have been significantly impacted by roadway development and off -road vehicle use. No listed, threatened or endangered species were found A:\EA Addendum USHomes.WPD 14 Addendum to Environmental Checklist EA 99-386 - U S Homes on the project site The project site occurs adjacent tot he Santa Rosa Mountains, which is habitat for the federally listed Peninsular bighorn sheep. No sheep or sheep sign was located on the project site. Continued urbanization adjacent to bighorn sheep habitat has the potential to indirectly impact the animal. In order to mitigate the indirect impacts of the proposed project on the species, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall provide an easement to be recorded for the three remainder parcels on the subject property, to remain undeveloped open space. The easement shall be approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation. No blasting or pile -driving shall be permitted as part of the construction of this project during bighorn lambing season, from Jan. 1 to June 30. in the final project design, the applicant shall ensure that the roads and driveways within the tract are designed to minimize headlight shine from vehicles onto the hillsides. This design shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. All landscaping on the proposed greenbelts, retention basins and common open space shall be non -toxic to the Peninsular bighorn sheep. All exotic plants and plants which are known to invade or degrade Peninsular bighorn sheep habitat, such as tamarisk and fountain grass, shall be prohibited. All landscaping plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee. The design of lighting for homes within the project shall incorporate the use of non -glare glass. Exterior lighting shall be kept at a minimum, and shall be aimed away from the hillsides. All lighting plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. To assess the need for a buffer fence between the development and the toe of the slope of the hillside to keep Peninsular bighorn sheep off the project site on an ongoing basis, a three person committee shall be formed to monitor the Peninsular bighorn sheep activity in the area. The committee shall consist of a member of the Homeowners' Association (HOA), an official of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and the Community Development Director. The committee shall monitor sheep activity through various means, including interviews with residents, and any available scientific information or A:\EA Addendum USHomes.WPD 15 Addendum to Environmental Checklist EA 99-386 - U S Homes studies to be funded by the HOA. If bighorn sheep are entering the project site, the committee shall require the HOA, at its expense, to construct an 8 foot fence between the development and the hillsides. The fence shall not contain gaps of greater than 11 centimeters (4.3 inches). If fencing is required, and if the HOA is requested to do so by the CDFG, the HOA shall, at its expense, construct temporary fencing to the specifications of the CDFG to prevent Peninsular bighorn sheep from entering the project site pending construction of the permanent fence. The committee shall exist for at least ten years, unless the Peninsular bighorn sheep are removed from the threatened or endangered species list, or no longer inhabit the Santa Rosa Mountains. If, at the end of the 10 year period, any member of the committee deems it appropriate to keep the committee in existence, the committee shall continue to function until it is unanimously agreed by its members that it is no longer necessary. The project's Codes, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall prohibit unleashed dogs within the project site. Dogs shall not be permitted in any of the drainage areas along the perimeter of the tract adjacent to the hillsides. The CC&Rs shall prohibit human access from the tract to the hillsides. The project shall be designed so as to not facilitate persons entering the hillsides from the project site. To the extent that any portion of the project site begins to be used by persons entering the hillside, the Homeowners' Association shall post notices to discourage such use. The CC&Rs shall require that all swimming pools be fenced. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Project applicant shall submit a plan demonstrating that all pesticides, fungicides, herbicides and fertilizers to be used during the construction and operation of the site will not be harmful to wildlife. This plan shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Department, and once approved shall be incorporated into the CC&Rs. If required to do so by law, the project applicant shall obtain a Section 2081 permit from CDFG. If required to do so by law, the applicant shall enter into a Section 1603 Agreement with CDFG and ovtain a 404 Permit from the Army Corps of Engineers, and comply with any additional conditions imposed in the Agreement or Permit. The a portion of the project occurs within the boundaries of the Coachella Valley fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan, and shall be required to contribute a mitigation fee of $100 per acre towards the purchase of off -site A:\EA Addendum USHomes.WPD 16 Addendum to Environmental Checklist EA 99-386 - U S Homes habitat. This mitigation measure will reduce the potential impacts of the proposed project to less than significant levels. V. a) & b) Phase I and Phase II Cultural Resource Reports were conducted for the proposed project'. The analysis concluded that there were 9 potentially significant archaeologic or historic sites on or adjacent to the property. A Phase II investigation was recommended and undertaken. The site investigation resulted in seven of the nine sites not being considered significant, as defined by CEQA. One site, a rock shelter, was recommended for further testing and preservation. 10% of the site is to be tested to determine whether buried artifacts are present, and 90% of the site is to be preserved. The other, a trail which occurs outside the development area, should be protected from future access. The project was reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission at its meeting of January 6, 2000. The Commission accepted the recommendations made by the project archaeologist, and these mitigation measures are hereby incorporated into this environmental assessment by reference. VI. a) i) The proposed project does not occur in an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone. Hazards from ground rupture are not expected to be significant. Vl. a) ii) The City does occur in an area subject to significant seismic ground shaking. The project site is located in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The City has adopted the provisions of the Uniform Building Code for this hazard. Construction of any structure on the project site will conform to these standards, and will reduce the potential hazard to a less than significant level. VI. a) iii) A preliminary soils engineering report was prepared for the proposed project'. "Cultural Resources Report, La Quinta Cove Project," prepared by CRM Tech, May 1999; and Phase II cultural mitigation for same, also by CRM Tech. "Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation... for US Home Corporation," prepared by Geosoils, Inc., April, 1999. A:1EA Addendum USHomes.WPD 17 Addendum to Environmental Checklist EA 99-386 - U S Homes The proposed project does not occur in a liquefaction hazard area. The depth to groundwater in the project area is estimated to be more than 100 feet. The soils on the site are loose silty sand, which has the potential to shift in a seismic event. The soil engineering report prepared for the proposed project recommends over -excavation and recompaction of the site in any area where structures are proposed. The findings of the report are preliminary, and not based on construction plans. The City's standards for site preparation and geologic analysis, as detailed below, will reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level. VI. a) iv) The proposed project occurs adjacent to the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains. A rock fall analysis was prepared for the proposed projoct3. The analysis included site investigations and modeling of conditions at the site to determine stability of the slopes. The study resulted in a finding that the east -southeast -facing slopes and the westerly -facing slopes around the site "have a moderate potential for toppling or wedge failure type of rock fall to occur." In order to mitigate this potential hazard, the following mitigation measures are recommended: In conjunction with the preparation of final grading plans, the applicant shall prepare, or cause to be prepared, a rock fall mitigation plan, to include but not be limited to catchment systems, and impact/diversion walls or berms. The plan shall include a construction phasing schedule which determines when the protection structure(s) must be completed in order to protect surrounding homes. Such a plan shall be prepared at a scale of 1"=40', and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading permits. A qualified soils engineer shall be on -site during the grading of the project, to confirm and/or further evaluate geologic conditions. If adverse geologic structures are encountered, supplemental recommendations and earthwork shall be recommended and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. All data provided in the "Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation" and the "Supplemental Rock Fall Evaluation" report shall be applied to the design of the site. "Supplemental Rock Fall Evaluation... for US Home Corporation," prepared by Geosoils, Inc., October, 1999. A:1EA Addendum USHomes.WPD 18 Addendum to Environmental Checklist EA 99-386 - U S Homes VI. b), c) & d) As discussed above, the soils on the proposed site are loose silty sand. As such, unstable soil conditions can occur from improper grading or excavation. The City's standards for site preparation shall be adhered to in all site preparation activities. In order to reduce the impacts of unstable soils on the proposed site, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: Prior to issuance of a grading permit on the proposed site, the applicant shall submit, for review and approval by the City Engineer, a detailed, site specific soil study. The findings in this study shall be the basis for all grading plans on the project site. Vlll. a) All development activity has the potential to concentrate pollutants and cause a hazard to water quality. The proposed project includes a system of retention basins designed to retain the 100 year, 24-hour storm on site. The City's requirements for such facilities include standards for swales, oil separators and other structures which ensure that contaminants are removed from surface waters. The imposition of these standards will reduce the potential impacts to water quality to a less than significant level. VIlk bl Development consistent with the proposed project was analyzed under the City's General Plan EIR in 1992. Although continued development will impact the Valley's groundwater supplies, the impacts are being mitigated through groundwater recharge programs, and the percolation of surface water in retention basins. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), which will provide water to the proposed project, continues to implement programs to conserve water. The project's impacts on groundwater supplies are not expected to be significant. Vill. c), d) & e) The City requires that all projects retain the 100 year, 24-hour storm on -site. The proposed project must also retain off -site flows which can be expected from the adjacent hillsides. The diversion of these flows into the planned system of retention basins will represent a substantial change from the sheet flooding which typically occurs on undeveloped desert lands. The project design includes de -silting basins which will control the potential for erosion on the project site. The implementation of the project's planned drainage and retention system will reduce the potential impacts of flooding both on and off site, and control the release of flood waters from the site. The potential impacts of flooding, with implementation of the proposed drainage system, are A:\EA Addendum USHomes. WPD 19 Addendum to Environmental Checklist EA 99-386 - U S Homes expected to be less than significant. IX. b) The proposed project includes a request which would conflict with existing General Plan Policy 3-2.1.5 and Table CIR-2. To eliminate this conflict, the applicant has requested a General Plan Text Amendment, which would modify the City's current standards. The City currently requires that signalized intersections on Primary Arterials be a minimum of 1,200 feet apart. The proposed General Plan Amendment would allow the modification of this standard under certain conditions, and with the implementation of a Master Plan of Signals. The proposed project would allow a signalized intersection at a distance of 1,000 fee from another. The applicant has provided the Master Plan of Signals (SP 2000-046) and has therefore complied with the requirements of the General Plan Amendment. Should the Amendment be adopted, the proposed project will not conflict with the General Plan. (Technical discussion regarding the implementation of a reduced standard is included under item XV, below.) XI. a) & c) The proposed project occurs along Eisenhower Drive, which has noise levels, immediately adjacent to the right -of way, in excess of 60 dBA CNEL. The balance of the property occurs in an area where noise levels do not exceed 60 dBA CNEL. A landscape parkway, wall and retention area are planned for the frontage along Eisenhower Drive. The closest single family home will be located at least 25 feet from the roadway right-of-way. Land uses consistent with the proposed project were analyzed in the General Plan EIR in 1992. Residential land uses are considered sensitive receptors. The construction of the project with a perimeter wall, will lower potential noise impacts from circulation activity on Eisenhower Drive. In order to ensure that the homes which abut Eisenhower Drive do not exceed City standards, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: Prior to the issuance of building permits for homes which abut the Eisenhower Drive right-of-way, the applicant shall provide analysis to the Community Development Department demonstrating that exterior noise levels in the rear yards of these homes will not exceed the City's exterior noise standard in place at that time. The implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. XIII. a) Development consistent with the proposed project was analysed in the General Plan EIR. The impacts to public services from this project will not be significant. A:1EA Addendum USHomes.WPD 20 Addendum to Environmental Checklist EA 99-386 - U S Homes Cumulative impacts associated with buildout of the City have been addressed through the imposition of Impact Fees, and plans for future public facilities and services, to which this project will contribute. XIV. a) Development consistent with the proposed project was analyzed in the General Plan EIR. The projects retention basins will provide for passive recreational opportunities for its residents. The impacts to parks and recreation from this project will not be significant. Cumulative impacts associated with buildout of the City have been addressed through the imposition of Impact Fees, and plans for future parks, to which this project will contribute. XV. a) & b) Development consistent with the proposed project was analyzed in the General Plan EIR. The levels of service on Eisenhower Drive are expected to be acceptable at buildout. The proposed project will not contribute significantly to the area's traffic. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be required to pay the City's Development Impact Fee. The impact fee funds an improvement program established by the City to pay for a specific scope of improvements identified to mitigate impacts to the General Plan circulation system caused by a specific threshold of anticipated development. XV. d) The proposed project includes a General Plan Text Amendment which would require a Corridor Master Plan of Signals to allow a reduction in the distance between intersections for Primary Arterial roadways. The applicant has requested a full turning movement intersection for the proposed project entrance which is from 800 feet the potential full turning movement intersection (one of two full turning movement driveways) at Laguna de la Paz, The Villa La Quinta project, located adjacent and southwesterly of the proposed project, will take access at Coachella Drive. The traffic analysis prepared for that project included analysis of shared access at the Coachella Drive intersection, plus a right -in -right -out -left -in access point at the center of the property, 1,000 feet to the north. An alternative, which included no shared access but the same restricted access at the project entrance, showed that left turn movements would double at Coachella Drive. The shared access at Coachella Drive was therefore the preferred alternative. The issue of traffic safety is of particular concern on Eisenhower Drive because of the significant curve in the roadway. The proposed General Plan Amendment would also allow the reduction in standards throughout the City, on a case by case basis. The amendment would clear the way for this project to have a A:\EA Addendum USHomes.WPD 21 Addendum to Environmental Checklist EA 99-386 - U S Homes proposed signal, if the Signal Master Plan demonstrates that the signals in the corridor can be adequately synchronized. The proposed signal would serve only the proposed project, and no other development. The lands on the east side of Eisenhower are developed, and no access is taken at that point in the roadway. Further, this proposed amendment is not necessary to provide access to the property. Access can be achieved by either right -in -right -out -left -in, and/or by sharing access to the project at Coachella Drive, if signalized access is desired by the proponent. The General Plan amendment, and associated full turning movement intersections, will have a potentially significant impact on traffic movement on Eisenhower Drive and access to adjacent properties. Mitigation of these impacts can be achieved by redesigning the subdivision to allow shared access at Coachella Drive, or by limited access at the project entrance. XVI. c) A comprehensive drainage system, to handle both on and off site 100 year storm flows, is included in the proposed project. The applicant will be required to secure approval of the City Engineer prior to implementation of the drainage plan. These requirements ensure that the impacts to storm water facilities will be reduced to a less than significant level. A:\EA Addendum USHomes.WPD 22 O W >_ M Q M N N > uj Z CO o CNuj O v O U o F. CN u7 U W CN M O O F-- C}' L1J M O CO O N 00 0O t — W U aci v cn W Q 00 z 6 •� (n a �0 M O a 0- v CKi CL _. Q O O Z C dr za o ►., U p d: d0 v z z O cc 0 o ~x U a a z � z w LU O p N O a a Q a Q H � NLL O C LL F O O O N coo W 2 O = LL O 00 o U HL O oN co CO Ct N Z W O N w C N 0 00 � 0 _ °C a u O N L6 M _ j a_ CD to O a M ZF d C 0 u f �1 o z a °C Z V W d S H uj U) U A Lair Q u C W F- a C U m Z .410 av 0w v= v (D U Q C ui V c •c 0 N v- O m � c a g `O F. C U co o� c a) U. W Z O o z z CL +. can 0 c CD W 7 E C E E a. m U y cu rn �o ai s c t- co E cn c Z = y cn m a) m C7 y _ C _ c� 04 ` n•• N E U >� " W F- U O _ _ C� Uw y a) C co L a ' C co f0 f0 C )' d: W to (n c�oCL (n c E a) a > c N a ._ cE W O ccu JI 'a (D cin-m (a � cc O. > a>y 'O mo � W C cc ? o .UDtm IL O Luu cc QQo mo 0 1 _ ER 4. CQ a W t- Q U 00 Z Q W J Y CL v * LLa O = UU Q w H U O Z F- O C7 LL.UJ Z J � m0 N1 F' ZZ 00 y � W a y LU z 0 O LD W W NJ W Q .Q C,4 .D G ci U > uj CD N a a U a z o W z W a 0 Um z Q w IL V W O= U U ai U Q G C C W N F- co n. O c m c ca .0Oa UNJ O a) O O C C7 Z co 0 to U cn O to C 41 C +_ cn ++ N ~ cA O (n O L () cn OL n a +1 O O 0) O tm O tm o n rn a m n_ rn ., c c OC c a) a) E p U.0 E E N O J GC m p CL U > Op CL aa) aa)) ai ,�' c E •E a) CM W O W E E C. >, > > +' a)U1 O a) 06 c _ m U O a _O c m ~ N CL E E CD N Lu _ v °� ns 06cn c m ns c a) c O > w f- c c0 U O p y c0 c Q (n c0 O. _ cC O a > + � cv .� W D U p t`O co.F ca co P O NcE ` W -1 c a m c > y Oca cto O z Co O M C& O aa : mCL w F- Q V m Z Q W J Y a v gw O= v� a� C = U O L � L O W m r N a, C F- L a) U c6 ` — a V O V > a N LL C(1)Q> cu C N c O L a) - N co O U� (Lt! CLm(n n 0 0 C -C41 CO � ca a) ' � a) N a) U a) c U C U T O 9 a m m m m O O a O m O m _ O � O > O > c0 co O O d m a. m d E d E 65 C C C U. a) () a) OL -, a. CD 0 wZ C) c0 O(j Q OC mO 6 OL a) LL. L > a) >p O Z U Z >• >. > >c _ E a0O }I L cn E 0 W m � a) E U Q C7 CD C_ LL m O O a) !_' C Ua. UD U Uw c O E _.� co >,a) o °) E L m >, ,� L Nt V cUo U cU0 0 a C c6 m N " E VO a. O Q N E c E o a) a) > w � 0 o to F- OC to w � o *rC U a) -C On t E V C o U 4- U Oc u c o' -0 �. Q w .J y_ U° ELB O CD O � 'r+ cu co UUL O 0 E '2 QN ci m O m m a) m_ N +, OcD Nc: m to cn� .c w a) t CD 4-- a- a °(a ) � m a. 0 J C a n N o " C O C = co O O a) N Q`O O Q. (1) a - co N ' 00 m+v c L E V w N NOQ a caa) O N = C"`NL NCL J . U nv LLO aam v) aW Q m W Q um Z Q W J Y a. c� �W O= a� Q U w O Cr- UU � � L � O U a � a) U " E- U) a� U Z O) 'O F- c`a CD 0) C C N O O u. Z O. O .Wa m O N V zZ 0 ❑3: 00 c >CD w� n E ac E E n a O c CD U m ❑ v U co U co U _ ` U co CD Z p p i/i U 0 O N O U U N C L co ++ Q U f0 f9 O p U ++ P Y O U W =O Q. U O cu n c� c `° °' D E ,� �- m C_ E p E c ca U -o Q O co C cn U CAfd �►- C Fn _? CD G c N U N �j L W f0 C V O a� .E ❑ -aa U a L c a 0 V 0 _ +, +; V i U cn p O N (L CD J t z a m O L n uj L CL N M W Q C V m Z Q W .� ]G a0 'sW O= v� a W �U V C O � ++ 0 vi N w-- O N a U C ci co Z cn F- t C +, Co O m +' C_ N 0 C ` N c0 m Q oc CD W Z m O o� y F- Z Z O 0 IL CD C: C N cc W cc0 >^ C. -1 y U 0 = O ? cD to - Co E L U QJ CL a. co 00 E +0, 0) O C7 N p aNi E" Yco ~ y C-C C N mN -0 m co N N CO co } Q CZ W Q ►_ 4- a C C 0� c 0 U = 0 O vi �' N (n - to O N W O O a 0)C co +, N c c > C U O W � U cC0CD 06 N CL V Q +' U M > U C ca N C E N +' N CO W -� N `� y Q OC -0 co O Co + C 0 0) W C N O' > _ (L) Z O n N U (n W H Q m U Z Q w ..I Y a U E W O= U U Q W H U U Z_ 9 F- w O U LL w Z m °C O OZ O W z O O LD W Q cn H OC Q C N = N fn L f6 ' y G cc W co '� C J N Q coo � LU cc O -7 m f6 N O" Q W C O >� z 0 N .0 z W Q C V m Z Q W IL v W O= v� a W z c 0 m c O c cc m E Z co CL �a 0 No 00 ILLLI o 7 IL U .r Z c 7 CD Q N E E c cu W Q �- ~C C C ~ c N cu c Q U U cr LU Q G O N E Q > c U W C W a) ++ cnn O m N W m d a. 'O J Z 0 m W 0 LLI U m Z Q W J ]G av w O = U U Q W H U O Z_ H O C7 LL Z J m0 y H Z Z 00 N W Z O Z Z � Z Q co a W a C c +� W Q 2 UJ y C 0;� rn U U > Cco Lii U) Q a. V f° N -' a X CL Z O CD 0 2 Z Lye d m 0 ua U W 2 U O Z FE O F- Z O N N W N Q w W U O N w J N W `_' CC +, ' w Z X Q E z ® a W E N CD Z J J vi c n. a) in 4- O CD U C m E c ` a) y CL O cm O a _ m CL m C a) r a) a) Z � C a) 7 E E a o a) U 0 vi -� rn _ U m p c O C C m m " CD m CL CL m +�+ O w E E pC +� 4 m O V) v m 06 (n E m Q uj C.)_ cn +) LU N ? aC ) C . , W cc $- aU'i O m to C m n. U > > C C m Z cn a) CD U cn Q U °j +' x cn E o o® umi W cn 0Q X a° °) J f° Z O n`. ami m J z r z O z y O y w LO W 0 Q _ U *' m U P: O J W co +' > .Oco W IL O a X 0 a O z V m O N C a W c O z a 3 co t 0 0 0 0 N d a U a n iJ J L J z r z s o +� +� c cn CD UJ W C.)` U a. O N > W N vOi > U_ CW G N N Q co m U a a , O LLJ a' m E w � o .F U Q ai c X O z m O O U cn co IJJ O z a 3 v O 0 0 0 N IL w U a n 3 a) t o •E CD 0 a) C a. cu a tm O O N n. 4= c a) z o m � z � � c a E E a. O a) U r) cn as m •> a U U Q N Q > W a E N Z o '� d O a) W Q Cuj N O '+- CC + W > cvo coW 41 4— O Wcvo V OL E 0 O +' T C OC a E W n w E E 0o o E a >O O ns x Z 0 :� cm U a a 3 O 0 0 0 N IL d U m U U C N co Q cn LLto U a U cu co o to .o C O• co O (D (n O a) U N fo E O i cN y N Q. O m O ma_ CL 0) c a� z o ac m Q F- O z � � O C }+ U N � E -a w Ccu CL o a)U U coo vi N vi N N D i m co U CO V U U C o CA CO ++ co co f/1 a) a' O O N z CL CL w O U LL rn a) C CC F- Q +, rn U) U U C N co Oca a o o a� E E U)> ui _� cn (n U a) C U i z > C U > O ul cc t� CU CO ca a O. a) a) a) ~ C ~ E W �r= U) U U 0 ai O Co W ca 0 N o X CL B Z O t— n. a o U a 3 cD d C7 0 0 0 tV a N a w U CL n rn c 0 rn c O C U E Z N Q � N 0 Z U � O U_ O n. U ui U n. dS _ o N 5 W _v iE N Q 4- W +� _ C C ca U cn cu W N E � L +, F - f0 (� W 0 J N F- C a- f° co , 4- cn W <n C W Q E V w N �•� a . N N cn J N` W C_ co X cn Z O Q in a co d O 0 0 0 N a a w U d PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO MODIFY THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-065 APPLICANT: U.S. HOMES CORPORATION WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 13th day of June, 2000, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and continued said Public Hearing to the 27th day of June to consider amending the City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element, Policy 3-2.1.5, Table Cir-2 to modify the minimum required intersection spacing standard for Arterial Streets, as shown on Exhibit A; 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 to justify a recommendation for denial of said General Plan Amendment: The proposed Amendment is not consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan Circulation Element in that to allow a full turning movement intersection for the proposed tract is not consistent with the General Plan Goal, Objective, and Policy 3-2.1.5. 2. The proposed Amendment is not internally consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element Goal 3-3 in that a full turning movement intersection requiring a traffic signal for one development project does not provide the desired and appropriate access control envisioned in this goal. 3. The proposed Amendment is not consistent is not consistent with General Plan Circulation Element Goal 3-4, Policy 3-4.1.1, Policy 3-4.1.2, and Policy 3-4.1.3 in that an additional full turning movement intersection requiring an additional traffic signal does not create the Image Corridor envisioned for the design character and identity desired by the citizens Of La Quinta. 4. The situation and general conditions regarding the existing and anticipated development in the area have not substantially changed since the existing standards were imposed in that residential development has not created a need for adjustments to signal spacing. 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 Commission in this case; PABETTY\i1.S.11omes\PC RESO GPA 2000-065.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- General Plan Amendment 2000-065 June 27, 2000 2. That it does hereby recommend denial of the above -described General Plan Amendment request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of -the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 27th day of June, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\BETTY\U.S.fiomes\PC RESO GPA 2000-065.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF EISENHOWER CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS CASE NO. SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-046 APPLICANT: U.S. HOMES CORPORATION WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13T" day of June, 2000, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing and continued said Public Hearing to the 271h day of June to consider a Eisenhower Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals for Tentative Tract 29436 generally located north of Eisenhower Drive, east of Coachella Drive, more particularly described as: A.P.N.'S: 623-310-008, 623-310-009, 631-31 1-001, 631-31 1-003, 631-312-001, 631-312-020 643-090-025, and 643-090-004 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 denial of said Specific Plan: 1. That the proposed Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals is not consistent with the General Plan Goal, Objective, and Policy 3-2.1.5. 2. That the proposed Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals will create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting circulation and traffic signal timing will not ensure current and future development plans and resulting traffic patterns and traffic signal timing on Eisenhower Drive are adequately provided. 3. The Corridor Master Plan of Traffic Signals is not compatible with the existing and anticipated area development in that the project does not provide adequate circulation and traffic signal spacing. 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 Commission in this case; P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC RESO SP 2000-046.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Specific Plan 2000-046 June 27, 2000 2. That it does hereby recommend denial of the above -described Specific Plan request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 27th day of June, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PABETTY\U.S.HomesTC RESO SP 2000-046.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL TO SUBDIVIDE 75.86 ACRES IN THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT INTO 169 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, AND EIGHT LETTERED LOTS, LOCATED NORTH OF EISENHOWER DRIVE, EAST OF COACHELLA DRIVE CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29436 APPLICANT: U.S. HOMES CORPORATION WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13T" day of June, 2000, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing and continued said Public Hearing to the 27th day of October to subdivide 75.86 acres in the Low Density Residential Zoning District into 169 single family lots, and other lettered lots generally located north of Eisenhower Drive, east of Coachella Drive, more particularly described as: A.P.N.'S: 623-310-008, 623-310-009, 631-31 1-001, 631-31 11-003, 631-312-001, 631-312-020 643-090-025, and 643-090-004 WHEREAS, the Members of the Planning Commission have carefully reviewed and considered Environmental Assessment 99-386 and the comments received thereon prior to reaching their decision on the project; and WHEREAS, said Tract Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63). The Community Development Department has prepared an Environmental Assessment 99-386 for this project which states the project will not have a significant impact on the environment based on Conditions; and, WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to approve said Tentative Tract Map 29436: Finding Number 1 - Consistency with the General Plan The project is consistent with the with the City's General Plan Low Density Residential land use designation of 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre. The proposed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the City's General Plan with the implementation of Conditions of Approval to provide for adequate stormwater drainage. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC RESO TT 29436 .wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Tentative Tract 29436- June 27, 2000 Finding Number 2 - Consistency of Design and Improvements The design and improvements of the proposed subdivision are consistent with the City's General Plan, with the implementation of recommended conditions of approval to ensure proper street widths, perimeter walls, parking requirements, and timing of their construction. Finding Number 3 - Consistency of Public Easements As conditioned, the design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of, property within the subdivision. Finding Number 4 - Public Health and Safety The design of the subdivision and type of improvements, as conditioned, are not likely to cause serious public health problems, in that this issue was considered in Environmental Assessment 99-386 in which no significant health or safety impacts were identified for the proposed project. Finding Number 5 - Suitability of Site The design of the subdivision amendment, or the proposed improvements, are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially, and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife, or their habitat, in that Environmental Assessment 99-386, prepared for Tract 29436 did not identify any significant impacts for this issue. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby require compliance with those mitigation measures required for Tentative Tract Map 29436; 3. That it does recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map 29436 to the City Council for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PABETTY\U.S.Homes\PC RESO TT 29436 .wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Tentative Tract 29436- June 27, 2000 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27T" day of June, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC RESO TT 29436 .wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436- U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Upon conditional approval by the City Council of this development application, the City Clerk shall prepare and record, with the Riverside County Recorder, a memorandum noting that conditions of approval for development of the property exist and are available for review at City Hall. 2. The subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this tentative map or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The subdivider agrees that this obligation shall continue in full force and effect even if, as a result of the action or proceeding, the approval of the tentative map is ordered to be set aside. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 3. This tentative map and any final maps thereunder 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 Charter and Municipal Code (LQMC). 4. Prior to the issuance of a 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 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. PABETTY\U.S.HomesTC COA TT 29436.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 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 CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent 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. Final maps under this tentative map shall be subject to the provisions of the Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of final map approval. 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. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Eisenhower Drive - 50-foot from centerline of the existing raised median. B. PRIVATE STREETS 1 } Residential: 37-foot width. Width may be reduced to 33 feet with parking restricted to one side and 29 feet if on -street parking is prohibited provided there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors and the applicant makes provisions for ongoing enforcement of the restrictions. 2) Collector: 41-foot width. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 C. CULS DE SAC 1) Public or Private: Use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A (offset); Public - 45-foot radius, Private - 38.5-foot radius. 9. Right of way geometry for knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 10. 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. 11. 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 the necessary rights of way within 60 days of written request by the City. 12. 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. 13. 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. Eisenhower Drive - 20-foot The setback requirement applies to all frontage including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall dedicate blanket easements for those purposes. 14. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 15. The applicant shall 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. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 16. 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. 17. 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 18. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval of this tentative map 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) AND PARCEL MAP(S) 19. 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 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. 20. 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." Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. All other plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, entry drives, gates, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 include irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and entry monuments. "Precise Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 21. 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. 22. 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 23. Depending on the timing of development of the lots or parcels created by this map and the status of off -site improvements at that time, the subdivider may be required to construct improvements, to construct additional improvements subject to reimbursement by others, to reimburse others who construct improvements that are obligations of this map, to secure the cost of the improvements for future construction by others, or a combination of these methods. In the event that any of the improvements required herein are constructed by the City, the Applicant shall, at the time of approval of a map or other development or building permit, reimburse the City for the cost of those improvements. 24. 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. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 25. 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 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, development -wide 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. 26. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (e.g., Site Development Permits), 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. 27. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely manner or as specified in an approved phasing plan or in an improvement agreement, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 28. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard Regulations)• If any portion of any proposed building lot in the development is or may be located within a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year) flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall furnish certifications as required by FEMA that the above conditions have been met. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 29. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and an approved 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. 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. 30. 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. 31. 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 or parcel map, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. The limits given in this condition and the previous condition are not entitlements and more restrictive limits may be imposed in the map approval or plan checking process. If compliance with the limits is impractical, however, the City will consider alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 32. 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. 33. 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. 34. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each pad, the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 DRAINAGE The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the following: 35. 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. 36. 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'/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. 37. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated, unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route. 38. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on site or passed through to the overflow outlet. 39. 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 inches per hour. 40. 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. 41. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leachfield approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leechfield shall be designed to contain surges of 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. (of landscape area) and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. 42. In developments for which security will be provided by public safety entities (e.g., the La Quinta Safety Department or the Riverside County Sheriff's Department), retention basins shall be visible from adjacent street(s). No fence or wall shall be constructed around basins unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 43. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or building permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this tentative map excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the C',C&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. 44. The tract shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water from any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. UTILITIES 45. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within the right of way and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 46. Existing aerial lines within or adjacent to the proposed development and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv are exempt from this requirement. 47. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 48. 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.) P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Eisenhower Drive - Construct 38-foot half of 76-foot improvement (travel width, excluding curbs) plus 6-foot sidewalk. B. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Residential: 36-foot travel width. Width may be reduced to 32 feet with parking restricted to one side and 28 feet with on -street parking prohibited if there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors and the applicant provides for perpetual enforcement of the restrictions by the homeowners association. C. CULS DE SAC 1) Use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A (offset), with 38-foot curb radius. 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. 49. 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. 50. 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). 51. 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. 52. Knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 53. 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. If a wedge or rolled curb design is approved, the lip at the flowline shall be vertical (1 /8" batter) and a minimum of 0.1 ' in height. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to normal curbing prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot. 54. 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 shall be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials): Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.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" 55. 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. 56. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the tract or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. 57. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. "A" Street at Eisenhower Drive shall be limited to right turn movements only (both from Eisenhower Drive and onto Eisenhower Drive) unless General Plan Amendment No. 2000-065 is approved and a traffic signal is installed at the intersection. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 B. Emergency access (20-foot wide) shall be provided from the end of the cul- de-sac in "D" Street to Eisenhower Drive."D" Street emergency access at Eisenhower shall be limited to right turn movements only (both from Eisenhower Drive and onto Eisenhower Drive. C. If full turning movement access to the project at Eisenhower Drive is desired by the applicant, then the project site plan must be reconfigured to provide an access point aligned with the existing intersection at Eisenhower Drive and Coachella Drive. LANDSCAPING 58. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. 59. 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. 60. 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. 61. A perimeter block wall (sound attenuation barrier) shall be constructed along Eisenhower Drive. An emergency access gate (designed per Fire Marshal's requirements) shall be installed at the southerly terminus of the emergency access road which extends from the cul-de-sac in "D" Street. 62. A perimeter block wall shall be constructed along the project's westerly boundary from Eisenhower Drive to the foot of the mountains. 63. At locations where the proposed development shares a common property line with the Laguna De La Paz project (Tract 20052) where an existing wall encloses properties in the adjacent development, the Applicant shall accomplish the Zoning Code required 5-foot minimum wall height in accordance with one of the following methods: P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wod PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 A. If permission from the adjacent property owner is received, and if additional wall height can be structurally achieved, add additional course(s) of matching block to the existing wall. This alternative shall be rejected by the adjacent landowner before utilizing the second alternative. B. If the adjacent property owner does not consent to the first alternative, the Applicant shall achieve the 5-foot minimum wall height by constructing a new wall, with matching block, adjacent the existing wall as close as physically possible, and fill the empty space between the two walls with pea gravel and slurry cap. The two walls shall be structurally bound together with tie rods. 64. A 6-foot sidewalk shall be constructed along Eisenhower Drive. The sidewalk shall meander within the 32-foot Right -of -Way and setback. QUALITY ASSURANCE 65. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 66. 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. 67. 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, specifications and applicable regulations. 68. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 MAINTENANCE 69. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. The applicant shall maintain required public improvements until expressly released from this responsibility by the appropriate public agency. FEES AND DEPOSITS 70. 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. FIRE MARSHALL 71. 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 1000 gpm for a two hour duration at 20 psi. 72. Prior to recordation of the final map, applicant/developer shall furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review/approval. The plans shall conform with the Fire Marshal's requirements for types, location and spacing of hydrants and fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 73. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. 74. The minimum dimensions for fire apparatus access roads entering and existing this project shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet in each direction and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. 75. Gated entrance and exit openings shall be not less than 16 feet in width. All gates shall be located at least 40 feet from the roadway and shall open to allow a vertical stop without obstructing traffic on the road. Gates shall have either a secondary power supply or an approved manual means to release mechanical control of the gate in the event of loss of primary power. Power operated gates shall be equipped with an override system consisting of KS-2P series Knox Key Operated switches. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wod PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 - U. S. HOME JUNE 27, 2000 MISCELLANEOUS 76. Prior to recordation of the final map, a Hillside Conservation Easement shall be dedicated to the City for all the remainder area, identified as the remainer parcels, within the Hillside Conservation Overlay District or other options contained in Zoning Code Section 9.140.40N. P:\BETTY\U.S.Homes\PC COA TT 29436.wod ATTACHMENT(S) LOCATION MAP ATTACHMENT 1 z 0 - N to Ln W W Z Z bil W WASHINGTON STREET a - an , U W O cc a EISENHOWER DRIVE ATTACHMENT E ru E _ 'o 0 o 0> o J}. O N C p= a N 00 y 'O :5 00 M i m ce) lY i E 7 O = •- 0uj Upp,s o o J O N M O Z N p O Ln M N O O ci W M tl y w to M y s LU ui °- CD C N p Vi O O M 'pp M w O U Cl .� O Z M � M Q M O LQ UN G N d O U V O �� CL (O to m W Q ov cl vo W r to Q OOl = = G O C ca O EL Go tV y C ZO �� o �41 a2j.« O O �� O c tU> C �L- •� t0 - N a. o ul o � ° Y � N N — C 7 y p)'C tV LL O LQ ® uj O N p t T t0 N O it O O O V N C C CD a0 e- a O O C V O t O tN 7 O 0)D O O N N lL N (y/1 ttu C_ U. U { N 0 0 � � 7 U2 © N O m - O a W O 5 O tL y O _ 4LL W N� to E .� rn o 2 E ® a t0 U F CLm O E'U 0 C (to l0 t0 'U � U)•U� 'B •E N U d .n tQ O (A m 0 Z 'D y C C lQ t � . C y 'y U a CG O V u a� c o C v D to C C O O_ U E w 0 C � r- VCD ; y L 0 2) G) a) -m a C N UD U N w Y Ocu r- L }y m y w N y y Lf) O O C 7 O tl. m Q C:C � N C - E X > iv N 2 N ` �p D N N y N O- C N N O y E N w y fl tll a E G) O m 0 y C +• U t m o 'B th U L tYQ (U O y 7 E � :3.. .0 O 0 0 0 y 7 ff v.0 vv� tom- / �vx s l/ _ I •: sad'' D`v5G rpr 4 TA r • • D "rd MMM a a r octm S.,, a ` r j � w 9 `& u7r r.t s � �, c 4 ` . .ra qqe � � r �qra r 4• •r 44` �` a r a �` 3r §fie Se • My WA wm la we 6 • I 1\y/ 'R �'• WA a � - am-rr#m10 i-----% (EKNOMM _ ATTACHMENT I City of La Quints Planning Commission��� La Quints City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quints , CA 92253 c; v• June 5, 2000 Gentlmen, In regard to the General Plan Amendment 2000-065, Specific Plan 2000-046, Tentative Tract 29463, it is difficult to understand how the La Quints Development Department could have arrived at a negative environtmental assessment, claiming there would be no adverse environmental effect on the proposed area of development. This would be a questionable conclusion unless the aim of the City of La Quints is to cover the small amount of vacant land with cookie cutter houses in a sea of petunias. According to the very skimpy drawing on the notice of public hearing, the land in question appears to that which skirts the foot of the magnificent mountians, the view of which is a major attraction of La Quints. To obscure that skyline at night by street lights and in the day by more of those accursed and ubiquitous palm trees would be a crime. That area is now the habitat for coyotes, snakes, birds (especially the wacky road runners and dainty quail) and the stately hawks which soar overhead in search of food. Further the drainage looks to be inadequate with stagnant water remaining long after every storm. In addition, cutting of the access to trail to the ridge would be a great disservice to many hikers. Having no knowledge of the "spacing standards" which the developers hope to circumvent, I can only say we need all the space we can get in this formerly wide open desert. Thank you for your kind attention. Jane H. Jorgensen 815 Columbia St. South Pasadena, CA 91030 626-799-7292 Cam} 4���3 (�-/-/oo r7. c2;g X,,� - STATE OF CALIFORNIA - THE RESOURCES AGENCY ATTACHMENT GRAY DAVIS, Governor DEPARTMENT OFFISH AND GAME 330 Golden Shore, Suite 50 LongBeach, California 90802 (310) 590-5113 June 19, 2000 Mr. Jerry Herman City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 U. S. Homes Corporation Environmental Assessment 99-386 Dear Mr. Herman: The Department of ]Fish and Game (Department) has reviewed the above -referenced project, relative to impacts to biological resources on several occasions. The proposed project is located in the north side of Eisenhower Drive and east of Coachella Drive. The proposed project consists of Tentative Tract Map to divide 190.51 gross acres into 169 residential lots on Low Density Residential designated land. General Plan text amendment to allow for spacing of traffic signals at a distance less than the currently mandated 1,200 lineal feet. 1601-1603 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements This project requires a 1603 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement from the Department. The Department is a Responsible Agency regarding the issuance of 1601-1603 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements (Agreements). Potential impacts to waters of the United States, wetlands or jurisdictional streambeds should be determined during the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process, not following it. The lead agency can consult with the Department on project impacts and mitigation and incorporate a discussion of recommended mitigation measures in the CEQA document. The Department is implementing new procedures for processing Agreements. In this regard, the Department is notifying lead agencies that projects which will result in impacts to lakes or jurisdictional streambeds must include the supporting biological studies and CEQA-required analysis in the text of CEQA-certified documents. Any information necessary to the issuance of an Agreement must be processed via CEQA. If the information necessary for the issuance of an Agreement is included with the CEQA documents and has been subject to CEQA and public review, the Agreement can be processed per Department procedures. Information which the Mr. Jerry Herman June 19, 2000 Page 2 Department requires for its issuance of an Agreement which has not been CEQA-certified must be again subject to the CEQA process for public review. In this scenario, the Department has several options: 1) the lead agency can initiate a subsequent CEQA document and forward it to the Department following completion of the CEQA process, and 2) the Department can become lead agency. This same process applies to other discretionary actions, such as CESA Incidental Take Permits. The Department prefers that the applicant submit an Agreement application with information approved during the CEQA process. The Department is available for consultation on projects prior to submittal of an Agreement application. Ordinarily, the information required includes: a description of the direct and indirect impacts of the project on the lake or stream; a biological survey of the lake or stream and identification of the absence or presence of riparian resources (flora and fauna); a discussion of environmental alternatives; a discussion of avoidance measures to reduce project impacts; and a discussion of potential mitigation measures required to reduce the project impacts to a level of insignificance. The applicant and lead agency should keep in mind that the State also has a policy of no net loss of wetlands. The Department understands that this Agreement process is new to most applicants and lead agencies. The Department also understands that this is not the way Agreements have been processed in the past and that delays in Agreement processing may result. In order to avoid delays or repetition of the CEQA process, the lead agency should consult with the Department to discuss potential project impacts and avoidance and mitigation measures. This change in Agreement procedure is a result of litigation. The Department is under a writ of mandate from a State of California Superior Court regarding the processing of Agreements (Mendocino Environmental Center vs California Department of Fish and Game, Respondents, Bruce Choder, River Rat Salvage et al, Real Parties). The write of mandate states in part: A writ of mandate shall issue ordering the California Department of Fish and Game on or before May 1, 1999, to prepare and implement a program or process that will incorporate a CEQA review into the Fish and Game Section 1603 process. The writ of mandate shall further order the California Department of Fish and Game to cease and desist entering into Section 1603 agreements after May 1, 1999, unless such agreements have been subject to a CEQA review. Therefore, the Department is advising the lead agency that all potential impacts to biological resources and sensitive habitat areas be analyzed in the Environmental Accessment document, along with specific measures and alternatives to avoid or mitigate for the loss of sensitive biological resources. A 1989 statute requires that public agencies adopt reporting or monitoring programs to ensure mitigation measures are implemented. In this connection, mitigation measures have to be specific, have to be capable of being implemented and must be capable of being monitored. This is not the case with the mitigation measures in the Environmental Assessment. Mr. Jerry Herman June 19, 2000 Page 3 Peninsular Bighorn Sheep The Department is concerned that the Environmental Assessment Report did not reference Fish and Game Code Section 4700. Which states, "Fully protected mammals or parts thereof may not be taken or possessed at any time and no provision of this code or any other law shall be construed to authorize the issuance of permits or licenses to take any fully protected manurial and no permits or licenses heretofore issued shall have any force or effect for that purpose." A reference to this Fish and Game Code Section 4700 should be made part of the Environmental Assessment Report. The Department recommends that the buffer fence to avoid impacts to the Peninsular bighorn sheep be completed as part of the project and not subject to a committee's decision at a later date. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this document. A Streambed Alteration Agreement application is available by contacting Teresa Newkirk at (760) 251-4817 or via our web site at: www.dfg.ca.gov. Please submit all Streambed Alteration Agreement applications to our Long Beach Office, at the letterhead address listed above, until further notice. Any questions you may have concerning this letter should also be directed to Ms. Newkirk. Sincerely, e Glenn Black Supervisor Habitat Conservation - South Region 6 cc: Scott McCarthy, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CIRCULATION ELEMENT -Chapter 3 TABLE CIR-2 LA QUINTA ROADWAY DESIGN STANDARDS Minimum Intersection Spacing Propose to add superscript "5" to Minimum Intersection Spacing. (5) Unique situations may require exemption, e.g., the adoption of a specific corridor signalization/intersection plan, existing intersection spacing precludes efficient access solutions, significant increase in vehicle miles traveled, no feasible alternative access, projected traffic volumes lower than maximum for street type, etc. Rationale to apply an exemption to Tentative Tract Map 29436, U.S. Home Corporation: U.S. Home Corporation has applied for a Tentative Tract Map 29436 to subdivide a 186 acre parcel located on Eisenhower Drive into 169 single-family lots. The property is bordered on the east by a gated community (Laguna de la Paz) and on the west by a vacant parcel currently being processed by KSL Corporation for its entitlements. The proposed land use for that project is vacation ownership units and will require a General Plan amendment and Change of Zone in addition to site development permits. U. S. Home Corporation is requesting a General Plan Amendment to facilitate full access to Eisenhower Drive at the project's main entry. As initially designed, this access was situated midway between the existing exit -only egress from Laguna de la Paz and the existing traffic signal located at Coachella Drive. The distance between these existing intersections is approximately 2000 feet leaving a separation of approximately 1000 feet between intersections. Currently, the General Plan of the City of La Quinta (adopted in 1992) requires a minimum of 1200 feet between intersections. Further discussion with City traffic engineering staff indicated that the primary issue is future signalization spacing and coordination and not necessarily distance between minor intersections. U.S. Home Corporation would propose that a Master Plan of Signalization be adopted for Eisenhower Drive as a means to ensure good traffic flow. To that end, the main entry drive to the proposed Tentative Tract Map 29436 has been shifted to the east (1200 feet from the existing signal at Coachella Drive). A conceptual Master Plan of Signalization for Eisenhower Drive is attached. This shows the locations of all existing and possible traffic signals as well as the location of all existing intersections. With the approval of the Master Plan of Signalization, the General Plan requirements for distance between intersections can be modified if necessary to be consistent with the Master Plan. Thus, the long-term efficiency of traffic signalization can be assured throughout the entire planned corridor. The City staff has suggested that the primary reason given for the adoption of this standard was to ensure good traffic flow and mobility. The standard in question is established in the Circulation Element in Table CIR-2, La Quinta Roadway Design Standards, p. 3-15. There is no specific discussion of this standard within the General Plan text although several goals and policies speak to the issue of traffic flow and mobility. Some of these goals and policies include: • Goal 3-2 Arterial, collector and local roadway design standards designed to accurately reflect projected travel volumes based upon development densities. Objective 3-2.1 The General Plan shall identify a roadway system that recognizes the importance of the use and function of each roadway classification. • Policy 3-2.1.1 The City shall plan, design and implement a roadway system based upon roadway functional classification. Functional classification is the process by which routes in a roadway network are grouped into classes according to the service they are intended to provide. • b) Primary and Secondary Arterials — This level of arterial classification is designed to provide mobility as the primary function, and land access secondarily. These roadways generally serve trips of a mile or more; provide continuity through the community, and generally border neighborhoods. Primary and Secondary Arterials are generally four lane facilities. Primary Arterials are designed to carry higher traffic volumes and typically include center medians to separate through lanes and control access. • Policy 3-2.1.5 The City shall adopt design standards for all streets in accordance with their functional classification and recognized design guidelines. All streets within the City of La Quinta shall be designed in accordance with the standards presented in Table CIR-2, City of La Quinta Roadway Design Standards. • Goal 3-3 Appropriate access control to arterial streets from adjacent properties. • Objective 3-3.1. The General Plan shall specify appropriate guidelines regarding access to arterial roadways to maintain capacity, efficiency and the safety of the traffic flow on the City's streets. • Policy 3-3.1.1 Access to all major and primary arterials shall be restricted to intersection locations and other approved points of ingress and egress. • Policy 3-3.1.2 The City shall require new development to provide local streets which service the needs of direct access to abutting properties. • Policy 3-3.1.3 The City shall institute street access guidelines consistent with the functional roadway classifications. These shall be applied, where feasible, to all new developments. The following guidelines shall be used to define appropriate access: a) The City shall restrict individual driveway access to Major and Primary Arterials wherever possible. b) Access to Major and Primary Arterials shall be limited through the use of medians and access controls to maintain street capacity. c) When permitted, access along arterial and collector streets shall be located a minimum of 250 from the ends of the curb returns. In the case of the subject parcel, staff had indicated that a full -movement intersection as proposed would be inconsistent with the General Plan as the distance between intersections cannot meet the 1200-foot rule. Therefore, staff suggested two alternative solutions for access for the project in addition to the possibility of amending the General Plan standards: 1) eliminating the left turn out of the project leaving right -in, right -out and left in movements, or 2) sharing access (full or egress only) at Coachella Drive with the adjacent vacant property. U.S. Home Corporation feels that a full access is essential for the marketing and long-term functioning of the property. Access can be designed for this project which meets the various goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan and therefore is pursuing a General Plan Amendment which would allow some flexibility in the distance between intersection standards; in this case reduction to 800 feet to a non -signalized intersection (the egress drive from Laguna de la Paz). The current standard is a good standard and should be implemented wherever overriding concerns are not present. It can be fairly stated that the adoption of the General Plan could not have analyzed every situation that was present or would exist in the future. It is rare to find such a standard for intersection spacing within the body of a General Plan. It is much more typical to find standards such as this within the Zoning or Subdivision Codes. In the case of zoning or subdivision ordinances, an applicant might be able to find relief from certain standards by means of a variance, Specific Plan and Planned Development District process. A variance from General Plan requirements is inherently inconsistent with the General Plan and is therefore not appropriate. General Plans frequently incorporate flexible standards that can be applied under as the circumstances dictate which is the request in this application. Such flexibility can be seen in the same Table CIR-2 in the requirements for Minimum Horizontal Curve Radius. Some of those special circumstances and concerns which could affect property in conjunction with the Intersection Spacing standards are: 1) preexisting conditions which preclude the ability to meet the current standard, 2) physical or topographic conditions that preclude access at the prescribed distances such as cove properties, properties near flood control or canal improvements, etc., 3) lack of workable alternative access possibilities, 4) alternatives causing a significant increase in vehicle miles traveled or inefficient traffic movement, 5) the adoption of a Master Plan of Signalization or 6) other concerns or conditions as determined by the Planning Commission and City Council. In the case of the U.S. Home Corporation request, there are circumstances that meet all of the above criteria: 1) Existing access points to either side of the subject property were arbitrarily approved at some time without consideration of the future access needs of the vacant property. At the same time, an 800-foot separation of access points (one signalized and one unsignalized) is not an unworkable condition and, in fact, is not an uncommon condition throughout the Valley. Also, while Coachella Drive is currently signalized, there is probably little possibility of signal warrants developing for the westerly egress from Laguna de la Paz. Any signalization for that complex would now take place at their main access due to the adoption of the Master Plan of Signalization. 2) The subject property is cut off from other access by the arm of the Coral Reef Mountains. No collector or other General Plan streets are capable of providing access to the site. 3) Theoretically a shared access condition could be established with the vacant property to the west of the subject site. However, that property is being processed for a General Plan Amendment and Zoning Map amendment for a resort type land use. The area of the site that might be considered for providing access to the U.S. Home site is currently shown as a parking area. Access, even an egress only condition, through a parking lot is not a workable solution for a quality residential development that is envisioned for the property. 4) Another access alternative that has been suggested is a right -out -only exit. It is estimated that upwards of 85% of the traffic will have a destination to the east or north. This would force residents leaving the site to make a U-turn at Coachella or continue to 50th Avenue before being able to head easterly. The result would be a minimum increase in vehicle miles traveled of 275 miles a day that is over 100,000 extra miles per year for the life of the project. If traffic is not allowed a U-turn at Coachella Drive, the additional miles traveled could be upwards of 386,000 miles each year. 5) The adoption of a Master Plan of Signalization for Eisenhower Drive is an alternative that allows the existing and future traffic mobility to be ensured through careful planning. The spacing of signalized as well as non -signalized intersections can be established on the Master Plan and the primary Goals and Objectives of the City's General Plan can be implemented. Realizing that the proposed General Plan Amendment is citywide and not project specific, the approval of exceptions to the General Plan needs to be limited and unusual if the overall goal of mobility is to be accomplished. As is already evident in the chart of standards, "unique situations may require exemption." Alternative General Plan Amendment —An alternative (which is acceptable to U.S. Home Corporation) would be to simply change the 1200 foot requirement to 1000 feet. This type of fixed standard removes the question of how much flexibility is appropriate but doesn't allow factoring in the unique conditions that will continue to arise, particularly in the areas of the City that are partially developed. APPENDIX Intersection Spacing Regulation by other Agencies City of Palm Desert General Plan — "Driveway access points onto arterial roadways shall be limited in number and location in order to ensure the smooth and safe flow of vehicles and bicycles." Zoning Ordinance — No regulation Subdivision Ordinance —Wherever practicable, such intersection should be space not less than 1000' (Municipal Code — 26.40.060) City of Palm Springs General Plan — "Require driveway and/or local street intersection consolidation along major and secondary thoroughfares." Zoning Ordinance — No regulation Subdivision Ordinance — No Regulation City of Rancho Mirage General Plan — "The number of access points and intersections along arterials shall be limited in order to preserve mid -block and intersection capacities and to maintain public safety." Zoning Ordinance — No regulation Subdivision Ordinance — No Regulation Riverside County General Plan — "Access points and intersections of streets and highways shall be limited based upon the road's classification and function." "All street intersections shall be designed to assure the safe, efficient passage of through traffic and the negotiation of turning movements." Zoning Ordinance — No regulation Subdivision Ordinance —660 feet separation for Major Thoroughfares (100' r/w w/76' improvement or 1320 feet separation for Arterials (110' r/w w/86' improvements) Cathedral City General Plan — "Direct access to all streets above Collector Streets shall be judiciously controlled to minimize traffic conflict points and promote efficient and safe traffic movements within the City." Zoning Ordinance — No regulation Subdivision Ordinance — Same as Riverside County TO: FROM: DATE: RE: C&'�p 4 4 a" MEMORANDUM HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR JUNE 27, 2000 ADDITIONAL_ CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR U.S. HOMES CORPORATION TENTATIVE TRACT 29436 Staff recommends adding Condition of Approval No. 79: "Prior to final map, Lots 69 and minimum lot frontage of 35 fee Standards, of the Zoning Code " Pc Memo. Gp Mtg Notice t 79, cul-de-sac lots, shall be required to have a per Section 9.50.030, Table of Development